SVS AS-EQ1 vs Velo SMS-1

[Warpdrv]

I am jealous of both your guys room sizes... although its been an amazingly fun adventure - albeit expensive to get the stupid output I have now... I really have no issues with getting the headroom I have always been looking for and the SQ is second to none. I usually run about 5-10db hot on a regular basis, but can adjust it on the fly....

Picked up Iron Man on bluray yesterday and just can't believe how much bass I get, shaking the entire house... and not a drop of distortion - my buddy was just blown away literally. So much fun...

 

[AVRat]

So where did he blow to?

 

[Warpdrv]

AWAY !!!! hheheheh

I got a good woman with great sweater meat for that type of blown !!!

 

[KEW]

Have you been watching the DIY thread - Danley is shipping mini SPUD KITS for people that want put it together themselves... kinda cool...

Is that the DIY forum here (Audioholics)?

 

[rmk]

Is that the DIY forum here (Audioholics)?

No, It's on the AVS Forum

 

[Warpdrv]

Oh and btw, that unit is not a mini, so my mistake on the posting language I used.....

Its larger in comparison to what RMK bought and will have more output the the TH-50 SPUD

 

[rmk]

Oh and btw, that unit is not a mini, so my mistake on the posting language I used.....

Its larger in comparison to what RMK bought and will have more output the the TH-50 SPUD

Yeah, Maxi is a better description. It is quite a bit larger than my TH-SPUDS but as you say will go lower and louder and all you have to do is glue and screw.

BTW and back on topic, apparently Franing is buying the AS-EQ1. I hope it gives him the performance improvement he wants.

 

[Warpdrv]

Very good... I'm sure he will like it, and I think may be a bit better in performance if he plans on sticking with a dedicated 2 subs...

 

[Franin]

Yeah, Maxi is a better description. It is quite a bit larger than my TH-SPUDS but as you say will go lower and louder and all you have to do is glue and screw.

BTW and back on topic, apparently Franing is buying the AS-EQ1. I hope it gives him the performance improvement he wants.

Thank you rmk for your help but your correct I decided to go with the sub eq from svs. You guys have been great in helping me here. I'm looking forward to see the results

thanks again

 

[Franin]

Very good... I'm sure he will like it, and I think may be a bit better in performance if he plans on sticking with a dedicated 2 subs...

Pm sent

 

[Franin]

Well I bought the AS-EQ1. I had to move the right sub along the right wall centre and there was a difference.

Two Subs at front:

One sub at front, one Sub on the right wall centred:

Im quite happy with the results again as some have said it doesnt mean much but I have noticed the difference in bass.

 

[rmk]

Glad that you are happy with the results Frank.

That Audyssey "After" graph is theoretical so have you played test tones with an SPL meter to verify the post EQ room response? I found that Audyssey was optimistic about the results.

 

[Franin]

Glad that you are happy with the results Frank.

That Audyssey "After" graph is theoretical so have you played test tones with an SPL meter to verify the post EQ room response? I found that Audyssey was optimistic about the results.

When I moved the sub to the sidewall I have to admit I did even get a chance to try the SPL meter. I just wanted to get stuck into it. But I have tried the spl meter with the new graph and it hovers around the 74db-76db.

 

[rmk]

When I moved the sub to the sidewall I have to admit I did even get a chance to try the SPL meter. I just wanted to get stuck into it. But I have tried the spl meter with the new graph and it hovers around the 74db-76db.

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. i was referring to playing multiple frequency tones from a source like this Rives Audio Disk . Playing tones from this disk will show you the SPL at all of the frequencies as they are played. It is best to place the SPL meter on a mic stand at the main listening position.

This allows to you see you frequency peaks and nulls at the location of the SPL meter.

 

[mike c]

the only way to confirm the "after" graph is to:
1) measure one and only one position using the as-eq1
2) measure that exact one position using another measuring tool
3) you might also need to measure just one of the outputs of the eq1 since there might be some merging of the two subwoofers' measurements ... or you can just use dual instead of dual discrete.

because as you know, that "After" graph is theoretical of multiple measured locations and dual subwoofers combined

 

[Warpdrv]

Congrats Franin, I didn't think it would get to you that fast.... Looks like the projected after response would be quite an improvement over what you had.

If it sounds better to you, I'm sure it has made an improvement ...

 

[Franin]

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. i was referring to playing multiple frequency tones from a source like this Rives Audio Disk . Playing tones from this disk will show you the SPL at all of the frequencies as they are played. It is best to place the SPL meter on a mic stand at the main listening position.

This allows to you see you frequency peaks and nulls at the location of the SPL meter.

No I don't have software, sorry!

 

[Franin]

the only way to confirm the "after" graph is to:
1) measure one and only one position using the as-eq1
2) measure that exact one position using another measuring tool
3) you might also need to measure just one of the outputs of the eq1 since there might be some merging of the two subwoofers' measurements ... or you can just use dual instead of dual discrete.

because as you know, that "After" graph is theoretical of multiple measured locations and dual subwoofers combined

I did the first measurment and got a similar result. I did not want to go through the whole mic positioning if the result did not improve. I don't have another measuring tool unfortunatley.

 

[Franin]

Congrats Franin, I didn't think it would get to you that fast.... Looks like the projected after response would be quite an improvement over what you had.


If it sounds better to you, I'm sure it has made an improvement ...

Thanks Warpdrv, it has changed for the better. My wife has commented on the improvement and saying something.

I do have a question for all though. I've noticed many people saying the results are only theoritical, not absolute etc, does that mean that audyssey is just a real basic eq system ( that's even for the pro )and doesn't give absolute results it just guesses? Would I have been better off with the velo SMS-1? To me what people are saying it feels like audyssey is showing you what you want to see am I correct? If that is the case that is a bit of a con?

 

[rmk]

Thanks Warpdrv, it has changed for the better. My wife has commented on the improvement and saying something.

I do have a question for all though. I've noticed many people saying the results are only theoritical, not absolute etc, does that mean that audyssey is just a real basic eq system ( that's even for the pro )and doesn't give absolute results it just guesses? Would I have been better off with the velo SMS-1? To me what people are saying it feels like audyssey is showing you what you want to see am I correct? If that is the case that is a bit of a con?

Audyssey is not just a "real basic EQ system" but it is clearly the easiest to use system. As Warp said it is most effective when multiple positions are measured as it takes all of those locations into consideration when applying its signal processing.

As Mike stated, the After graph is a result of multiple locations being measured and so this graph has to be theoretical. There is no question that Audyssey affects the FR and sound. If you are happy with the results thats all that matters.