Unledd I missed it the room is as important as the sub. The room (acoustics) are covalent to sub/speaker sound.
The room becomes less of a factor the more subs you add. With a swarm (4 subs) the room becomes almost a non issue.
Is There A Big Difference Between Subwoofers From Different Manufacturers
This is likely the last thread I’ll be posting about subwoofers.
I was just wondering if there is really a big difference between subwoofers from different manufacturers if the quality of the subs (which is mostly governed by the specifications) are fairly similar. Also, with the assumption that the set up is properly done to ensure a seamless integration with the main speakers.
There have been many comparisons or experiences on subwoofers shared by members here on this forum, people who upgraded their old sub to a new seemingly superior sub. Or people who added additional subs to the system which contributed to an overall improved bass performance. I’m referring to the former, the comparison between single subs.
To cut to the chase, I understand high quality subwoofers which are essentially higher spec designs will usually produce better performance than lower spec subs. When people upgrade their subs, I assume the new subs are superior in terms of specification, either a larger sub with larger drivers, higher power output of the internal amplifier, lower frequency extension or the combination of any of the above.
Has anyone compared subs which are fairly similar in quality or performance when upgrading from the old sub?
Example. If someone upgraded from a REL T7x to an SVS SB-3000 or SB-4000, I suppose the SVS would be an upgrade since they come with larger drivers, higher power output, everything superior spec-wise. What if the models are closely spec’d? Will the subs sound fairly similar or closer to each other ?
Say, the comparison between
SVS SB-3000/4000
Rythmik F12SE / F15
REL S510 / S812 / Carbon Special or Limited
I presume the subs will still sound slightly different but the difference may not be night and day if the quality or specifications are closely matched?
83 responses Add your response
@akg_ca Spot on It’s simple to add a first order passive HP to roll the lows out of the mains. The -3dB point should be slightly above the mains’ anechoic -3dB. Doing so effectively doubles the power available for the rest of the spectrum. Polystyrenes, while hard to find today, are preferred. That being said, most subs today are missing some of the necessary controls
The Martin Logan X series has some of the above. The rest can added, if necessary, with external DSP. A failing of the ML series, other than Chinese origin, is insufficient mass. 10kg weights, while not particularly Audio Salon, are effective:
|
Yes… VANDERSTEEN subs are terrific with their high-end crossovers. I’m hoping to upgrade mine to their current model as my next sub at some time in the near future. There is a 2nd part to the edited review I posted before. It highlights the prior VANDY model sub that is now upgraded further .
Enter the Vandersteen 2Wq 300 watt powered subwoofer. “…. This is the only subwoofer that is specifically designed to be inserted into the highest of high-end music systems without doing any harm to the precious signal. So how does Vandersteen do it? Simply. In fact his crossover scheme is so ingeniously simple that it’s a wonder nobody else thought of doing it the same way. I’ll spare you an in-depth description and just say that the only thing you end up inserting into your system is a couple of high quality capacitors. That’s it, nothing more! No additional wires or gadgets enter your signal path. Hell, you don’t even have to disconnect the wire between your amp and speakers to add this subwoofer. The model 2Wq sub uses the same basic crossover scheme as the $15,000 flagship Model 5As. As a matter of fact, you can even run the specially designed Model 5A crossovers (M5-HP) with the 2Wq if you want the most transparent sound imaginable. So what about the other reason to add a subwoofer to your system: for more powerful and extended bass? I don’t care how big your main speakers are, they’re no match for a good subwoofer in the bass. A really good subwoofer can run rings around the best floorstanding speakers when it comes to bass extension, power and control because it is designed to be good at that and nothing but that, whereas main speakers have to be good at higher frequencies as well. Ideally, you want two subwoofers so that you have true stereo separation down deep into the bass. Stereo subs can also help to lessen room interaction problems by providing two discrete sources of bass information. Remember, if you can’t afford to buy two subwoofers at once, you can always add the second one later. Adding a pair of 300 watt powered subwoofers is exactly like adding a pair of 300 watt monoblock amplifiers to your system and upgrading to a pair of better main speakers at the same time. The beauty is that you don’t have to replace your main power amp or speakers to do it. But there is a problem here as well. Everything comes at a price, and the price you pay with most subwoofers is that when you add