# SVS PB-2000 vs PSA XV15 vs DIY



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

I know it doesn't seem to have any formal reviews yet but I was hoping for some additional thoughts on the PB-2000 sub from SVS. All anyone has seemed to state is that it will be better than its predecessor the PB12-NSD but by how much specifically? I've seen some info saying it will have 2-2.5db more output but is that just down low or across the entire frequency range? How will this compare to say the XV15? I'm sure the PSA will still have more output but what about linearity? I'm really torn between going with dual PSA XV15's, dual 18" SI sealed DIY subs or now since this sub was just released, dual SVS PB-2000's. My biggest concern in going DIY is they would need to be sealed and I would be putting them in a fixed location which would cause me to have to do a lot more work as far as re-routing electrical outlets etc......also since they would need to go in a specific location the size does not allow for a ported enclosure. 

The major benefit IMO for the PB-2000 is they could also go in the areas I'm thinking of doing the sealed enclosure in due to their size and being front firing and front ported will be the best for this application. The PSA XV15's would need to be placed inside the main speakers due to its down firing rear ported configuration and would not be able to be placed in the same areas as what the svs could or the DIY would have to be placed in. That's not a negative of course but perhaps WAF would kick in with the subs sitting where they would need to sit for the PSA's and that would present a dilemma if the wife decided she wanted them where the DIY subs or the SVS could be placed. The other concern with DIY is I like the idea of a warranty and DIY would not offer me that much in warranty in comparison to the likes of SVS and PSA. Also the built in DSP on the PSA and SVS is also a big plus as well as the low power consumption in comparison to what DIY would be when being powered by an EP4000. Connections would also be much simpler with the manufactured powered subs. LFE cables are already in place. I know it's a lot of info to ask for a sub that's not been professionally reviewed yet but some input would be nice.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

At this point the new SVS PB/SB 2000 subwoofers are a bit of an enigma, without many owners or reviews, so any claims regarding their abilities should be considered purely conjecture. Until info starts getting out I would put little value in what others are speculating. FWIW... I did reach out to Ed Mullen toward the end of last year offering to do the same thing I did with the PB/SB 1000 - review them both at the same time - but I don't have a commitment either way. It may still happen, but there's nothing imminent.


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

theJman said:


> At this point the new SVS PB/SB 2000 subwoofers are a bit of an enigma, without many owners or reviews, so any claims regarding their abilities should be considered purely conjecture. Until info starts getting out I would put little value in what others are speculating. FWIW... I did reach out to Ed Mullen toward the end of last year offering to do the same thing I did with the PB/SB 1000 - review them both at the same time - but I don't have a commitment either way. It may still happen, but there's nothing imminent.


 I figured as much cause it just came out. Looking forward to the possibility of your review and hopefully some info will roll in soon on the real world performance of the PB-2000. Thanks for your response and at least a thread has been started so hopefully it will generate some interest in comparing the PB-2000 with the XV15. Seems to me to be the top two subs in this price range and even slightly higher. Couple that with getting duals of these products for the same price as a single "higher end" product it stands to reason this should be a hot seller for SVS as the XV15 has been for PSA.


----------



## Bear123 (Dec 31, 2013)

The PB2000, according to SVS, will have 2-2.5 dB increased output from about 25 Hz up. Although nothing is 100% until tested, this should still put its max output below that of the XV15. However, that is by design. The XV15 focuses on max output. The SVS focuses on linearity and gives up some max SPL to do so. The new PB2000 is also tuned slightly lower than the PB12. I noticed this first hand as I went from the PB12 to the PB2000. On "Bass I Love You", the PB2000 provided a much more extended low frequency rumble at the end of the low bass sweep in the song than the PB12 did. Another words, this song hits somewhere in the 17Hz range which is inaudible, but can be felt and shook my room/couch/house with the PB12. The PB2000 also did so but the effect was more prolonged and noticeable, so it seems to me that it is digging deeper than the PB12 was able to.

Also, I saw an in room measurement of an owners PB2000, and his FR was very flat down to about 15Hz in room.

If you are filling an enourmous room on a tight budget or listen extremely loud, the XV15 might be better due to its higher ouput. If you want linearity and wont miss the few dB of max SPL, SVS should work.


