# Please recommend "sub system" for 100% music



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

First off, I apologize for what is likely a repeat post. I'm sure this has been asked before, but I cannot think of a reasonable way to find previous posts on the topic. Obviously a search of "music" and "sub" would return almost every thread on subs.

After lurking for awhile, Wayne's sub reviews inspired me to join this forum. His reviews are the first place I have read anything about modern subs not properly providing bass detail for music.
He seems to solve this by using the high-pass filter to relieve the sub from the lower frequencies.

I would like suggestions on a music-only sub system. I say system because I consider the high pass filter (or equivalent) as part of the sub package.

Lets call the budget for the sub $800 - $1200. Less is better and I _can_ go more if there is something truly significant to be gained.

PS - In Waynes review of the SB12Plus, he says the detain on Manhattan Transfer is not as good as he is used to. Does anyone know what it is he is used to?

Thank you for your help!


----------



## davidburn (May 10, 2007)

In my experience with subs I built a 35lt box using 1" mdf tuned to 35hz with external 2x90mm ports and it was amazing for music using a Jaycar 12" profile sub and a 240w 4 ohm plate amp. It sounded great and hit hard but it could not play movies very well at all. With music no high pass filter was needed. I believe lower xmax drivers work really well for music in small ported enclosures but they are not suited to movies.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

davidburn said:


> I believe lower xmax drivers work really well for music in small ported enclosures but they are not suited to movies.


I don't know the lingo. Is "xmax" maximum displacement? - so you are saying a driver which does not have a long stroke is probably better for music?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

My personal take on the music vs movies debate is that a sub that is tuned properly and is good for movies will do very well with music. I have never understood the reason for a person to state that a sub will or will not be good for music if it has a good frequency reponce (and again I say that it needs to be tuned and built properly).
I have a SVS PB13 Ultra and it not only sounds fantastic with movies but music is effortless and not at all overpowering. Music will not run a sub nearly as hard as movie soundtracks and if a sub is good at handling the frequencies down below 20Hz then there should be no issue.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

I agree with the good for movie, good for music, except if you are only building for music you may choose to obtain greater output at the expense of losing deep bass, ala movies. This can allow a builder to use a smaller sized ported enclosure, maximize a smaller amp, or both. Just be sure that you don't regret the choice!:duh:


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

Here is an explanation of the difference as provided via Wayne's review I referenced. To me, this is a big deal. The subwoofered systems I have heard cannot compare with my old AR 3a full-range speakers for providing good bass detail. They do dig deeper, but they do not pass muster for accurate music reproduction.

From Wayne's review of the PSB10-ISD:
_SUMMATION
After my initial music listening I was feeling that if a clear winner had emerged, it was my humble DIY subwoofers, not the ones being reviewed. None of them compared well to my throw-down rig when it came to conveying low frequency detail – not even close. I didn’t know what to attribute this to except their ported designs vs. the Shivas’ sealed enclosures.

In my mind there are three characteristics that qualify a sub as "musical": Tightness (often labeled speed), detail and extension. Actually, a sub’s ability to render detail is directly related to its speed and accuracy, so I guess you could arguably narrow the requirements down to two characteristics.

Anyway you define it, the tightness and detail simply wasn’t coming through with any of these subs the way I’m used to hearing. None of them could resolve the subtle texture in Basia’s "Cruising for Bruising" bass line at all. They could only vaguely deliver the "growl" and texture of "Drunk on Love," a far cry from the clear distinction I get with my subs. With the difficult lines in Manhattan Transfer’s "Sassy," the subs all exhibited considerable "overhang" (although the SVS was better in this regard than the others), whereas mine are tight and concise.

The SVS’ superior extension, while certainly impressive and noticeably better than my own subs, seemed almost too much of a good thing with music – everything sounded "heavy." Considering that the EQ boost my subs have at 25 Hz also means they roll out pretty fast below that point, I wondered if that would make a difference with the PB10-ISD.

Conveniently, the AudioControl equalizer has an optional 18 dB/octave high-pass filter with available settings at 15 Hz, 25 Hz and 35 Hz. I switched it on to 25 Hz, and the effect on the PB10-ISD’s ability to render detail was simply astounding. Suddenly there was resolution and detail in spades!