them and their built-in amplifiers to your system, they don’t tend to blend or integrate well with the sound of your power amp and speakers. This is especially true if you own a tube amp, because the character of your amp is nothing like the character of the big solid-state amp that is built into most subwoofers. The result is that your system sounds split in half. You can hear where one part of the system leaves off (namely your amp and speakers) and where the other part takes over (the sub and its amp). This is a HUGE problem for audiophiles who aren’t willing to destroy their system’s coherence for additional power and bass extension. Fortunately, Vandersteen has the perfect solution for this problem that is, again, so simple, I wonder why nobody else thought of it first. His solution is to build a very powerful 300 watt amplifier that strictly provides the huge current needed to drive the subwoofer. You can think of this amplifier as only half of an amplifier; or just the power portion of an amplifier. The release of this power is controlled by the signal that is provided by your power amp. Vandersteen’s amplifier needs a voltage to modulate its current output, and what better place to get that voltage than from your main power amp? This way, your power amplifier is directly responsible for the sonic character of the deep bass coming from the subwoofer because it provides the necessary voltage signal. This voltage signal contains the unique and characteristic sound of your main power amplifier and insures that that character is maintained in the sound of the subwoofer itself. The beauty of it is that your amplifier is only providing a voltage reference and no actual current, so it is not taxed with the burden of “driving” the subwoofer in any way. As a matter of fact, your amplifier doesn’t even know that the sub is connected to it. The 2Wq’s potential is almost unlimited given that it will ratchet up its performance as you improve your power amp. Remember that you always want your subwoofer to sound just like your power amp. No better, no worse. NO DIFFERENT! After having spent time with the amazing Vandersteen Model 5A loudspeakers with their 400-watt powered, metal cone subwoofers, we were reminded of the sound we had with the awesome Audio Research Reference 600 mono power amps. With the Ref 600s there was a sense of effortlessness, openness and unrestricted dynamic freedom that we have only otherwise heard with live unamplified music. Listening to those monstrously powerful amps made us realize that all other systems sound compressed by comparison. Only when we heard the new Vandersteen Model 5As with their hugely powerful built-in subwoofers, did we again have a strikingly similar sonic experience. The reason is that the Model 5As provide a total of 800 high-quality watts, to which you have to remember to add the power of the amp we were using, the ARC VT-100, at 200 watts. This means we were listening to about 1000 total watts of amplifier power – not far from the 1200 total watts provided by the Ref 600s. With the Vandersteen subwoofer crossover and amplifier, you are able to get those hundreds of subwoofer watts to blend seamlessly and even take on the character of the ARC VT-100. It’s amazing! What’s even better is that the price of the system with the Model 5As and the VT-100 is under half the cost of the Ref 600s alone! Since this discovery, we have achieved the same kind of unbelievable dynamics and seamless blending with ProAc loudspeakers and twin Vandersteen 2Wq 300 watt powered subs. So, if you want the sound of Ref 600s but cannot afford them, buy a pair of Model 5As or your favorite pair of ProAcs plus a couple of 2Wq subwoofers and mate them with a VT100 and you’ll get surprisingly close. You can cut the cost even further by running a pair of Vandersteen 2Wq 300-watt subwoofers with your existing speakers. Or mate a pair of 2Wqs with your favorite ProAc. In any case, it is the magic of SUBWOOFERS that allows this to happen. It is for all of the above reasons that there is only one subwoofer in existence capable of integrating seamlessly into a high-end music system, allowing you to reap all of the benefits of having a subwoofer, with none of the drawbacks. And the Vandersteen 2Wq is the one. And just in case you think I am a biased source, our correspondent Blaine Peck (who, for all you know is also a biased source) recently wrote the following, with no discussion between us about the topic prior to his sending us his comments. Whether reproducing the plucked string of an acoustic bass or the sound of an analog synthesizer, the Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofer is a seamless extension of any system. Nothing else need be added! With its internal 300-watt power amplifier, it is the perfect compliment to any sound system. Designed to take on the characteristics of your main stereo amplifier, the amp in the 2Wq will not sound foreign in your system. Also, through an extension of the Vandersteen design philosophy, a unique gradually sloping crossover system is implemented so you simply do not know where your main speakers stop and the 2Wq begins.
