SVS PB12-Plus DSP Subwoofer Review

[emorphien]

I'm not really criticising, I still enjoy and very much appreciate what you guys do with these reviews but when I read a couple back to back it can sometimes get a bit wacky when some things don't seem to be done the same way.

For example the Emotiva Ultra 12 and SVS PB12 reviews both have a different number of pages and some other differences therein. It's a bit pedantic but if I were comparing multiple subwoofers and wanted to look at the same part of the review across both (granted I doubt I'd be shopping those two against each other) then it helps to have the same overall format.

Also on a side note, as I went to pull up both reviews by using the audioholics.com front page, I notice that all the product previews and first looks are listed under the Pro Reviews subsection. I can't say I really like that terribly much and while I don't know if it was intentional or one of those things that "just happened" I wonder what you guys would think of having a separate section for the first look/previews.

 

[KEW]

In a perfect world that would be nice. In such a world, we wouldn't need money and everyone would captain a Galaxy class starship and have plenty of Romulan tail on hand

Fixed it for ya!

 

[Paul_Apollonio]

Yep on personal appearance, nobody should get bunched up over whats given from one persons OWN opinion, take that with a grain of salt. What looks poor to one, may be great to another.


As for testing guidlines, and the obnoxious inconsistencies on how a product is review. Here is what I think:

A. No problem giving a subs max SPL point right below driver compression with the natural frequency response from X hz to Y hz, with an accomanying plot showing the differing order harmonic distortion along with group delay.

B. This same test should then be performed -3db down from compression point which should be right around half rms power. Again give specs like group delay, and the order harmonics. This same complete test should be performed once again at minimal power of around 1-2 watt rms depending on an 8/4 ohm load.

C. There should be also be a test performed to find the true sensitivity of a given sub. Sensitivity is rarely given. This alone would be a good measurement given to find out roughly if you sub solution your pondering can
keep up with the main system speakers. SUbs generally have much lower sensitivy values that typical speakers today. So knowing if a single sub(or possibly if multiple subs are needed) can keep up with the dynamic capabilities of your main speakers would be good knowledge to have.

For example one of systems has a 200x5 power amp running speakers with a sensitivity value of around 87-90db with 1 watt/8ohms. I run 3 15" subs in parallel (grouped together)to make sure I have enough dynamic range to not clip the subs even at high output bursts. It allows me to keep the gains much lower reducing any potential for harmonic distortion/clipping and gives my subs much better dynamic abilities to keep up with my main speakers. Now I know my speakers probably only use 1-2 watts rms during normal playback, but there are without question plenty of dynamic bursts that will easily hit 15-20db over normal RMS power output. Now if I was using just one single 15" driver, to equal my main speakers at 1-2 watts rms, it would probably have to be outputting 16-32 watts rms or even a bit higher even. So I run a few extra to drop the amplifier output so that each sub RMS power is closer in line with my main speakers. What I wish I knew was the true sensitivity of my sub so I didnt have to guesstimate how many I would need to keep the dynamic capabilities in line with my main speakers. So as budget has allowed, Ive added a couple more in the process. I will probably run a total of 4 when funds allow.

I am the one responsible for any inconsistancies you note. Gene tries to get me to conform, but I am not much of a conformist frankly. Sorry to dissapoint you. The intent of my article was not consistency but rather fidelity to the standards and metrics presented in the new standard written in part by one of our industry greats, Don Keele, who was kind enough to share his program, something he had spent several years of his life in development with me for free. If you need consistency, better compare the authors first, and the publishers second.... Sorry I dissapointed you with the review.

 

[Paul_Apollonio]

I'm not really criticising, I still enjoy and very much appreciate what you guys do with these reviews but when I read a couple back to back it can sometimes get a bit wacky when some things don't seem to be done the same way.

