SVS PB10-NSD vs Klipsch Sub-12 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 29 Old 01-11-2009, 05:04 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
surma884's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The SVS is a 10" and the Klipsch is 12", so is the SVS still better than the Klipsch? The retail prices for them are $429 (SVS) and $499 (Klipsch). I've heard the Klipsch Sub-10 and it sounded very nice. I couldn't test the Sub-12 in the same setting because they didn't have it out on display. So my assumption is that the Sub-12 would be better than the Sub-10.

I'm planning on getting a Denon AVR-789, so I don't think the crossover knob on the back of the sub amp would matter. The PB10-NSD doesn't have a crossover setting on the amp like the Sub-12 does. The Denon AVR-789 has a crossover setting for the subwoofer (yay!).

So what do you guys think? Is the PB10-NSD better than the Sub-12?

Thanks
surma884 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 29 Old 01-11-2009, 06:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
chengbin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
THe PB10 will be a lot better than the SUB 12. It will have deeper extension, more power, more feel, and better sound quality. Basically it will do everything better than the SUB 12.
chengbin is offline  
post #3 of 29 Old 01-11-2009, 08:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lalakersfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 3,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
The PB10-NSD is a quality subwoofer, and performs far better than most 10" subs. It should dig deeper than the Klipsch Sub-12 while being capable of at least comparable (if not higher) output across the board. The PB10-NSD also sounds quite good. I used to own two PB10's and they were very capable subs. If it were between the two at a similar price, I'd have to say the SVS is a no brainer. However if you can find the Klipsch for under $300 they might be closer in terms of value. The Sub-12 is a better sub than most people give it credit for.
lalakersfan34 is offline  
post #4 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 09:04 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
surma884's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the info. I really want to be sure that the PB10-NSD will be good because I'm sort of buying blindly. I'm going to wait a little more and see if they come out with a newer one, and I have to see how much my tax refund is.

Anyone heard any news of new models coming out? I may get a better deal if I purchase the clearance item.
surma884 is offline  
post #5 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 09:04 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
surma884's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
EDIT: For some reason it double posted my post above to I'm editing one of them.
surma884 is offline  
post #6 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 11:40 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hughman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I couldn't help but notice there's been some recent chatter about the Sub-12 lately, when browsing through BestBuy last week I saw one on sale for half price so picked it up more for experimental purposes than anything. I just want to post a couple graphs depicting it's frequency response which I measured using TruRTA with a Behringer ECM-8000 mic calibrated by West Caldwell Labs Inc.

I't's cold and rather miserable outside so all measures were conducted indoors. To remove the room as much as possible I took two measures, one with the mic as close to the driver as possible and the other with the mic just at the plane of vent. I presume this should give a reasonable approximation how each is contributing to the overall output but if not those in the know please chime in.

The first graph shows the response with the sub/receiver crossover setup as most would run it. Sub xover maxed out at 120hz and the receiver at 80hz.

The second graphs show various crossover settings, the orange line best represents the subs full response with it's xover at 120hz and the receivers xover out of the way as much as possible at 200hz.

Based on these measures it would appear the -3dB point is indeed at or about 24hz and no I'm not going to run max output sweeps.

Hope this helps.
LL
LL
Hughman is offline  
post #7 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 03:18 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
surma884's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughman View Post

The first graph shows the response with the sub/receiver crossover setup as most would run it. Sub xover maxed out at 120hz and the receiver at 80hz.

The second graphs show various crossover settings, the orange line best represents the subs full response with it's xover at 120hz and the receivers xover out of the way as much as possible at 200hz.

Based on these measures it would appear the -3dB point is indeed at or about 24hz and no I'm not going to run max output sweeps.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the graphs. So it seems the db level fluctuates compared to SVS's graphs they have on their website. The SVS db level hovers around 90db up until you go past 100hz. A subwoofer's spl vs. freq graph should be logarithmic correct? That is to say that it's a good subwoofer.
surma884 is offline  
post #8 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 03:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KyleLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 1,125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Sub-12
more sensitivity
Twice the port area
Lower port noise and compression
More SPL above ~25Hz

SVS
more extention
better built box.
better driver

I have owned both. I like the build quality of the SVS, but the Klispch really gets the job done for less money. I know what the Sub-12 costs Klipsch and it blows my mind how much they get out of it for what they spend...its very well designed.