I went back through my reference tracks one at a time and the resolution the PB10-ISD was now exhibiting was simply jaw dropping. Where there was none before, the subtle texture in Basia’s "Cruising for Bruising" bass line was all there, even better than with my own subs. The prominent low freq growl in the "Drunk on Love" track was more "growly," the texture more pronounced and tighter than I have ever heard. The staccato triplets and syncopated legato notes in Manhattan Transfer’s "Sassy" were also tighter and better defined than I’m used to hearing with my subs.

So, it seems when it comes to music the SVS may be a victim of its own success. Apparently its prodigious output at the lowest frequencies can obscure the amazing detail the sub is cable of rendering. In other words, the PB10-ISD's "problem" is being too good at what it does! _


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

I think if Mike P were to get in on this discussion, he'd be asking to find out more about your listening area and habits, including music preference and spl, to get a feel for your expectations. Also, how low you need to go for music will be influenced by your content. I probably would be much help, but we'll see who else gets in the discussion. BTW did you say if this was a diy or otherwise? A couple of major decisions on your sub will depend on the above questions to satisfy your need for clean solid output so you're sure to :bigsmile:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I personally have two of the same Audio control EQs he references to (very high quality) and can not really figure out why turning on the HP filter would create such a dramatic increase in bass in the musical range of the PB10. That does not make any sense the only thing I can think of is that the sub was running out of power when outputting the below 25Hz range and by engaging the HP filter he allowed the sub to concentrate on the higher frequency's.
Although the PB10 is a nice sub for your budget you could get into something that would probably not exhibit the same "problem" Wayne encountered.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Higher freq bass, aka mid-bass is going to sound 'tighter'. Perhaps engaging the filter actually deemphasized some content that he simply doesn't prefer? Coupled with a 'limited' amp, sound quality may have been compromised before cutting some freq out. Wayne did state that all of the tested subs' sound quality 'improved'.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

tonyvdb said:


> ...why turning on the HP filter would create such a dramatic increase in bass in the musical range of the PB10.


He doesn't indicate an increase in the bass (as in SPL). It is an increase in bass detail and articulation which is obtained. 
I certainly do not pretend to know the physics, but as a simplification, I suspect it is easier to vibrate a driver accurately at 40Hz than it is to vibrate a driver at 40Hz while it is also being vibrated at 18Hz at near its maximum extension.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

FidelitySeeker said:


> He doesn't indicate an increase in the bass (as in SPL). It is an increase in bass detail and articulation which is obtained.


Yes, I do understand that poor wording on my part.


> I certainly do not pretend to know the physics, but as a simplification, I suspect it is easier to vibrate a driver accurately at 40Hz than it is to vibrate a driver at 40Hz while it is also being vibrated at 18Hz at near its maximum extension.


 Yes but there is very little music that goes that low 30Hz is usually the lowest recordings go (yes I know there are some exceptions).


----------



## nova (Apr 30, 2006)

Where is that Wayne guy anyway? :bigsmile:
I'm sure he'll pop in and shed some light on his review.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Sorry guys - been TV shopping today... 




FidelitySeeker said:


> After lurking for awhile, Wayne's sub reviews inspired me to join this forum. His reviews are the first place I have read anything about modern subs not properly providing bass detail for music.
> 
> He seems to solve this by using the high-pass filter to relieve the sub from the lower frequencies.


Not all subs, just the SVS PB10 I reviewed. 



tonyvdb said:


> My personal take on the music vs movies debate is that a sub that is tuned properly and is good for movies will do very well with music. I have never understood the reason for a person to state that a sub will or will not be good for music if it has a good frequency reponce...


Funny, I’ve always felt just the opposite. Movies are more about “boom” than anything else. Just because a sub can do that, it’s no guarantee it’ll have good detail and resolution. Get a good music sub and it should be fine with movies too, as long as it has the extension and power handling capabilities.



