Honest Discussion: PSA XV15 vs HSU VTF-3 MK4 - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 72 Old 04-13-2013, 06:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

This doesn't really make sense too me, why would you only try to measure the driver and take the cabinet out of the equation?
Because as I said you get a different result as you move away. I didn't say that you're trying to measure just the driver, only that the most accurate result comes when the speaker acts as a point source. That requires being a lot further away than 1 meter, further than 2 meters for that matter, unless the speaker in question is quite small.
Quote:
If this is a better way to measure the true performance of a sub why hasn't it been adopted as the standard to measure and gauge the performance of subs?
Strictly speaking there is no standard, not even CEA 2010. Use of it is voluntary. IMO more than a few manufacturers won't go along with it, being a little too honest for their taste. As for the 2 meter measurement, that was probably a concession for the benefit of those manufacturers who don't have an available place to test at longer distances.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 72 Old 04-13-2013, 09:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jbrown15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 5,725
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 664 Post(s)
Liked: 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

Because as I said you get a different result as you move away. I didn't say that you're trying to measure just the driver, only that the most accurate result comes when the speaker acts as a point source. That requires being a lot further away than 1 meter, further than 2 meters for that matter, unless the speaker in question is quite small.
Strictly speaking there is no standard, not even CEA 2010. Use of it is voluntary. IMO more than a few manufacturers won't go along with it, being a little too honest for their taste. As for the 2 meter measurement, that was probably a concession for the benefit of those manufacturers who don't have an available place to test at longer distances.

So in your opinion is the 2m ground plane test a valid measurement to get good performance numbers on what a sub is capable of doing?
jbrown15 is online now  
post #63 of 72 Old 04-14-2013, 07:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

So in your opinion is the 2m ground plane test a valid measurement to get good performance numbers on what a sub is capable of doing?
It's adequate for most HT subs, since they tend to be physically small enough that a 2m distance won't severely influence the result.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #64 of 72 Old 04-15-2013, 09:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ricci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 5,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 204
As Tom seems to have cleared up quite well, a lot of comments in the AH review for the XV-15 and posted here are getting taken out of context and blown way out of proportion. Did the XV-15 exhibit a little port noise during the outdoor tests and with Pulse in the HT? Yes. Is this one of the few negative comments I could make about what this sub delivers for the price point it is at? Yes. Some of the comments here seem to give the impression that the XV-15 port is just chuffing left and right and is whistling Dixie whenever you are watching the nightly news. Pulse is incredibly demanding with a sustained 16-18Hz signal at high level with little other content in the soundtrack to mask any distress noises from the sub. It makes the majority of subs wilt completely when attempting to play it back at high level. This is also right in the port tuning range of a lot of vented commercial HT subs including the XV-15 so it produces chuffing when 99% of other tracks don't. In reality the test signals used for the outdoor measurements are absolutely worst case scenario. (Outdoors, no masking content from other speakers, no boundary reinforcement, pure test signals, sub driven to its very limits) Every single vented sub I have ever used will produce some port artifacts if pushed hard enough near tuning under these conditions. All of them. Some are better than others certainly. At the end of the day every ported sub mentioned in this thread will produce these noises to one degree or another if subjected to worst case scenario test signals at vent tuning. Part of my testing regimen is centered around identifying and quantifying the absolute limits of a system and its behavior when pushed there in a very unflattering environment. The typical use that the product might see is much much less demanding.


Bill have you even read what the testing procedures I use are? confused.gif It certainly seems like you haven't.

CEA-2010 specifically is for recording maximum short term output over a specified 1/3rd octave centered range and does not limit at a 10% THD threshold but is instead based on individual thresholds for each harmonic. The higher the harmonic the less distortion is allowed. The 2nd harmonic being largely inoffensive to the ear is allowed to be very high in amplitude compared to the fundamental where as the much more objectionable 5th harmonic is only allowed to be a fraction of the strength of the 2nd comparatively. The 2nd-9th harmonics and beyond are recorded. I know of no pro sound companies using this to report actual measured short term output data instead of the calculated sensitivity + peak power calculation which is common and allows room for a LOT of fudging. I wish some of them would take this up but I suspect that the reason they do not is because most looking at the specs to compare systems will not know the difference when looking at a claimed figure and an actual measurement and will assume the two are equal which will make the much higher claimed figure look better.

