or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Best sub EQ under $400
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best sub EQ under $400 - Page 52

post #1531 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjyap View Post

I don't think FBQ2496 had a delay option. If you need that, you need DCX2496.

TRUE! Thanks for the clarification.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #1532 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes k View Post

I have the an8033 and my sub doesnt have oomph that i want. Can i just move the cable to the other phase on the 8033 and see how it sounds? My sub is a seaton submersive in a 1200 cf room. Placement is on back wall and cant be moved.

It's a good bet that it is not the Anti Mode that is causing it. Did you setup and calibrate the sub first for where youi have it in the room? Once you have it in place, test it with the reciever pink tone using a spl meter. If the ouput is good, run the Anti Mode, then run the receiver/prepro calibration. The only time I have had a issue with a sub not putting out was with Audyssey. It takes some tweaking to get it just right. For some good info on setting up for HT http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=824554.
post #1533 of 1785
bump
post #1534 of 1785
I took the easy route and bought a 2nd submersive.
post #1535 of 1785
Bsoko2...you bumpin life back in the 9 day nap?
post #1536 of 1785
It lives!
post #1537 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes k View Post

I took the easy route and bought a 2nd submersive.


LOL nice, congrats ... I'm surprised though. I'd think a single submersive could easily handle any sort of output in a room that small. Something else must be wrong.

Since you can't move your existing sub, I'm assuming your only option is to co-locate the submersives, probably stacking them. If that still doesn't satisfy you, there has to be a problem elsewhere. You have gobs of sub for that small area.
post #1538 of 1785
Wes K, were you able to get your subs tuned to your liking? It sounds like your biggest problem is on positioning. I TOTALLY understand how sub positioning is often not a possible variable due to room layout. A product as awesome as the Antimode 8033 (or any other sub eq) can't fix huge nulls....which is very possible for your current seating position. Did you ever obtain a graph of your sub curve within your room? I too went with dual subs trying to balance the curve within my room....BEFORE attempting any type of sub eq.

Here is a pretty informative thread of my struggles and enlightenment.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1197370
post #1539 of 1785
I havent downloaded rew yet. I will ince i get the other sub in. Thanks for helping.

Wes
post #1540 of 1785
Sure Wes. Honestly, I learned the hard way that there is no substitue with having some type of room graph. The crawl test and others did not work in me finding the best position for my subs. Best wishes!
post #1541 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by deepstang View Post

Sure Wes. Honestly, I learned the hard way that there is no substitue with having some type of room graph. The crawl test and others did not work in me finding the best position for my subs. Best wishes!

+1 for me too. Until I bit the bullet and got a working REW setup, I had no idea how good a rear-left near-field position was with my SubMersive! It is completely un-locatable back there and gives me incredible tactility and sectional-moving infrasonics.
post #1542 of 1785
I got a feeling yall will be calling me Gump once i start asking for help them rew graphs.
post #1543 of 1785
I know that you can do 2 readings, can you do more than that? Like maybe 5?


If so, how do you do this and save it to the unit..


Thanks..


BTW..

Thinking of getting 2 units, one for each of my subs..



Question:

Do all of you that have this device, find the lowest bass in now stronger? mainly due to the fact the responce in now flatter, and thus, you turn up the sub to get the correct SPL and therefore the low end is also increased?

Thanks..
post #1544 of 1785
It is fully automatic and you only need one unit for sub(s). I have 4 subs running off one Anti Mode. Setup is about 5 minutes.
post #1545 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

It is fully automatic and you only need one unit for sub(s). I have 4 subs running off one Anti Mode. Setup is about 5 minutes.



Is it not better to have one for each sub? Mainly due to the fact that each sub is at different locations in room and distance is difference for each, and room effect from each sub is also different?

Thanks, and if true that 1 is enough, SWEEET...

Saves me $350.....
post #1546 of 1785
You only need one unit, you can save one calibration, correct level is set and Anti-Mode is something else and has nothing to do with this.
post #1547 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by muad'dib View Post

Is it not better to have one for each sub? Mainly due to the fact that each sub is at different locations in room and distance is difference for each, and room effect from each sub is also different?

Thanks, and if true that 1 is enough, SWEEET...

Saves me $350.....

Yes.....and....No. As an ANTIMODE dealer, I get this question all the time.

If you are using the ANTIMODE 8033 in a HT system with the LFE output (which is mono) then all you need is a single unit. That unit will "see" your multiple subs as ONE SUB and equalize as a single unit.