----------



## Basshead81 (Apr 9, 2013)

Bear123 said:


> The PB2000, according to SVS, will have 2-2.5 dB increased output from about 25 Hz up. Although nothing is 100% until tested, this should still put its max output below that of the XV15. However, that is by design. The XV15 focuses on max output. The SVS focuses on linearity and gives up some max SPL to do so. The new PB2000 is also tuned slightly lower than the PB12. I noticed this first hand as I went from the PB12 to the PB2000. On "Bass I Love You", the PB2000 provided a much more extended low frequency rumble at the end of the low bass sweep in the song than the PB12 did. Another words, this song hits somewhere in the 17Hz range which is inaudible, but can be felt and shook my room/couch/house with the PB12. The PB2000 also did so but the effect was more prolonged and noticeable, so it seems to me that it is digging deeper than the PB12 was able to.
> 
> Also, I saw an in room measurement of an owners PB2000, and his FR was very flat down to about 15Hz in room.
> 
> If you are filling an enourmous room on a tight budget or listen extremely loud, the XV15 might be better due to its higher ouput. If you want linearity and wont miss the few dB of max SPL, SVS should work.


I think some focus way to hard on linearity also...putting a heavy limiter on a sub squashes its dynamics when pushing the sub near its limits. There are several members on AVS who went from the NSD to XV15 and noted it was a night and day difference in sound quality and output.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Basshead81 said:


> I think some focus way to hard on linearity also...putting a heavy limiter on a sub squashes its dynamics when pushing the sub near its limits. There are several members on AVS who went from the NSD to XV15 and noted it was a night and day difference in sound quality and output.


Interesting point, and a valid observation as well.

SVS is renowned for their billiard table flat frequency response. Most people -- myself included -- applaud them for diligently striving to achieve a neutral sound. It's not without penalties though, because DSP tuning invariably requires boosting certain frequencies to achieve a flat response. As you correctly stated, that negatively impacts dynamics at some point.

SVS dances the fine line between output and dynamics better than most companies, but immutable laws of physics are just that. Something has to give eventually.


----------



## jbrown15 (Dec 7, 2011)

Sorry, do you have to go sealed with the DIY sub because of the size?


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

jbrown15 said:


> Sorry, do you have to go sealed with the DIY sub because of the size?


 Yeah, the size would have to be over 10 cu ft for ported.


----------



## bmoney003 (Nov 21, 2012)

Basshead81 said:


> I think some focus way to hard on linearity also...putting a heavy limiter on a sub squashes its dynamics when pushing the sub near its limits. There are several members on AVS who went from the NSD to XV15 and noted it was a night and day difference in sound quality and output.


I am one of them. Xv15 vs pb12 was no contest. Xv15 blew it out of the water. Easily too it might add. Actually got a smoother response in my room as well


----------



## Basshead81 (Apr 9, 2013)

bmoney003 said:


> I am one of them. Xv15 vs pb12 was no contest. Xv15 blew it out of the water. Easily too it might add. Actually got a smoother response in my room as well


Good to know!! Thank you for sharing!!!


----------



## kfish (Jul 11, 2013)

Mike,

There's one person I'm aware of on another forum that has typed up a review/comparison that may help you out.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1515496/svs-pb-2000-unboxing-and-review-now-up


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

kfish said:


> Mike, There's one person I'm aware of on another forum that has typed up a review/comparison that may help you out. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1515496/svs-pb-2000-unboxing-and-review-now-up


 Thanks for the link! The sub looks nice and the reviewer seems to be very happy with it. My only issue is he is reviewing based on a room that's 960 cu ft where as mine is 6700cu ft. Hence the reason I know I need at least duals. I just like the idea of being able to put the subs in the little alcoves I have just in case WAF kicks in and that would mean going sealed 18" DIY or dual pb2000 since they are a front firing and front port design. Too bad PSA couldn't develop a front firing front ported sub in the next few months. Lol!


----------



## gorb (Sep 5, 2010)

Out of your three choices, I would definitely choose the DIY 18"s. You'd have much more extension and output above and below the tunes of the ported subs.


----------



## Tom V. (Jul 12, 2012)

Basshead81 said:


> I think some focus way to hard on linearity also...putting a heavy limiter on a sub squashes its dynamics when pushing the sub near its limits. There are several members on AVS who went from the NSD to XV15 and noted it was a night and day difference in sound quality and output.



An important point here is that we need to be sure we understand what each graph is telling us. You don't look at a basic frequency response graph and try to extrapolate max output...it would be total guesswork with no frame of reference. And conversely you should not look at a CEA-2010 maximum output graphs and start making assumptions about anything except---maximum output capabilities. There is no correlation that we can use to "connect-the-dots". 

The higher the CEA-2010 scores the better. There is no way the higher scores can be considered "less" accurate when it comes to the reproduction of transient material like music and home theater. 

I'll try to explain in a little more detail over the weekend if orders simmer down a little.

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

Thanks for the info Tom! Looking forward to more details on this. Also since this discussion is primarily due to proper placement, what are the advantages/disadvantages of down firing like your design as opposed to front firing? My biggest issue that has popped up is potentially having to put the subs in alcoves in the front corners of my room. How would this hinder the performance if down firing rear ported sub? How much room should be between the back of the wall and the rear port? Thanks again!