FidelitySeeker said:


> Here is an explanation of the difference as provided via Wayne's review I referenced. To me, this is a big deal. The subwoofered systems I have heard cannot compare with my old AR 3a full-range speakers for providing good bass detail. They do dig deeper, but they do not pass muster for accurate music reproduction.





tonyvdb said:


> I personally have two of the same Audio control EQs he references to (very high quality) and can not really figure out why turning on the HP filter would create such a dramatic increase in bass in the musical range of the PB10.


There wasn’t an increase in bass with the filters, but an increase in low freq detail. The reason, I surmised, was because of the peculiar and rather severe rise in response I was getting below 30 Hz. Probably just something weird with my room, or perhaps the fact that it was a prototype and maybe something was a bit “off” with it. I’ve never seen anyone else have this problem with the PB10. In fact, IIR someone on that thread took me to task about that because they thought it wasn’t normal.












ironglen said:


> Wayne did state that all of the tested subs' sound quality 'improved'.


Actually no, it was only the SVS that sounded better with the filter. The others in the comparison could barely get down to 25 Hz as it was, so a 25 Hz HP filter on them would have been redundant.



FidelitySeeker said:


> PS - In Waynes review of the SB12Plus, he says the detail on Manhattan Transfer is not as good as he is used to. Does anyone know what it is he is used to?


”Used to hearing,” meaning from my own subs. I had moved to a different house by the time I reviewed the SB12, so I’m reluctant to say definitively that it wasn’t as detailed as the PB10, since the two tests were conducted in different rooms.

Not sure how it would hold up to your ARs, but if you’re looking for a good music sub you might want to give the SVS PB12-Plus/2 a look. I got a chance to hear Sonnie’s when I visited his place a few years ago and I was blown away by the detail, not just in the low freq, but the mid bass as well. It was simply astounding. I'd have one myself, except that I don't have a place for a big box in my living room.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

ironglen said:


> I think if Mike P were to get in on this discussion, he'd be asking to find out more about your listening area and habits, including music preference and spl, to get a feel for your expectations. Also, how low you need to go for music will be influenced by your content. I probably would be much help, but we'll see who else gets in the discussion. BTW did you say if this was a diy or otherwise? A couple of major decisions on your sub will depend on the above questions to satisfy your need for clean solid output so you're sure to :bigsmile:


Thanks! Knowing what the questions are is half of the process!
Room is 18' X 27' X 12' vaulted ceiling.
Music is progressive rock, jazz, classical, and pop (generally avoid rap, opera, and hip-hop).
Casually listen at 65dB with peaks in the low 70's. The loudest I would listen is with peaks in the low 90's. 
I would guess that one of the reasons I perceive this as fairly loud is my room is acoustically live (think upholstered missionary decor - not stuffed furnishings). At higher volumes the reflections of treble get jumbled and if you are actually listening, sound quality degrades quickly.
I don't have the reference or experience to say how low. Some of the music I listen to has pedal tones (the 6th track of Focus- _Moving Waves_ comes to mind. On the other hand Clapton - _Unplugged_ and Yes - _Yessongs "The Clap"_ both have places where there is overbearing bass content which was not part of the true music. I guess the ideal would be adjustable filter frequency.
I have a SVS SB12-Plus. It has a high WAF rating, but I can put it into service elsewhere if it is a poor choice.
My objective is to do this, get it right, and enjoy it for the next 20+ years!


----------



## Mike P. (Apr 6, 2007)

> I have a SVS SB12-Plus.


What are your impressions of the sub with music?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

FidelitySeeker said:


> Thanks! Knowing what the questions are is half of the process!
> Room is 18' X 27' X 12' vaulted ceiling.
> 
> I have a SVS SB12-Plus. It has a high WAF rating, but I can put it into service elsewhere if it is a poor choice.
> My objective is to do this, get it right, and enjoy it for the next 20+ years!


Given the room dimensions The SB12 Plus is a great sub for the job. Your not going to get much better than that for music or movies. The PB13 Ultra or PC13U is about the only subs that would do better but its a bit out of your price range.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

Thanks for posting, Wayne! 
Sorry for the confusion of interpreting your comments as valid for all subwoofers. I have certainly heard a few that just muddled their way through what should have been some nice bass riffs!
I plan to get my SB12 hooked up by this weekend and will see how it compares to my AR's.
With my AR's (which are soon to retire assuming I get the new system working well), I use an old Sansui amp which has a subsonic filter which can be set at 16Hz or 32Hz. I use it at 16Hz and don't really notice a difference in the music, but it does eliminate some errant "hops" of the woofer.