Now that your main speaker/amplifier combination need not concern themselves with those power demanding low frequencies, they are freed up to work in a more comfortable range. Yes, now what is coming from your main speakers will sound better than ever.
The 2Wq is not just another subwoofer. It consists of three 8″ floor-facing drivers, each with a massive motor. So why not a more typical single 12″ or 15″ design? Well frankly, the mass of a larger driver will not allow it to respond as quickly as the Vandersteen 8″ drivers to today’s demanding recordings. The 2Wq’s 8″ drivers are designed to handle the content but be “fleet of foot” at the same time. Concerned about where to put them? You need not worry. With the control of both its respective level and the “q” (how loose or tight the low end is) you have the flexibility to place them in a location that fits your living environment and not sacrifice performance. The simple beauty of this product will soon become an addition to your room.
So whether on orchestral music, hard rock or something in between, the Vandersteen 2Wq will exceed your expectations…” |
some very knowledgeable replies on this thread.
I have an old Richard Lord REL , Stentor III, 55kg horn loaded , beautiful cabinet. it's-6db at 13hz. just a 10inch long throw driver. wish I had room for 2 but in my 14ft by 22ft by 10ft room it does a fantastic job with a lyngdorf tdai3400 and jern 14eh standmounts. |
Given the OP's assumptions, I would expect the answer to be "no" (although I have not done my own comparisons or seen any reports that address these issues). The reason I say "no" is that, given the physics of low frequency sound, the designer doesn't face all the challenges faced by designers of main loudspeakers to control sound wave dispersion and tonal response. So, given 3 different brands of 12" front-firing non-ported subs, all with good stiff cabinets and high-quality drivers, could the average user consistently tell the difference across a wide variety of music? I kinda doubt it. I doubt REL's high level connection, per se, or Rythmik's servo design, per se, makes all that much difference to SQ. Or not nearly as much as the effects of different high-quality main speakers on the sound of the female voice or a piano through the midrange. That is my expectation, anyway.
|
Hello Ryder I have had many subs , a perfect example was ihad the Svs SB 3000 i bought the SB 4000. It was just more powerful and ease in the Baer more articulate , notnight and day , but enough to sell the sb 3000 i had my brothers Svs ultra 16 which is the big brother to the sb400 and it was slightly better still but too big for my space being almost 2 ft deep and over 200 lbs the driver in the sb 3000 is around 24 pounds,the sb4000 44 pounds , and cabinet much more ridged it weighs 102 lbs , the Svs App is excellent and allows you to adjust bass on the fly ,for many recordings either have too muchbsss or not enough. where Rel are not sealed ,they are more efficient ,less power for they are like a semi port, using a passive radiator firing down , Sealed boxes have a bit better control comparing , in my friends system hisJL audio Fathom 12 , with true auto room correction with Mike you just plug in $5 k retail it should be special ,, |
@akg_ca - My understanding is that getting that high pass crossover just right is difficult and can be expensive. The manufacturer of my speakers and subs suggested simply blending in the subs at a low frequency and letting my mains roll-off, which they do below 40 Hz, even though the subs have a built-in crossover. He suggested this because he knows I use the set up solely for reproduction of music. If it were a HT set up, he might have recommended using the sub's internal crossover. Fortunately my 650 wpc amps have enough power to still sound good without rolling off the mains. Vandersteen makes two high pass crossovers that I could try. Unfortunately, the more expensive M7-HP model rolls frequencies off below 100 Hz, which is a little high for where I want to be with my subs and mains, and they list at $3,300/pair. I would be more interested at around 50Hz and less than $1,000/pair.