2m measurements are far enough away to allow most sub systems to integrate the various radiators output "enough" and to keep the effects from the cabinet faces on the output down somewhat. However there are still some differences of up to 2dB depending on cab size, geometry and orientation depending on how the cab is oriented relative to the mic. This is why I try every sub in a couple of orientations unless it is radiating from a single face. The XV-15 was tried with the bottom plate faced towards the mic but it did not significantly change the reading from normal downfiring. I did not remove the base plate because I felt it would be going a little too far in order to squeek out another dB or so and Tom did not mention it until later when we compared my measured results against their internal ones. I will add that this extra 1-1.5dB or so will show up in room because of boundary loading of the total output versus an unloaded condition with measurements taken from a single point in space. Please read the article on measuring dual opposed subs on DB. Anyway this is why it was mentioned in the review. Abnormally large cabs such as horn subs and cabs with drivers, PR's or vents on multiple faces of the enclosure will show some response differences by rotating them at a distance of 2m. Some of them will even show a notable difference >1dB at 4m. In those cases it is a matter of picking the orientation that is "best" and rolling with it. Again most systems will have a 10m measurement to also compare to.

2m measurements also allow a better SNR in the outdoor measurement than a further distance which can often be a problem at LF's. Also it conveniently is roughly equivalent to a 1m anechoic measurement. Bill you mentioned Danley Labs and measuring at 10m distance. As far as I can tell they measure only 100w (28.3v actually regardless of impedance) sensitivity and the basic FR and phase at 10m for their cabs. You may have not known this but I measure every DIY and passive sub cab sensitivity at both 1w/1m and at 100w/10m the same as Danley does and also show the comparison of the 2. I also have response measurements at known input voltages at 2m and 4m. The rest of the tests are done at 2m as standard but I have the 10m measurements listed for easy comparison with the 2m ones so you can make an easy determination of how a 10m measurement would differ from a 2m one. Additionally I also do the CEA-2010 burst tests for maximum THD limited output, long term output compression and output by driving the cabs progressively harder until into clear compression and or showing signs of distress, distortion is shown at these same drive levels, etc...I even do high power impedance testing occasionally. Most commercial subs are internally powered so there is no reason for the impedance testing or sensitivity testing.

The reason that all tests are not done at 10m is simple. Firstly your SNR degrades 20dB by going from 1m to 10m (14dB from 2m to 10m) and this causes issues with accuracy especially in the deep bass unless the drive levels are significantly higher. I test everything from small commercial 8" sealed subs to massive horn subs for industrial type apps. At 10m most commercial subs simply don't have enough output headroom to get the output up out of the background noise floor. Again you lose 20dB of level at the mic element by moving it back 10x the distance however the background noise will still be the same level. So if the little 8" sub is producing 105dB at 40Hz at 2m, near maximum output, its level has dropped to just 91dB by 10m and that is with it being flogged for all it is worth. On the other hand my ACO Pacific mic rig and soundcard clip at about 140dB output from the speaker so I limit the input to about 135dB or so to ensure that the signal chain is not causing artifacts itself. With some of the big DIY or pro sound cabs this necessitates moving the measurement back to a 4m or even 10m distance to gain back some headroom in the signal chain for the CEA-2010 tests as they do start to approach 135-140dB at 2m. These longer distance measurements are then back calculated to a 2m result for easy comparison. 2m (and yes 4m) results are a good compromise of integration of the output from the cab and getting out of nearfield effects and maintaining decent SNR in the measurement for less powerful systems.
its phillip and dsrussell like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Ricci is offline  
post #65 of 72 Old 04-15-2013, 10:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricci View Post


Bill have you even read what the testing procedures I use are?
To tell the truth I've only glanced at your site a few times. It's not like I'm in the market to buy a sub. And please don't take offense, but I don't care for the spreadsheet style. It may be OK for the layman, but I prefer a standard SPL with THD chart, that being the format that I'm used to. I agree that not all subs should be measured at 10m/100w, certainly not the average HT sub. But like Tom Danley I don't do average HT subs. cool.gif

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
post #66 of 72 Old 04-17-2013, 11:04 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
bowmah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I demo'ed a few bass scenes from Bass Demo disc and have been smiling since yesterday. My current sub does not even play loud enough below 30Hz, I can only try to imagine the pressurization of the room with either the XV-15 or VTF-3 MK4! #jealous
bowmah is offline  
post #67 of 72 Old 09-08-2013, 05:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
derrickdj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

If this is true why does Josh even bother facing all of the subs at the mic when taking the measurements? Why not just turn them 90degrees to the mic and have them fire away from it?