For example the Emotiva Ultra 12 and SVS PB12 reviews both have a different number of pages and some other differences therein. It's a bit pedantic but if I were comparing multiple subwoofers and wanted to look at the same part of the review across both (granted I doubt I'd be shopping those two against each other) then it helps to have the same overall format.

Also on a side note, as I went to pull up both reviews by using the audioholics.com front page, I notice that all the product previews and first looks are listed under the Pro Reviews subsection. I can't say I really like that terribly much and while I don't know if it was intentional or one of those things that "just happened" I wonder what you guys would think of having a separate section for the first look/previews.

Well, I understand the confusion this caused. This is in large part because I did the review in my own way, and Gene was kind enough to give me a long leash. Had I realized the kickback, I would have made more of an effort to conform to prior formats. The CEA standard is new, so my concern was in adherence (within the realm of reason while being true to my own experience and beliefs) to the CEA standard, as opposed to prior published works. Hopefully the review can stand "on its own". Thanks for reading! - Paul Apollonio

 

[GranteedEV]

Paul did not do phase measurements. He feels they are VERY misleading when you have a DSP FIR filter vs an analog IIR filter

The crossover on a receiver is FIR? I always assumed otherwise.

 

[emorphien]

Well, I understand the confusion this caused. This is in large part because I did the review in my own way, and Gene was kind enough to give me a long leash. Had I realized the kickback, I would have made more of an effort to conform to prior formats. The CEA standard is new, so my concern was in adherence (within the realm of reason while being true to my own experience and beliefs) to the CEA standard, as opposed to prior published works. Hopefully the review can stand "on its own". Thanks for reading! - Paul Apollonio

I have no problem with implementing a new standard if it improves on the previous methodology! As long as future reviews follow the measurement standard set with your review then that would be getting more to the point of what I am saying.

Change happens and should be embraced but I don't think it's good if the change is just that reviews are done however someone pleases for that individual review without having real cause for deviating from a specific template. If each review stands on its own as having different methodology and different structure/formatting/etc then we wind up with a bunch of reviews done different ways with different organization and information and that's something I'd try to avoid (just my personal thoughts on the matter, aimed at AH brass and how they want things to look and feel). Your review still looks and feels like an AH review, which is a loose form of the kind of consistency I'm talking about.

 

[GranteedEV]

I have no problem with implementing a new standard if it improves on the previous methodology! As long as future reviews follow the measurement standard set with your review then that would be getting more to the point of what I am saying.

Part of it has to do with what Gene was comparing the Emotiva U12 to:

I used 1 meter groundplane RMS sinesweeps not CEA 2010 burst testing since we didn't develop a test procedure for that at the time I measured the other subs. All subs were measured using the exact same test rig, same location, same calibration, etc. Its a direct apples to apples comparison.

Obviously Paul is on the opposite end of the continent. Likewise, all of his "shootout" reviews will probably have identical format to this SVS review.

 

[emorphien]

Obviously Paul is on the opposite end of the continent. Likewise, all of his "shootout" reviews will probably have identical format to this SVS review.

I would imagine that to be true.

 

[Pyrrho]

Personally, I think people should get over reviewers giving opinions and ratings on appearance. Everybody has their own personal preference.

...

Although normally I agree that such a rating is not usually very useful or important, in this particular case I think it is. I want to be informed if the wood veneer looks almost like vinyl, especially in a product not available in local stores where I could look at it myself before buying it. I would be really annoyed if I paid extra for some special wood finish, and then it ended up just looking almost like vinyl!

So I say to the reviewers, please continue to provide such information for us. There will always be someone who complains no matter what you do, but there are some of us who do appreciate such useful information. Usually, though, you will probably hear more from the complainers than from those who appreciate such facts, which is an unfortunate aspect of dealing with the public. Please try to not let it sour you.

 

[zhimbo]

Also on a side note, as I went to pull up both reviews by using the audioholics.com front page, I notice that all the product previews and first looks are listed under the Pro Reviews subsection. I can't say I really like that terribly much and while I don't know if it was intentional or one of those things that "just happened" I wonder what you guys would think of having a separate section for the first look/previews.

