Any recommendations for an 18" sub driver good for music? I heard the pro audio drivers tend to put out more mid bass than HT focused drivers like dayton UM18s.
Are big subwoofers viable for 2 channel music?
In thinking about subwoofers to get for a large future listening space
(30' x 30'). So far there seems to be a lot of great options for smaller
subs for music.. such as the rel s812. Now my main focus will be music
but I do plan to do some home theater on the system and I do enjoy subs
that reach low and have strong but clear sub-bass. Would a large sealed
sub still be able to provide clean tight bass that digs low and thus
satisfy both duties. Can it ever match the speed and precision of a pair
or more of rel 812s? Something like PSA S7201 or Captivator RS2?
A realize a smaller sub has a smaller moving mass and thus for a given level of power would be faster than a bigger sub with a bigger moving mass (driver mass). But a large sub would have to move less to achieve the same SPL and would reach lower.
Anyhow what do you guys think? Thanks.
A realize a smaller sub has a smaller moving mass and thus for a given level of power would be faster than a bigger sub with a bigger moving mass (driver mass). But a large sub would have to move less to achieve the same SPL and would reach lower.
Anyhow what do you guys think? Thanks.
167 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
I suggest using the TIP: on page 23 in the Velodyne DD User's Manual or running the Sweep Tones while walking (Crawl Test) your room and mapping the the loudest bass modes for a potential sub position. If your DD-18 is positioned in your rooms loudest bass mode resulting from the TIP or Crawl Test with the mic at the listening position you should see a reasonably improved before and after result after running the Self EQ. The initial goal is a relitivly even (not ruler flat) frequency response from the speakers 200Hz and the subs frequency adjustments beginning at 100Hz to where your speakers just begin to fall off. These are your crossover region adjustments which should be saved to your presets. Everything below that frequency are personal taste levels. Unfortunately the manual LOW PASS, SUBSONIC, CONTOUR frequencies / slopes, PHASE and POLARITY parameter adjustments can be a tedious task using the sweep tones and confirmed with some music, also stored to memory. Despite its twenty year old software these efforts will result in greater adjustability and detail compared to most any current onboard subwoofer processing today. Hardly impossible. DD Plus does it all along with added discrete Q filter building automatically leaving some quick multiple drag and drop Manual matter of taste adjustments. |
JBL SUB18. Peak output of 137db and gets pretty low while doing it, Pretty nuts.
https://jblpro.com/products/sub18
|
When it comes to big vs little subs and one vs many, I don't care. I just want the best performance for the money. I already have a Velodyne dd18, Infinity Intermezzo 1.2, and the tiny PSB. One thing that I know is that it's impossible to get flat bass in any room I've ever been in with a single sub and without a lot of bass traps and eq. I tried when I was in my twenties and it's not worth the trouble. I did get really flat bass with the help of 25+ bass traps and extreme eq. It sounded weird, though, and I didn't stick with it. I find the claim that multiple subs can solve a lot of room problems plausible. The more you have the less hard they all have to work and I'm confident the room nulls can be solved by this. Since the more you have the lower volume setting they'll all have, the node excitement is bound to be reduced. The main problem with small subs IMO is that the small driver needs extreme excursion which means extreme pressure in the box and a ton of power. These things are very bad for longevity. I'm not opposed to having 10 18" high sensitivity subs but if I can avoid it I will. I agree that high sensitivity has a sound characteristic that I like. |
@smodtactical , For that space you are going to need at least two 12" subs with excursions over a cm or you will be pissing into a forest fire. The idea that music requires different subwoofers than theater I find very odd. Any sub system that can reproduce down to 18 Hz accurately is perfectly acceptable for both. What is speed when it comes to driver performance? What does "faster" mean? The faster a driver can move the higher the frequency it can reproduce. If a driver can move fast enough to reproduce 500 Hz then 100 Hz should not be a problem at all. What everybody is referring to when they say "fast" or "faster" is transient response. The diameter of a driver is only one factor that can influence transient response. There is also the stiffness of the suspension, the weight of the moving system, and the power of the drive motor. The point is, when it comes to reproduction under 100 Hz an q18" driver is no slower than an 8" driver. Anyone who thinks so is just falling prey to "lay intuition," There are many excellent subwoofer drivers available today. The driver is usually not the source of problems. It is that enclosure that separates the men from the boys. |
Has anyone heard of or had experience with Snap AV? They are a custom install only brand that I had never heard of. I ran across some used subs on ebay for dirt cheap and they appear to be well-designed. They're sealed, and have phase knobs instead of the 0/180 switch. I consider that to be a sign of serious design in a sub. I wonder if the low name recognition results in them having terrible resale value even though they're pretty good. I just bought one for a whopping $112. Not much of a risk. |
@phusis I definitely am wrestling with this now. What if I got some 12 inch klipsch subs... maybe 4 or 6 of them and put them all over my room even at different heights. For that money I can buy 2x full marty gsg cabs with 21 inch mach 5 drivers (used pair has come up on canuck) and dual crown amps. Which would be better? I think you make a lot of good arguments. Or if you look at something like rel for the price of even 1.5x of S812s I can get this dual 21 inch setup. |
