What sub?

[Good4it]

Looking for a cheaper small and lighter sub that will sound good with my SVS PB2000 for my small room. Any suggestions?

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

How about another one?

 

[lovinthehd]

Maybe the PC2000, 15.6 lbs lighter and a smaller footprint, yet a match for the PB2000....

 

[Good4it]

If the wife had her way the 2nd one would be invisible. Or I could move then I could have a bunch.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

If the wife had her way the 2nd one would be invisible. Or I could move then I could have a bunch.

Lol. Mine would too. But I live her as well! The pc HD mentioned is a good choice. Two of my subs are PC pluses. Love em. Not sure how much latitude you have with her but I would recommend keeping them the same(pc or pb2k).

 

[WaynePflughaupt]

It’s never a good idea to mix subs of different capabilities and extension. Overall performance will typically be “dumbed down” to that of the lesser sub.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

 

[shadyJ]

It’s never a good idea to mix subs of different capabilities and extension. Overall performance will typically be “dumbed down” to that of the lesser sub.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Not necessarily. A sub like the PB-2000 will not be pushed into misbehavior, so if you run a more powerful subwoofer along with it, it isn't going to be pushed into heavy distortion in an effort to keep up with the powerful sub. Of course, if you run a lesser performing sub along side the PB-2000, it's a different story.

 

[Matthew J Poes]

Not necessarily. A sub like the PB-2000 will not be pushed into misbehavior, so if you run a more powerful subwoofer along with it, it isn't going to be pushed into heavy distortion in an effort to keep up with the powerful sub. Of course, if you run a lesser performing sub along side the PB-2000, it's a different story.

You can also mix subs which have different capabilities but similar peak output in their respective bandwidth. For example the mixing of a ULF sub with more of a midbass sub. As you know, this is an approach I use. All of the subs are capable of similar peak output levels (well, ok, they can all exceed my needs), but over a different primary bandwidth. The 18 being capable of a lot more output below 35hz than the 12's are.

You can also use "lesser" subs at a reduced level (this is really the right way to use them anyway) in parts of the room closer to the listening position or back of the room for acoustic reasons. Let's say the main sub is capable of 110dB across an operating bandwidth of 30hz to 100hz. You might run another sub at -6dB of the main sub that is only capable of 104dB across its operating bandwidth of 30hz to 100hz. In this scenario, the sub wouldn't distort because you have it turned down.

If it's a DIY affair, you can also implement really strong limiters to ensure the lesser sub simply can't distort.

 

[speakerman39]

It’s never a good idea to mix subs of different capabilities and extension. Overall performance will typically be “dumbed down” to that of the lesser sub.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

This guy claims that you can. Here are (2) articles by Dr. Earl Geddes.


http://seriousaudioblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/two-great-articles-on-multiple.html


Cheers,

Phil

 

[shadyJ]

This guy claims that you can. Here are (2) articles by Dr. Earl Geddes.

You can also mix subs which have different capabilities but similar peak output in their respective bandwidth. For example the mixing of a ULF sub with more of a midbass sub. As you know, this is an approach I use. All of the subs are capable of similar peak output levels (well, ok, they can all exceed my needs), but over a different primary bandwidth. The 18 being capable of a lot more output below 35hz than the 12's are...

To be fair, I wouldn't normally recommend mixing subs of greatly differing performance characteristics unless you know what you are doing, or unless you understood the behavior of the subs like the SVS subs, that they are protected from misbehavior. Sure it can be done, but most people don't have the time or know-how to make it all work. Dr. Earl Geddes made this the subject of his PhD thesis in acoustics, and Dr. Matthew Poes is his evil henchman. These men are insane fanatics who are willing to invest the time to gain the expertise in order to accomplish this. Most people, even audio enthusiasts, don't have the means or know-how to correctly measure their system, let alone place differing subs according to their optimal system-wide response. For those non-crazy people, a group that I sadly do not belong to, they should probably just get subs of similar capabilities and place them in room according to certain rules of thumb, like Harman's or Geddes' typical placement recommendations.