If you are using the ANTIMODE 8033 in a two channel stereo system then you could use 2 units.

However, later next month there will be a STEREO version of the 8033, the AntiMode 8033S.
See this Press Release for more info. It will be $100 more than the mono unit.
post #1548 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post

You only need one unit, you can save one calibration, correct level is set and Anti-Mode is something else and has nothing to do with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bioforce View Post

Yes.....and....No. As an ANTIMODE dealer, I get this question all the time.

If you are using the ANTIMODE 8033 in a HT system with the LFE output (which is mono) then all you need is a single unit. That unit will "see" your multiple subs as ONE SUB and equalize as a single unit.

If you are using the ANTIMODE 8033 in a two channel stereo system then you could use 2 units.

However, later next month there will be a STEREO version of the 8033, the AntiMode 8033S.
See this Press Release for more info. It will be $100 more than the mono unit.

Thanks..

Just saved me few $$

I will be using both subs in a theater settings, so guess the 1 is good...

Just to confirm, after the setup (2 locations of readings if one chooses), I have to add 3 feet to the actual distance of the closest sub (if using 2 subs)??to compensate for the DSP?

Very excited.. I'm coming from an anthem d2v from the past and it ARC room corrections.. I missed the flat sub sound it gave, and now I can have it again close...
post #1549 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsoko2 View Post

It is fully automatic and you only need one unit for sub(s). I have 4 subs running off one Anti Mode. Setup is about 5 minutes.

I will also add that I use a SMS-1 with the Anti Mode for bottom end tweaking & EQ.
post #1550 of 1785
Greeting fellow AVSers,

I am new to this forum, it's DSPeaker that brings me to this very lively forum. I am a strictly 2 channel guy. I would like to seek some real life experience sharing on using Antimode in a 2 channel context.

Currently my main speaker are ESL 57 (electrostatic). Because of the fast transient response of electrostatic, I worried that I could not found a cone based sub would produce fast enough bass hence I have never thought about all this subwoofer and EQ things. This changed until I read about Robert's Review on TAS, he has good thing to say about Antimod working with his Harbeth M40. I am indeed quite surprise, both Bob and Harbeth are well respected in the 2 channel circle. Seeing Bob being able to get good result matting the MK Sub with Harbeth M40 got my mind working.

To start with, I think I would like to hear from you guys, how many of you use Antimod in your 2 channel system and what are the subs that you use.
post #1551 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by muad'dib View Post

Is it not better to have one for each sub? Mainly due to the fact that each sub is at different locations in room and distance is difference for each, and room effect from each sub is also different?
Thanks, and if true that 1 is enough, SWEEET...

Saves me $350.....

Well asked, as those are my exact concerns.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bioforce View Post

Yes.....and....No. As an ANTIMODE dealer, I get this question all the time.

If you are using the ANTIMODE 8033 in a HT system with the LFE output (which is mono) then all you need is a single unit. That unit will "see" your multiple subs as ONE SUB and equalize as a single unit.

If you are using the ANTIMODE 8033 in a two channel stereo system then you could use 2 units.

However, later next month there will be a STEREO version of the 8033, the AntiMode 8033S.
See this Press Release for more info. It will be $100 more than the mono unit.

I think it is common knowledge that it is possible to connect one Antimode (or any other sub-eq processor) to multiple subs...from a LFE out.

The poster above did bring up good points, and I don't think that I have read a satisfactory answer yet. IMO, I think we are ignoring theoretical discrepancies when using 1 sub processor for multiple non-symmetrically placed subs. In reality it HAS worked for many, so I guess that set-up can work.
post #1552 of 1785
For those who use Sub with their 2-channel stereo. May I know what is the known best practice? Use one unit or ONE PAIR of subs?

My current plan is the borrow a pair of subs from my AV buddies, put them in the respective corners behind the main speakers and have Antimod doing some wonder.

Or, should I just use ONE sub and have it placed in the CENTRAL position behind the main speakers?

Comments and opinion welcome.

Many thanks.
post #1553 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoltm View Post

For those who use Sub with their 2-channel stereo. May I know what is the known best practice? Use one unit or ONE PAIR of subs?

My current plan is the borrow a pair of subs from my AV buddies, put them in the respective corners behind the main speakers and have Antimod doing some wonder.

Or, should I just use ONE sub and have it placed in the CENTRAL position behind the main speakers?

Comments and opinion welcome.

