Official Rythmik Audio Subwoofer thread - Page 16 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Audio > Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers > Official Rythmik Audio Subwoofer thread

Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

porksoda's Avatar porksoda
11:19 AM Liked: 10
post #451 of 17213
04-01-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
cyberbri...

i see you are boosting some of the nulls throughout the range on your graph... or is it just the final chart has smoothing so its smoothing out the nulls as they are quite sharp.

How many filters did you end up using?

How did you finally set up phase using rew... i was using polarity change and spl to find the peak to set the phase.

Do you find your hsu's amp gets very hot from that ?

I am redoing my setup starting with placement first instead of subcrawl with spl meter i am placing the sub in various locations and rew'ing the result to see whats best.


I can say my avr unit when set to xover at 80hz it rolls off both mains and lfe at that xover given the mains are set to small.

If i set main to large it doesn't.

on my hsu i found the internal xover when added does clean up bass a bit but on account of removing/rolling off information.
cyberbri's Avatar cyberbri
11:40 AM Liked: 53
post #452 of 17213
04-01-2010 | Posts: 8,095
Joined: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

cyberbri...

i see you are boosting some of the nulls throughout the range on your graph... or is it just the final chart has smoothing so its smoothing out the nulls as they are quite sharp.

How many filters did you end up using?

How did you finally set up phase using rew... i was using polarity change and spl to find the peak to set the phase.

Do you find your hsu's amp gets very hot from that ?


This is my final before/after for what I currently am running with, although I made a few minor +/- 1dB changes to the BFD filters since I took this. And the graph has no smoothing applied.



I think I ended up with about 11 or 12 filters. I start with the big cuts to bring down the big peaks, then bring down other areas, add / split filters to attack a peak in pieces to keep from bringing the surround freqs down too much. Then after all the cut filters, if any freqs were inadvertently dropped from other filters, I bring them back up to about zero. And then I tweak filters, sometimes add a few - 1~2dB filters to smooth it out a bit more. And you can see that I brought up the 22-30Hz range as well. I haven't noticed any issues in doing this. My sub has two modes that change the tuning. I run one port plugged for 20Hz mode, and the both ports open mode for 24Hz~ tuning has a lot stronger bass through 22-30Hz (it's like a plateau) but drops off pretty steeply around 20Hz in my room. So I eq'd it a bit to give me more of a slope there. I could have brought <22Hz and >30Hz down a lot more to leave a natural slope at 22-30, but I didn't want to cut other areas more than I already had (which, as you can see, was already 10-20dB cuts for the big peaks).


To find best phase setting, I took measurements with both 0 and 180, and looked for the smoothest transition. Then I recently learned about using the sub distance setting to tweak response. I previously had it set at the actual distance plus one foot for 1ms of delay for the BFD response time. But once I tried the sub distance setting, I was able to set phase at a specific setting, then tweak the distance to bring the peaks above the xo point into line (see the graph with the various sub distance settings in my previous post).

I don't know enough of the technical side of it, so maybe Brian @ Rythmik can comment, but if the response is flattened out to be pretty much the same, like in the last graph in my previous post, there shouldn't be too much difference in sound. That's assuming the waterfall/spectral decay graphs don't show major differences in SPL after the original sound stops and the sound keeps echoing. I could be wrong, and even if the graphs are the same there could be audible differences because of the phase alignment. I don't know enough of the technical stuff to say for sure.


Quote:


I am redoing my setup starting with placement first instead of subcrawl with spl meter i am placing the sub in various locations and rew'ing the result to see whats best.


I can say my avr unit when set to xover at 80hz it rolls off both mains and lfe at that xover given the mains are set to small.

If i set main to large it doesn't.

on my hsu i found the internal xover when added does clean up bass a bit but on account of removing/rolling off information.

If your cable for the SPL meter is long enough, you can put the sub in your listening position and just move the SPL meter around measure at different locations.

And yes, if the sub is playing less above 100Hz, it sounds cleaner (if the sub is anywhere but close to the front mains). I initially had this, then tried watching a movie (Cloudy w/ a Chance of Meatballs) and noticed the bass sounded really weak. Switched it back and re-ran my setup routine. That kind of bass is more noticeable in movies, music still sounds great with my sub's xo off. I have it behind the couch for more impact, saved me from wanting to spend lots of $ to upgrade to a bigger sub for my room... Not ideal, would love to have a couple of beasts in the room.
porksoda's Avatar porksoda
11:03 PM Liked: 10
post #453 of 17213
04-01-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
cyberbri thanks for taking the time to give me a rundown on what you did.

I did something similar... i knew the phase trick re: distance but i was thinking there was a definate way to perfectly ring in the phase.

I use the inverse of mains to and proper sub and then run distance variably to find the least spl (tone at xover).

It's funny you mention how you smoothed your curve which is what i did today... i ran a few presets and listened to music and a few movies and finally dialed in to a smooth curve as it can be...

I do have a super long cable with the spl meter... but instead i just moved the sub to various locations today 10 locations and found a better location for the sub which gives me little to no nulls and gives me 4 peaks... not a problem i rang in some filters on bfd and got a fairly flat response... I think i may Set my phase again tomorrow for 80hz plus the 1ft for bfd and try this again. I was going to order midi setup for bfd but manually is fairly easy its a bit tedious but i don't expect to do filter setting changes very often anyway.