For a large space like the one initially lined out by the OP (or be that even a smaller ditto), serving home theater duties to boot, I'd wager to keep the thing of it all the most "musical" - i.e.: with low distortion, effortless and smoothly distributed bass - is to go with two or more big, higher eff. subs. Many seem to be hellbent on the "multiple smaller subs vs. fewer or only a single big one" division. For Pete's sake, what's with the self-imposed limitations? Have your cake and eat it too with a bunch of large subs like the ones from the reasonably priced and quality items PSA, and make them no less equipped than with 18" diameter woofers. These are high eff. pro drivers with a moving mass to cone diameter and motor force ratio that in no way makes for "slow" bass, contrary to some high moving mass, very low eff. (<85dB's) woofers meant for ultra small sub cabs with a bass reproduction that never really "gels" with the mains. Yes, very generally large, high eff. subs to my ears sound somewhat more musically "right" and well-integrated, because you don't sense they're using any real effort reproducing bass with their large diameter cones that barely move. Sonically in some regards REL subs are one of the more notable exceptions from the small cab/low eff. "camp" being not least they don't try and squeeze out infrasonics from their designs, that would have otherwise necessitate a higher moving mass in the driver and thus resulted in even lower sensitivity and likely bass lag. But, again: big (higher eff.) subs are not only viable for music reproduction; they would seem wholly essential if you ask me, while providing for a very worthwhile impact watching movies as well. What people won't do to avoid size in subs, and the hassle this has a tendency to bring with it (sometimes unknowingly, because they haven't heard the difference). It may even come down to large size being judged as "not looking cultivated enough," or "too brute for hi-fi." 🙄 When you got the space, use it. Bass properly sized/scaled is all the better for it. |
@jon_5912 That is sort of like a rel six pack except you have different sizes and types of subs. I bet it would work well if it was properly setup. |
I'm curious if anyone has tried having a multi-way sub array with several small subs throughout the room and one big one that only plays the lowest notes. If you give a big sub a gradual rolloff starting at 30 or 35 hz it's less likely to have negative interactions with the room in the higher frequencies that tend to have the most problems. Then add a bunch of smaller, cheaper subs that rolloff above 30 or 35hz. It'd be a hassle but might get the most bang for the buck. I've got a tiny psb subseries 100 that sounds fantastic but has very limited dynamics and extension. There's a used one on ebay for around $100. I might be able to buy 10 small subs for not that much money. Having a whole bunch would even out room response everywhere but the lowest bass. The limited dynamics would be greatly improved by having a whole bunch of them. |
| Post removed |
Honestly I have thought of this same issue. I also have a large basement setup that is 95% two channel and 5% home theater. I have looked at large home theater subs (JTR captivator etc.) online and read up on them but almost no one uses them for two channel. I think they would be just as good for two channel but have no idea. I think there is very little crossover between the crazy custom HT crowd and the highend two channel crowd. I think you should let us know how it works lol. |
Normally I would say that if you like the gsg then I would go with the gsg. But your case may be a bit more complex. It appears that the gsg subs are passive so depending on what amp you use, you may not even have low pass capabilities not to mention any phase control. It will also depend on what main speakers you pair it with. If you are going to pair it with a full range floor stander that cycles quite low and use only a low pass filter then you will probably be not be using much of the subs potential. If you are going to pair it with a smaller main that doesn’t cycle low and use an active crossover then you should be good to go with the gsg, though I would go with the 18” over the 21” |
Hey sorry to revive the thread but now i am in the future space I mentioned. Its 32 x 34 feet x 8 feet basement. I am only doing music / hifi here no HT. I am thinking of what subs to get. I got some dual gsg audio full martys for my HT and i love them. I wanted to know if I should go that route for this space or mix and match approach with multiple different subs. Looking to buy used to save money. I am in Canada. I have been all over canuck audio mart but can't find anything that I think is a good deal. |
Hello smodtactical, " Do big subwoofers just automatically mean someone is a bass head and the bass they are getting is of poor quality? Many people here said that a well designed large subwoofer is not inferior or slower than a small subwoofer. Do you disagree with that sentiment?" No, I don't think using big subwoofers automatically means someone is a bass-head and they're relegated to poor quality bass. I believe there's a variety of viable options using 2 or more subs to incorporate better bass performance in the lowest 2 octave range, about 16-32 Hz in frequency, into one's system and room. Unfortunately, I just understand I lack the knowledge and personal experience of the various possible options, including the use of various sub sizes, to confidently and reliably state how well large subs perform on music and HT as compared to multiple smaller subs. I can tell you with complete confidence and certainty that the AK Swarm or Debra DBA , utilizing 4 rather small subs and priced at a complete kit price of about $3K, will provide near sota bass response for music and HT. I suspect that 4 larger subs in a similar DBA configuration, however, would perform at least as well or likely even better than either AK system. The best suggestion I can offer you is to select 