I know at least the older SVS 10" Drivers made could take a lot more power, if you mod'ed one of the PB10's with two or three times the power, it would rock your world. Of course that 3" port would be making some noise too!

data-bass.com
@databass_audio
KyleLee is offline  
post #9 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 03:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lalakersfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 3,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Surma,

Keep in mind that these tests were done in-room and using a receiver with a crossover employed. There are all kinds of factors that are affecting the frequency response graphs - microphone placement, subwoofer placement, room size, room dimensions, room shape, and the receiver's crossover to name a few. These graphs are not able to be compared to any other FR graphs you see. The only way to truly (and fairly) test these graphs of a Sub-12 with another sub is if Hughman used the other sub in the exact same room in the same place, with the same microphone placement, same calibration, etc. Hughman was just running some tests for fun but his graphs should not be compared to any other FR graphs you might see. It would be great if he could do 2m GP tests when it gets warmer, but of course that's up to Hughman .
lalakersfan34 is offline  
post #10 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 06:23 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hughman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by lalakersfan34 View Post

Surma,

Keep in mind that these tests were done in-room and using a receiver with a crossover employed. There are all kinds of factors that are affecting the frequency response graphs - microphone placement, subwoofer placement, room size, room dimensions, room shape, and the receiver's crossover to name a few. These graphs are not able to be compared to any other FR graphs you see. The only way to truly (and fairly) test these graphs of a Sub-12 with another sub is if Hughman used the other sub in the exact same room in the same place, with the same microphone placement, same calibration, etc. Hughman was just running some tests for fun but his graphs should not be compared to any other FR graphs you might see. It would be great if he could do 2m GP tests when it gets warmer, but of course that's up to Hughman .

The response has two humps due to my standard method of near-field measuring not due to the room as mentioned in my post. I have removed the influence of room effects by measuring the driver and port separately and placing the mic as close to the driver I could get and at the plane of the port. The graph clearly shows the response of the port separate from the response of the driver, if room effects were present the graph would not appear smooth like it is. Placing the mic away from the sub would fill the hole between the two humps, think of these two measurements the same as measuring a sub separate from x-over'd mains, the graph would show dips from the crossover slopes but measure both playing together and the xover point flattens out when the two responses are summed. This method of measuring is the standard method for near-field measuring of a ported sub. I should add that I did measure the sub from two different locations which, far-field, provides drastically different responses but near-field measures came out nearly identical.

I'm a little surprised anyone would look at those graphs and feel they are somehow not fair to the Sub-12.
Hughman is offline  
post #11 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 08:19 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hughman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Ok, to provide a pretty graph I took one measurement with the sub/mic postioned in such a way which provided a similar port and driver response to the separate measurements performed in the previous graphs but note how the hole is now filled in due to summing of the two sound sources. The response above 80 hz is being effected by the receivers 80 hz x-over. This measurement is less accurate than the first and does not provide a repeatable in-door setup to faithfully compare two subs.
LL
Hughman is offline  
post #12 of 29 Old 01-14-2009, 10:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lalakersfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 3,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Thanks for further explaining your methodology. I'll admit I didn't read your first post as clearly as I should have. What you did makes sense and is probably about the best that can be done indoors. Your last graph which showed the summing of the two different mic placements puts it all together nicely. BTW, I wasn't trying to imply that the test wasn't "fair" to the Sub-12. I was simply trying to make the point that these graphs can't be directly compared to the 2m ground plane FR graphs of other subs in some ways (for example, comparing dynamic compression or linearity at a given SPL). Overall, the graphs were quite informative and are much appreciated. Keep up the good work .
lalakersfan34 is offline  
post #13 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 05:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ed Mullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 70
The dip in the close-mic woofer curve indicates the system tuning frequency. At/near the system tuning frequency, the port(s) will damp woofer motion, and shoulder most of the output load - hence the drop in woofer output. In the case of the Sub-12, the system tuning frequency is ~30 Hz.

