SVS SC-02 HTM Review

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The SCS-02 listening window response measures +4.94/-2.05 dB from 200Hz-10kHz.

From 100Hz-7kHz, it's +/-2dB, which is great.

@8kHz, it's +4dB.

@9-10kHz, it's almost +5dB.

So would you say it's pretty good overall?

 

[zieglj01]

The SCS-02 listening window response measures +4.94/-2.05 dB from 200Hz-10kHz.

From 100Hz-7kHz, it's +/-2dB, which is great.

@8kHz, it's +4dB.

@9-10kHz, it's almost +5dB.

So would you say it's pretty good overall?

Well, it is good if you want to highlight the sssszzzz, in female
singing voices or, some high level male voices. And, can you
imagine a Violin that is playing above 7 khz?

Here is an interesting chart.
http://www.dak.com/reviews/tutorial_frequencies.cfm

 

[shadyJ]

That isn't a terrible FR, seems about average, at least that can be EQ'd. What I don't understand is why SVS would make such weak speakers yet such powerful subs. An 84 sensitivity spec? and 82 for the SBS speakers? Even their MBS bookshelfs have an 82 db sensitivity spec, that is pretty bad for a $900 pair of speakers. I hope they have articulation and great imaging to make up for their lack of dynamics. These are not serious home theater speakers.

 

[cschang]

Where is the review?

 

[cschang]

Well, it is good if you want to highlight the sssszzzz, in female
singing voices or, some high level male voices. And, can you
imagine a Violin that is playing above 7 khz?

Here is an interesting chart.
Drew's Equalizer and Frequency Equalization Tutorial - The More You Know, The Better It sounds.

Great chart, Jim.

 

[mike c]

That isn't a terrible FR, seems about average, at least that can be EQ'd. What I don't understand is why SVS would make such weak speakers yet such powerful subs. An 84 sensitivity spec? and 82 for the SBS speakers? Even their MBS bookshelfs have an 82 db sensitivity spec, that is pretty bad for a $900 pair of speakers. I hope they have articulation and great imaging to make up for their lack of dynamics. These are not serious home theater speakers.

one needs just 32 continuous watts for ear damaging levels (102db continuous) in a large room, 4m distance for 84db speakers

again, it's not all about SPL. db sensitivity and ohms would be last on the list when considering speakers, what's important is how they sound.

regarding whether they are "serious home theater speakers" or not ... have you even heard these speakers?

price:sensitivity being your top consideration ... you should recommend pro audio speakers

 

[agarwalro]

Is say wall mount it or leave it....

 

[shadyJ]

one needs just 32 continuous watts for ear damaging levels (102db continuous) in a large room, 4m distance for 84db speakers

again, it's not all about SPL. db sensitivity and ohms would be last on the list when considering speakers, what's important is how they sound.

regarding whether they are "serious home theater speakers" or not ... have you even heard these speakers?

price:sensitivity being your top consideration ... you should recommend pro audio speakers

Your math is incorrect. According to the SPL calculator, a single 84 db speaker at 4 m (13.1 ft) hits 87 db at listening position. When we change that to three speakers, and put them near a corner with their maximum power handling (160 watts) we can achieve 104.8 db. That is loudest their front stage can possibly get at 4 m (you will also need three 90 degree corners in your front stage, lol). That isn't to say that is not loud though, that is very loud. However, I have a feeling they won't be sounding too great at that point. You also have to wonder about their dynamic range with such a low sensitivity. On the other hand, I haven't heard them personally. Honestly, I don't think they would be awful speakers, and I think they might be nice for near-field speakers or for people who only listen at modest volume levels. As for myself, I like to let my system blaze every now and then, and while I would love to own some SVS subs, I would not want their speakers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Where is the review?

Latest HTM issue. It also reviewed Cary Audio Cinema 12, Onkyo NR1009, Golden Ear Triton 3.

 

[psbfan9]

Here is an interesting chart.
Drew's Equalizer and Frequency Equalization Tutorial - The More You Know, The Better It sounds.

Thanks for this!

 

[zieglj01]

Thanks for this!

Your welcome!