4 larger subs, from a vendor with a liberal return policy, and give it a try. The main drawbacks would be the time, effort and the required optimum setting of the volume, crossover frequency and phase controls on each sub individually. " Besides, I don't think there's much if any available music or HT source material that has content below about 20 Hz."Another statement I see often. Pipe organs can go below 20 hz and I find frequencies below 20 hz provide an incredible sense of space, scale, growl of the organ that I really love. Also lots of my EDM/techno/ambient goes below 20 hz. So I think there is value there." I formerly believed commercially available music and HT content had bass extension below 20 Hz, too. But then someone asked me to identify a single commercially available music or HT recording as an example. I searched for a while but couldn't find a single example, not even one. Of course, you're more than welcome to try and find an example if you'd like. The closest I could find was a group of guys that discovered an arcane method for retrieving any sub 20 Hz content from some discs if any trace of the original master recording with deeper bass extension was still accessible. They maintained a list of such discs that did on some online site I've forgotten. Talk about bass-heads. Best wishes, Tim |
" I'm not a bass-head at all and much prefer high quality bass. " This is a statement I see often and actually kind of why I made this thread. Do big subwoofers just automatically mean someone is a bass head and the bass they are getting is of poor quality? Many people here said that a well designed large subwoofer is not inferior or slower than a small subwoofer. Do you disagree with that sentiment? "- Besides, I don't think there's much if any available music or HT source material that has content below about 20 Hz."Another statement I see often. Pipe organs can go below 20 hz and I find frequencies below 20 hz provide an incredible sense of space, scale, growl of the organ that I really love. Also lots of my EDM/techno/ambient goes below 20 hz. So I think there is value there. |
phusis: "
What is your reply other than to essentially advocate, or indeed advertise for a multi-sub set-up with smaller drivers? We know it works excellently, yes, but sorry - it’s not the primary relevance of this thread. The OP asked whether BIG subs are viable for 2-channel music, and they most certainly are while bringing to the table possible advantages few get to experience, because large size isn’t desirable or otherwise allowed for. Nothing holds anyone from going the DBA-route with big subs - now that would be awesome, and with proper designs it’s a win-win." Hello phusis, Good points and fair enough. It's obviously true that I highly recommend the AK Swarm or Debra 4-sub DBA systems that use one smaller 10" driver in each of its relatively small sub cabinets, admittedly ad nauseum and unapologetically, mainly because it's proven to be so exceptionally effective in my own room/system, as well as numerous other A'gon members' rooms/systems, and because I know it's a reliable, relatively affordable and relatively simple method to attain near sota bass performance, that's flat down to 20 Hz, in virtually any room and with virtually any pair of main speakers. What's not to like, right? But I agree with you. let's just agree to concur on all that and rightfully focus on the OP's inquiry. I get the impression from this thread that the OP, smodtactical, has learned quite a bit, and has done a considerable amount of research on his own, concerning the attainment of good bass performance through the use of subs and bass systems. He also seems to have an admirably open mind as well as the courage, curiosity and spirit of adventure necessary to consider and explore various options. Contrary to apparently popular belief, I've always realized there's multiple methods of achieving very good and well integrated system bass performance besides simply buying and installing a complete AK Swarm or Debra DBA system. In fact, I learned of the 4-sub distributed bass array concept before learning of it being sold in complete kit form by AK. At this point about 7 years ago, I had already proven to myself, through personal experimentation and experience, that very good bass performance could be achieved at my designated listening seat through the use of 2 good quality and precisely positioned subs. I also learned that this dual sub concept was scalable, since larger subs performed equally well but just with greater bass impact and dynamics, and that there's no requirement that the subs utilized are the same brand, model, size or even type (sealed or ported). I discovered combining a sealed sub with a ported sub works equally well and that the overall bass extension perceived extends to the depth of the sub with the deepest rated bass extension, which is almost always the ported sub. I was originally intending to create a custom 4-sub DBA for my combination 2-ch music and HT system using a pair of the JL F112 subs with a 12" driver each and a pair of the JL F110 subs with a 10" driver each. But then I learned about the AK Swarm complete kit DBA for $2,800 and started noodling . My custom JL DBA would cost about $15,000 at the time 5 years ago: - Sure, the custom JL DBA would likely go a bit deeper than the AK DBA's 20 Hz, but how deep did I need? - I'm not a bass-head at all and much prefer high quality bass. - Besides, I don't think there's much if any available music or HT source material that has content below about 20 Hz. -With a custom DBA, I'd need to optimally adjust the level, crossover frequency and phase controls on all 4 subs individually. On the AK DBA, I'd only need to optimally adjust these three controls once on the supplied amp/control unit for all four subs and the bass system as a whole. - It'd be a lot easier accommodating the four AK DBA's 1'x1'x28" subs in our living room than four larger subs. - Hmm, I could save over $12,000, get near sota bass performance down to a flat 20 Hz and it'd be simpler to optimally setup? Long story short...ish, I bought the AK complete kit and it's exceeded my expectations plus made me smile for over 5 years thus far. From what I've read and experienced however, I still think smodtactical's idea of using 4 large subs,in a DBA configuration for music and HT would likely perform very well. But I suspect a combo pair of larger and smaller subs, or an AK DBA, would probably perform at least as well. I think his bass preferences and his budget wll, and should be, the key factors in his choice. Tim |