----------



## GregBe (Apr 20, 2006)

Interesting discussion. I think I have read in the past that some people prefer the sound of subs that don't go as deep for music, because they think it is tighter. In reality, they are not used to hearing the deepest bass. Unless for some reason the PB10 does not perform well below 25, which I don't think is the case, I am surprised by Wayne's findings. 

I agree with Tony, that in most cases, won't matter much for music, because there are virtually no musical instruments that play below 30hz, which is why you can get away with a sub that does not go as deep for music vs. movies.


----------



## DougMac (Jan 24, 2008)

I suggest you look at the Rhythmik subs sold by Ascend Acoustics: http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/subs/subintro.html

I have not heard them, but I used to have an Infinity Servo sub that sounded great. DIY subs using Rythmik drivers have gotten excellent reviews. 

My other recommendation would be the SVS PB-13 Ultra, but it is more expensive and much larger.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

GregBe said:


> Interesting discussion. I think I have read in the past that some people prefer the sound of subs that don't go as deep for music, because they think it is tighter. In reality, they are not used to hearing the deepest bass.


That would be me! As a purist, I suppose I should crave flat response all of the way down, but the truth of the matter is there is not much music content that low... which introduces the concern of my system faithfully reproducing sounds which were not intended to be part of the music. 
I mentioned it earlier in brief, but there is one place in Eric Clapton's _Unplugged_ where you can hear a low bass pounding. It may be Clapton tapping his foot on a resonant stage with a poorly placed mic for all I know, but it is way too dominant with a full range sub. The same is true where Steve Howe is playing _The Clap_ on Yessongs. I'm not sure what caused it, but there is a low frequency thud every time he pushes his finger down on the fret (not a rare event!) It totally ruins a great song! Both of these are live albums. Maybe that is a factor-perhaps recording the lowest bass in a large room and reproducing it a smaller room creates a problem. I have heard plenty of live music, but the bass there never sounds "wrong".

In any case, I guess I am looking for a sub with a fast roll-off at around 30Hz. I may miss some pedal tones, but I don't need to "feel" the truck cranking up outside the recording studio.

I hooked up my SB12-Plus and compared it to my old AR 3a's. The 3a's each have a single 12" woofer (sealed in design). Deep bass is indeed missing, but the 3a's are more articulate. In fairness, I have not properly set up the SB12-Plus (locating and EQ), which could be the issue. The nice thing about the old speakers is that this issue didn't exist - at least not so much as to be a major issue.
Any ideas on a good high pass filter or maybe an Aperion Bravus 8D or other sub of quality, but a relatively high roll-off frequency?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

This is strictly my opinion but I think your going in the wrong direction if your looking for a quality sub with a rolloff at or above 30Hz. The key word is "quality" most good sub manufacturers build subs to go lower than 30Hz because the true meaning of a sub is to cover the frequencies in the range between 100-15Hz. and by getting a sub with a higher frequency response you may very well sacrifice some quality of the output in the range you want. I think your best bet is to get a good HP filter that allows you to adjust HP so you can find the right setting for your needs and use the PB12 as your sub for music if you dont have another use for it.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

You are probably right.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Hmm... When I re-worked my DY subs and improved response from 25 Hz down to 20, there was a noticable improvement on a certain section of a song on a Michael Buble CD. While it's true that music fundamentals don't extend below ~30 Hz, there is some harmonic energy that extends lower than that.

Maybe the best option is to get a good high-performance sub, and then make sure your equalizer has an adjustable HP you can switch in if needed. That way you can have the best of all worlds.

A tip with your SVS/AR set up, what you might do is set the SVS crossover to roll it in where the ARs roll out. Win win.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Maybe the best option is to get a good high-performance sub, and then make sure your equalizer has an adjustable HP you can switch in if needed. That way you can have the best of all worlds.
> 
> A tip with your SVS/AR set up, what you might do is set the SVS crossover to roll it in where the ARs roll out. Win win.
> 
> ...


