or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Decent Sub, Very Low Price...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Decent Sub, Very Low Price... - Page 2

post #31 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

The Klipsch is back on sale at Newegg at $299 through 12/7 (promo code EMCJHKJ65).

This deal is back on again - I missed it last time - got it this time, can't wait!
post #32 of 80
i just got this 299 deal too
post #33 of 80
Does sound like a good deal, so I bought one too.

Man, I had just bought a new sub 2 weeks ago... this forum is doing bad things to my wallet.
post #34 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by tential View Post


So in comparison to the PL-200, this would blow it out of the water?

Edit: I know this review says it wasn't too good for music but how about actual user experience? I have never had my own system. I had the Z-5500 before this. Is this worth it or should I still go with the PL-200 if I listen to a lot of music?

I don't think there will be a lot of difference between the 12D and the PL-200 based on the measurements I've seen. I think it is possible to be VERY happy with either one (for the price) if your mains will allow you to cross them over lower (40hz to 50hz)...this seems to eliminate their upper frequencies where they get loose and tend to boom more than the next higher class of sub. Both seem capable of real output that is fairly flat between 20hz - 40hz, but fall off rapidly below 20hz and is all over place above 50hz or so.
post #35 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiophile2k View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tential View Post


So in comparison to the PL-200, this would blow it out of the water?

Edit: I know this review says it wasn't too good for music but how about actual user experience? I have never had my own system. I had the Z-5500 before this. Is this worth it or should I still go with the PL-200 if I listen to a lot of music?

I don't think there will be a lot of difference between the 12D and the PL-200 based on the measurements I've seen. I think it is possible to be VERY happy with either one (for the price) if your mains will allow you to cross them over lower (40hz to 50hz)...this seems to eliminate their upper frequencies where they get loose and tend to boom more than the next higher class of sub. Both seem capable of real output that is fairly flat between 20hz - 40hz, but fall off rapidly below 20hz and is all over place above 50hz or so.

Welcome to AVSforum!

So I see you are a happy owner of a couple PL200 subs! They aren't a bad choice and I'm glad you are enjoying them!
http://www.avsforum.com/t/990726/bic-acoustech-owners-thread/3460_20#post_22247549

I'd like to know what measurements have you seen that show they are about the same performance level as the Klipsch RW-12D?

I've not seen measurements of the PL-200 that look terribly enticing, but I may have missed some. The ones that Josh did don't look very flat at all.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1350479/bic-acoustech-pl-200-data-bass-test-results/0_20

None of the subs in the 2007 Sound and Vision shootout would have measured as 'poorly' as the PL200 and by that I simply mean such a large peak at 50hz and strong trail off towards 20hz, and yet the Klipsch RW-12D placed midpack in that five sub round up. The PL200 I'm sure still sounds impressive, especially if you've not had as much experience around high end home theater subwoofers.

Here is the shootout article.
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article/shootout-five-mid-price-subwoofers

I'm not stating that the PL200 is a bad sub for $300, (I do recommend the BIC F12, and think it's a great sub for $200 price range -- I've not heard the PL200, but I'm sure it's a wee bit more capable and so thus an improvement) However I do believe the Klipsch RW-12D is significantly superior sub for the same price of $300 when it is on sale.

There is more discussion along these lines in this old thread - page 2...
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1394073/rw-12d-299-again/0_20



Crossing over your mains at 40hz or 50hz is not typically advisable regardless if they can handle it or not because a subwoofer is specifically designed to handle those lower frequencies, allowing your speakers to sound cleaner at higher SPL levels as well as utilize less power from the receiver. Eliminating the requirement that your speakers produce the lowest frequencies and matching those speakers with a quality sub has made a positive difference in any system I've yet been exposed to. Even if you have VERY nice/expensive main speakers that are rated to 20hz, I'd still cross them over at 80hz at minimum.