To boil it down, properly designed larger subs are just as fast as smaller ones. You can see thi is their frequency response curves. The larger driver will have less distortion because it does not have to move as far to produce the same volume. Unfortunately the larger driver will require a larger enclosure and their is the trade off. Distortion vs Size. My approach has always been to take the smallest driver that will take you down where you want to go and use them in multiples to lower the distortion. With DSP and powerful amplifiers sealed enclosures are King. If you have DSP and can match the subs to the satellites in phase and time the absolute best place to put the subs for Hi Fi use is in the corners. If you want a really unified wavefront and fewer room interactions connect the subwoofers with more subwoofers every five feet. In my case with a 16 foot wall that would be 4 total. Since I cross over high at 125 Hz the subs are connected to their appropriate channels. If the drivers are closer together than 1/2 the wavelength of the highest frequency they are to reproduce they will act acoustically like one driver. So, since most bass is mixed mono I have a 16 foot subwoofer. Rock and Roll:) |
@noble100 -- Thanks for your follow-up. I think we must careful not to make ourselves the judges on the level of ambition and complexity to dictate in this matter, but rather to relevantly pursue the subject of this thread to the fullest extend possible. At its core linked article by the OP simply tries to debunk a general assumption within audiophilia that larger drivers are slower sounding than smaller dittos, and indeed some perspective is given into this by Mr. Ricci. The general "math" behind it, as presented by him, isn’t that hairy, and in any case there’s the choice of going ground-up by yourself, or implement shared, existing knowledge in the form of actual, specific DIY designs. Or, you could simply buy pre-assembled, large subs and be done with it easily (not to take lightly proper integration/implementation) - they’re out there the likes of JTR, PSA, Deep Sea Sound, Funk Audio, Danley Sound Labs and others. What is your reply other than to essentially advocate, or indeed advertise for a multi-sub set-up with smaller drivers? We know it works excellently, yes, but sorry - it’s not the primary relevance of this thread. The OP asked whether BIG subs are viable for 2-channel music, and they most certainly are while bringing to the table possible advantages few get to experience, because large size isn’t desirable or otherwise allowed for. Nothing holds anyone from going the DBA-route with big subs - now that would be awesome, and with proper designs it’s a win-win. And yet, I’d go on to maintain the following: personally I’d rather have two symmetrically placed, very big and efficient subs vs. 4 small-ish lower efficiency subs in a Distributed Array. It’s what I have (2 BIG subs), and have very deliberately chosen. Would I want two more of them? Hell yes, if space and economy allowed, which unfortunately it doesn’t at the moment. As is though it’s a treat, and it would take something like 2x ported dual 18"-loaded subs to equate a pair of 15"-loaded tapped horn subs that I use. It’s not bragging; it’s underlining the importance of headroom and sheer air displacement capacity, and what it does to the bass presentation and how it integrates with the mains. |
Hello phusis, Wow, I was a bit surprised that this thread is still continuing. I don't have any disagreements with anything stated in the linked article but think it may be a bit technical for some consumers to completely comprehend and apply the information usefully to their own buying and system building decisions. I believe most consumers seeking better bass in their rooms/systems would prefer to purchase subs or bass systems that have intelligently incorporated the best and most relevant bass reproduction knowledge and technology into their products. My main point being that some consumers have taken the time and have the interest in knowing the details of how to attain very good bass performance in their domestic rooms and many, most?, don't and just want a simple and affordable solution. You, some others on this thread and I understand that getting good bass performance is more complex than just plopping down a sub in a convenient room location. I think it's best if we keep things as simple as possible for this thread to be beneficial to the largest number of readers. For example, I think we agree that multiple subs will typically provide much better bass performance than a single sub in virtually any room and that 3 to 4 subs will generally provide even better bass performance. A pair of well positioned, good quality subs is usually sufficient for achieving good bass performance at a single designated listening position and 3-4 subs are usually sufficient for achieving good bass performance throughout the entire room, which is important for HT setups with multiple listening positions. If consumers want very good bass performance throughout their entire room, the Audio Kinesis Swarm or Debra 4-sub distributed bass array complete kits for about $3K are a simple, relatively affordable and very high quality solution. Here's an Absolute Sound review of the Swarm: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audiokinesis-swarm-subwoofer-system/ Tim |
