AVS Forum banner

JTR Cap 118HT vs SVS Ultra SB16

9K views 56 replies 23 participants last post by  Tom Vodhanel 
#1 ·
Pricing aside which sub is better?

Looking for something to match Revel f206. I am 70/30 HT:Music.

I have a large great room family/kitchen. Is the sealed more musical versus ported?

Thanks!

I would love to make the decision in the next few days, since the JTRs are going up in price.
 
#4 · (Edited)
If you are choosing between SVS SB16-Ultra and JTR Cap 118HT, it means you are ok with the size of Cap 118HT.

If your budget allows for a SVS SB16-Ultra, JTR Cap 1400 is less than $100 more. You should also consider it as it will crush PB16-Ultra :D

Please give Jeff a call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mlankton
#5 · (Edited)
I have not heard either sub but seeing feedback from people that have and seeing data-bass results on JTRs subs I would expect the JTR to have significantly more output than the SVS and at least match it in SQ if not exceed it.

And no sealed it not more musical than ported in my listening experience and opinion. There are threads here on blind testing(at GTG) of ported vs sealed and most people could not tell which was which. I think it was a ported JTR vs a Seaton Submersive(which are known as an excellent SQ sub)
 
#10 ·
I'll vote JTR between those 2. Although, I have 2 Seaton Submersive HP's and absolutely love them. They sound incredible, no matter what I'm playing through them, whether it be smooth Jazz at lower volumes, or action movies where the bass impact is on the verge of compromising the structural integrity of my house and causing cardiac distress. I've had them for just under 4 years now and to this day, I have never seen the limit light come on at any time on the back of the amp. I can't comment on the caps but I have no doubt that they are in the same league.
 
#11 ·
Hi,

I agree with posters who have said that the particular comparison that you are making is a bit surprising. The SB16 is a sealed sub, intended for smaller rooms which benefit from more room gain, or for smaller spaces, where larger subs would not fit as well or pass WAF considerations. Some people consider sealed subs more musical than ported subs, but there is no real agreement on that issue. And, with 70/30 HT to music, I would not expect that to be a strong consideration, anyway. Ported subs can typically develop a lot more low frequency SPL, down to their tuning point, than sealed subs can. And, that is important for HT in a large room.

You have specified that the sub will be for a larger room, and the 118HT will definitely have more output than the SB16. So, given your situation, I don't think it is a very close call. The PB16 would be a better choice than the SB16, in my opinion, for what you have described, although it would also be more expensive. But, if you like the looks and features of the new SVS subs, those can be considerations. Purely on an output basis, though, the Cap 1400 would have even more SPL, at most frequencies, than the PB16. And, it would cost less.

So, in your situation, I would drop the SB16 from consideration, and concentrate on the 118HT, the Cap1400, and if you like SVS subs, the PB16.

Regards,
Mike
 
#12 ·
Thanks Mike. I appreciate the clarification. The reason for selecting the sealed SVS sub versus ported is a price issue. Although I am getting a deal for the SVS subs, the $500 increase is a jump to an area I can't afford. I am coming from a HSU 10inch ported sub which was pretty strong in my former home (smaller area), so I thought the 16inch sealed would be sufficient. It sounds like the 118HT is the better choice size aside..
 
#14 · (Edited)
Output wise, JTR Cap 118HT will have more output than 2 SVS SB16-Ultra combined in almost all frequencies. Cap 118HT will sound more than twice as loud under 25 Hz.

As for voice coils, you want to have a good size of voice coils that is appropriate for the driver size. A 4" voice coil is good for an 18" driver. Therefore, 8" voice coil is not the perfect match for PB/SB16-Ultra's 15.5" driver.

A member here commented on PB16-Ultra's performance (after Audioholic's review):

It's about what I expected. The driver looks cool but it was really designed to be cost effective. The reason for the 8" coil is so they could put an iron ferrite magnet on inside... Labor in china is inexpensive so I'd bet the PB16-Ultra cost them as much as other capable 18" subwoofers cost the ID companies here.
 
