Official Craigsub rankings thread - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 09:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
swgiust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
[quote=craigsub]

And, as an estimate on the Ultra/2 ... I would call it 3 points higher than the single driver ultra.

QUOTE]

I would agree that in no way the Ultra 2 is twice the sub as the Ultra, but I would
expect it to be better that 15% better?
swgiust is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 10:02 AM
Newbie
 
dcoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post

No ... It has been about 6 years since any of the Sunfire Subs have been in our home.

Any particular reason? Where do you think it might rank?? Thanks
dcoil is offline  
post #93 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 10:07 AM
 
craigsub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by swgiust View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post


And, as an estimate on the Ultra/2 ... I would call it 3 points higher than the single driver ultra.

I would agree that in no way the Ultra 2 is twice the sub as the Ultra, but I would
expect it to be better that 15% better?

I am basing this on tests with dozens of subs, including duals from different companies.

To help clarify this, let's look at the GP session from Ed Mullen on the PB12-Ultra/2 in its 20 Hz tuning ...

20 Hz Tune 10% THD Ground Plane 2M:
16 Hz: 89.5 dB
18 Hz: 100.7 dB (8.4% THD amp limited)
20 Hz: 102.8 dB (9.4% THD amp limited)
22 Hz: 104.9 dB (7.7% THD amp limited)
25 Hz: 106 dB (6.2% THD amp limited)
30 Hz: 109.5 dB (7.9% THD amp limited)
40 Hz: 113.1 dB
50 Hz: 112.2 dB

Now let's look at the PB12-Plus from Ed, using the 16 Hz tune (both subs are using their 2 port open setting) ...

16 Hz: 95.0 @ 10.0
18 Hz: 99.4 @ 6.8*
20 Hz: 100.9 @ 9.2*
22 Hz: 99.9 @ 10.4
25 Hz; 101.9 @ 10.3
32 Hz: 106.7 @ 9.9
40 Hz: 107.3 @ 4.7*
50 Hz: 106.7 @ 4.6*

When you consider the Ultra driver delivers appx. 1.5-2 dB higher levels of SPL than the Plus ... and crunch these numbers, I think the 15% figure makes sense from an objective sense.

The Ultra/2 averages 104.8 dB from 16 to 50 Hz while the Plus averages 102.2 dB.

Hopefully this helps everyone understand this issue more.
craigsub is offline  
post #94 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 10:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
cschang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan Beach, CA
Posts: 14,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUCHO View Post

Adding in my two bits -

I went from a SVS 20-39 PC+ (with 12.3 driver) to a HO w Turbo based largely on what Craig had to say about the new HO driver/amp. My impression is that they aren't that much different for HT but I could easily notice a difference in music articulation. I presume this difference should be noticeable for HT as well but I just didn't spend much time comparing the two. Craig is truly a sick man. (In a good way)

Of course - due to the turbo - there is a large difference in scenes like Irene or Neo talking to the machine in Revolutions since I was only running the SVS in its native 20 hz tune.

To me....it is much easier to judge sound quality with music. For HT, it is less important IMO.

-curtis

Owner of Wave Crest Audio
Volunteer Mod at the Ascend Acoustics Forum
Like all things on the Internet, do your research, as forums have a good amount of misinformation.
Help beat breast cancer!

cschang is offline  
post #95 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 11:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bgillyjcu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cleveland Ohio
Posts: 3,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Of course - due to the turbo - there is a large difference in scenes like Irene or Neo talking to the machine in Revolutions since I was only running the SVS in its native 20 hz tune




That scene from Irene has like SUB 10HZ Bass......that is crazy

Twitter @ Clefoodandbrews
 

bgillyjcu is offline  
post #96 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 11:13 AM
 
craigsub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcoil View Post

Any particular reason? Where do you think it might rank?? Thanks

Yes, there is a particular reason - there is no dealer near here any longer. I really have no idea how well it would do in testing against today's subs - especially when you consider the sub I had is no longer even made.
craigsub is offline  
post #97 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 11:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
swgiust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post

I am basing this on tests with dozens of subs, including duals from different companies.