Best addition to my sub is the bfd.

My waterfall does look a bit better as well... though i think something maybe the issue with phase as there is a dip at 85-105hz my xover is at 80hz.

no smoothing and i used 8 filters... i set the filters manually and used rew but i had to manually apply some filters as rew's predicted response was not always 100% what i got.






Also i think the F12 in my square room goes to 11.3hz at -3db



I moved the hsu to a different location and i am not about to lug the beast back to do side by side but i think we all know f12 would be a bit better... but still i am interested in the ported vs sealed responses in my room maybe one day i will do side by side.
Rythmik's Avatar Rythmik
07:36 AM Liked: 79
post #454 of 17213
04-02-2010 | Posts: 1,856
Joined: Aug 2005
The DVD is Avia 2, not Aria 2 (sorry I have listened to too many operas).

Cyberbri,

I am glad you joined the discussion. Sometimes I wish we can have a phone conversation to understand the setup and personal philosophy of each other better, instead of via posts. Anyway, can you remind me which track is this the 20hz-100hz sweep? The disc is organized like a book. I wish they had a index for all the tracks they have.

Porksoda,

Some of the things may affect your waterfall are 1) the distance of your measurement position to the wall. If your measurement position is close to walls, you have more reflection wave than direct wave, and 2) the sound absoprtion of your flooring and furnishing. In the past, I had carpet and I also had hardwood. The first thing you notice is the clapping test results. The hardwood floor has more echo than carpet. However, that may not be a bad thing (My personality acoustic philosophy is never make your listen room dry. Stereo image works because of room). You can use other methods to treat the room. But don't over do it. Also it is good to look at the actual measurement waveform if it is based on pseudo random or impulse test signal. You can compare the waveform before the impulse and after the impulse to have an idea of your measurement noise floor. Without a low noise floor to start with, the adjustment may not make as much sense.
cyberbri's Avatar cyberbri
09:30 AM Liked: 53
post #455 of 17213
04-02-2010 | Posts: 8,095
Joined: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

The DVD is Avia 2, not Aria 2 (sorry I have listened to too many operas).

Cyberbri,

I am glad you joined the discussion. Sometimes I wish we can have a phone conversation to understand the setup and personal philosophy of each other better, instead of via posts. Anyway, can you remind me which track is this the 20hz-100hz sweep? The disc is organized like a book. I wish they had a index for all the tracks they have.


At least on the Avia 1 disc I have, the LFE sweep is in the Verification/evaluation section I believe. There are bass sweeps that go from 200-20Hz for all 5 channels, then an LFE channel-specific sweep from 100Hz to 20Hz. I'm not familiar with the content of Avia 2.
porksoda's Avatar porksoda
10:38 AM Liked: 10
post #456 of 17213
04-02-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

Porksoda,

Some of the things may affect your waterfall are 1) the distance of your measurement position to the wall. If your measurement position is close to walls, you have more reflection wave than direct wave, and 2) the sound absoprtion of your flooring and furnishing. In the past, I had carpet and I also had hardwood. The first thing you notice is the clapping test results. The hardwood floor has more echo than carpet. However, that may not be a bad thing (My personality acoustic philosophy is never make your listen room dry. Stereo image works because of room). You can use other methods to treat the room. But don't over do it. Also it is good to look at the actual measurement waveform if it is based on pseudo random or impulse test signal. You can compare the waveform before the impulse and after the impulse to have an idea of your measurement noise floor. Without a low noise floor to start with, the adjustment may not make as much sense.

Brian,

I am about 9' from the wall below is the plan of the room and the sub is located just above the coffee table next to the love seat.

I do my measurements from the sofa middle seat on a tripod at ear level. There is probably a lot of echo/reverb in the room i will try the clap test... but yes the soundstage sounds good. The sub is Very controlled and good w eq but i do miss a bit of the 25hz peak i had... good thing with the BFD is i can have 10 presets and i can set them to WHAT I WANT to have the shape of the curve to.

I was THIS close to ordering one of those automagic audyssey things.. while i understand the market for those press the button and leave it eq's for me i really have to see what the eq is doing and its very easy to use... easier than my cars built in computer.

In any case Brian getting back to the room... my choices on sub placement are limited initially i had it at the wall near the front left speaker... which had decent results but had a lot of sharp dips... this new location i have it facing the wall oddly enough and it is firing onto the loveseat which probably is the best seat to sit on to "feel" the bass but i have no problem feeling it at my position.

On my avr worst case scenario i go to 75 db for movie or tv watching.


NapalmV5's Avatar NapalmV5
03:37 AM Liked: 10
post #457 of 17213
04-03-2010 | Posts: 62
Joined: Mar 2008
goodness gracious.. lots of updates/new products/new stuff coming

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRADH View Post

UPS dropped on my E15's. The arrived in perfect shape.
Thanks Brian for the fast service order 3/18/10, delivered today.
I will hook them up tonight.

Brad

after seeing the f15 in black.. very tempting!


