Originally Posted by BiGBADDABOOM
The Submersives are the superior full bandwidth no-compromise design provided you can afford enough to get the output you need. The advantage of the Captivator is some more output in a similar form factor for a similar price. The downside is your ULF is filtered.
If you've got money to throw at multiples and let this system grow, the Submersive is the obvious choice. I would think if you're looking at a $10K LCR front stage, you'd want to spend the money on the no-compromise choice for the bottom octaves.
BiGBADDABOOM. I'm curious - have you heard the Cap? I totaled the scores ranking last night with Greg, and when he posts them I think you'll see that the Cap gives very little if anything up to the SubM on the average score for the scenes that were measured to be the lowest of the Low LFE material...those same scenes it should have a clear advantage on? For instance the cap won on wotw and bass I love you. The overall final variance in averaged voting score total was about 2%.
The SubM had an EQ chart flatter than a pancake (very impressive), but the Cap's EQ was nice too, and --- I'll add, flat to 15hz in Greg's room with the 20hz tune (to make a further example of our discussion from another thread). The FR charts may suprise you a bit BiGBADDABOOM. If we'd cut loose on the volume during those scenes, the small advantage the SubM had may have been overcome by the remendous headroom the Caps had. I found my scores really flipping back and forth as to which of the subs I preferred depending on the material, but it was like a 1 point difference on each of the swings usually on a 10 point scale. (overall I still preferred the ported sound) If the Cap and SubM are 1 on 1 ---the people who prefer a sealed subwoofer will find the Submersive is superior at a standardized volume like we listened to on all the clips last night - after that a single Captivator would be happy to add a bit more SPL when the submersive is out of gas.
I prefer the ported sound - (maybe I'm the minority) but for me I walked away happy because I've heard the Cap lined up against the Submersive on two occassions (at my subwoofer meet and now this one) and on both occassions I've definately prefered the ported sound of the Cap. (and all ported subs in equivalent classes have been my preference during both of these meets)
Ask some of the attendees how they liked the open range gun fight scene that Jeff and Mark threw in there. Multiple people threw some explicatives around when the shotguns were going off during the cap demo. That scene was a bonus scene shown on the Cap and SubM at a ramped up volume compared to the rest of the demo material at the end of the normal material and was not graded.
Also keep this in mind. The cap pair was being powered off a single EP4000 amp. 1 Cap on L channel, 1 Cap on R channel - parralled inputs. The amps HPF was completely off, and no HPF was engaged via EQ. The amp gain of course maxed out. During the lowest of the lowest of the lowest scenes and even during Bass I love you, not one person heard port noise. Feel free to PM all the attendees. No HPF? 120dB + measured perfectly clean with plenty of headroom remaining + cheap single amp? IIRC, ALL of the other passive subs used more amp than the Caps got (except the DTS/Growler combo) which used the same single EP4000 amp. If I understood correctly most of the other passive combos used one Dayton amp per subwoofer driver - I don't know how many watts were being pushed by the Daytons to the other subs, but the Cap used one channel per driver (2ohm wiring) -- so maybe 800 watts RMS per sub, on a 4,000 watt RMS capable driver... Jeff had a Lab Gruppen 7k amp available, but he said he didn't choose to hook it up because he didn't want to tear up Greg's house.It's not all about SPL for everyone
-- I fully understand and can appreciate that
, but the takeaway is that it isn't 100% advisable that the SubM is the obvious choice for everyone. Ported and very underpowered it was still neck and neck in overall averaged scores to the SubM at the volume choosen for our listening session. Check out the results thread scores when Greg posts them.
At any rate - both are fantastic subs, along with other very competitive (and well preforming) contenders at the meet!
Last point of note...Mark's Submersive was truly a stunning looking subwoofer - well done on that front, as well as every other front! Overall a very remarkable sub - even if not my preference! Mark's knowledge about this industry is apparent in his product AND in watching and talking with him at the meet.