Indeed, great article. Josh Ricci knows of what he’s writing. I’d go so far to say big subs aren’t only viable for 2-channel music, they’re wholly essential. The effortless quality of very large, preferably efficient subs means the cone(s) move very little, and it’s directly translatable into lower distortion and cleaner, more tuneful bass. Either you use a bunch of large diameter direct radiating drivers, or you horn-load a fewer number of them for what’s effectively a similar air radiation area, but a differently perceived bass presentation (one that I prefer, I might add, but to each their own). I guess with regard to subs you could say: by and large, buy ’em large (and plenty of them) :) |
Great article here talking about subwoofer speed. " Smaller woofers sound faster than larger woofers One of the biggest myths about woofers is that smaller units like 8's and 10's sound "tighter" and "faster" than 15's or 18's. Even bigger drivers such as 21's and 24's are supposedly worse than 15's or 18's. This can be true in some specific cases, but as a blanket statement of all drivers this is factually incorrect. This subjective impression is often caused by factors other than the simple size of the driver. What tends to happen is that the smaller drivers have a lower Qts because manufacturers tend to share one motor design across many different sizes of drivers in the series. They may have the same motor on the 10" driver that they have on the 15 or 18". Unless the motor can compensate for the extra mass it has to push, then the Qts will not be the same as the smaller drivers. Ultimately the larger driver may not be suited for the same kinds of alignments as the smaller driver and ends up requiring a much larger air volume for the same system "Q" and response shape. Typically the larger driver will end up in a higher "Q" undersized system with a less linear response shape that may cause it to sound more uneven or "one note". It may also end up being tuned much deeper in frequency and the increased low frequency output may also cause it to sound "slower" or "heavier". Smaller subs and those using smaller driver sizes are often not asked to go as low and will not have the same low frequency extension in their design. When comparing subs the one with more low frequency extension and output will sound quite different. Having said that, high Qts drivers are not inherently inferior sounding when compared to more efficient, highly damped drivers, but they require larger boxes and less internal pressure to prevent response peaking and increased group delay. Large sub drivers can be made to have the same motor to cone ratio
as smaller drivers. The larger woofers also have more room for bigger
suspension components and voice coils which can allow higher power
handling, more excursion capability and larger mechanical clearances
that simply cannot fit on an 8 or 10" driver frame. It is more expensive
to make larger driver sizes in this way, but not impossible. There are a
number of good examples on the market. It's just a matter of picking
the right driver for the job." |
Subwoofers have just too many advantages. 1. You can choose the size and specs to get the best speed, power character you want. 2. Can place them in the ideal position which is usually not near the main towers 3. You can cross them so you get the right FR that you want or right effect you want... play with phase as well, delay and dial them in perfectly 4. You can have multiple in an array so you get an even response in a room 5. You can do vertical array by either stacking in a tower or just have them at different heights at different positions in the room like Denis Foley recommends for a great vertical component to the bass and vertical even-ness |
Millercarbon I am 100% on board with DBA. So you think mixing ported for lower frequency and sealed for higher frequencies makes sense? Also I have 2 subs connected via RCA from my preamp. How would I connect another two? Also do you like Denis Foleys approach of having the various subwoofers are different levels vertically? He feels then you get a more even vertical response in the room. |
I just had a mind blowing listening session. Utterly incredible resolution, imaging, spaciousness, holography. Just hard to believe things can sound much better. I don’t think my system is far off from the magico m2. And I was listening to organ music... it was great. I could sense the space and power of organ, the scale. (This is on NS5000) BUT THEN... I turned on my dual 18s. HOLY SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT. The soundstage grew enormously. The organ became life like in its scale... it was simply real now. I closed my eyes and I was in a massive church. The subwoofers helped capture the shape of the space and the visceral low growls as the organist played low. For the rest of my session I left my subs on (crossed at about 50-55 hz) and I realized today that I simply love subwoofers and there is no way around it. The weight, gravity and power.. scale in every song i played was mind blowing. And keep in mind the NS5000 is flat to about 25 hz so it does bass very well but the boost in the low end just adds so much to the music. The bass didn’t seem bloated or boomy either to me. It was powerful and fast still. I am sure better and maybe smaller subs might do speed better but the way my system sounds. I could absolutely live with it for life. Only thing I want to do in my new listening room is get another 2x 18s.. and im thinking sealed. Then when ill do is cross the dual 18s at maybe 60 hz and then cross my dual 18 ported at 40 hz so they can fill out the low end and provide an even bass response in the room. I am just a subwoofer bass guy... I can’t get away from that. I am reminded by my sonja 1.3 demo how i was really disappointed by the bass. It was just utterly lacking. Other audiophiles might not like the sound in my room and prefer the Sonja bass but I love this sound. And rather than spend $500k on Goebel divin majestics... why not spend a bit more on more subwoofers... youll get all the power, impact, scale of the big goebels for a fraction of the price! I think more affordable speakers and a proper sub array is a much smarter option than dishing out millions on speakers that may give you similar bass performance and maybe not even similar. Subwoofers are the key for me for incredible low end and saving money while I am at it! Lot of my audiophile friends criticize my love of subwoofers... at the end of the day we all have different tastes and this is mine. I doubt ill ever give up my subs. They are amazing. |