|
Whilst agreeing with many viewpoints some are contradictory, worst sub I ever had was a massive and expensive Sony, completely useless for music simply dominated everything at even the lowest volume. That heaviest is best is in my experience a fallacy, just too much retained energy to be musical. Lighter weight can actually be an advantage, Wharfedale made speakers out of a very light material, I think called Areolam? This means the cabinet is so light it has negligible effect as almost no energy is stored. There is more than 1 solution. I tries lots and essentially found that most around the same price performed similarly, no they didn't 'sound' the same but that's OK neither do your speakers. In the end I settled on 2 Definitive Technology Supercube 4000's, small and great for placement, quick enough to be musical, very important in my system, controllable via remote with a great display, tracks and albums vary greatly the same volume and crossover frequencies do not suit all sources or equipment, some subs cope with digital sources but sound awful with vinyl. And I got them half price, no not the best at their advertised price but at half of that nothing else came near. Had the both now for over 10 years, never missed a beat (pun intended). |
Here’s a question I haven’t seen properly addressed - Are there any subs that can properly keep up with full range ribbon speakers? My understanding is there isn’t due to excursion delays that only increases the larger the subs. I don’t necessarily think subs are needed with my Apogees, but I try to always stay open to what I don’t truly know firsthand and haven’t yet auditioned. The ultimate proof is always with the ears. |
@akg_ca , right on akg. No argument from me. I build my own subs because nobody makes one that sounds good for a reasonable price and I do not need the second rate electronics they stuff into the enclosures, @phusis , good dissertation. I particularly like your comments on excursions. Larger drivers do not need to move far to displace air. Longer excursions always mean higher distortion. The notion that larger drivers are "slower" is mythology to the max. There is a limit as larger diaphragms are harder to control. I hold the line at 15" but for my own subs I stick to multiple 12" drivers. 15" drivers require much larger enclosures which would dominate the room. Put your hand on the subwoofer. Any vibration you feel is distortion. Stopping it is not easy. Balanced force designs are a good start but this is not enough. Bass is very powerful and stopping all resonance in an enclosure is not easy. The only commercial units I know of that do it successfully are the Magico Q series. Digital crossovers with delay management and room control are a godsend for subwoofers. They make integration soooo much easier. Another big plus for subwoofer performance are balanced mono amps you can place behind or next to the subs with long signal cables and very short speaker wires. Damping and control of the driver are greatly improved. |
What @mijostyn said, though I disagree with some of the prioritizations mentioned here. With subs it’s mainly about capacity, design principle and implementation. Through this structural integrity of the enclosure and overall build quality should be "sufficient," but personally I find the need to make them inert/heavy in the extreme to be unnecessary. I’m not saying rigid, heavy cabs don’t make a difference, but to which degree and at what cost (in more than one respect)? Some may find capacity and implementation the most important, others implementation mostly, and others again (like @mijostyn) stress the importance of enclosure inertness (among other things). There are different ways to attain prowess augmenting the mains in the lower octaves. Capacity, i.e. sheer displacement area and also sensitivity is very important in my book. All things being equal, the less those cones move the lower the distortion, and the less power needed for a given SPL the more headroom. Headroom in the lowest frequencies is paramount (where prodigious amounts of energy can be released), because more of it equates into lower distortion and a cleaner, more effortless reproduction. To boot ample displacement gives you that important physical feel and power of music - vastly overlooked, I find. Design principle matters. Balanced force approach has been mentioned. By far most subs today use direct radiating drivers in sealed cabs, because this way they can be made as small as possible (and the cabs more easily inert) and retain extension. It’s is the most inefficient approach though, but in multiples this can be somewhat ameliorated. Still, sealed designs have max. cone movement at the tune (contrary to vented cabs and others), and moreover the exposed, direct radiating driver is prone to emit mechanical noise - not least when working harder, which smaller drives in sealed cabs and limited numbers do. Mechanical driver noise = distortion. I prefer large, efficient designs with partially or completely hidden drivers in either horn and/or bandpass variations acting as force multipliers, and with pro drivers no less than 15" in diameter. These designs also bring "inherent" bracing to their enclosures due to horn paths and other design innards, and build in plywood not least are structurally very sound. Implementation has been covered already. I would also stress the importance of at least two subs, stereo coupling, symmetrical-to-the-mains placement and, preferably, a cross-over no lower than 80Hz. I’m aware this