Many thanks.

How will you be wiring it/them up? Stereo or summed bass?
post #1554 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

How will you be wiring it/them up? Stereo or summed bass?

Kal, to be honest with you, this is a well asked question that has always been in my mind and I have not come to the point of asking yet.

I am talking about 2 channel application not Home Theater. I have tried to read around the subject and it makes me even more confused. As most sub-woofer related info are 99% for Home Theater application, I am not technical enough to know what are the fundamentals or principles discussed that can be used in 2 channel application. (That's why I come to this forum for some interactive discussion and hoping some authority could come and shed some light.)

1. Is bass stereophonic or monophonic? My current understanding is it's monophonic.
2. What is LFE? I know it reads Low Frequency Effect, but is that some sort of EXTRA bass information only encoded in movie DVD to "boost" bass for some HT excitement?
3. Is there any LFE info in typical red book CD or even vinyl? My current understanding is there is none.

Base on the above understanding, I start to postulate my own model setup in mind.

Case 1. 2 channel plus ONE sub in centre position, some where between the plane of the main LS and the back wall.
Case 2. 2 channel plus ONE sub in the LEFT or RIGHT corner position
Case 3. 2 channels plus TWO subs, the left and right subs placed somewhere around the TWO corners on the back wall, i.e. behind the main speaker.
Case 4. Respective sub is put somewhere around the respective main speaker as an integral cluster.

I am a believer of KISS, so I would start with something simple first. I would start with Case 1 or Case 2 to see the result. I really hope TEL79 could come out and shed some light in this subject if this is a waste of time or something that worth exploring before I fork out my hard earned. I have no friends having the Antimod that could be on loan for a trial.

Subwoofer though is not a problem.

Coming back to the wiring question, this is indeed where I want some help from TEL79 too. In the DSPEAKER web site, it's possible to use ONE AM-8033 with MULTIPLE subs, if the signal feed is LFE (I suppose this is some form of BLENDED bass from AV receiver). What should I do with a typical 2 channel preamp? My understanding is I can use a Summation Cable to work with single LFE INPUT from the current gen 8033 (b or c), soon there is Stereo INPUT on 8033S to take L & R channel bass and sum it in the 8033s.

If I decided to go with one sub then the 0 degree OUTPUT from the 8033 would go to the sub. Amy I right?

I think I better stop here before things get out of manage.

Look forward to more discussion. Thanks a million in advance.
post #1555 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoltm View Post

For those who use Sub with their 2-channel stereo. May I know what is the known best practice? Use one unit or ONE PAIR of subs?

You will get better results with two subs than one. But makes sense to start with one and see how it goes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoltm View Post

I am talking about 2 channel application not Home Theater.

1. Is bass stereophonic or monophonic? My current understanding is it's monophonic.

Depends on how the recording was made. Both conditions exist. But that does not mean the bass needs to be reproduced in stereo.

Quote:


2. What is LFE? I know it reads Low Frequency Effect, but is that some sort of EXTRA bass information only encoded in movie DVD to "boost" bass for some HT excitement?

Exactly! It is a separate channel, limited to bass frequencies. The ".1" in a 5.1 mix.

Quote:


3. Is there any LFE info in typical red book CD or even vinyl? My current understanding is there is none.

Correct.

Quote:


Base on the above understanding, I start to postulate my own model setup in mind.

Case 1. 2 channel plus ONE sub in centre position, some where between the plane of the main LS and the back wall.
Case 2. 2 channel plus ONE sub in the LEFT or RIGHT corner position
Case 3. 2 channels plus TWO subs, the left and right subs placed somewhere around the TWO corners on the back wall, i.e. behind the main speaker.
Case 4. Respective sub is put somewhere around the respective main speaker as an integral cluster.

I am a believer of KISS, so I would start with something simple first. I would start with Case 1 or Case 2 to see the result.

The optimal result between Case 1 and 2 will depend on your room's acoustics, and whether or not you have EQ (the Antimode) or not. In other words, the best place for the sub might be different when you have no EQ than when you do. Without EQ, you need as smooth a response as possible, and that might be away from the corners. With EQ, the emphasis from being near the corner can be smoothed by the EQ while benefiting from the extra output level.

I cannot see ever getting close to optimal results without bass EQ. The risk is very low in getting the Antimode.

Quote:


What should I do with a typical 2 channel preamp? My understanding is I can use a Summation Cable to work with single LFE INPUT from the current gen 8033 (b or c), soon there is Stereo INPUT on 8033S to take L & R channel bass and sum it in the 8033s.