To help clarify this, let's look at the GP session from Ed Mullen on the PB12-Ultra/2 in its 20 Hz tuning ...

20 Hz Tune 10% THD Ground Plane 2M:
16 Hz: 89.5 dB
18 Hz: 100.7 dB (8.4% THD amp limited)
20 Hz: 102.8 dB (9.4% THD amp limited)
22 Hz: 104.9 dB (7.7% THD amp limited)
25 Hz: 106 dB (6.2% THD amp limited)
30 Hz: 109.5 dB (7.9% THD amp limited)
40 Hz: 113.1 dB
50 Hz: 112.2 dB

Now let's look at the PB12-Plus from Ed, using the 16 Hz tune (both subs are using their 2 port open setting) ...

16 Hz: 95.0 @ 10.0
18 Hz: 99.4 @ 6.8*
20 Hz: 100.9 @ 9.2*
22 Hz: 99.9 @ 10.4
25 Hz; 101.9 @ 10.3
32 Hz: 106.7 @ 9.9
40 Hz: 107.3 @ 4.7*
50 Hz: 106.7 @ 4.6*

When you consider the Ultra driver delivers appx. 1.5-2 dB higher levels of SPL than the Plus ... and crunch these numbers, I think the 15% figure makes sense from an objective sense.

The Ultra/2 averages 104.8 dB from 16 to 50 Hz while the Plus averages 102.2 dB.

Hopefully this helps everyone understand this issue more.

Numbers don't lie. I was not suprised by the Ultra/2 numbers, I am supprised by
the Plus though. Damn good sub IMO. Your reputation is still intact
swgiust is offline  
post #98 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 11:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RMK!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 95608
Posts: 5,698
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by cschang View Post

To me....it is much easier to judge sound quality with music. For HT, it is less important IMO.


I agree, but film scores are very musical these days and a subs deficiency in this regard will be noticed.

HToM

"Well, la di fricken da."!
RMK! is online now  
post #99 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 11:24 AM
 
craigsub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by swgiust View Post

Your reputation is still intact

Is that a GOOD thing ?
craigsub is offline  
post #100 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 12:03 PM
Member
 
avsrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Let me see if I'm understanding correctly from your chart:
5. Hsu VTF-3 HO + Turbo: 94 points
5a. Hsu VTF-3 HO w/o Turbo: 92 points
6. SVS PB12-Ultra: 90 points

If PB12-Ultra/2 is approx. 93 then are you saying the HSU VTP-3 HO + Turbo is better and roughly half the price?
avsrebel is offline  
post #101 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 12:15 PM
 
craigsub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsrebel View Post

Let me see if I'm understanding correctly from your chart:
5. Hsu VTF-3 HO + Turbo: 94 points
5a. Hsu VTF-3 HO w/o Turbo: 92 points
6. SVS PB12-Ultra: 90 points

If PB12-Ultra/2 is approx. 93 then are you saying the HSU VTP-3 HO + Turbo is better and roughly half the price?

When you are dealing with a 5% difference, considering all the criteria involved, I would call the 2 "comparable".
craigsub is offline  
post #102 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 12:18 PM
Member
 
avsrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It sounds like it would be a no-brainer to go with the cheaper model if they are "comparable". There has to be some catch. I need to hop over to your review and check out the analytics used.
avsrebel is offline  
post #103 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 12:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
G-star's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post

When you are dealing with a 5% difference, considering all the criteria involved, I would call the 2 "comparable".

people tend to get too hung up on these numbers. as has been alluded to, i doubt 99% of people would be able to pick a clear winner. this is just great fun and stuff to stoke the fire of debate among the sub geeks. i'm sure most of us would be tickled pink with either of these subs...i'd go for the one that makes most sense in my room with the available funds.

great work by the way, craig.