Case in point -- here is an example I recently encountered where a pair of $5,400 speakers crossed over at 40hz as set by a Denon receiver and Audyssey made a mess of things in the room in the subwoofer frequencies with $6000 worth of JTR S2 subwoofers. Simply upping the mainspeaker crossover to the THX recommended 80hz fixed the issue immediately and allowed both the excellent speakers to do their job, and the excellent subwoofers to do their job. Sometimes you'll find that you need to play with a crossover frequency to help rid a room null, or mode, but most times it is by moving the crossover up rather than down.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/871474/ia-meet/3300_20#post_22240791

dlbeck-changingDenon380xrecievercrossoveronmainsfrom40hzto80hzTHXstandard-5dBspacing.jpg

and here is my original encounter with such an issue in my own room a year and a half back.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1321789/anyone-heard-the-jamo-d6-or-d7-sub-thx-ultra-2-specs-how-would-it-compare-to-id/80_20#post_20212041
Edited by Archaea - 8/7/12 at 8:39pm
post #36 of 80
You can't compare your measurements on the 12d to those you linked to for the PL-200. The test situations couldn't have been more different. If you can show me a link of the same reviewer doing testing of the 12D under the same conditions, then it would be valid. Even your F12 test looked better than his PL-200, and I don't think anyone is claiming the F12 is a better sub. I am going by what people have measured in room, and the consensus is you can get substantial output from both subs down to the low 20s, exact extension is going to vary by room and placement. There are several post in various Bic forums. I never claimed one was better than the other, just that they were PROBABLY more similar than not.

As far as the crossover is concerned, I did say "if your mains will allow", so that advice isn't meant for everyone, but your own charts show the sub is flatter in the lower regions than in the upper regions where it is a boomy mess...so if your mains are flatter and tighter in that region it makes sense to cross over at a lower frequency to get the best overall FR. If you have mains that cannot go that low, or that are too inefficient and you need all the amp power you can get, then I would think it is obvious that advice would not be for you. On the other hand, by crossing the sub lower you are gaining more headroom for the sub, and these budget subs are probably more likely to need the headroom than most reasonably efficient mains, so I think that is an even trade and the headroom argument cuts both ways I don't see what a chart with different subs has to do with the subs in question when it comes to a flatter response. People should experiment and do what sounds best to them. Too many people on these forums get attached to the "crossover must be set to 80hz no matter what" mentality, even when it doesn't fit their situation. Sometimes it is better higher, sometimes lower, sometimes 80hz is the right spot. But you don't know unless you try...and if you have a known issue in a subs upper frequency range, but it performs well in the lower range, how is bad advice to say "try a lower crossover"? IF the sub can handle that region better than your mains, your advice is correct. IF it cannot, then my advice is correct. With this sub and capable mains, more often than not, my advice will sound better. (unless you like boom and a slow, loose sound)
post #37 of 80
Read page 2 of my thread I linked on the Klipsch RW-12D. Compare my measurement of the SVS PB12 and the Epik Empire in my room to Josh's data-bass reviews. The measurement differences are actually unbelievably similar. Uncanny for sure. My room doesn't offer much gain to 20hz at all. Specifically read post 35 and 37 which show measurements of identical subs in my room vs. Josh's tests outdoors. You'll see that my room has a couple nulls because of the center wall placement, but that room boost is not occurring to any strong degree. Ignore the nulls and our graphs are actually fairly similar. Which would indicate the Klipsch RW-12D sub FR would not fall off a cliff at 50hz like the PL200. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1394073/rw-12d-299-again/0_20



I've never measured the PL200, nor heard it, but I know the BIC F12 has measured fairly flat to the 30hz-35hz tune in another room that has lots of other subwoofers tested in it. (HuskerOmaha from the 2011 subwoofer meet) Just like you can compare the BIC F12 to a pleathora of subs measured in my room, you can compare the BIC F12 to a dozen popular subs measured in HuskerOmaha's room. Check out post 27.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1368326/subfest-2011-huskeromaha-and-desertdomes-subwoofer-showdown/20_20#post_21119776