Ed Mullen
Director - Technology and Customer Relations
SVS

"What We Do In Life, Echoes In Eternity"

Ed Mullen is offline  
post #14 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 05:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ed Mullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by lalakersfan34 View Post

Thanks for further explaining your methodology. I'll admit I didn't read your first post as clearly as I should have. What you did makes sense and is probably about the best that can be done indoors. Your last graph which showed the summing of the two different mic placements puts it all together nicely. BTW, I wasn't trying to imply that the test wasn't "fair" to the Sub-12. I was simply trying to make the point that these graphs can't be directly compared to the 2m ground plane FR graphs of other subs in some ways (for example, comparing dynamic compression or linearity at a given SPL). Overall, the graphs were quite informative and are much appreciated. Keep up the good work .

Right - the only way to truly compare both subs is to get them outdoors and measure FR and clean output at discrete test frequencies.

As others have indicated, the PB10-NSD will extend to ~20 Hz before roll-off, so expect an additional 3/4 octave deep extension from the PB10-NSD when comparing F3 points.

The Sub-12 and the PB10-NSD will have comparable max output capability from 80 Hz - 35 Hz. Below 35 Hz the SVS will start to assert an advantage, which will quickly grow substantial <30 Hz.

Klipsch rates the Sub-12 @ 117 dB @ 30 Hz @ 1M in 1/8 space. The conversion to 2M GP is fairly simple, and equates to 99 dB @ 30 Hz @ 2M GP, which is exactly what I'd expect from this unit. The PB10-NSD can pull about 103 dB at the same frequency under the same conditions, which is about 60% more acoustic output.

Ed Mullen
Director - Technology and Customer Relations
SVS

"What We Do In Life, Echoes In Eternity"

Ed Mullen is offline  
post #15 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 06:19 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
surma884's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Mullen View Post

Klipsch rates the Sub-12 @ 117 dB @ 30 Hz @ 1M in 1/8 space. The conversion to 2M GP is fairly simple, and equates to 99 dB @ 30 Hz @ 2M GP, which is exactly what I'd expect from this unit. The PB10-NSD can pull about 103 dB at the same frequency under the same conditions, which is about 60% more acoustic output.

Wait 103db vs 99db, how would that make it 60% more output?
surma884 is offline  
post #16 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 06:29 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hughman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by lalakersfan34 View Post

Thanks for further explaining your methodology. I'll admit I didn't read your first post as clearly as I should have. What you did makes sense and is probably about the best that can be done indoors. Your last graph which showed the summing of the two different mic placements puts it all together nicely. BTW, I wasn't trying to imply that the test wasn't "fair" to the Sub-12. I was simply trying to make the point that these graphs can't be directly compared to the 2m ground plane FR graphs of other subs in some ways (for example, comparing dynamic compression or linearity at a given SPL). Overall, the graphs were quite informative and are much appreciated. Keep up the good work .

Ok gotcha, the primary purpose of the measurements was, as Ed pointed out, to provide some objective data of the ports tuning frequency which could further be used to access differences between the two subs. I probably should have posted this in a more generic Sub-12 thread but this one was the first I found. Though I was shocked this sub performed substantially better than I expected, after listening, I wasn't surprised to find the tuning at or about 30hz.
Hughman is offline  
post #17 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 06:44 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Browninggold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Depends on who's looking for me
Posts: 2,384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I owned a Klipsch sub 12". Ran using Audyssey from a Denon 3808ci. Just sold it to a neighbor for 150.00 dollars. I know this sub would shake the house real good. It had a lot of "bang for the buck".

"We can complain because rose bushes have thorns or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses". - Abraham Lincoln
Browninggold is offline  
post #18 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 06:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ribbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,004
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by surma884 View Post

Wait 103db vs 99db, how would that make it 60% more output?

6db is double
3db is half = 50%

Mike C
MKC International
SVSound Philippine Dealer
ribbit is offline  
post #19 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 07:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ed Mullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by surma884 View Post

Wait 103db vs 99db, how would that make it 60% more output?

Since dB is a log10 function, seemingly small differences in output are actually quite significant.

If a single Sub-12 can generate 99 dB @ 30 Hz, two of them side-by-side will be able to generate 105 dB, which is (ostensibly) 2X the acoustic output.

Take the dB differential, divide by 20, and then take the inverse log.