"That's right Mr. Martini...there is an Easter Bunny".
G-star is offline  
post #104 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 12:26 PM
 
craigsub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsrebel View Post

It sounds like it would be a no-brainer to go with the cheaper model if they are "comparable". There has to be some catch. I need to hop over to your review and check out the analytics used.

Please do ... and let me know if you have any questions or comments ...
craigsub is offline  
post #105 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 01:45 PM
 
craigsub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-star View Post

people tend to get too hung up on these numbers. as has been alluded to, i doubt 99% of people would be able to pick a clear winner. this is just great fun and stuff to stoke the fire of debate among the sub geeks. i'm sure most of us would be tickled pink with either of these subs...i'd go for the one that makes most sense in my room with the available funds.

great work by the way, craig.

Well said, and thank you.

Gents (I am assuming women are too smart to be reading this stuff), I am off to Cleveland for a big swim invitational with my wife and son. He does the swimming. She keeps his diabetes in check. I do what I am told.

See you guys Sunday !
craigsub is offline  
post #106 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 02:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub View Post

You are pretty close ... At the end of the Velodyne DD-18 vs. ACI Maestro test, the winner was assigned a score of 100, with the other having been about 15% behind it, or 97 points. Based on the scale, it is possible, for example, that a subwoofer "scores" 115 points. That subwoofer would be roughly twice the perormer that the Velo DD-18 is.

I have been running some ideas about the effect that duals of any subwoofer adds to its performance, and the estimate is typically going to be one can add from 2-4 points for duals. Duals of any sub will NOT add 15 points to a subwoofer's performance (15 points is juat a bit over doubling the performance).

To answer the question, for example, about the Ultra Cylinder, it would score the same as the box Ultra.

And, as an estimate on the Ultra/2 ... I would call it 3 points higher than the single driver ultra.

Also ... keep this in mind on the Ultra: This is a driver which is in its 5th year of production (if memory serves, the current driver was available in May, 2002, in the SS cylinder subs). SVS is not just sitting still, and looking to "do nothing but raise prices" in 2007.

The next Ultra series is in the works, and will be a welcome addition to the testing being done here. The current Ultra driver is still competitive, even after this long. That speaks volumes.

All right, you lost me here.

I'll admit math ain't my strong point, but I cudda sworn that 15% of 100 is 15.
100-15=85.

How'd you come up with 97?
John Schneider is offline  
post #107 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 02:43 PM
Member
 
huff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oakville, ON
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schneider View Post

All right, you lost me here.

I'll admit math ain't my strong point, but I cudda sworn that 15% of 100 is 15.
100-15=85.

How'd you come up with 97?

Re-read post #1 in this thread where Craig says "How the scaling works is this: each 3 points represents a 15% higher level of overall performance"
huff is offline  
post #108 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 02:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Seaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 5,976
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsrebel View Post

It sounds like it would be a no-brainer to go with the cheaper model if they are "comparable". There has to be some catch. I need to hop over to your review and check out the analytics used.

The "catch" is a simple statement. "Your mileage may vary..."

With any largely subjective review, there are a variety of intertwined factors at work to determine both what we hear and our personal preferences, or more accurately, the pecking order of our priorities or annoyances.

Let's not forget that 10% THD limits or even just maximum output at various frequencies does not determine everything about a subwoofer. As the output capabilities of the subwoofers being compared start to approach being "enough" for the use (more can always be beneficial) or have comparable playback limitations, other characteristics of the subwoofer start to dictate the subjective experience. The "best" is never going to be easy to identify, but we will note differences between the many available solutions.

Mark Seaton
Seaton Sound, Inc.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood..." Daniel H. Burnham
Mark Seaton is offline  
post #109 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 02:58 PM
pbc
AVS Special Member
 
pbc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 5,333
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:


It sounds like it would be a no-brainer to go with the cheaper model if they are "comparable". There has to be some catch. I need to hop over to your review and check out the analytics used.