Hello tellefsen, It seems like you have figured how to integrate your pair of subs very well into your system. You may not have experimented with the Swarm concept yet but you certainly have experimented with the multiple sub concept and now have valuable personal experience with its benefits. Congrats on your adventurous spirit and bass system! Tim |
I have not experimented with the SWARM concept but did hear Duke's room at an RMAF (remember when we used to have those :-) a few years back an he definitely had good sound and balanced low end.. I have experimented with subs for two-channel music and surround as I have those two formats integrated into my current main system. What is current working for me is a pair of Seaton Submersives (active dual opposed 15 inch drivers). They do not have any form of crossover for the model I have. I use a DBX PA-2 drive rack which is a DSP that I use for he low pass crossover (many choices of crossover type), PEQ and RTA. I run my main speakers fully range and bring on the subs where they start falling off. I use an RTA app on my iphone that gives me 1/3 octave RTA measurements. The DBX PA-II has an iPad app so you can control all the settings remotely. It also has a large number of user configurable presets..so I can have a setting for each speaker I might bring into the system. The cool thing is you can play with all these settings easily from the listening postion. I stream a pink noise track, look at the RTA on my iphone and play around with crossover points, slopes, gains, etc while I am listening.. I like to play around with the crossover slope types while playing music with real bass (like Dire Straits - Six Blade Knife) and listen to the impact of making changes. Do I end up with something that is perfect....no., but I do end up with something I like. I also strongly agree that subs is not just about adding bass it can transform the spatial aspects of a performance. For surround I have an XLR switch box going to the two subs...so in surround mode Iet the Surround Pre control all aspects of the subs by routing around the DBX PA2 |
phusis: "Well-integrating subs IS about pursuing High Fidelity in its truer sense and certainly not like "added ketchup to some kind of gourmet food," but rather about making the intend of gourmet food taste gourmet in the first place. This applies to both music and HT reproduction; when the capacity is properly at hand you won't need "compensation" gain-wise in an HT-system, and it complements music as well." I completely agree with phusis. High fidelity reproduction of the bottom two octaves of bass on music recordings, through the incorporation of 2 or more optimally positioned and configured subs in a system, is one of the most effective methods available to obtain near state of the art bass performance that is powerful, fast, smooth, dynamic, articulate, realistic. seamlessly integrated with the main speakers with a sense of effortlessness and naturalness in virtually any room and with any pair of main speakers. Those dismissing the effectiveness of the scientifically proven method of utilizing multiple subs in a room/system(see the works of Dr. Earl Geddes, Dr. Floyd Toole and Todd Welki for details) as analogous to pouring ketchup on gourmet food or other tropes, are simply proclaiming their complete lack of knowledge and experience with this method. For those lacking knowledge and experience concerning the effectiveness of multiple subs, I suggest gaining knowledge through online research, gaining experience by auditioning multiple sub bass systems and determining the concept's effectiveness for yourself. Tim |
The distinction between music and Home Theatre reproduction as it applies to subs is notably expressed here. I used to run previous, smaller sub set-ups much hotter (like +5dB's) when watching movies - as an act of compensation, I'm now aware - vs. when listening to music only. Since I started using a pair of much bigger (20 cf.) tapped horn subs in my system there's no gain-differentiation needed with music vs. HT. Music isn't overpowered by a sluggish bass but is instead more naturally present and organically integrated, while movies have all the visceral force and impact, even potentially intimidating in nature, to truly make the experience felt. Well-integrating subs IS about pursuing High Fidelity in its truer sense and certainly not like "added ketchup to some kind of gourmet food," but rather about making the intend of gourmet food taste gourmet in the first place. This applies to both music and HT reproduction; when the capacity is properly at hand you won't need "compensation" gain-wise in an HT-system, and it complements music as well. |
Yes, I have Vandersteen TreoCT ( no subs ) and 7’s with built in push pull subs and 11 band asymmetric EQ ( more cut than boost ) on a great deal of music the sub is clearly not needed. However the ability to high pass and separately amplify your main speakers and the sonic benefit of doing so cannot be overstated. Also you can swarm any sub and derive benefits from EQ below 120 hz. Note I said music above, Home Theatre is a different animal. |
smodtactical OPFor movie, theater and HT big 15" subs are great. But for 2ch hiend stereo system for music I find smaller faster drivers twin 8" or 10" are more precisely controlled and faster they mate up to your high quality mains better. I use two active subs L & R, with twin servo 8" drivers in each, they are next to my mains, and get fed from the L & R outputs of the preamp, the system sounds like it's just designed as a whole. Cheers George |
Adding subwoofers is so much more than bass. Adding subwoofers to my system has improved spacing and detail across the audio spectrum. To my ears it makes listening to music more enjoyable and I will never have 2- channel without subwoofers again. The great thing is I don’t know that my subs are on, until I turn them off. |