@brian when h600 xlr ??

heres my setup.. including d15se (a370peq) which does left+right

behringer b1520dsp | rythmik d15se | behringer b1520dsp

50" plasma for ref/planned: projector/100"+ screen




brian what would you recommend i do ??

add 2x d15se a370xlr ?? one for left exclusively/one for right exclusively
or
add 2x f15 a370xlr ?? one for left exclusively/one for right exclusively
or
add 2x f15 h600peq ?? one for left exclusively/one for right exclusively

since you offer black f15 i would like to go with 2x f15 and keep d15se where its at.. this way i get the best of both down and front firing

d15se | d15se | d15se - min space between/how close can they be placed next to each other ?
f15 | d15se | f15 - min space between/how close can they be placed next to each other ?
JimP
07:07 AM Liked: 208
post #458 of 17213
04-03-2010 | Posts: 15,542
Joined: Sep 2002
Does the quality of the receiver's and prepro's DACs have much bearing on subwoofer frequencies?
monomer's Avatar monomer
11:11 AM Liked: 11
post #459 of 17213
04-03-2010 | Posts: 1,767
Joined: Apr 2002
Here are some (older, from back around November) REW measurement graphs of my F12s crossed at 50Hz with both mains playing. I was specifically looking for interactions (nulls) between my left and right mains and also between mains and subs at the time. The frequency response is a bit lumpy due to using MultEQ for a rather large sweet 'spot' targeted to encompass 8 seated positions thus there are obviously going to be some trade-offs made (thus the lumps). If I move from seat to seat the response will change but is basically no worse than what these graphs depict, just different in each seated position. The only real constant is the bump below 30Hz and the last part of that 30Hz centered dip... (I tried everything and I now think its the room). Notice the waterfalls... in the first one I've scaled it so that you can see a full 60dB drop (note the 300ms scale max limit). Unfortunately I did not take active steps to lower the noise floor before taking this measurement and you can see what having fans (projector at less than 3 ft from mic, cabinet fans and two computers with one at less than 3 feet from the mic), the HVAC (furnace heater and fan running) and a noisy fridge in the next room along with ticking clocks etc. do to the noise floor... its rather high. Still I show a relatively tight room. The second waterfall is the same graph but with the scaling adjusted to where REW usually defaults as its what most people that post REW graphs usually scale to. Note its less than 200ms until you get down into the 20Hz region... I think its from the HVAC but it could also just be my room. I intentionally lower the noise floor before running MultEQ (like calibrating in the early morning hours to avoid traffic noises, shutting down all extraneous equipment, etc) but I always take REW measurements with the theater operating as usual with projectors, HTPC, heat/air, etc running as they would be normally during movies/music listening. It is important to realize that MultEQ also operates in the time domain in an effort to reduce reverberation times at all seated locations.... the main reason I gave up on the Behringer approach a few years back was that its mainly used to target a single listening position as the sweet spot, often to the detriment of any of the other listening positions (IOWs, no compromises for the other seats)... also its very difficult to get it to positively affect time domain without also messing with the current adjusted freq response. The conclusion I finally came to a few years back was that the complexity of everything MultEQ does simply at the push of a button (well several pushes really) is going to be quite difficult to duplicate with a Behringer/REW no matter how much time and skill you have... especially over a very wide target area. I only listen to music solo about 50% of the time and I almost never watch a movie alone, therefore I require a larger sweet 'spot' area as opposed to a single listening sweet spot position. Bottom line here is... my FR measurement graph is lumpy for a reason.... but notice how tight the room is? I also have extensive acoustical treatments strategically placed around the room. I personally don't believe that a room can ever be 'too tight' where bass frequencies are concerned. (BTW, I never apply smoothing to bass response graphs... smoothing only makes sense when trying to evaluate the upper frequency ranges because of combing and other effects.)
LL
LL
LL
porksoda's Avatar porksoda
03:01 PM Liked: 10
post #460 of 17213
04-03-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
monomer:

you can easily add a wide area with bfd/rew combo by using averaging and or using a simple algorithm from various readings.

A colleague brought over his svs eq and we compared it to my manual bfd rew configurations.

I did rew before and after with the svs eq and i am glad i did not buy it. It does tame the peaks but its very limited... on the other hand it took me 10-15 mins to create a new filter on the bfd and the results graph wise mine were a lot better and a flatter response over 6 seat locations.

On the svs eq it was unable to tame large many peaks drastically.

I have been asking this question here and there and no ones seems to answer it so now that i have tried the svs eq in my acoustically horrible room i can safely say for someone who is not technically inclined svs is a good eq for them but if you have most of the tools and a bit of tinkerer the svs eq is not worth it at all.

I was easily able to tell the svs eq also with all the readings it takes it avgs them out they are not always "linear avgs" but nonetheless you can come with a better filter yourself.

Also even with svs multi position eq with all seats in my room the end eq'd result was all over the place. No one position was the "sweet spot".



The only drawback from the bfd/rew combo is when even the input volume is set on the bfd to be very high on my reciever at +10 it does take away some db in its processing.

Whereas the svs the db loss after in is not as large.



I also have a paradigm sub 12 here which after calibrating i will post some of my thoughts which will not be scientific in nature but just a comparison from just music standpoint maybe some movies. Some may say well my comments will be useless if its not scientific in nature... but my point is just to relay my thoughts on the matter as just my opinion nothing more.

I will have to calibrate phase/flat response wise somewhat to how i have done the f12 and do a comparison between the two.
David Barteaux's Avatar David Barteaux
08:50 AM Liked: 10
post #461 of 17213
04-04-2010 | Posts: 900
Joined: Jan 2001
I'm really looking forward to your comparison between the Paradigm Sub12 and the Rythmik F12. I have 2000 ft3 room and am considering both manufacturers.