One other thing to consider when looking at the price equation, the build quality of the SVS subs do seem much better than the HSU subs, for instance. Had the chance for the first time to see the VTF-3 against the SB12, PB12ISD and PB10 subs today in the same room (local dealer that carries both in Canada) and the SVS subs clearly felt and looked superior. The VTF-3 had kind of a "glued together" look to it (i.e., the top piece clearly looked like it was glued to the box) versus the rounded "looks like one piece" edges of the SVS. I imagine the newer HO has the same build quality as the VTF?

They also pulled out a PB12-Plus/2 and my what a monster that is compared to even the PB12NSD and it absolutely dwarfed the VTF-3!! At least it took that one out of the equation for me, no way my wife would allow that beast in the house!!

 

My DIY Subs ... http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1233892

Quote:

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures.

 

pbc is online now  
post #110 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 03:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DreamCatcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I feel the same way, SVS is a step up in build quality compared to the HSU subs.
On the other hand, HSU subs are a step up in sound quality compared to SVS subs. Not a big step mind you, but with the VTF-3 HO HSU has raised the bar on bass quality/quanity versus price, imho at least. I've owned a lot of SVS subs recently, PB12 Ultra/2, PB12-NSD, Dual 20-39 PC- Plus, etc... and while all very good subs, the 3HO Turbo just out performs them, at least in my system and room.

dc
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbc View Post

One other thing to consider when looking at the price equation, the build quality of the SVS subs do seem much better than the HSU subs, for instance. Had the chance for the first time to see the VTF-3 against the SB12, PB12ISD and PB10 subs today in the same room (local dealer that carries both in Canada) and the SVS subs clearly felt and looked superior. The VTF-3 had kind of a "glued together" look to it (i.e., the top piece clearly looked like it was glued to the box) versus the rounded "looks like one piece" edges of the SVS. I imagine the newer HO has the same build quality as the VTF?

They also pulled out a PB12-Plus/2 and my what a monster that is compared to even the PB12NSD and it absolutely dwarfed the VTF-3!! At least it took that one out of the equation for me, no way my wife would allow that beast in the house!!


StayThristyMyFriends
DreamCatcher is offline  
post #111 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 04:24 PM
pbc
AVS Special Member
 
pbc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 5,333
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Surprising actually. I can't imagine that a slightly nicer enclosure would have run them more than another $50 to $100? I'm still seriously considering the HO over the PB12-Plus based on the reviews of the HO here, but the difference in build quality was definately evident.

 

My DIY Subs ... http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1233892

Quote:

J Dunlavy:.. if you stop to think about it, no loudspeaker can sound more accurate than it measures.

 

pbc is online now  
post #112 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 04:38 PM
Member
 
stevenassco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
have you tested/compared subs such as the the ASW-825/855, Seismic/Servo series, ML Depth/Descent, Theil SS3/SS4

there are some excellent non ID subs out there that will compete with that lineup, although they are all great subs
stevenassco is offline  
post #113 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 05:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
swgiust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
If you were considering adding another sub, and you had a good sub (one on the list) would you add it or buy the #1 sub on the list? Is it better to have two of the same sub? I am looking at another Ultra/2. I think SVS will give me a good deal,
past customer, new ultra's coming out soon. What would you do?
swgiust is offline  
post #114 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 05:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by huff View Post

Re-read post #1 in this thread where Craig says "How the scaling works is this: each 3 points represents a 15% higher level of overall performance"

DOH!
Of course, I'll have to rethink a few other things. (6 points = 30%, 12 points = 60 %).
Kind of puts new perspective on the ratings.
John Schneider is offline  
post #115 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 05:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

There are plans to have Craig play with a SubMersive and then a BMF over the next few months. I expect both to compare rather well in the mix.

I don't want to cause a problem for you, if this does, I'll delete.

What do YOU think sets the 2 apart? Is one louder than the other? Lower? More musical?