#17 ·
I would buy JTR. My first choice would be the Cap 1400 but the 118HT would also be a good choice.

JTR is all about performance. And while those new 16" Ultras are a marketers dream, I don't think they were made with the same performance goals in mind that JTR had.
 
#27 ·
I would buy JTR. My first choice would be the Cap 1400 but the 118HT would also be a good choice.



JTR is all about performance. And while those new 16" Ultras are a marketers dream, I don't think they were made with the same performance goals in mind that JTR had.


For the price of the cap 1400 after shipping could the OP not consider a PSA V3601? Would that not have more output than the cap 1400?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#18 ·
^^^

Well, in all fairness, I think that the new 16 Ultras are better than just a marketer's dream. But, I don't think they can ever quite compete straight-up against the relatively less expensive JTR subs. And, I do think that JTR (and PSA) subs are more about sheer performance, than the equivalent and even more expensive SVS subs are. I have three of the PB16's, working in conjunction with a nearfield PB13, and I can attest to their quality and performance. But, they certainly won't ever win any bang-for-the buck contests with JTR or PSA. :p

Regards,
Mike
 
#20 · (Edited)
Mike you have three PB16's with a PB13 nearfield? Now that has to be fun.

What were you running before that set up? Please tell me you didn't go from a single PB13 to a PB13 with with three PB16's? Because if that was the case you must have experienced shock and awe when you turned that system on.

And I'm not trying to bash the PB16 it's just that it has so many fun things on it that a marketer can have a field day playing up all its bells and whistles. And while it's a very good or (even great) performer... as you pointed out the JTR subs are focused on sheer performance. They are two different animals.
 
#22 ·
I might be weird but...

OK, talking about subwoofers on the internet would be "normal"... :rolleyes: Setting performance and numbers aside, I would give the nod to JTR's choice of amplifier manufacturer over SVS amplifiers. Throw in plywood construction over MDF and for amp/cabinet quality, that goes to JTR.

Another factor is if/when SVS quits supporting the sub and you blow out the 16 in the future--have fun finding a replacement driver in that odd-ball size. Never mind the processing will give you a headache, just more factors to weigh in.

I can't use speakers with a shiny finish, my two dogs are more important than speaker finish and they have claws. :eek: I can refinish duratex and full coverage cloth grills, piano black? Fuggetaboutit!

Just other points to consider. Good luck and enjoy whatever you end up purchasing. :)
 
#26 ·
Hi everyone,

I don't really have lot of deep knowledge in Subs but can someone explain why Captivator is louder and more powerful than SVS PB16 ?
On paper SVS PB16 is at 1500 RMS while Captivator is at 1400 RMS and PB16 goes lower frequency than Captivator, so why Captivator is more powerful ?

Am I missing anything other than above numbers ?

Thanks in advance !
D.

Captivator 1400
16-190hz (in room response below 16hz)
1400 watts RMS (Dual ICE Power 700ASC modules)

SVS PB16
1,500 watts RMS (5,000+ watts peak)
15-280 Hz +/- 3 dB (standard mode)
13-280 Hz +/- 3 dB (extended mode)
14-360 Hz +/- 3 dB (sealed mode)
 
#29 ·
This thread is pretty old now..op has probably decided ages ago


More experienced members can give you the exact reasons why, but the fact that the Cap 1400 uses an *approximately* 3" larger driver and (I'd guess) a more efficient driver would play a large part in its performance advantage
 
#36 ·
Exactly how big is the driver in the 16 series Ultra subs? Is the driver the same size in both the SB16 and PB16?

The reason I ask is because I've become very interested in the SB16. I seem to recall reading something saying it was 15.75", but I'm not entirely sure where I saw that. Has this discrepancy been mentioned or noted during any of the reviews or tests? If not, why? I certainly don't recall seeing it mentioned in most of the review material I have read. How big of a deal is it?
 