Have you tried the paradigm PBK eq? I think the dealer will let you borrow it if you ask nice
porksoda's Avatar porksoda
09:44 AM Liked: 10
post #462 of 17213
04-04-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Barteaux View Post

I'm really looking forward to your comparison between the Paradigm Sub12 and the Rythmik F12. I have 2000 ft3 room and am considering both manufacturers.

Have you tried the paradigm PBK eq? I think the dealer will let you borrow it if you ask nice

well now that i have used the bfd i don't think i will bother with the pbk... especially since i compared the svs sub eq with the manual bfd and i prefer the flexibility of bfd better... so for eq i think for me the bfd/rew combo is a winner.
monomer's Avatar monomer
07:46 PM Liked: 11
post #463 of 17213
04-04-2010 | Posts: 1,767
Joined: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

monomer:

you can easily add a wide area with bfd/rew combo by using averaging and or using a simple algorithm from various readings...

Congrats for you that's its so easy but unfortunately for me it wasn't. About 4 years ago I tried the BFD1124p in my system for about six months before removing it with the hopes of being able to use it with more success sometime later... two years later I sold it on eBay. I became disenchanted with it in the first month or two of struggling with it. I could flatten the in-room response to a +/-2dB in about 30-40 minutes but if you move the mic more than six inches in any direction that tolerance was gone... meaning a movement of my head by a similar amount also changed the FR heard... so that amount of flatness proved irrelavent and later determining the best filtering to employ across both seating rows in my theater was quite difficult when you include the weighting factors and reverberation times... you get one closer only to find you lose on the other. I wish I'd found it as easy as you say but sadly it just wasn't for me... and one of my degrees is in Applied Mathematics yet. The other issues I'd had were a slight hum (only heard within a foot or two of the sub) that turned out impossible for me to silence (and I threw quite a bit of money at it too) and an audible level of distortion that the BFD added. I wasn't the only one with these issues... if you search the shack for older threads you will find legions of us with these same issues. Many have gone the BFD/REW route in the past and some of us moved on due to such issues. This isn't about pitting one EQ system against the other and picking sides... this is a Rythmik thread... I was just trying to explain why my FR graph looked lumpy compared to some that lay flat as a snake. Its not that I can't produce that kind of a graph for a single position, its that its impossible to do for an area... for any EQ system. What I was trying to point out was the low reverberation times in the bass region as I believe that is the key to hearing and enjoying the satisfying articulate bass abilities from the Rythmiks. The tightness of my theater isn't so spectacular until you consider what I had to work with... its a sealed room and its in the basement so I got cement blocks for walls and a poured concrete floor... these surfaces have no give whatsoever to them and in a sealed room the bass frequencies bounce around like crazy and go on and on and on and on and... Rythmiks are amazingly tight on the high damp setting with virtually no overhang but to fully appreciate it you really need to showcase it in a very tight room as well. It will sound good enough in a 'loose' room but it really impresses in a room with low reverberation times. The point I was trying to make with those graphs was 'look how tight those Rythmiks can play'... you can't really see that in a loose room.
porksoda's Avatar porksoda
08:01 AM Liked: 10
post #464 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post

Congrats for you that's its so easy but unfortunately for me it wasn't. About 4 years ago I tried the BFD1124p in my system for about six months before removing it with the hopes of being able to use it with more success sometime later... two years later I sold it on eBay. I became disenchanted with it in the first month or two of struggling with it. I could flatten the in-room response to a +/-2dB in about 30-40 minutes but if you move the mic more than six inches in any direction that tolerance was gone... meaning a movement of my head by a similar amount also changed the FR heard... so that amount of flatness proved irrelavent and later determining the best filtering to employ across both seating rows in my theater was quite difficult when you include the weighting factors and reverberation times... you get one closer only to find you lose on the other. I wish I'd found it as easy as you say but sadly it just wasn't for me... and one of my degrees is in Applied Mathematics yet. The other issues I'd had were a slight hum (only heard within a foot or two of the sub) that turned out impossible for me to silence (and I threw quite a bit of money at it too) and an audible level of distortion that the BFD added. I wasn't the only one with these issues... if you search the shack for older threads you will find legions of us with these same issues. Many have gone the BFD/REW route in the past and some of us moved on due to such issues. This isn't about pitting one EQ system against the other and picking sides... this is a Rythmik thread... I was just trying to explain why my FR graph looked lumpy compared to some that lay flat as a snake. Its not that I can't produce that kind of a graph for a single position, its that its impossible to do for an area... for any EQ system. What I was trying to point out was the low reverberation times in the bass region as I believe that is the key to hearing and enjoying the satisfying articulate bass abilities from the Rythmiks. The tightness of my theater isn't so spectacular until you consider what I had to work with... its a sealed room and its in the basement so I got cement blocks for walls and a poured concrete floor... these surfaces have no give whatsoever to them and in a sealed room the bass frequencies bounce around like crazy and go on and on and on and on and... Rythmiks are amazingly tight on the high damp setting with virtually no overhang but to fully appreciate it you really need to showcase it in a very tight room as well. It will sound good enough in a 'loose' room but it really impresses in a room with low reverberation times. The point I was trying to make with those graphs was 'look how tight those Rythmiks can play'... you can't really see that in a loose room.