Thanks. Certainly, an adjustable HP filter would give me the ability to tailor it. 

I was A-B'ing the sub in a 2.1 system _against_ my AR's to see how the bass compared. The AR's are being replaced and will not be part of the final system.

I just spent more time listening. I already had my SB12-Plus set to "small room" to reduce boundary effects (room is 14' X 20' X 8' to 10' vaulted ceiling). I also put it on a sub-dude. However, I think my room has a *tremendous* peak in resonance in the low-20's. I set the built in equalizer (cut filter) at 20Hz with the "Q" and the "level of cut" set to the middle and 80% of my problem went away. I think further increasing the level of the cut would improve it. While I doubt this is the optimal solution, it does reassure me that things can be adjusted to provide a good sound.

Does it make sense that a substantial peak at lower frequencies could disrupt the detail which presumably is mostly at mid-to-high frequencies? Could the lower frequencies simply mask the higher or is something else going on?


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

> Does it make sense that a substantial peak at lower frequencies could disrupt the detail which presumably is mostly at mid-to-high frequencies? Could the lower frequencies simply mask the higher...


Absolutely.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## GregBe (Apr 20, 2006)

FidelitySeeker said:


> However, I think my room has a *tremendous* peak in resonance in the low-20's. I set the built in equalizer (cut filter) at 20Hz with the "Q" and the "level of cut" set to the middle and 80% of my problem went away. I think further increasing the level of the cut would improve it. While I doubt this is the optimal solution, it does reassure me that things can be adjusted to provide a good sound.
> 
> Does it make sense that a substantial peak at lower frequencies could disrupt the detail which presumably is mostly at mid-to-high frequencies? Could the lower frequencies simply mask the higher or is something else going on?


That makes a whole lot of sense, as to why you were hearing some unpleasant things in some music recordings down deep. I think if you were flat down to 20 hz, a deep playing sub would not bother you at all for music.


----------



## chipperman (Jun 17, 2009)

I have two Rhythmik 15" subs and have had them playing for three months. They are hooked to the SVS EQ1 and I can say this much: The response is dead flat from 11-100 Hz, dropping -1 db at 10Hz, which is as low as I can measure. I find them to be so clear that the tendency is to crank up the sound, as there is no listening fatigue. 
And yes, the ability to play low DOES make a difference as all the fundamentals are there. It really expands the "feel" of the music. All the bass test cuts I have used from the various CD's we all know and love sound exactly like the music. I rarely hit above 90 db on peaks, but on the big pipe organ notes at 16 hz, these are the real deal; fluffing pants, jumping couch, rattling dishes. I switch freely between music and movies with seamless integration. With my present system (VMPS 626's sitting on top of them crossed over at 50 hz) the sound is about as perfect as one can get. They are small, very well built with a flawless piano black finish, and come packed better than any audio product I have seen to date. I was going to embark on a high end DIY sub system, but after using these as a temporary stop gap, I have abandoned the project. They are that good.
And on a note about subwoofer "speed"... What is so fast about a cone moving at 10 cycles per second? It is the ability to stop the cone that counts. Heavy cone, lots of power, big damping factor. Lighter cone, less to control. The Rhythmik philosophy works. I have not heard a more musical sub. These are a bargain well beyond their cost, and one of audio's hidden gems.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

Thanks for the responses. I need to spend some time fine tuning my system. I have been focusing on auditioning speakers but guess I need to make time to run through my receiver's Audyssey MultEQ and see if that has much effect on the bass.

On the topic of "speed" in a subwoofer, I believe the way it is commonly used, it means how quickly it starts and stops (or how "tight" it is). Technically, this is acceleration. As an analogy, we say a car which does 0 to 60mph in 4 seconds is "fast", but 60mph isn't notably fast.

But to keep the physics straight, the actual speed of the cone depends on the amplitude of the sound. For example a loud 10Hz signal sent to a 7" diameter car subwoofer might cause a driver to oscillate at 10Hz with 5" travel in each direction. Thus the "speed" of the speaker is 100 inches per second. 