I second this. The first looks and the reviews serve completely different functions, and it makes harder to find reviews of interest by just browsing.

 

[its phillip]

Also on a side note, as I went to pull up both reviews by using the audioholics.com front page, I notice that all the product previews and first looks are listed under the Pro Reviews subsection. I can't say I really like that terribly much and while I don't know if it was intentional or one of those things that "just happened" I wonder what you guys would think of having a separate section for the first look/previews.

I agree with this.

 

[audioholic212]

I agree with this.

I agree with it too myself. It would be a good idea to seperate first looks from actual reviews.

 

[billy p]

Although normally I agree that such a rating is not usually very useful or important, in this particular case I think it is. I want to be informed if the wood veneer looks almost like vinyl, especially in a product not available in local stores where I could look at it myself before buying it. I would be really annoyed if I paid extra for some special wood finish, and then it ended up just looking almost like vinyl!

So I say to the reviewers, please continue to provide such information for us. There will always be someone who complains no matter what you do, but there are some of us who do appreciate such useful information. Usually, though, you will probably hear more from the complainers than from those who appreciate such facts, which is an unfortunate aspect of dealing with the public. Please try to not let it sour you.

Aesthetics do play an important part in some peoples decisions...it did with me...

 

[gene]

I agree with it too myself. It would be a good idea to seperate first looks from actual reviews.

that would involve us having two completely separate Org charts for the site. The better approach would be a more powerful search filter so you can filter the content type you want to search. This is something we are planning for the near future. B/C of our site popularity, 9/10 you can simply goto Google to search for a product review and you will find us on the first page of searches, if not the very first or second link.

Considering how no other A/V publication has any real organization to their content, I say ours is pretty good so far but we do need a better search tool.

 

[its phillip]

I haven't the slightest idea what an org chart is, but thanks for responding to our concerns

 

[audioholic212]

Considering how no other A/V publication has any real organization to their content, I say ours is pretty good so far but we do need a better search tool.

Fair enough, thank you for the explanation.

 

[ntrain42]

Although normally I agree that such a rating is not usually very useful or important, in this particular case I think it is. I want to be informed if the wood veneer looks almost like vinyl, especially in a product not available in local stores where I could look at it myself before buying it. I would be really annoyed if I paid extra for some special wood finish, and then it ended up just looking almost like vinyl!

So I say to the reviewers, please continue to provide such information for us. There will always be someone who complains no matter what you do, but there are some of us who do appreciate such useful information. Usually, though, you will probably hear more from the complainers than from those who appreciate such facts, which is an unfortunate aspect of dealing with the public. Please try to not let it sour you.

Well then the real simple solution is detailed UP CLOSE pics posted in each review IMO.

 

[kevon27]

you guys crack me up. Either people complain b/c our ratings are too high for a product or b/c we are too critical and the ratings are too low. The SVS sub got one of the most glowing reviews to date of any sub we've ever reviewed so quit your b1tch'n!

You just don't get it Gene.. If your review of a product does not match what your reader's opinion of that same product, then your review of that product is wrong.
For instance, if you ever reviewed Polk Audio speakers and give it a bad rating, even if the hard number says the speakers are crap, I will personally hate you because of gave the brand I pay allegiance too a bad rating.

I'm sorry, it's just how the internet works.

 

[GranteedEV]

For instance, if you ever reviewed Polk Audio speakers and give it a bad rating, even if the hard number says the speakers are crap, I will personally hate you because of gave the brand I pay allegiance too a bad rating.

huh?

So you're more interested in paying allegance to absolute garbage than searching for excellence?

 

[kevon27]

huh?

So you're more interested in paying allegance to absolute garbage than searching for excellence?

Yep.. It's like sports... Your basketball team may suck, but it's your team.