 

[speakerman39]

To be fair, I wouldn't normally recommend mixing subs of greatly differing performance characteristics unless you know what you are doing, or unless you understood the behavior of the subs like the SVS subs, that they are protected from misbehavior. Sure it can be done, but most people don't have the time or know-how to make it all work. Dr. Earl Geddes made this the subject of his PhD thesis in acoustics, and Dr. Matthew Poes is his evil henchman. These men are insane fanatics who are willing to invest the time to gain the expertise in order to accomplish this. Most people, even audio enthusiasts, don't have the means or know-how to correctly measure their system, let alone place differing subs according to their optimal system-wide response. For those non-crazy people, a group that I sadly do not belong to, they should probably just get subs of similar capabilities and place them in room according to certain rules of thumb, like Harman's or Geddes' typical placement recommendations.

Oh I very much agree here. At one time, I owned (4) of the SVS SB12-NSDS's and remember what a nightmare it was getting them dialed in my small room. Sure, things sounded very smooth with more headroom. But, honestly I preferred dual 15" sealed subs myself. That is, the 15" duals gave me more extension and more mid-bass impact keeping things very tight and articulate. Not to mention, much easier to place and /or dial in. I find Dr. Geddes's approach very interesting. Just not sure I am in agreement w/him. However, he has a PhD. and knows far more than me. So, who am I to argue?


Cheers,

Phil

 

[Matthew J Poes]

I like that I was just referred to as a mad henchman!

 

[Matthew J Poes]

To be fair, I wouldn't normally recommend mixing subs of greatly differing performance characteristics unless you know what you are doing, or unless you understood the behavior of the subs like the SVS subs, that they are protected from misbehavior. Sure it can be done, but most people don't have the time or know-how to make it all work. Dr. Earl Geddes made this the subject of his PhD thesis in acoustics, and Dr. Matthew Poes is his evil henchman. These men are insane fanatics who are willing to invest the time to gain the expertise in order to accomplish this. Most people, even audio enthusiasts, don't have the means or know-how to correctly measure their system, let alone place differing subs according to their optimal system-wide response. For those non-crazy people, a group that I sadly do not belong to, they should probably just get subs of similar capabilities and place them in room according to certain rules of thumb, like Harman's or Geddes' typical placement recommendations.

While it is true that mixing subs can be risky, I would just say that attempting to use the multisub approaches without measurement and a decent understanding of the concept risks a worse end product. They can easily increase deviance and reduce the flatness of the response if not setup correctly. When I setup systems using this approach I typically find that the response gets a lot worse until I optimize their settings.

And James, I know you and I disagree on this, but I happen to think that without EQ this approach can also increase peaks. Geddes has actually said the same thing in his discussions. I’ve seen this problem throughout the range, but it’s readily apparent at the bottom Uniondale region. At those low frequencies the subs typically either cancel each other or couple in phase. If the latter, since there is virtually no spatial variance with the mode, that modal peak tends to just increase with each additional sub. Like a lot!

 

[shadyJ]

While it is true that mixing subs can be risky, I would just say that attempting to use the multisub approaches without measurement and a decent understanding of the concept risks a worse end product. They can easily increase deviance and reduce the flatness of the response if not setup correctly. When I setup systems using this approach I typically find that the response gets a lot worse until I optimize their settings.

And James, I know you and I disagree on this, but I happen to think that without EQ this approach can also increase peaks. Geddes has actually said the same thing in his discussions. I’ve seen this problem throughout the range, but it’s readily apparent at the bottom Uniondale region. At those low frequencies the subs typically either cancel each other or couple in phase. If the latter, since there is virtually no spatial variance with the mode, that modal peak tends to just increase with each additional sub. Like a lot!

In my experience, adding subs doesn't normally make the response worse, but that certainly is a possibility. I would think that the odds are that the overall response would improve, but certainly there is no way to know for sure without measurements. It's all guesswork until you break out the microphone.