Nonetheless, Ascends approach on their subs makes sense and warrants consideration. 

Right now, I plan to see how far I can get with my SB12-Plus. If the Audyssey MultEQ doesn't do the job, I'll try either the SVS EQ1 or the Behringer FBD approach, and if that doesn't get me there, I'll be in the market for a different sub.
Thanks!


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

chipperman said:


> I have two Rhythmik 15" subs...
> The Rhythmik philosophy works. I have not heard a more musical sub. These are a bargain well beyond their cost, and one of audio's hidden gems.


Which do you have? The F15 or the D15 SE (I guess the F stands for front-firing and the D for down-firing)

The D15 does include a "sub-sonic" filter:
Rumble Filter (High Pass) 14 / 20 / 28 Hz: 18 dB / octave


----------



## chipperman (Jun 17, 2009)

I have the D15 SE. Playing around with the subsonic filters is a nice touch, and the amps have been modified so you can do that. You will get sub control with you Multi EQ, but the SVS/Audyssey goes much further in addressing the problem. It will make a significant difference in the sound quality of your sub, regardless of make. Based off your room dimensions, your peak in the 20's doesn't seem right. The EQ1 will give you a better measurement.
You are correct about acceleration vs feet per second. I would tend to agree with the driver makers that a bigger cone with less xmax is better than a small cone with a lot of xmax. Rhythmik has a nice compromise, and I can attest that the design works, and works well. If you want 133 db in your room, this isn't the one, but both of mine exceed my pain threshold with room to spare.
What's kind of fun, though weird, is to play a piece with a lot of bass and disconnect the other speakers leaving the sub playing. Since I use an outboard processor, I just shut off the main power amp. The D15 SE's just hum along musically, like a big whale humming a tune.

I also own an SVS unit that is in another house. I cannot say enough about the people that work there and the impeccable customer service they provide. Another excellent choice. I chose the Rhythmik for my current application because I wanted a sealed unit, relatively small, that would play REALLY deep (it does, and absolutely flat) in piano black. It fit all the crieteria, and happens to be an outstanding bargain. Do not be fooled by the price. And just when you think you are done tweaking, you can start all over!


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
In addition to the many great subwoofers recommended above, I would also check out Martin Logan's ESL Series Subwoofers (Grotto, Depth, Descent). 

I own the Depth and absolutely love it. Truly excels in musical applications. Martin Logan's patented trilinear array all but vanishes cabinet distortion. This is accomplished by placing the 3 woofers 120 degrees apart from each other canceling out most of the distortion. The Depth and Descent both feature the 3 woofer array. The Grotto, which features a single 10 inch aluminum woofer, also sounds incredible and is rated to 22 Hz. It uses the same 10 inch woofer from the 3500 Dollar Descent i
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## chipperman (Jun 17, 2009)

The depth is a gorgeous speaker. I am not convinced that a lot of little cones moving in unison is the same as a big one, at least with anything I have heard. And their specs of -3db at 20 hz is not the same as -0db at 11 hz, which mine measures. This is not woofer bashing, because for most input it doesn't matter, and there are as many different applications as there are consumers. It is so great to see all the different technology out there, isn't it?


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
I certainly understand where you are coming from. However, the Depth measures amazingly well considering its size. Here are some measurements from a British site: http://www.avtalk.co.uk/showthread.php?t=15239&highlight=martin+logan+depth
And here is the Stereophile review:http://www.stereophile.com/subwoofers/804ml/
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## chipperman (Jun 17, 2009)

Those are good reviews. And I like the pictures; they have done an amazing job of making a different looking "box" and making it visually pleasing. But subwoofers are like big motors, there is no substitute for cubic inches. Oh would that I could have a couple of 12 cubic footers in my room.
Pretty impressive manipulation of the physics with Logans, though.


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

Hello,
Believe me, when I first saw my subwoofer, I was shocked at how small it was. I purchased it in Tampa from a former employee of Sound Advice. It had never been used and he included a 4.5 meter Audioquest Sub-1 cable all for 700 Dollars which is an absolute steal. A heavily damaged Depth just sold on Audiogon for 775 Dollars so I figured even if the sub wasn't for me I could actually make money off the the sale in the future. All the same, on the drive back down to Sarasota, I kept on looking back at how bloody small the sub was.