That's why i said for people who are technically inclined the bfd for 100 bucks maybe a good solution rather than spending 600-800 on a dedicated eq.

It is odd from what you are saying about the fr that you got a flat response and it changed drastically... here are my findings from manual bfd/rew method vs what svs did in my room.

SVS never acheieved flat response in my room i think what it does is avgs them from a derivative base of the fr curve and then uses that as the final curve.. i was somewhat able to replicate what svs did by taking 6 seperate measurements and using the peaks that were the greatest and taming them to a degree and some dips that i up'd (which svs rarely does it leaves the dip very dipped) and i was able to get a result that svs did close to i would say 85-90%. In fact in my room it was not able to do too much in time domain for me and my waterfall was worse than what it was with bfd/rew combo. I also found its timing only corrected the phase issue to some extent and it was the easiest thing that i liked about it... although i am told the new version of rew will have some provision of distance calculation that maybe able to help us with phase alignment.

Overall my point was for some svs is definitely a good piece of hardware and i would recommend to whoever doesn't want to spend time calibrating rew/bfd and manually eq-ing. I mean my living room is a mess right now with a tripod bfd sitting on the floor and i have hundreds of sweeps saved... it's turning out to be a viscous obsession.

I was not saying get svs its better or do rew/bfd its better... i think both are excellent solutions.. its almost like a DIY sub vs pre-made... i chose the pre-made because i did not want to spend time on building/assembling cabinetry and do the veneer myself and i think for me it was best solution... in the same sense the rew/bfd is probably a better solution for some than svs. I just provided my opinion on it.

Another funny thing is i had a hum from my f12... which i can defeat by using a cheater plug... but when i introduced the bfd... the hum is gone if i remove the cheater plug. I am probably going to change the cables from/to bfd to a different set and see if it makes a difference.


----


I did calibrate the paradigm with my system and oddly enough its phase setting is a lot different than the rythmik I am not sure why it would be so at the same time i think it may have to do with how the servo in rythmik works and makes it quicker.

After listening to both subs a/b wise it was almost very close the lower frequencies... the hulk's thumpy walking... hurt lockers 50mil they sounded very close to each other... i was hoping and anticipating i would have been able to go "oh that one is a lot better" but i found half the time i would play the scene 4-5 times to pick a vs b and it was almost 50/50 as in i picked sub 12 and then f12.

Also with sub 12 a bit more eq was required to make the sub 12 to be flat-ish... the rythmik required 3 less filters to make flat-ish... exact/same location same orientation and same spl set volume.

I am not convinced the a/b worked very well so i spent 6 hours listening to music a playlist i made with various sorts of music with bass.... then later i switched to a different sub (f12) and listened to the same music. I am reluctant to say i preferred the sound of f12 more... i maybe biased since i own the f12 but i found the f12 to be "too quick" compared to the paradigm. My friend who owns the f12 will be listening to the same two subs and a/b and i will post what he thinks.

To me personally at this point i am glad i got the f12 because for me personally it almost cost me 1/2 as much and im here nit picking between the two subs.. they are both great subs but one is slightly better than the other... they are not day and night different subs they are both quick but i found with a lot of music the bass was very well articulated with the f12. Paradigm was also but occasionally some bass notes got muddled together.

The reason i got the sub 12 in is as it was the sub i was going to buy but i changed my mind after i found rythmik's reputation here... i do need another sub for my 2ch room and i was going to get the f15 for my living room but since it is out of stock i thought i should compare the sub 12 since i have a chance and perhaps buy it.

One pro of the sub 12 is which i think everyone knows and is posted here as well is it gets a LOT louder and it has the capacity of pbk... so if you don't want to fiddle with the bfd you can buy the kit and press a few buttons and you are done. If you got f12 and a svs sub eq it i think is still cheaper than the sub 12.

My room is big and i am sitting in the worst possible location as you can see from the image up in my previous posts in this thread and f12 has no problem giving me bass... i don't turn my system up a lot so for me its perfect... the paradigm has lots of power... when i was listening to movies the spl peaked at 85db with all channels running in my listening position in the dialogue parts it was running at about 74-77db.

For music it was running approx 77-79 db. 2ch + sub only. Xover at 80hz for both and mains set to small.
Rythmik's Avatar Rythmik
09:11 AM Liked: 79
post #465 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 1,856
Joined: Aug 2005
Monomer,

The reason I said don't over do it is because most sound absorbing material is not effective below 100hz. When one uses too much to get effective results below 100hz, it is already making the area above 100hz too dry. But I agree with your approach. You are using bass traps with effects only at bass frequencies.