usually involves the need for high-passing the main speakers, and that quite a few audiophiles are against this. Such things would be more easily demonstrated with actual demos to highlight the potential advantages (depending on the ears (and preconceptions) of those who’re listening) of such a configuration, also to narrow down the specific setup context in which the high-passing of the mains has been done - which of course matters a lot to the outcome and to prevent unnecessary generalizations either for or against HP’ing of mains. So, it’s about choosing the designs that accommodates the above, I find, and this not least calls for the need to include DIY solutions. I’d disregard brands if it means making subs very expensive to get some minimum of physical requirements. In other words, hugely expensive subs from the likes of Magico and Wilson Audio are a waste of money if you ask me, although I’m sure others may disagree. This is below the Schroeder frequency we’re talking about, resonators meant to move air efficiently, cleanly, effortlessly and acoustically well implemented. Trying to make subs into some dubious, "sophisticated" affair akin to selling the idea of expensive, single item (well, two for stereo) small 2-way standmounts is severely sidetracked marketing B.S IMHO. |
It is not just a rigid box design by itself, or throwing more money at it, or the latest app that carves out the contenders from the pretenders. There are three main challenges that we face. The link below and its condensed and edited article extract is one of the best reads on the issues of introducing subs into a two-channel system. http://ultrafi.com/why-everybody-needs- ... subwoofer/ Why Everybody Needs a Good Subwoofer……And Why a Really Good Subwoofer is so Hard to Find INTRO Audiophiles and music lovers are missing out on one of the most dramatic improvements they can make to their audio system: Powered Subwoofers. Most audiophiles won’t even use the word “subwoofer” in public, let alone plug one in to their precious systems. There is a kind of snobbery that exists in the world of high-end audio aimed primarily at receivers, car audio, home theater and especially subwoofers. As a matter of fact, subwoofers are responsible for many people disliking both car audio and home theater, since it is the subwoofer in both of those situations that tends to call attention to the system and cause many of the problems. The truth of the matter is that subwoofers have fully earned their bad reputation. They usually suck. Most of them sound boomy, muddy and out of control with an obnoxious bass overhang that lingers so long as to blur most of the musical information up until the next bass note is struck. We have all had our fair share of bad subwoofer experiences, whether it’s from a nearby car thumping so loud that it appears to be bouncing up off the road, or a home theater with such overblown bass that it causes you to feel nauseous half-way through the movie. You would think that high-end audio manufacturers would be above all of that, but you would be wrong. In many cases, their subwoofers are almost as bad as the mass-market models because they too, are trying to capitalize on the home theater trend that is sweeping the land. (1) QUALITY BUILD SUBWOOFER AMP and its POWER SUPPLY IS EXPENSIVE. You see, it’s very difficult and expensive to build a good subwoofer. One reason is that a sub has to move a tremendous amount of air, which places big demands on the driver (or drivers). Moving lots of air requires a lot of power and that means an amp with a huge power supply, which can cost huge money. (2) QUALITY BUILD SUBWOOFER BOX BUILD IS EXPENSIVE Finally, in trying to move all of this air, the driver (or drivers) which operate in an enclosure, create tremendous pressure inside of the box itself. The cabinet walls must be able to handle this pressure without flexing or resonating. Building such a box involves heavy damping and bracing which gets very expensive. When you consider these requirements, you quickly realize that it is virtually impossible to build a really good subwoofer (I mean good enough for a high-end music system) for under $2000. Yet most of the subwoofers out there sell for between $800 and $1200. Manufacturers do this because their marketing research has shown them that that is what people want to spend on a sub, never mind the fact that what people want to spend and what it takes to get the job done right may be two different things. The result is that even most high-end manufacturers are putting out poorly constructed subwoofers that just don’t sound very good. (3) JUST THROWING MORE-MONEY AT IT IS A MIRAGE, it’s the CROSSOVERS that matter I don’t want to give you the impression that anyone who really wants to can build a good subwoofer so long as they are willing to throw enough money at the problem, because that really isn’t true either. There are some pretty expensive and well-constructed subwoofers out there that you would never want to plug into your music system because they would most certainly make the sound worse. Why? Because of their crossovers. A crossover is inserted into your signal path in order to remove the lowest frequencies (the deep bass) from your main speakers so that they no longer have to do all of the dirty work. The deep bass will instead be dealt with by the subwoofer. Once your main speakers are freed from the burden of making deep bass, they will sound cleaner, faster and clearer, especially in the midrange and midbass. They will also image way better because there will be far less air pressure and therefore resonance and vibration affecting their cabinet walls. And since the power required to make the deep bass is provided by the subwoofer’s built-in amplifier, your main power amp will be free from that burden and begin to sound like a much more powerful amplifier. The one big problem with all of this is that you need a crossover to roll off the deep bass in your system and achieve all of these benefits. And the crossover that comes with almost every subwoofer on the market will cause more damage to your signal than can be overcome by these benefits. That is the main reason that audiophiles refuse to consider adding subwoofers, even very expensive onres with well built cabinets. |