After letting the subwoofer break in, I was absolutely shocked at how much clean power this little enclosure could put out. It is as though Martin Logan has defied the laws of physics. It honestly puts out meaningful spl's in the 20-25HZ range all the while sounding clean.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## 1artist (Jul 16, 2008)

Got a email to say Hello and read some good posts. Here's my take and advice based on my real life experiences: 

This has extra details to help newbees understand in-room set-ups. 

Music reproduction is my main focus followed by HT. Get a huge music soundstage right and you got HT. The SVS PB-13 Ultra may musically be the best bang or close to it for the buck. The JL Audio 12 and 13 Fathom are both very good and cost more. From JL's line-up, two JL 12's are probably best for music. JL Techs told me most JL employees prefer two 12's for music, even over two 13's. Considering the build quality, no wonder. 

A true "in-home set-up" makes all the difference and it's a very simple procedure. 

Materials: Radio Shack analog sound level meter (SLM), SVS test disk for calibration, and graph paper. 

First up, double check speaker connections for correct phasing (plus and minus leads). Reseat all audio system connections (simply unplug and reseat all connections to be sure all's good to go from the start). 

First, I set the distances to each speaker in my Proceed processor, and later, I balanced the output of each speaker in db's at 80 dB's. Then, balanced the output levels for each "source" for equal sound levels when changing inputs (Tanberg to OPPO) on the Proceed using the SLM. 

As usual when crossing over a Sub, I simply switched crossover points from 30 to 40, on up to THX recommended 80, and up to 100 hz in my Proceed AVP2 +6 processor. The sub was behind the 60" monitor in a corner with the SVS crossover defeated. Nothing sounded right and I'm a musician and play stringed instruments by ear fairly well. 

After reading a couple books, here's what I did. Major point: position the sub close to the listening position and higher up at ear level - That was a big plus, great on some tracks, but wasn't right on all music until I calibrated it all like this: 

1. Placed the Ultra 8 feet behind the listening position and UP on a sturdy table (no corner, no wall and it sounds great), placing the port facing forward into the listening area at ear level. 

2. I went a additional step that I don't see very often. I determined where my front mains REALLY drop off and play flattest by calibrating them first. My fronts are self-powered, Pro Yamaha cathedral organ monitors from the 1980's with 15 inch sealed subs, three 6 inch mids and six tweeters. They may not be Revel II Ultimas, etc., but man oh man. I use a full set of RF-7's with matching ceiling surrounds for HT. The RF-7's are flanking the TV in center mono powered by a matching Proceed AMP 5 as well as the matching surrounds. I don't use the RC-7 - it's was too small to match my fronts. Luckily, the toed-in RF-7's compliment the Yamaha's main monitors very well. 

Using the SLM, disk and graph paper - the Yamaha 15's tested relatively flat from 50 hz and up. That's when I set the Proceed crossover to 50 Hz for all speakers. 

3. Ran the parametric EQ test on the Ultra. Very easy to do. Perfect instructions come with the sub. The test results identified and removed a very annoying notch centered at 60 Hz in my listening room. 

Now, here's where I became confused: 
The only setting that sounds better with the sub Off is in a unique Proceed L/R surround mode and only with my Tandberg FM tuner. I believe my Tandberg plays down to 50 Hz. That is probably why - the crossover is too close to the Tandberg with the Sub ON. I can toggle my sub On/Off with one remote button and send full range to all speakers with a single button on the remote. With the Sub OFF and full range set to all speakers, it sounds like heaven for this mode only. 

Otherwise, all other music and HT sounds best with the sub ON, crossed over at 50 Hz, and parametrically flattening the 60 Hz spike. I haven't wanted to change any settings in over 6 months. For me, that's Miracle Land. 

I have a OPPO 981 to play HDCD, DTS, DVD-A, SACD, true multi-channel and redbooks. A single COAX cable out from the OPPO sounds best using the DAC's in my Proceed - way better then OPPO's DAC's in analog mode or the optical cable input. Of course, SACD is multi-channel IN and also sounds superb. 