Yes, you need the L/R summed, but it cannot be a hardwired Y cable, but one with resistors inside, such as shown here. Better yet, if there is a new Antimode with it built in, that'll be perfect.

Quote:


If I decided to go with one sub then the 0 degree OUTPUT from the 8033 would go to the sub. Amy I right?

To start, yes. There are ways to confirm the optimal polarity for best splice with your main speakers. Since the mains are still running full range, it will take some work to dial in the right LP filter setting in the sub. If the sub has built-in high-pass filters for the main stereo channels, that could help not only for the crossover setup but also for summing the L/R bass for you. My old Aerial SW12 had such facilities, but it's rather rate.
post #1556 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Quote:


You will get better results with two subs than one. But makes sense to start with one and see how it goes.

Thanks a lot Roger, your reply is very educational and thorough. Please keep it coming

Quote:


Depends on how the recording was made. Both conditions exist. But that does not mean the bass needs to be reproduced in stereo.

Is this the reason why a pair of subs is better that ONE?

Quote:


The optimal result between Case 1 and 2 will depend on your room's acoustics, and whether or not you have EQ (the Antimode) or not. In other words, the best place for the sub might be different when you have no EQ than when you do. Without EQ, you need as smooth a response as possible, and that might be away from the corners. With EQ, the emphasis from being near the corner can be smoothed by the EQ while benefiting from the extra output level.

This makes sense. If it's not Antimod's ease of use parametric based EQ it would NOT make my mind spins. I have seen some inmates work very hard trying to integrate subs into a high quality 2 channel without EQ, typically it screws things up than help.

Quote:


I cannot see ever getting close to optimal results without bass EQ. The risk is very low in getting the Antimode.

This is good to know

Quote:


Yes, you need the L/R summed, but it cannot be a hardwired Y cable, but one with resistors inside, such as shown here. Better yet, if there is a new Antimode with it built in, that'll be perfect.

I understand, in fact, I read from DSPeaker's web site, there is a diagram showing how to make that bass summation cable. May I know if this is the purpose of the cable? The cable is to BLEND the bass information in the TWO main channels such that it could be EQ-processed? Then my next question is how I should deal with the processed output? Do I need to separate them into LEFT and RIGHT if I choose to have TWO subs producing the respective bass info. I can see there is ONE sub out from the Antimod, one being 0 degree while another is 180 degree. How I should wire TWO subs to Antimod properly for TWO channel apps?

There are TWO cases in my mind,

Case 1. Y splitter from 0 degree, going to line in of the two subs.
Case 2. One normal phase RCA cable connecting 0 degree out of Antimod to Line in of the LEFT sub. Then made another RCA cable with reverse polarity in the side connecting to the 180 degree out on the Antimod. This way, I would have TWO 0 degree output going to TWO subs. Is this a proper thinking? What is the difference from Case 1?

Quote:


To start, yes. There are ways to confirm the optimal polarity for best splice with your main speakers. Since the mains are still running full range, it will take some work to dial in the right LP filter setting in the sub. If the sub has built-in high-pass filters for the main stereo channels, that could help not only for the crossover setup but also for summing the L/R bass for you. My old Aerial SW12 had such facilities, but it's rather rate.

Would that help if I can put an electronic crossover between the 2-channel preamp and Antimod? I can borrow a Bryston 10B from friend for experiment. In fact, you make me wonder, is this indeed better for me to have a dedicated active crossover between the preamp and Antimod with a relatively dumb subs than a pair of very expensive more intelligent (with lot of HP and LP filter one) subs?

This way, I have the electronic crossover dealing with the frequency distribution to the mains and sub while having the Antimod dealing with the bass management EQ, then the dumb subs is only responsible with the production of low frequency?
post #1557 of 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoltm View Post

Is this the reason why a pair of subs is better that ONE?

No. Not in my book. I would use the subs in mono even with two of them. The reason for two subs is to help smooth out the room modes. For best results it takes careful arrangement and consideration of the room boundaries, but it’s a pretty safe bet that it will bring benefits in almost any case. This modal smoothing effect needs the two subs to be playing the same signals—hence mono.