----------



## Tom V. (Jul 12, 2012)

Mike0206 said:


> Thanks for the info Tom! Looking forward to more details on this. Also since this discussion is primarily due to proper placement, what are the advantages/disadvantages of down firing like your design as opposed to front firing? My biggest issue that has popped up is potentially having to put the subs in alcoves in the front corners of my room. How would this hinder the performance if down firing rear ported sub? How much room should be between the back of the wall and the rear port? Thanks again!


 Hi Mike,

I'll definitely drop by again before leaving the office tonight and share more thoughts on the subject. Here is one quick link though...

Vel 18" servo. Considered a "benchmark" subwoofer design for the last decade. Dozens(hundreds?) of reviews with near universal praise of the overall sound quality. http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=64 Max output "graph" is hardly "even" through all frequencies... Again, no correlation between sound quality (or as someone suggested----the subwoofer becoming "boomy") and max output scoring. 

Predetermining the position of a subwoofer like you describe will usually result in some level of performance compromise. But, that isn't uncommon with non dedicated rooms. With the subwoofer *in* an enclosed area like this(with one baffle open to the room) ideally, all the components(PR, active driver, port, etc) emitting acoustical energy would face into the room. However, the sound waves in the typical bass range are long enough that there wouldn't be a significant performance drop if one or more of these "emitters" faced to the side or down. This would be particularly true for a port or PR. In your specific case I would orient the XV15 on its side so the driver is facing into the room. Have the port directed to the left or right and keep a minimum of 3" clearance there. Also, if you could angle the enclosure so the port was directed into the room a bit...that couldn't hurt. 

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

Wow never thought of that!!! That could definitely work then as the dimensions of the PSA would fit well into the alcove to allow for more then 3" from the wall and it would allow the sub to be angled towards the listening position. Hmmm..... Previously due to the size of my room you had recommended an xv30f but I'm liking dual subs


----------



## Tom V. (Jul 12, 2012)

Hi all,

I'm going to post my thoughts on FR, max output, "linear", etc in the Power Sound Audio thread as not to side track any further discussion in this thread.

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

Thanks Tom! Very good info in the other thread! Now we gotta see what the CEA 2010 measurements will be for the PB-2000 but like you stated, the real world performance is really what we should be concerned with.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Mike0206 said:


> Thanks Tom! Very good info in the other thread! Now we gotta see what the CEA 2010 measurements will be for the PB-2000 but like you stated, the real world performance is really what we should be concerned with.


I've made a comment like that countless times, but the bench racers pounce upon me like they're lions and I'm wearing a meat necklace (although a side benefit has been those responses have helped me identify the people who know what they're doing from the posers). The CEA 2010 numbers are very significant -- something I doubt any of us will argue against -- but on most other forums I've essentially given up extolling the virtues of using ones ears to make the final decision.


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

theJman said:


> I've made a comment like that countless times, but the bench racers pounce upon me like they're lions and I'm wearing a meat necklace (although a side benefit has been those responses have helped me identify the people who know what they're doing from the posers). The CEA 2010 numbers are very significant -- something I doubt any of us will argue against -- but on most other forums I've essentially given up extolling the virtues of using ones ears to make the final decision.


 I've seen your posts on other forums as well Jim about this and I have always found your posts very informative. I don't belong to other forums for a reason lol! Bench racing is always something that cracks me up! It cracked me up when I was racing cars and it seems every hobby has there bench racers. You just can't get away from them!


----------



## Tom V. (Jul 12, 2012)

Mike0206 said:


> Thanks Tom! Very good info in the other thread! Now we gotta see what the CEA 2010 measurements will be for the PB-2000 but like you stated, the real world performance is really what we should be concerned with.


 Just to be sure I'm not misunderstood---I feel the CEA-2010 burst data is very accurate in gauging the real world output capabilities of a subwoofer. The entire testing protocol (Tone bursts used, harmonic distortion limits, averaging method, etc) is entirely designed to simulate how the subwoofer will operate in our homes with real source material---music and film.

Tom V. 
Power Sound Audio


----------



## Mike0206 (Jul 14, 2013)

Tom V. said:


> Just to be sure I'm not misunderstood---I feel the CEA-2010 burst data is very accurate in gauging the real world output capabilities of a subwoofer. The entire testing protocol (Tone bursts used, harmonic distortion limits, averaging method, etc) is entirely designed to simulate how the subwoofer will operate in our homes with real source material---music and film. Tom V. Power Sound Audio


 Ok thanks for the clarification. I was interpreting it as the CEA-2010 measurements being important but the real world performance is what mattered. You just helped me to appreciate that the entire testing protocol of the CEA-2010 measurements simulates the real world as close as possible. I think I got it it now. So now we wait to see what the true performance of the SVS PB-2000 will be once somebody gets it for review.


----------