The bass integrates perfectly with my mains and RF-7 HT / multi-channel set. Everything sounds clear, fast, smooth, articulated, with a muscular viseral chest slam when musicians really get on it. 

Equal speaker levels are important - I read Sub's are often set to loud. I keep mine balanced as calibrated except for rarely turning the Sub up on some movies for show. My room is 30' by 30', 9' tall with a 14 foot vault in the center. One sub properly set-up was enough. Two may be better. I'd probably place two equally flanking and just to the rear of the main seating position to easier balance the levels. 

Calibrate you mains first in-room, then set your sub crossover, do the Sub's parmetric EQ set-up, set all levels for sepaker matching and input source matching, and you should be a very happy listener. 

SVS told me the cubes put out more bass than cylinders - especially in large rooms. It's inherent to the sub designs, although I hear both are great when correctly set-up.


----------



## Jon Liu (May 21, 2007)

I think often times, most people tend to bump up sub levels a lot more for home theater because of the "slam" factor. I am slightly more a stickler for accuracy so I usually stay within 2-3dB for home theater use with a sub. For music, I usually keep sub levels to match the dB level of my speakers. It provides a more natural sound to me this way. Of course, it's all about personal preference and I know my brother who likes weightier bass even in music runs it about 5-6dB hot.


----------



## 1artist (Jul 16, 2008)

That's exactly how I like to set my Ultra, too. After adjusting out the 60 Hz notch during the parametric calibration, I used the SLM to equalize all speaker volume levels together using a 80 dB reference test tone(my setting), including the Ultra, to produce a perfectly balanced set from the Proceed processor. 

For strickly movies and to seamlessly add special movie sound impact, I may add up to 5 dB or so max above the balanced reference. My Ultra is tuned to 20 Hz. I can block ports and adjust a switch to go down to 15 or 10Hz quickly during films, but haven't tried it. I'm sure it would work great for certain movies. 

Yet, for music performances and concerts on DVD's, I always keep all speaker outputs equally balanced together. The Ultra sounds most musical to me tuned to 20 Hz. 

When tuned down to 15 or 10 Hz, it sounds less musical up to 50 Hz in my situation (notes lacked clear definition and sounded fatigued reproducing the normal wide variety of rapid musical attacks with or without hard "viseral punches". Tuned to 20, it sounds great (after the set-up).


----------



## Jon Liu (May 21, 2007)

In my last place, I used my Ultra almost exclusively in Sealed mode. SVS recommends against using 10Hz tuning because it causes a lot of distortion pushing so much air through a single port.

The Sealed mode provided me with the flattest response and the speed was noticeably even better!

Not everyone can use sealed mode due to the drop in overall output, but if you have a room like the one I previously had, then it might just work wonders!


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

Thanks for the continued tips and comments!


----------



## chipperman (Jun 17, 2009)

Yes, sealed will drop the output, but if you use two units, you will gain it back and the eveness it provides makes the sound so much better. Those of you with two units know what I mean. There are good subs out there, and a lot of bad ones. SVS and Rhythmik make two of the best. I have them both, each for different applications. Hard, if not impossible, to beat for the price.


----------



## 1artist (Jul 16, 2008)

Yes, two would be better. I could co-locate another as a mirror image on the other side of the listening area. 

I set-up the Ultra 13 "sealed". After adjusting the volume, it sounds very good - quick and clear with a smooth yet deep punch. Yet, in the present open-air location, it progressively lost too much volume as the Hz dropped below 50. Even with the gain way up, I couldn't correct the progressive reduction below 50Hz after setting the "Q". 

If it was co-located it in a corner or along a wall, it should have flattened out better. Musically, I'm really sold on a locating a Sub close to the listening area and up at ear level - especially, a forward firing Sub. I set-up a inexpensive downward ported sub on a table co-located against a wall in a bedroom and the results also significantly improved musically. 

The 20 Hz setting sounded and tested best overall in this particular open-air location. I'll try the 15 Hz tuning on the right movie.


----------