Wanted to revisit this thread. I am getting arguments from the guys on our sonic visions discord about how only bassheads like subs and its like added ketchup to some kind of gourmet food. My question is this: Is it possible for someone who enjoys high fidelity music (someone who enjoys music with good imaging, soundstage, dynamics, microdetails etc.... who is not simply looking to rock out and bob there head aggressively to the music as the ground shakes) to enjoy a system with well integrated subwoofers more than one without them? |
But if you have a DBA, then when you apply the room correction it'll work a lot better!Yes, all things being equal, the more subs the merrier. I think it’s best that I just accept your claim as fact that room correction/DSP/Dirac have had positive effects on your systems.Tim - I'm using Dirac live on PC. Sound quality improved a good deal with the SOtM txusb-exp card, RUR, and curious cable feeding a Schiit Gungnir. The W4S dac-2 when paired with Dirac was too sharp/forward and when paired with class D amp - unbearable. Now the sound is more tame. Using 244 panels and tritraps from GIK which helped out mostly above 80 hz. I've always been a bit skeptical and suppose somehow the dsp is ruining something. When swapping new amps, speakers and preamps, the unique sonic characteristics of new components have always shown through even after calibration. It's not too unlike the DBA decay effect where certain sonic characteristics do not reside with the initial CW signal. Send a CW signal through a system, and each component imparts it's unique harmonics and noise. Speakers especially retain their flavor from inert to lively cabinets and drivers, both of which will impart higher order harmonics from a CW signal during cal, but it is only the CW signal that is phase and mag corrected at that instance in time. The broadband response to the CW excitation remains and is uncorrected. I'll probably always periodically test feeding the Dirac device and then the dac directly too make sure I'm not leaving something on the table. The P5 so far sounds as you say, neutral, and likely has a better attenuator than the LM508 integrated. Inevitably it is just a stepping stone. Wanted to spend $3000 on a higher quality preamp but figured the P5 with dual subs for similar price would make more of an impact. |
brotw: " I believe room correction has the benefit of improving the tonality of the rooms bass response at the LP. Of all the speakers and amps that have made their way through my listening room, not one did not benefit from dsp. Music sounded more coherent and live with tighter bass and imaging every time I flipped on the Dirac filter. The mixed phase filters are great, and perhaps they are correcting the speaker crossovers and room all in one. " Hello brotw, I think it’s best that I just accept your claim as fact that room correction/DSP/Dirac have had positive effects on your systems. I also realize individuals are unlikely to improve their system’s performance without having the sense to learn from the experiences of others and taking the initiative to actually audition the promising suggestions in their own systems. However, I’m a bit confused about exactly what component you’ve been utilizing in your systems that contains DSP/Dirac filtering capability, can you let us know? My prior preamp was the Parasound Halo P5 with bass management, so I am very familiar with that unit. Imho, it’s a good preamp with a very neutral sonic signature. I now use a Levinson 326S preamp in my system. I didn’t see a purpose in having 3 bass management systems, one with controls on the back of the P5, one incorporated into my Oppo 205 Bluray/CD/SACD player and the one with controls on the front of my AK Debra 4-sub amp/control unit. I also liked the improved tonal quality and more 3 dimensional sound stage I perceived with the 326S in my system. However, I think the P5’s bass managent could prove very useful in your system, especially if used to reduce the bass duties of your Line Magnetic 508ia SET tube class A 48w/ch integrated amp. I believe your best solution is utilizing a pair of good quality self-amplified subs in your room. You could connect both subs to your P5, set the P5’s bass management controls so that all bass frequencies below about 60 Hz are sent to the subs and all frequencies at or above about 60 Hz are sent to your 508ia. I think this would likely eliminate your 3-5db suckout near 50 Hz and improve the midrange, treble and stereo imaging performance of your 508ia and main speakers combination. You could then optimize the overall system performance and balance by making small adjustments to the low and high pass crossover frequency control settings on the P5 by ear and preferences. For best results, I recommend precisely locating each sub in your room, and in relation to your LP, sequentially utilizing the ’sub crawl method’. You can google it for details. Tim |
I suspect that having ruler flat bass response in a room may not sound as good as we might expectThanks for the sharing Tim. I believe room correction has the benefit of improving the tonality of the rooms bass response at the LP. Of all the speakers and amps that have made their way through my listening room, not one did not benefit from dsp. Music sounded more coherent and live with tighter bass and imaging every time I flipped on the Dirac filter. The mixed phase filters are great, and perhaps they are correcting the speaker crossovers and room all in one. That being said, dsp is no silver bullet. Can't fix reflection points nor extended decay from a "lumpy" single sub bass response, only DBA appears to do that. One area of interest include using room correction to help integrate dual subs better after level and phase matching to the mains at the crossover frequency. Another curiousity is seeing if using bass management in my newly acquired Parasound P5 produces better sound by unloading my tube integrated LM508ia from sub 50-80Hz duty driving Tekton DI's and simultaneously reducing the SBIR effect from the mains below 50Hz. That falls into the "to high pass or not" category. Xovers like the JL CR-1 potentially disturb the pristine signal coming out of really nice preamp, then again, the same is said of dsp. I have neither so I'll dip my toes in the water with the P5 which allows funds for a pair of good subs. |
