Looking for a compact sub to be part of a 5.1 system.

The system consists of Def Tech ProCenter 2000, ProMonitor 1000’s for the fronts and ProMonitor 800’s for the rears. The ProSub 1000 is 'ok' sounding but at $500 it doesn’t really impress me like the remainder of the system does.

The one thing I do like about the ProSub1000 is its relatively low price and its overall size. I would be looking to keep the price below $700 AND a small footprint (one thats not too tall either). A footprint 12x16x15H would be preferable.

The room is 13x22 with 9 foot ceilings and is being powered by either an HK AVR354 or a Marantz 5003.

Going that small would probably require a sealed sub unless you wanted a tiny ported 10". The SVS SB12-plus was on my hit list and it's $699 w/ free shipping right now (15x14x14):

http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-box-sb12plus.cfm

I ultimately ended up with a larger ported sub, but that should be a great sub.

--Illah

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/lfmcompact.html
That's the tiny one, the bigger ones are better, just read the dimensions and see what fits your space needs

I would go with the SVS if you need a small sub. A larger ported sub give you more bang for your buck, especially with HT

As mentioned in your other thread...another possible option for just a bit over your budget...

Rythmik F12G Direct Servo for $749
http://www.rythmikaudio.com/F12G.html

Thanks for all your suggestions. As I look up each of the compact subs on either the manufactures web site reading reviews, I read where because of their size they are all 'limited' in performance. With that in mid how does the following SVS compare in performance?

http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-cyl-pc12_nsd.cfm

Its cylindrical shape gives a small footprint, and while it’s rather tall (nearly 3 feet) where the sub is going this may not be so bad. Ant at $549 its nicely priced.

If given the choice of the small box or this cylindrical one, what would your choice be?

Thanks for all your suggestions. As I look up each of the compact subs on either the manufactures web site reading reviews, I read where because of their size they are all 'limited' in performance. With that in mid how does the following SVS compare in performance?

http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-cyl-pc12_nsd.cfm

Its cylindrical shape gives a small footprint, and while it’s rather tall (nearly 3 feet) where the sub is going this may not be so bad. Ant at $549 its nicely priced.

If given the choice of the small box or this cylindrical one, what would your choice be?

The PC-12 NSD will have much more low bass (<32Hz), than the SVS SB-12 Plus.

The PC-12 NSD compared to the Rythmik 12 incher. The PC-12 NSD will have perhaps 6 db more output at 16Hz, 2-3 db more output at 20 and 25 Hz, and they will be very close from 32 Hz on up to 80 Hz.

So, the PC-12 NSD gives more output and extension for less money. In a very small room the differences will not be as great.

Some people are very sensitive to sound quality, and the sealed subs are proving to be favored by critical listeners.

If you want to see some comparisons, take a look at this chart. Note that it tells you nothing about the sound quality.

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/subwoofer-tests/5748-cea-2010-standard-compilation-new-information.html

Personally, I place more of a premium on extension and output than on sound quality when you get to this level. If I was a big fan of pipe organ music, I would probably go with the sealed Rythmik.

The PC-12 NSD will have much more low bass (<32Hz), than the SVS SB-12 Plus.

The PC-12 NSD compared to the Rythmik 12 incher. The PC-12 NSD will have perhaps 6 db more output at 16Hz, 2-3 db more output at 20 and 25 Hz, and they will be very close from 32 Hz on up to 80 Hz.

So, the PC-12 NSD gives more output and extension for less money. In a very small room the differences will not be as great.

Some people are very sensitive to sound quality, and the sealed subs are proving to be favored by critical listeners.

If you want to see some comparisons, take a look at this chart. Note that it tells you nothing about the sound quality.


http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/subwoofer-tests/5748-cea-2010-standard-compilation-new-information.html

Personally, I place more of a premium on extension and output than on sound quality when you get to this level. If I was a big fan of pipe organ music, I would probably go with the sealed Rythmik.


I agree with most of your points, but now having some experience with a sealed, Rythmik 15 SE, I now lean towards sound quality.
Compared to my SVS Ultra, the Rythmik beats it hands sound in quickness and details. It extends deeper as well.
So unless one plans to listen at 0 (reference) or higher, I really don't see output as being that big of an issue, at least with the RhythmiK. IMO.

I agree with most of your points, but now having some experience with a sealed, Rythmik 15 SE, I now lean towards sound quality.
Compared to my SVS Ultra, the Rythmik beats it hands sound in quickness and details. It extends deeper as well.
So unless one plans to listen at 0 (reference) or higher, I really don't see output as being that big of an issue, at least with the RhythmiK. IMO.

Interesting, but how about a comparison of the SVS PC12 NSD and the Rythmik F12G???

Also I cant seem to find on the Rtyhmik the difference between the F12 and the F12G.

A third question is with the LFE input, why is ther a left and right on the back of either the PC12 or the F12G? ... Do i need to split my input cable?

A third question is with the LFE input, why is ther a left and right on the back of either the PC12 or the F12G? ... Do i need to split my input cable?Basically, there are R and L inputs there for people who wish to use a sub with a 2-channel pre-amp or who wish to bass manage unconventionally with their receiver set up as having NO SUB. In these cases one would want to be able to connect BOTH of their R and L pre-outs to the sub.

Many subs have R and L inputs instead of a single input, btw. Some even have a separate LFE input which, in most cases, bypasses the sub's internal crossover.

No, you do not need a Y-adapter with a standard, conventional connection to an AVR's mono sub-out. Sometimes the manufacturer will label one or the other to be used for a mono connection, but in all likelihood it doesn't really matter which one you use.

[QUOTE=sivadselim;15131615]
Many subs have R and L inputs instead of a single input, btw. Some even have a separate LFE input which, in most cases, bypasses the sub's internal crossover.

QUOTE]

I believe that both sub makers reccomend that for a HT install to bypass the internal crossover and use the receiver to manage that function.

I believe that both sub makers reccomend that for a HT install to bypass the internal crossover and use the receiver to manage that function.Well, of course they do!

But not all subs will allow you the option to actually bypass the sub's crossover. In this case the only option is to set the sub's crossover as high as it will possibly go.


(And as sort of an aside, it is not really a "crossover", but a variable low-pass filter.)

Also I cant seem to find on the Rtyhmik the difference between the F12 and the F12G.

http://www.rythmikaudio.com/selection_guide.html

In short:

F12 - aluminum cone; stiffer cone gives better performance at high output, best when crossed over at 80Hz or below.

F12G - GR research paper cone; slightly better performance at low/moderate volume, but doesn't hold up as well at high output; more extended response on high end, so better choice when crossover set to above 80Hz