Porksoda,

I agree with the manual approach. In particular before the computer algorithm behind it truly becomes proven, a manual override is a good feature. Also a lot of real world problems involve trade-offs. It is difficult for a dummy software to see what is a good trade-off. For a similar situation, I had also worked in EDA (electronics design automation) before. It is a software business. Some software provides only push button solutions while others provide more hooks and options to allow user to customize. They called these features "power user" features. But in reality, they is nothing but a few manual steps. Just for the laugh of it, when you do manual adjustment, think of you are using the power user features

I have another whole perspective of this EQ business and how flat we should be. We should look at where the mics are placed during a recording session. Without considering that, we have just oversimplify the problem. The mics are place way closer than the instruments (performers) than the listeners. Doesn't that mean the near field output is far more important? It is correct that a poor room can have annoying ringing. But once we reduce it to acceptable levels with minimal alteration, it should be good enough. Our EQ has not exactly undone the problem. If we want to undo the problem, we would have taken a different approach which is in time domain sending cancellation signals to cancel the echos. Between echo cancelling and EQ, some engineer(s) had put an equal sign between them. And ever since then no one questions if that is a right thing. In addition, EQ is done with steady state signals. That means it is assumes the signal goes on forever. So we have the current wave, plus the reflection left by an infinite number of old signals (of course, the windowed approach has truncated them and it is no longer infinite) But in reality, the music signal is constantly changing. If it changes fast enough, one wouldn't have heard as much ring and for that type signal, the pre-emphasis of EQ optimized for steady state signal actually introduces a different type of coloration. So the whole thing again is a trade-off.

Naplamv5,

I would recommend to put one H600 for LFE and one additional D15SE and combine with your existing D15SE for a left/right stereo subs.
monomer's Avatar monomer
10:00 AM Liked: 11
post #466 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 1,767
Joined: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

Monomer,

The reason I said don't over do it is because most sound absorbing material is not effective below 100hz. When one uses too much to get effective results below 100hz, it is already making the area above 100hz too dry. But I agree with your approach. You are using bass traps with effects only at bass frequencies...

This is just one example of what I did to my 'cement box' of a theater to improve its acoustic character... I piled rolled fiberglass batts from corner-to-corner and floor to ceiling against the whole front wall (in effect pushing it 24" into the room... that's a lot of low freq absorption). Most of the unsightly mess is hidden behind an 8-ft projector screen (3' out in front) and the rest has black velvet draped in front of it. I got them on sale ($8 a roll) and most of these rolls are kraft faced... I left them in the compressed state tightly wrapped in the plastic bags they came in... I calculated around 4lbs/cu-ft density for the rolls and about half that density for the flat batts (I used just a couple of them). The outer plastic bags and the kraft facing, along with the projector screen, 'should' preserve much of the mid to upper frequencies while the sheer depth and density of the fiberglass rolls affect freqs down to around 60Hz (as you can see it in those waterfall graphs). The best of both worlds I'm assuming and it was relatively cheap compared to the commercial alternatives. Having parallel cement walls play havoc with the higher freqs as well and so I've also used broadband absorption together with diffusers to improve imaging and I believe I've been mostly successful, though sucking up so much loose reverberating energy does require a lot more amp power to get SPLs back up and so the diffuser approach did help in this respect.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani
02:18 PM Liked: 1046
post #467 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 19,996
Joined: Oct 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

EQ is done with steady state signals. That means it is assumes the signal goes on forever. So we have the current wave, plus the reflection left by an infinite number of old signals (of course, the windowed approach has truncated them and it is no longer infinite) But in reality, the music signal is constantly changing.

The incoming signal may be constantly changing, but the room's problems aren't. And that's what you're EQing for. You already know that at low frequencies you're hearing more of the room than the subwoofer. The resonances are fixed based on the room's dimensions. It doesn't matter that the music is constantly changing, but the incoming signal isn't the cause of the problem.
Quote:


I would recommend to put one H600 for LFE and one additional D15SE and combine with your existing D15SE for a left/right stereo subs.

I may end up ordering a third CI kit from you to use as a dedicated LFE sub. My pre-pro has a separate LFE output (in addition to the L/R stereo sub outs that I use currently).
John WL's Avatar John WL
03:50 PM Liked: 10
post #468 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 65
Joined: May 2009
Hey guys. I need your input. My room is 18x13x9. My current speakers are Paradigm Signature S6's with 7" woofers. Brian recommended that with anything greater that 6.5" woofers in the mains he opted to go with a 15" driver.

I am looking to go with 2 subwoofers to even out the bass in my room. With two subwoofers, would dual F12's be adequate or do I really need to upgrade to dual 15" drivers?

Any info would really help

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post18218177
Hrimnir's Avatar Hrimnir
05:22 PM Liked: 13
post #469 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 700
Joined: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by John WL View Post

Hey guys. I need your input. My room is 18x13x9. My current speakers are Paradigm Signature S6's with 7" woofers. Brian recommended that with anything greater that 6.5" woofers in the mains he opted to go with a 15" driver.

I am looking to go with 2 subwoofers to even out the bass in my room. With two subwoofers, would dual F12's be adequate or do I really need to upgrade to dual 15" drivers?

Any info would really help

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post18218177

Well, i can't speak for rythmik, but i have an eD a2-300 which is a 12" with a 200w amp, and my old room was only slightly smaller than yours, and it was just fine. Now, given its ported it *may* have had more output, but the rythmik is a much more advanced sub.

That being said, the price difference between the F12 and F15 is $100 per sub, at that point I would spend the extra $200 for the f15's over the f12's. If it was more of a price difference i'd say stick with the 12's, but for $200 for the 15's i wouldnt even hesitate to spend the extra.
BRADH's Avatar BRADH
05:56 PM Liked: 10
post #470 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 1,004
Joined: Jul 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by John WL View Post

Hey guys. I need your input. My room is 18x13x9. My current speakers are Paradigm Signature S6's with 7" woofers. Brian recommended that with anything greater that 6.5" woofers in the mains he opted to go with a 15" driver.