I agree with millercarbon and brotw, DBAs excel at providing very fast, smooth, detailed bass throughout the entire room, not just at a designated LP. The bass is also capable of being as powerful and dynamic as the music or HT content calls for because there's 4 of them operating in mono as a collective group. Based on my experience utilizing a 4-sub Audio Kinesis Debra DBA system for the past 5 years, the main benefit is the perception that there is a complete absence of bass peaks, dips, nulls, muddiness, boominess and ringing. I consider the bass quality as near state of the art in my room/system and cannot identify any actual bass deficencies. As I understand it, the benefits of utilizing multiple subs begin to be realized with the deployment of 2 subs in a given room, especially when both subs are optimally and precisely positioned in relation to the LP. It's also very important that the volume, crossover frequency and phase controls are optimally set on each sub for these benefits to be realized. Based on my prior usage of 2 self-amplified subs in my room/system, I would describe these benefits as the beginning of realizing the benefits of using a 4-sub DBA system. The bass begins to sound faster, smoother, more detailed, more powerful and dynamic, better blended with the main speakers and very good overall. My experience transitioning to 4 subs resulted in even further improvements in all of these bass qualities and the overall bass quality improved from very good to what I consider near state of the art. To answer brotw's question about whether one can attain an approximation of a DBA's bass quality performance utilizing just 2 higher powered subs with room correction, therefore, I believe the answer is a qualified yes, depending on whether an individual is satisfied having this high quality bass restricted to a single designated LP in the room. However, I'm less convinced of the positive effects of room correction hardware/software and room treatments on overall in-room bass performance. Of course, this could be the result of never utilizing room correction, and only recently utilizing room treatments, in any of my own multi-sub room/system configurations. I was concerned about adding bass room treatments recommended by GIK after a room analysis, 2 stacked TriTrap bass traps in all 4 corners and some other 5.5" thick bass trap panels spread about, but they've had no negative bass effects in my room. As to room correction hardware/software, I suspect that having ruler flat bass response in a room may not sound as good as we might expect. So brotw, my best answer to your question is a definite...... maybe. Tim |
This is by no means an absolute, but here's my experience. I had dual JL Audio F110 v2 subs and replaced them with a single JL Audio F112 v2. It wasn't close to my ears, as I preferred the single, bigger F112 v2. I recently sold dual REL Carbon Limited subs and replaced them with dual REL G1 mkII subs. For a couple of days I only had one REL G1 mkII, but once again I preferred the single larger subwoofer over dual smaller subs. Bigger subs pressurize my room better, open the soundstage, provides more detail, and space between instruments. We often talk about adding subwoofers to improve bass, but good subwoofers improve everything across the entire audio spectrum. |
Has anyone directly compared Rel offerings to JTR, PSA or RhythmikI have a REL S5/SHO and a Rythmik F12SE in my system. They both cycle low enough and are loud enough for my needs which is 2 ch. audio. The main difference between them is the notes reproduced by the REL have noticeably more sustain and a longer decay than the Rythmik. Some people really like the longer sustain and decay because it gives the bass a thicker, richer feel. Some people despise the longer sustain and decay because it can mask punch and detail. |
Thanks miller. Exactly right.
Just because the response is smooth at the LP doesn't mean ringing is occurring with long decay times from peaky modes at other locations in the room. Only DBA can fix that. For all the RF EE's, that like time domain codes modeling electromagnetic cavity modes where highly resonant cavities require sampling long durations of time to get the response right, where as low Q /broadband antennas and cavities can be accurately characterized by a quick impulse. |
Understand a smoother response from 4 subs before cal puts less stress on the filtering algorithm, No that's missing the point. Equalizing or getting flat response is only part of the problem. Another equally important factor is smooth bass is fast articulate bass. That's because bass energy is in the room whether its measured flat at your EQ location or anywhere else. To get flat bass with EQ always requires turning it up somewhere. Even if its not EQ'd louder still there's extra bass energy somewhere in the room for the simple fact that's the way bass works- there's always reinforcement somewhere, cancellation somewhere else. Nulls and sickouts aren't a problem. Reinforcement is, because that extra bass energy hangs around taking time to dissipate which until it does results in muddy bass. This probably more than anything else is why DBA bass is so exceptionally fast and articulate. More subs is diminishing returns only because once you have reduced one set of really big modes to two smaller ones they're half as big. Then form 2 to 4 half as big again. To cut them in half again means doubling to 8 which as Duke says is grounds for divorce. But I went from 4 to 5 and it sure did not seem like diminishing returns to me. In any case the returns are relative to DBA not EQ, which is apples and oranges. |