#37 · (Edited)
If i'm remembering correctly, i recall claims of 15.5" from the outside of the rubber surround, not 100% positive though.

The SB16 is a capable sub and in fact was on my list as an upgrade from my SB13-U. To cut to the chase the company i was dealing with was,,,,,,, i'll just leave it at that. I'm not referring to SVS US to be clear. I ended up going with my original plan and picked up my S-1. Beyond happy with my decision as the performance is just ridicules. Almost double the output of the SB16.

Oh and yes the driver diameter is the same for both subs but the PB16's will be built to accommodate it's ported box.
 
#45 ·
actual footprints of subs play a big role in what people buy...where you gonna put them and is that spot(s) actually gonna sound good.

I have my rythmik 15hp as an end table.
 

Attachments

#47 ·
If this works, this hyperlink should take you to a post with a few "poor" pics of my space. The color of my furniture is eerily similar to that in tori's post. Maybe it's just a common, or great, color.
 
#48 ·
The link worked fine and I remember your room now from that earlier post. I agree it's a nice warm color. Your listening area is actually quite condensed, so you would be fairly close to your subs, which should benefit from both boundary gain and room gain. I am more confident than ever that a pair of SB16's, or the equivalent, would provide plenty of bass SPL and low frequency extension.

Regards,
Mike
 
#50 ·
my velodyne sub is gloss piano black and looks fine after 15 years of use...however its like 14x14x14 and is not a big eye sore. sometimes once you get past a certain size, things get too gaudy. think it thru
 
  • Like
Reactions: indebtbassfreak
#53 ·
My SPL1200-R in piano black i had for nine years and dont recall there been any swirls or scratches when i sold it.
 
#51 ·
Many speakers made today are piano black, as are most mini and Grand pianos that have been around for generations. Any high gloss finish can show dust and fingerprints, and dark colors show more. For instance, black, dark blue, or dark red cars are harder to keep clean looking, than silver ones, although the analogy isn't perfect since they spend so much time outdoors. I have had multiple large piano black subs over a period of years with no problems. I currently have four piano black Ultras. But, if the piano black is a concern, a person can always go with the oak finish, or even with a matte finish from another maker.

Regards,
Mike
 
#52 ·
I guess my only real concern with piano black is whether it would fit into my space. I can't have something disrupting my Feng Shui. Honestly, I guess I had just never really considered PB an option until my "interior design consultant/sister" said it would be her choice. I have to admit, the PB finish looks pretty striking in some of the photos I've seen and I'm starting to warm up to the idea.

The face plates on my Polk LSiM speakers are primarily gloss black, and the granite countertops in my kitchen appear to be a shiny black, even though they aren't technically black. So, I guess there is some precedent for shiny black things in my space.

I'm a bit embarrassed to even be worried about a subwoofer's appearance. I consider myself a tool belt & steel toed boot wearing manly, man. My only concerns should be whether the sub/s will knock things off the wall and if I can sit my beer on it. Heck, when I put it in those terms it almost sounds like I'm buying a mating call.
 
#54 ·
I ask Jeff about the gloss finish on Captivator 1400 and it will cost extra $500, not sure if this was for pair or single sub. Probably single. That will be $1000 USD for a pair :( which is about $1400 Canadian, CRAP.

Extra $500 USD for a gloss finish completely turns me off, now I am not sure which dual subs should get.
 
#55 ·
A $500 upcharge for gloss on something as large as thecap1400 is a bargain in my opinion. We must remember this is a USA made product. A properly done gloss finish is labor intensive. Jeff isn't paying the lowest bidder in china's going wage of 75 cent's an hour ;)

Factor in you'd need three of the other subs to match the headroom of two cap14400s and even with the gloss upcharge the 1400s are arguably the value play here.

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top