Whether having two subs is a necessary step for any person’s taste/opinion/happiness cannot be determined by anyone but that person. If you have friends who will loan you a second sub, that would be the ideal way to explore.
Quote:


If it's not Antimod's ease of use parametric based EQ it would NOT make my mind spins. I have seen some inmates work very hard trying to integrate subs into a high quality 2 channel without EQ, typically it screws things up than help.

Not only does it make doing one setup fast, it makes it easy to try various options like moving the sub to a few positions, or trying 1 vs 2 subs relatively quickly, so you can see if that is worth the expense. I also like their bass lift option. I think flat bass is highly overrated.
Quote:


May I know if this is the purpose of the cable? The cable is to BLEND the bass information in the TWO main channels such that it could be EQ-processed?

Primarily the purpose of blending is to get all the bass from both channels into the mono sub(s). Even without EQ and even with two subs you want bass summing.
Quote:


Then my next question is how I should deal with the processed output? Do I need to separate them into LEFT and RIGHT if I choose to have TWO subs producing the respective bass info. I can see there is ONE sub out from the Antimod, one being 0 degree while another is 180 degree. How I should wire TWO subs to Antimod properly for TWO channel apps?
There are TWO cases in my mind,

Case 1. Y splitter from 0 degree, going to line in of the two subs.
Case 2. One normal phase RCA cable connecting 0 degree out of Antimod to Line in of the LEFT sub. Then made another RCA cable with reverse polarity in the side connecting to the 180 degree out on the Antimod. This way, I would have TWO 0 degree output going to TWO subs. Is this a proper thinking? What is the difference from Case 1?

Case 1 is safest/best. There is a Case 2 option, but not as you have described it. You cannot change polarity of an RCA cable. However, you can feed the second sub from the 180-deg output of the Antimode as long as you flip the polarity switch on that subwoofer to the 180-deg position. Now you will have both subs working in phase, same as Case 1. The only difference is you do not need a Y splitter for Case 2.
Quote:


Would that help if I can put an electronic crossover between the 2-channel preamp and Antimod? I can borrow a Bryston 10B from friend for experiment. In fact, you make me wonder, is this indeed better for me to have a dedicated active crossover between the preamp and Antimod with a relatively dumb subs than a pair of very expensive more intelligent (with lot of HP and LP filter one) subs?

This way, I have the electronic crossover dealing with the frequency distribution to the mains and sub while having the Antimod dealing with the bass management EQ, then the dumb subs is only responsible with the production of low frequency?

It may well be true that a separate crossover could help. Antimode will do a nice job EQing the entire bass range, probably higher than you want to go. Most folks like to maintain their main stereo effect down to at least 80 Hz. If your main speakers go flat down to 40 Hz, and you have no crossover to cut them off sooner, that will restrict the useable range for Antimode’s benefits since you will need to roll off the sub near 40 Hz so it doesn’t overlap the mains.

What speakers are you using?

Again, the decision whether to adopt a full crossover (as in the decision for a second sub), can be put off until you get some feel for what a single sub and Antimode bring to the party. Then plot the next step accordingly.
post #1558 of 1785
Roger,

Let me show you a photo of a pretty insane friend's setup before we continue with our discussion. That was a massive nightmare seeing him doing the placement of the bass reproducing panels. This system is now performing admirably.

He spend huge amount of effort on the fine tuning and placement. He didi not use any EQ at all in this setup. I would not do that personally. The Antimod and Bob's comments got me re-think. I believe P-EQ is a good technology to help with subs integration to 2 channel.

The front speaker is a pair of Magnepan 3.6 while the back panel is TWO pairs of Tympani 4's bass panel.

post #1559 of 1785
Roger,

My main speaker is Quad ESL 57 and MG 3.5. For most music I play, chamber classic, small Jazz ensemble, vocal. I do love the ESL more, the MG 3.5 does offer a bit more high and low frequency extension. The MG bass definition is very good compare to Quad ESL, which does not really go that low.

My current question is indeed first trying the cone based subs I can borrow easily from friends and see how well it matches with the ESL. If it's deemed satisfactory, I would move on trying some sort of panel bass driver to reproduce the bass. Using the MG3.5 (with proper low pass crossover) sticking in the corner is something in my mind.
post #1560 of 1785
For those who cares, this is the info in DSPeaker's web site regarding connecting Antimod with a typical 2 channel preamp.



http://www.dspeaker.com/en/support/u...ith-8033.shtml

I would like to ask the folks from DSPeaker, other than the stereo-in in the 8033s does it indeed carry different software (or algorithms or filters) than a 8033c?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Best sub EQ under $400