Would love to hear your thoughts on direct comparisons.
John Schneider is offline  
post #116 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 06:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Seaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 5,976
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schneider View Post

I don't want to cause a problem for you, if this does, I'll delete.

What do YOU think sets the 2 apart? Is one louder than the other? Lower? More musical?

Would love to hear your thoughts on direct comparisons.

No problem at all John. I wouldn't have agreed to design the BMF after I already had mine in the works unless it would offer something different from what my SubMersive offers. I've posted comments on the comparison between the two at AV123's forum a few times, but here are a few points of comparison. If you're looking for a clear "this is better than that" from me, keep looking.

For anyone who has followed some of my past adventures in subwoofing, the best analogy I can give is that the SubMersive fully intended to deliver on some of the strengths I observed when installing the monsterous b-Deap subwoofers into rooms like that of "thebland's" and "Pete & Pam," but do so in a managable package that was sized and priced to make it realistic to deploy multiples. The BMF is much more in the footsteps of the ContraBass's strengths with both designs using different means toward similar end goals. The BMF of course does not have the high power linearity afforded by the servo-motor in the ContraBass, but it gains low level linearity, and the acoustic low passing and excursion reduction of the front 18" PR that serves to give it a similarly unique composure under fire.

In maybe 80% of home theaters, the SubMersive will have power to much lower frequencies, where I have observed useful in-room response to 8-12Hz. The SubMersive also has quite startling power above 35-40Hz and smooth response out to almost 200Hz (makes for easier transitioning). Aside from the in-room extension, the SubMersive has extremely good linearity right to its limits at all operating frequencies which will be visible in compression testing with increasing sweep levels.

The BMF is 6" longer and 6" wider than the SubMersive. It has significantly more power in the 16-28Hz range which will be very welcome in open floor plan rooms and those who can simply never get enough deep bass output. The BMF will be a lower in audible distortion within it's operation range, while taking a very close second to the SubMersive in dynamic linearity. The higher frequency, front 18" PR affords the BMF a very un-obtrusive sound character that is deceptive given its physical size. The composure under fire I describe translates to no foul noises from the subwoofer until you are significantly clipping the amplifier, which is at some pretty enthusiastic playback levels.

The BMF is a well composed powerhouse. On the flip side, no quantity of BMF's will deliver the sub 14-16Hz extension in-room that SubMersives allow, especially with multiples. One slight complicating factor is that the Velodyne SMS-1 can significantly truncate the low end extension of a SubMersive in an enclosed room.

The whole purpose was to offer some alternate options with unique strengths and benefits that deliver the dynamic capability I and many of you have come to expect in a top home theater.

Mark Seaton
Seaton Sound, Inc.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood..." Daniel H. Burnham
Mark Seaton is offline  
post #117 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 06:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Thanks for the response. I'll check AV123's forums.

Would you say that one is faster/quicker/more musical? I do listen to alot of music.
John Schneider is offline  
post #118 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 06:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
MKtheater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Hartford, NY
Posts: 14,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 403
Hi Mark,
I am looking to upgrade my subwoofer, I want faster bass, and Have been considering the following: Jl audio 113, hsu ho turbo. How well will the BMF, or for that matter the other new 15 inch subs from av123 would compare in speed and accuracy. My SVS has alot of power so I expect that. The jl audio and your submersive are comparable in prices as well where the others are less. How about 2 of the 15 from av123 vs the hsu ho turbo, they run about the same price? Thanks
MKtheater is offline  
post #119 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 06:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
Richard Mayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

I want faster bass...

Uh oh...

Richard Mayer is offline  
post #120 of 6764 Old 12-15-2006, 07:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mazersteven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,784
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwingding View Post

You all have cursed me. Within the past 2 months I have bought two PB12 Plus/2 s. They make me grin from ear to ear.

However, I did not need to see this thread. Please go away and leave me alone.

LMAO I was thinking the same thing.

Think this is bad. Try headphones www.headfi.com
mazersteven is offline  
Closed Thread 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