Baseline
+1 dB = 1.12X louder than baseline
+2 dB = 1.26X louder than baseline
+3 dB = 1.41X louder than baseline
+4 dB = 1.58X louder than baseline
+5 dB = 1.78X louder than baseline
+6 dB = 2X louder than baseline
+12 dB = 4X louder than baseline
+18 dB = 8X louder than baseline
+24 dB = 16X louder than baseline

Ed Mullen
Director - Technology and Customer Relations
SVS

"What We Do In Life, Echoes In Eternity"

Ed Mullen is offline  
post #20 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 08:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hughman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by surma884 View Post

Wait 103db vs 99db, how would that make it 60% more output?

Surma884,

Keep in mind the 3dB increase in SPL is said to be barely perceptible while a 10 dB increase in SPL is said to sound about twice the loud.

To obtain a 3dB increase in SPL it requires a 42% increase in acoustic output (measured in dynes/cm3)

To obtain 6dB increase in SPL it requires a 100% increase in acoustic output (ie dynes/cm2 doubles, ie: pressure on the eardrum doubles)

To obtain 10dB increase (or twice the perceived loudness) requires a 316% increase in acoustic output or slightly more than tripling.

Now using Ed's example, to obtain 4dB increase in SPL requires a 60% increase in acoustic output the end result being perceptible increase in loudness.

dBspl is a 20 Log function, the formula is:
dBSPL= 20 LOG (p1/p0) where p1 and p0 are the sound pressures in dynes/cm2.

where p0=1, p1=1.6 (60% increase)

dBspl = 20 log (1.6/1)
dBspl = 20 * .20411
dBspl = 4.08 which is the theoretical difference at 30hz between the two subs.
Hughman is offline  
post #21 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 10:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ed Mullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughman View Post

Surma884,

Keep in mind the 3dB increase in SPL is said to be barely perceptible while a 10 dB increase in SPL is said to sound about twice the loud.

To obtain a 3dB increase in SPL it requires a 42% increase in acoustic output (measured in dynes/cm3)

To obtain 6dB increase in SPL it requires a 100% increase in acoustic output (ie dynes/cm2 doubles, ie: pressure on the eardrum doubles)

To obtain 10dB increase (or twice the perceived loudness) requires a 316% increase in acoustic output or slightly more than tripling.

Now using Ed's example, to obtain 4dB increase in SPL requires a 60% increase in acoustic output the end result being perceptible increase in loudness.

dBspl is a 20 Log function, the formula is:
dBSPL= 20 LOG (p1/p0) where p1 and p0 are the sound pressures in dynes/cm2.

where p0=1, p1=1.6 (60% increase)

dBspl = 20 log (1.6/1)
dBspl = 20 * .20411
dBspl = 4.08 which is the theoretical difference at 30hz between the two subs.

To build on the perceptibility of SPL changes, our sensitivity to these changes actually increases at the deepest frequencies.

A look at the equal loudness curves indicates that the "10 dB = twice the perceived loudness" rule of thumb only actually holds true over the 500-4000 Hz bandwidth. At 20-50 Hz, only a ~3 dB increase is required in order to be subjectively perceived as being 2X louder, at least in the 80-100 dB range (i.e., common playback levels).

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...nd/eqloud.html

Ed Mullen
Director - Technology and Customer Relations
SVS

"What We Do In Life, Echoes In Eternity"

Ed Mullen is offline  
post #22 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 10:49 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
surma884's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks guys, that makes sense. I'll probably go with the PB10-NSD since it provides comparable output to the SUB-12, and it does low frequency. I've never felt/heard frequencies below 50hz. I just made that number up but it's probably true. No one that I know of has a good sound system.

Now to go by the woofer size, how do the SUB-12 and PB12-NSD compare?
surma884 is offline  
post #23 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 10:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
blued888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
PB12-NSD will have increased output (compared to the PB10-NSD) due to the larger woofer size and enclosure.

Eclectic Electronics: A blog containing technology news, information about home theater, digital photography and more.
blued888 is offline  
post #24 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 10:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lalakersfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 3,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Mullen View Post

To build on the perceptibility of SPL changes, our sensitivity to these changes actually increases at the deepest frequencies.

A look at the equal loudness curves indicates that the "10 dB = twice the perceived loudness" rule of thumb only actually holds true over the 500-4000 Hz bandwidth. At 20-50 Hz, only a ~3 dB increase is required in order to be subjectively perceived as being 2X louder, at least in the 80-100 dB range (i.e., common playback levels).