 

[mike c]

Your math is incorrect. According to the SPL calculator, a single 84 db speaker at 4 m (13.1 ft) hits 87 db at listening position. When we change that to three speakers, and put them near a corner with their maximum power handling (160 watts) we can achieve 104.8 db. That is loudest their front stage can possibly get at 4 m (you will also need three 90 degree corners in your front stage, lol). That isn't to say that is not loud though, that is very loud. However, I have a feeling they won't be sounding too great at that point. You also have to wonder about their dynamic range with such a low sensitivity. On the other hand, I haven't heard them personally. Honestly, I don't think they would be awful speakers, and I think they might be nice for near-field speakers or for people who only listen at modest volume levels. As for myself, I like to let my system blaze every now and then, and while I would love to own some SVS subs, I would not want their speakers.

ah yes, i should have added 3db instead of 6db for the doubling of power (didn't use the calculator)

2 speakers, near a wall (i don't think you have an anechoic room), 64 watts (something any receiver can do), 13.1 feet, 99db.

99db not enough? oh btw, i HAVE these speakers in a 4k cubic room with only 1 concrete wall (living room with glass and wooden dividers connecting to the stairway, dining, etc). they are WAY loud before they break up, and that's based on actual experience instead of feeling. oh and LOL on your obsession to SPL.

oh and if you wonder why i'm on your case, i just got tired of your "this should be better because the interwebs thinks it's better" without even hearing ANY of the products in question, you could have gotten away with that with subs (not that that would have been accurate) ... but speakers?
i've NEVER concluded a speaker is better than another without hearing both in my home.

i also have custom made subwoofer and speaker switchers (though i didn't add gain control on the speaker switcher due to KISS) but switching from the SCS ('measly 84db') STS (90db) you'd think EVERYBODY would like the STS due to it's "louder" presentation. but i'd say more than half liked the SCS and others liked the STS due to more details. imagine that, listening to speakers to decide which they liked? what a weird world.

 

[shadyJ]

Given that the STS use the same tweeter, same woofers, and same cabinet materials and bracing type (I'm assuming), I am surprised you even AB'd them against the SCS in the first place, they are going to sound mostly the same. What you did was an exercise in gauging loudness preference.

Specs don't tell the whole story, but the sensitivity spec is a meaningful one. These speakers are going to be pushing your receiver harder than ordinary speakers. As these are budget speakers, this should especially be of concern if the 02 series of the SCS speakers have the impedance dips of the first series. Besides that, low sensitivity speakers have a reputation for compression. I don't know how the SCS speakers handles compression, but if I were a prospective speaker buyer, why would I chance it and not just go with something else? The fact is, these are not going to have the clean headroom of something with a 90+ sensitivity. To some people that matters, and to others it does not, but there are lots of other good speakers which cost the same or less that are far more efficient than these.

Also your statement about not concluding one speaker is better than another without hearing them both in your home is absurd. Do you really need to hear both some TAD Reference One speakers and some RCA HTiB speakers in your house to know which is going to sound better?

 

[mike c]

Given that the STS use the same tweeter, same woofers, and same cabinet materials and bracing type (I'm assuming), I am surprised you even AB'd them against the SCS in the first place, they are going to sound mostly the same. What you did was an exercise in gauging loudness preference.

Specs don't tell the whole story, but the sensitivity spec is a meaningful one. These speakers are going to be pushing your receiver harder than ordinary speakers. As these are budget speakers, this should especially be of concern if the 02 series of the SCS speakers have the impedance dips of the first series. Besides that, low sensitivity speakers have a reputation for compression. I don't know how the SCS speakers handles compression, but if I were a prospective speaker buyer, why would I chance it and not just go with something else? The fact is, these are not going to have the clean headroom of something with a 90+ sensitivity. To some people that matters, and to others it does not, but there are lots of other good speakers which cost the same or less that are far more efficient than these.

Also your statement about not concluding one speaker is better than another without hearing them both in your home is absurd. Do you really need to hear both some TAD Reference One speakers and some RCA HTiB speakers in your house to know which is going to sound better?

again with the assumption. yes one could think that, but it's simply NOT the case. hence the A/B. don't you think the STS would have a different crossover to accommodate the "two woofers" added? don't you think the cx would significantly affect how the speaker sounds?

and sifting through the "loudness preference" (if you read my post, i said that i SHOULD have liked the STS simply due to it's loudness) but i didn't like the STS myself, while it had more "detail" in the instruments, it was also too bright for my taste.

again, if you skimmed through speaker choice via "specs", you'd be skipping a lot of great speakers.