Even though this is an old post, the short answer is he does measurements outside. Also having the port facing the mic gives the sub a higher measured spl.

Klipsch RF 7 based HT 7.4, Pioneer SC 35, Acurus 200 Five, Dayton 18 Ultimxa Dual Sub Cab(2), Dayton 18 Ultimax Large Vented Sub Cab (2), on Berhinger I Nuke DPS amps, Samsung BDP F 7500, Asus/My Book Live HPC 4 TB

Yaquin VK 2100 amp, McIntosh XR 5 speakers, Samsung BDP F 7500
derrickdj1 is offline  
post #68 of 72 Old 01-26-2014, 10:09 AM
Member
 
atoddiv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowmah View Post

I demo'ed a few bass scenes from Bass Demo disc and have been smiling since yesterday. My current sub does not even play loud enough below 30Hz, I can only try to imagine the pressurization of the room with either the XV-15 or VTF-3 MK4! #jealous

Bowmah,
I'm not sure if I missed this in the thread, but have you purchased yet? If so, which one did you go with?
atoddiv is offline  
post #69 of 72 Old 01-26-2014, 06:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jbrown15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 5,725
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 664 Post(s)
Liked: 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickdj1 View Post

Even though this is an old post, the short answer is he does measurements outside. Also having the port facing the mic gives the sub a higher measured spl.

I know that it does, I believe I made that comment when making my point about the fact that the XV15 would of tested higher SPL output numbers if Josh had taken the base plate off of the XV15 and pointing the woofer at the mic similar to what he did while testing another downward firing sub.
jbrown15 is online now  
post #70 of 72 Old 01-26-2014, 06:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadyJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,627
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 188 Post(s)
Liked: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

I know that it does, I believe I made that comment when making my point about the fact that the XV15 would of tested higher SPL output numbers if Josh had taken the base plate off of the XV15 and pointing the woofer at the mic similar to what he did while testing another downward firing sub.

It isn't quite that simple, despite what PSA would want you to believe. If the woofer is closer to the mic, you would likely measure a bit more output from the woofer's band, but then you lose output from the port's band since it gets further away. You can see this principle demonstrated in one of the tests done of the Premeir Acoustics PA-150, under the tab 'extended measurements', look at the chart labeled 'orientation comparison', it compares the driver with port facing the mic, woofer facing the mic, and I assume a diagonal measurement of the box where both port and woofer are angled 90 degrees from the mic. Furthermore, if the XV15 were tested with woofer facing the mic, it would also get an increase in the THD measurements because a good chunk of those are masked when the driver is in a down-firing configuration. Since the driver is the primary generator of THD, and since CEA is limited by a THD threshold, measuring the XV15 in a down-firing configuration is doing it a big favor for those tests.
shadyJ is online now  
post #71 of 72 Old 01-26-2014, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jbrown15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 5,725
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 664 Post(s)
Liked: 881
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post

It isn't quite that simple, despite what PSA would want you to believe. If the woofer is closer to the mic, you would likely measure a bit more output from the woofer's band, but then you lose output from the port's band since it gets further away. You can see this principle demonstrated in one of the tests done of the Premeir Acoustics PA-150, under the tab 'extended measurements', look at the chart labeled 'orientation comparison', it compares the driver with port facing the mic, woofer facing the mic, and I assume a diagonal measurement of the box where both port and woofer are angled 90 degrees from the mic. Furthermore, if the XV15 were tested with woofer facing the mic, it would also get an increase in the THD measurements because a good chunk of those are masked when the driver is in a down-firing configuration. Since the driver is the primary generator of THD, and since CEA is limited by a THD threshold, measuring the XV15 in a down-firing configuration is doing it a big favor for those tests.

Oh okay, so the same thing applies to the numbers measured by Josh on the Outlaw sub then too which was tested with the woofer pointed at the mic.....lol
jbrown15 is online now  
post #72 of 72 Old 01-26-2014, 07:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadyJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,627
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 188 Post(s)
Liked: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

Oh okay, so the same thing applies to the numbers measured by Josh on the Outlaw sub then too which was tested with the woofer pointed at the mic.....lol

The Outlaw would likely have measured slightly less output were the tests taken with it in a down-firing orientation, but it's THD measurements would have been a lot lower as well. That is an unavoidable trade-off in this type of testing. The Outlaw is not getting an unfair advantage due to its configuration.
shadyJ is online now  
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

Tags
Hsu Vtf3 Mk4

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