My subs are tucked away behind furniture so appearance isn't important.I've had a Def Tech sub,a couple of Dayton subs, and now two HSUs and one SVS 2000.As you move up the line the cabinets are better quality and overall more attention to every aspect that results in improving sound quality should be obvious, not just bigger drivers and a few dbs lower. I really like the SVS app.Adjusting everything from the listening chair is wonderful.I'm far from being tech savvy and it's incredibly easy for me. |
Okay. I suppose that if I were coming at this from a technical point, I might feel the same. But as an audiophile, the sound quality is my first concern. I learned long ago that when theory and reality collide, reality wins every time. But even as a designer, SQ should not give way to technical jargon IMO. |
REL's system was created to cheaply get subs into peoples system (they don't have to buy additional items). It is a relatively poor way to do it and it fails to take advantage of a subwoofer's best advantages. People using that system should know that there are additional benefits they can grow into and really improve the performance of their system. Rules of the Road. Subwoofers have to be in corners or against walls. Subwoofers have to be in phase with and time aligned with the main speakers. Crossover should be between 80 and 100 Hz Multiple subs in a symmetrical array are mandatory (at least two) Bigger drivers are better. 10" is the smallest that should be used. At least four 10" subs would be needed. Two 12s will suffice. |
@ryder , sure. If you compare a range of 12" subwoofers there is a lot of difference. The single most important factor in subs is the enclosure. It has to be stiff, non resonant and heavy. The best spec to compare is weight. The heavier subwoofer is likely to be better. What the enclosure looks like means nothing. The best subs on the market use a balanced force approach. They put two identical drivers opposite from each other in phase. The Newtonian forces cancel and the enclosure does not shake. Magico makes it's subs this way. KEF uses this technique in the Blade. I build my own. I can make them heavier and stiffer than any company would care to for cost reasons. There are probably over 100 sub drivers on the market and many of them are excellent and even better than the units used by the manufacturers again for cost reasons. |
When I mentioned budget in previous post, I was referencing to decisions driven by lower cost of subs compared to REL. The REL Serie S cost more but you also get the outstanding build quality and ample watts in return. I own a pair of Carbon Limited and found them to be more than adequate in my 15’ D x 30’ W dedicated audio room. |
I agree wholeheartedly with @lalitk . I read about the nightmare’s people have setting up subs. Never had an issue with REL. |
Thanks for all thoughts. All good points. Similarly, apart from sound quality the design comes first for me. I’m bringing up specifications to suggest that subs from different manufacturers may sound closer to each other, that’s all. Purchase not driven by budget? I guess that is only applicable to billionaires. Anyway, that is good news about the REL. I have read many good reviews on the RELs throughout the years since the early days when they were built in England, the Strata and Studio III. I just haven’t managed to try one yet. Apart from sound quality, the one aspect I like about the REL is the looks and build quality. It looks like some expensive piece of hifi equipment when compared to most subs out there. The new range with the printed text on white/silver colored drivers, the logo on the feet, small metal piece at the top and the small details all add up to the elegance of the design
|
I have a different set of criteria than you. First is design and I like the servo design, and the brand that uses that design is Rythmik. There may be others, not sure. Secondly, I like integration as either easy or hard. I think SVS has an app that I have heard some people like and state it works, I have not tried it. Rythmik and REL have multiple ways to adjust levels to allow the sub to match my stereo and high level/ low level connection options. Third and and not necessarily in order is - does the company have a good reputation as a whole and are they know for making subs for the application your looking for ie Home Theatre, Stereo, etc. Fourth, and this is a BIG one, how is the reputation for service and build quality. If the sub is designed well, sounds great, but the brand does not care much about fixing the sub down the road, and would rather you buy another from them... I don’t buy from that company. I have had good luck with Rythmik, but I may try either REL or another brand down the road, maybe even Vandersteen. I wouldn’t buy SVS.
|