I am looking to go with 2 subwoofers to even out the bass in my room. With two subwoofers, would dual F12's be adequate or do I really need to upgrade to dual 15" drivers?

Any info would really help

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post18218177

John

My room is a little bigger than yours (13.8x21.6x8). I have Paradigm actives all the way around. They have 6.5" woofers and I have dual E15's (with 600 watt amps) in my room. They can play at ref- level with movies just fine, and they are great with music.

Hope that helps.

Brad
Rythmik's Avatar Rythmik
09:27 PM Liked: 79
post #471 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 1,856
Joined: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

The incoming signal may be constantly changing, but the room's problems aren't. And that's what you're EQing for. You already know that at low frequencies you're hearing more of the room than the subwoofer. The resonances are fixed based on the room's dimensions. It doesn't matter that the music is constantly changing, but the incoming signal isn't the cause of the problem.

I may not have explained the problem very well. Let us look at a simplified mathematical model. Let's assume our times are all discrete with 0 representing current time, and 1, 2, 3, 4,... for future time and -1, -2, -3,... for time that already passed. Let us assume futher, the echo is attenuated by a factor x with each unit time passed by. So, if there is an input signal with strength "a" at time zero. At time 1, that signal strength would have become "a*x", and at time 2, that signal would have become "a*x^2", ..etc. If the same input signal is present all the time (representing a stead state), what we have is a summary of infinite sequence with at time 0 is "a", plus "a*x" (from the input of time -1), plus "a*x^2"(from the input at time -2), ... It is an infinite geometric sequence and we know the summation is "a/(1-x)". So if the x is 1/2, we know it becomes "2*a" which is 6db boost. And this is same for all time, not just at time 0. Let us assume we do a perfect EQ and attenuate by 6db so in the steady state it becomes "a" again. However, here is the problem. If the signal is not steady state. Let us say it only appears once at time zero and then stops (or shift to a completely different frequency because of changing music note). One would notice the strength of input signal is now "0.5*a" at time zero. Its echo is 0.5*a*x at time 1, etc. This is what EQ has done and you can see it is still not right. That happens it normalize the total energy to 1. But the signal strength at time 0 becomes only half of what is should be as compared to all other signal that is not affected by this echo. It is only right when you look at the summation of entire infinite sequence. On the other hand, the exact correction is to use an inverse" cancellation sequence that will generate (for an input of strength "a" at time zero") a "-a*x" at time 1, and a "-a*x^2" at time 2, and .... This type of echo cancellation is exact but is far more sensitive to change in location (not so forgiving). Also this can be done only with a special digital filtering method (infinite impulse). I hope this helps illustrate the problem. You may ask wouldn't this uniformly happen to all frequencies? No. It would only affect the nodal and anti-nodal points where perfect phase alignment enable all these echos to line up. When the frequency changes, the phase alignment is destroyed and it becomes more like random phase... BTW, one can do a small compromose between static and dynamic signals by not doing a full boost.
NapalmV5's Avatar NapalmV5
10:38 PM Liked: 10
post #472 of 17213
04-05-2010 | Posts: 62
Joined: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

Naplamv5,

I would recommend to put one H600 for LFE and one additional D15SE and combine with your existing D15SE for a left/right stereo subs.

that would be one beachin 2.1 setup brian

unfortunately theres no 2.1 pc sound cards

if i stay on stereo output i gotta get a behringer dcx2496 crossover.. though its all xlr

if i go back to 5.1 which deteriorates front channels on some cards.. i would gain lfe thru rca/if the fronts dont get deteriorated on other cards.. the lfe is thru 3.5mm jack.. doable but..

no easy way brian i need proper 2.1 pc sound card

if anyone has seen/knows of a 2.1 pc sound card let me know!
saprano's Avatar saprano
12:04 AM Liked: 280
post #473 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 3,473
Joined: Oct 2007
Anyone have pics of the F12 SE?
John WL's Avatar John WL
05:44 AM Liked: 10
post #474 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 65
Joined: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hrimnir View Post

That being said, the price difference between the F12 and F15 is $100 per sub, at that point I would spend the extra $200 for the f15's over the f12's. If it was more of a price difference i'd say stick with the 12's, but for $200 for the 15's i wouldnt even hesitate to spend the extra.

Thanks for the reply . I agree the price difference is not much. The only real issue in my room is size and WAF.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRADH View Post

John

My room is a little bigger than yours (13.8x21.6x8). I have Paradigm actives all the way around. They have 6.5" woofers and I have dual E15's (with 600 watt amps) in my room. They can play at ref-level with movies just fine, and they are great with music.

Hey Brad,
Even though my room seems a decent size, it is full of "stuff"...haha . I am pretty sure I would have a difficult time with dual F15's, but dual E15's may be a much better option. Also, it is good to hear that Rythmiks easily integrate with the Paradigms. Currently, I am using a Definitive Tech supercube that rolls of in the high 20's. I am looking for a little bit more bass extension. Also, I have a large 30 Hz node in my room, so I am hoping the dual model will smooth out the response (fingers crossed).
sdurani's Avatar sdurani
07:51 AM Liked: 1046
post #475 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 19,996
Joined: Oct 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

This is what EQ has done and you can see it is still not right.