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...nd/eqloud.html

Interesting, I'd never heard that before. I figured it had to vary some across our range of hearing, but I had no idea it would be that big a difference. As always, thanks for stopping in, Ed. It's always good to hear from you . BTW - very interested to see more about those new sealed subs.
lalakersfan34 is offline  
post #25 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 11:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ed Mullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by blued888 View Post

PB12-NSD will have increased output (compared to the PB10-NSD) due to the larger woofer size and enclosure.

Right, the PB12-NSD cabinet volume is ~58% larger, the port area is ~80% greater, and the woofer cone area is ~44% greater (available stroke from both motors is similar). The result is predictable, and the PB12-NSD has about a 3-4 dB max output advantage over the PB10-NSD across the entire pass band.

Ed Mullen
Director - Technology and Customer Relations
SVS

"What We Do In Life, Echoes In Eternity"

Ed Mullen is offline  
post #26 of 29 Old 01-15-2009, 11:36 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hughman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Mullen View Post

To build on the perceptibility of SPL changes, our sensitivity to these changes actually increases at the deepest frequencies.

A look at the equal loudness curves indicates that the "10 dB = twice the perceived loudness" rule of thumb only actually holds true over the 500-4000 Hz bandwidth. At 20-50 Hz, only a ~3 dB increase is required in order to be subjectively perceived as being 2X louder, at least in the 80-100 dB range (i.e., common playback levels).

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...nd/eqloud.html

Though aware of both I never put those things together, our insensitivity increases our sensitivity, probably important for evading a herd of large wild animals at full speed headed in your direction. Obviously those graphs are crude but I would put it between 3-6dB for doubling of loudness depending on which line you pick. Sure explains why whenever I see it written that a 3dB is barely perceptible I just shake my head in disbelief and assume most people are quite deaf.
Hughman is offline  
post #27 of 29 Old 01-16-2009, 04:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ed Mullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughman View Post

Though aware of both I never put those things together, our insensitivity increases our sensitivity, probably important for evading a herd of large wild animals at full speed headed in your direction. Obviously those graphs are crude but I would put it between 3-6dB for doubling of loudness depending on which line you pick. Sure explains why whenever I see it written that a 3dB is barely perceptible I just shake my head in disbelief and assume most people are quite deaf.

Yes, it's an interesting phenomenon; our audibility threshold is considerably worse (i.e., higher) at the deepest frequencies, and yet once we can hear those frequencies, we are quite sensitive to changes in their sound pressure. Of course the exact opposite is true at higher frequencies.

Apologies to the OP for this sidebar, but often these types of tangential discussions can result in useful information exchange for everyone.

Ed Mullen
Director - Technology and Customer Relations
SVS

"What We Do In Life, Echoes In Eternity"

Ed Mullen is offline  
post #28 of 29 Old 02-05-2009, 03:03 PM
Member
 
K-Amps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Mullen View Post

Right - the only way to truly compare both subs is to get them outdoors and measure FR and clean output at discrete test frequencies.

As others have indicated, the PB10-NSD will extend to ~20 Hz before roll-off, so expect an additional 3/4 octave deep extension from the PB10-NSD when comparing F3 points.

The Sub-12 and the PB10-NSD will have comparable max output capability from 80 Hz - 35 Hz. Below 35 Hz the SVS will start to assert an advantage, which will quickly grow substantial <30 Hz.

Klipsch rates the Sub-12 @ 117 dB @ 30 Hz @ 1M in 1/8 space. The conversion to 2M GP is fairly simple, and equates to 99 dB @ 30 Hz @ 2M GP, which is exactly what I'd expect from this unit. The PB10-NSD can pull about 103 dB at the same frequency under the same conditions, which is about 60% more acoustic output.

Guys:

Would I be better off with a PC12-NSD in a 4500cuft room or for the price I can get two SUB 12's... I am inclinded to think 2 Sub 12's would fill the area better. I am not looking for a lot of infrabass that much... 25Hz to 80Hz is where the sub will operate.
K-Amps is offline  
post #29 of 29 Old 02-05-2009, 06:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ironmike86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Washington 98047
Posts: 1,710
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Get the Pc12nsd. You still may want 2 of those in that room size. But you can get another in a later date if needed. IMO always get the most sub you can afford before buying 2 the same price.
Ironmike86 is offline  
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off