now you're drawing extreme examples.

even for subwoofers ... YOU and many others would think that the ported subs would just simply be the better choice over the sealed subs from SVS. and yet, i have a large number of listeners simply walking away with the sealed subs. why? because it sounds better to them.

if they shopped based on SPL, and didn't bother to listen, they would have walked away with the ported subs. they would have missed how great sounding the SB's are for music.

i struggled with this myself, until i heard the SB's myself. it just defied the measured charts. distortion up the wazoo, SPL less than half that of the ported subs, ported subs having less THD at every frequency and equivalent db.

two ears, just one mouth. (i guess this is defeated by two hands hammering on the internets)

 

[shadyJ]

I can understand people's preference for sealed subs, but I wonder how much a prejudicial bias comes into play when picking favorites here. I would love to see a blind test between a sealed and ported sub, using the same driver, and EQing them so the FR is the same. I wonder how many people could truly tell which is which. That would make for a good Audioholics article. I like sealed subs, but I don't even trust my own senses when it comes to this.

As for the SCS, I find it troublesome that it should sound different than the STS. It was sold with the STS as a front stage package, I would have assumed they should all sound very similar, as a front stage is supposed to, except with the STS having a bit deeper extension. If it does sound dissimilar to the SCS, to me that raises more questions then it answers, but I suppose those questions are irrelevant now that the STS is discontinued.

 

[mike c]

I can understand people's preference for sealed subs, but I wonder how much a prejudicial bias comes into play when picking favorites here. I would love to see a blind test between a sealed and ported sub, using the same driver, and EQing them so the FR is the same. I wonder how many people could truly tell which is which. That would make for a good Audioholics article. I like sealed subs, but I don't even trust my own senses when it comes to this.

As for the SCS, I find it troublesome that it should sound different than the STS. It was sold with the STS as a front stage package, I would have assumed they should all sound very similar, as a front stage is supposed to, except with the STS having a bit deeper extension. If it does sound dissimilar to the SCS, to me that raises more questions then it answers, but I suppose those questions are irrelevant now that the STS is discontinued.

i actually had some guinea pigs come listen to a single blind test. PB13Ultra vs Velodyne DD18. they were pretty much 100% correct on which is which. now see, charts and measurements show these two to have absolute minimal distortion to give them away ... but still ... the sealed sub was picked out everytime with music listening (movies on the other hand, it was vice versa).

i won't argue about what SVS should have done with their speakers.

i don't think one "looks" at his speaker specs and measurements when one wants to listen to music, they're a good way to eliminate some options, but in the end, it still lands in your room with your ears doing the listening.

 

[cschang]

Latest HTM issue. It also reviewed Cary Audio Cinema 12, Onkyo NR1009, Golden Ear Triton 3.

Ahhh...I have to wait until it is online.

 

[avliner]

I do have a 7.1 SVS setup and I'm pretty much happy so far and no intentions whatsoever to upgrade them anytime soon, but one thing cought my attention since the release of the 02 series though.

My front array has 03 X SCS - 01's ( first generation ) with a sensivity of 87dB though and I assume they're using the exact same compoents (other than the front grille, which is now metallic one ), so my question is:

how's that possible, I mean to have a lower sensivity now ( 84dB )?
Can this "lower sensivity model" be considered as a downgrade or what??

 

[mike c]

I do have a 7.1 SVS setup and I'm pretty much happy so far and no intentions whatsoever to upgrade them anytime soon, but one thing cought my attention since the release of the 02 series though.

My front array has 03 X SCS - 01's ( first generation ) with a sensivity of 87dB though and I assume they're using the exact same compoents (other than the front grille, which is now metallic one ), so my question is:

how's that possible, I mean to have a lower sensivity now ( 84dB )?
Can this "lower sensivity model" be considered as a downgrade or what??

they changed the tweeter and crossover (though i don't know about the woofer). (the STS and SSS always had the new tweeter, it was a running change for SVS)

no, it's not a downgrade, like i said, the sensitivity does not dictate how the speaker sounds, i guess it's a sacrifice a speaker manufacturer has to make to make the speaker sound how it sounds. although i had the 01's i never bothered to A/B them and i highly doubt SVS would come out with a crappier speaker, it seems that all things equal, they go up and not down.

 

[avliner]

Thanks Mike!