Understood. But EQ is a compromise. You're notching out resonant frequencies, sometimes getting less at those frequencies than you are at all the other frequencies. In exchange, you're less likely to hear long decay times at those frequencies and avoid the 'one note' bass sound that folks complain about. It's certainly a compromise I'm willing to take, since it is much harder to hear missing sound (dip) than extra sound (peak).

However, if you don't want to use an equalizer, you can use 2 or 4 opposing subwoofers to minimize room modes. Don't know if you've read the Harman paper on the topic, but they present some useful information:

Subwoofers: Optimum Number and Locations
scyan's Avatar scyan
08:11 AM Liked: 10
post #476 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 73
Joined: Dec 2006
Very simple question guys.. are the DIY kit for the downfiring 15" with the 370w amp the same thing as the D15SE (minus glossy cabinet)

Are they essentially the same thing, same results if built properly ? ?
cschang's Avatar cschang
08:35 AM Liked: 82
post #477 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 14,784
Joined: Mar 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by scyan View Post

Very simple question guys.. are the DIY kit for the downfiring 15" with the 370w amp the same thing as the D15SE (minus glossy cabinet)

Are they essentially the same thing, same results if built properly ? ?

Yes.
scyan's Avatar scyan
10:08 AM Liked: 10
post #478 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 73
Joined: Dec 2006
I'm sorry about my questions btw.. but i have read through the thread a to z and didnt find answers

Brian, do the kits come with the new 1510 driver or the older generation ?
Would you be able to supply the new gen driver 1510 with the kit and could i still use the downfiring Sealed 15" enclosure on your site and get good results out of it as is.. or would it need a redesign ?

Also, If using Audyssey out of my integra DHC 80.1, do I need to add the PEQ and anti-mode 8033 anyways ?

This is all somewhat confusing to me, I know i need calibration but I dont understand where they all meet and are required.. arent they all redundant ?
PEQ, Audyssey and 8033.. isnt this all the same thing added on top of each other ?

I'm going to DIY way because I WANT to match my subs to my custom designed entertainment unit, see below



So, diy is really the only way since I live in Canada...

I will need probably 2 subs, maybe 3... one for 3.1 upstairs in my living room and 1 or 2 for my theater downstairs. The room is 13x25x7... so about 2400sqft. My speaker set are PSB, T65 for main and C60 for center.

I just want to make the correct choices and dont really know if I need to go with the 370peq, 370xlr (i do have dual XLR outputs on my DHC 80.1 for dual subs) or the 600w... Are they all servo ?

It's just a little confusing and I apologize in advance. But so far I have found the help and information in this thread completely amazing

Living room will be about 50/50 music in 2.1 and 3.1 "TV" mode.. and downstairs will be like 90HT/10music..


thx in advance.

D.
porksoda's Avatar porksoda
10:22 AM Liked: 10
post #479 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 298
Joined: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by scyan View Post

I'm sorry about my questions btw.. but i have read through the thread a to z and didnt find answers

Brian, do the kits come with the new 1510 driver or the older generation ?
Would you be able to supply the new gen driver 1510 with the kit and could i still use the downfiring Sealed 15" enclosure on your site and get good results out of it as is.. or would it need a redesign ?

Also, If using Audyssey out of my integra DHC 80.1, do I need to add the PEQ and anti-mode 8033 anyways ?

This is all somewhat confusing to me, I know i need calibration but I dont understand where they all meet and are required.. arent they all redundant ?
PEQ, Audyssey and 8033.. isnt this all the same thing added on top of each other ?

I'm going to DIY way because I WANT to match my subs to my custom designed entertainment unit, see below



So, diy is really the only way since I live in Canada...

I will need probably 2 subs, maybe 3... one for 3.1 upstairs in my living room and 1 or 2 for my theater downstairs. The room is 13x25x7... so about 2400sqft. My speaker set are PSB, T65 for main and C60 for center.

I just want to make the correct choices and dont really know if I need to go with the 370peq, 370xlr (i do have dual XLR outputs on my DHC 80.1 for dual subs) or the 600w... Are they all servo ?

It's just a little confusing and I apologize in advance. But so far I have found the help and information in this thread completely amazing

Living room will be about 50/50 music in 2.1 and 3.1 "TV" mode.. and downstairs will be like 90HT/10music..


thx in advance.

D.

Why is diy the only solution in Canada? I am in GTA and i got a F12 shipped to my door. I know you can get custom finish with rythmik... but i know it wont be 100% matched... maybe ask brian to send you a non finished cabinet with the sub and amp on it and you can finish it yourself or get it done locally.

For peq on the rythmiks its only single band so you can tame only one peak and it does work very well.

You are better off with a full eq for sub eq.. but to find out what kind of issues you have you should take a REW of your room with your sub in.

Having said that i did order my sub with peq2 amp knowing i had more than one peak... and later (a week or so) added a full eq.
scyan's Avatar scyan
10:32 AM Liked: 10
post #480 of 17213
04-06-2010 | Posts: 73
Joined: Dec 2006
Hehe, it is the only solution I trust (me)... I hate leaving the finishing details to someone else when it comes to color, that's really the only reason. My day job is color calibration, so im really difficult. lol

Plus, I trust Brian enterily on the technical side of things and I know he can provide a great product. Not one single bad review will do that
Tags: Rythmik , Rythmik Audio , Rythmik Audio F12 Direct Servo Subwoofer , Rythmik Audio F15 Subwoofer

Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3