You can tell that my room has less room gain than huskeromaha's (F12 down by about 10dB from 34hz to 20hz in HuskerOmaha's room) as compared to when I measured the BIC F12 in my room(F12 down about 16+dB from 34hz to 20hz in my room), but both rooms start rolling off hard on the BIC F12 at 33 or 34hz or so -- not 50hz like the PL200 graphs.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1391243/bic-v1220-and-bic-f12-omnimic-frequency-response-graphs/0_20

There is some interpretation occuring in my synopsis, but it is based on multiple graphs and some reasonable evidence that seems to point out the PL200 may roll off higher than the BIC F12. The PL200 may be louder than the BIC F12 at 50hz - explaining this situation -- who knows, without a comparable measurement made of both subs in the same room or setting - but the FR seems to be more peaked on the Pl200 than the F12 based on what I'm seeing.


As to the rest of your recommendations...how many subs have you auditioned in your room as compared to the PL200? How many systems have you measured with room analysing tools like REW, Omnimic XZT? Where does your experience in recommending crossovers and such come from? If only from your own subjective ear in audition - that is fine for your tastes - but it isn't a metric to promote to others with any authority.


Bedtime for me...Good eve all!
Edited by Archaea - 7/26/12 at 11:03pm
post #38 of 80
I'm not trying to turn this into one of those "I have this sub, so it is better than anything else" comments. I wouldn't be surprised if the 12D is slightly better. But I do know the chart you linked to isn't close to my experience in room with the PL-200s. There were several in the Bic threads that back up my personal experience. I don't think anyone who has heard them believes for a second they drop like that at 50hz. One guy is an audio engineer and did some pretty thorough test that back up what all the owners are saying. If I have some free time I might dig through those threads and get some links for you. My theater room is a nightmare in more ways than one, but it is not a great room for bass. MY experience is MY subs are flat to about 25hz in my room. They have decent output to about 18hz on test tones and sweeps, although they are significantly down at that point, then they drop off steeply after that. They are also NOT good in the upper frequency...so my personal experience with speakers I have heard and tested is very similar to what your charts show on a speaker I haven't heard...that is how I came to the conclusion they were probably pretty similar.
I'm pushing 50, I've been a 2 channel guy since I was kid. (l got into audio when I was about 15, and spent just about every dime I made on music and equipment). So I've had countless experience with speakers of all sorts. My first sub was the Velodyne ULD 15 (which I still have) used for several years in a stereo setup, then moved to what I then considered to be a HT setup (this was over 20yrs ago when Dolby Pro Logic was considered high tech) which I admittedly didn't put a whole lot thought into because stereo was my main focus. The thread you linked on my first post explained that only recently have I joined the modern era in HT...and even now I'm sure that is a system that many of you would laugh at. But it is surprisingly good for a system I've only invested $1500 in. In my 2 channel system I've experimented with a lot of different sub/speaker combos. Probably the best being a DIY stereo sub system with Carver Amazing Loudspeakers. So that is who I am and my background in the hobby. I use measurements, test, etc when I can. I don't believe they mean much if it doesn't sound good to me. I believe strongly in DBT. I could care less about brand names, expensive tweaks, or any other audiophile superstition....if I can't close my eyes and pick that A sounds better than B, then it doesn't matter to me. But if it does sound good, even if it might not measure perfect in someone else test, then to me that is a good.
I'll drop out of this now because it seems we aren't going to go anywhere with this. If I have to be a published audio expert to have an opinion, then I guess I'll just keep my mouth shut from now on. All I was trying to say was, EXPERIMENT and see if a lower crossover sounds better on your system if you pick up these subs. The graphs show they are not good in the upper frequencies, listeners have commented they are boomy and not tight, and your own experience tells you the same thing. But some are too married to the 80hz crossover to even try a lower crossover to see if it fixes some of this subs "problems" and actually sounds better that way. Oh well. I guess I was out of line to suggest something that might sound better on some systems.
post #39 of 80
Thread Starter 
From the standpoint of purely objective, standardized measurements (outdoor ground-plane from 2 meters) the PL200 measures poorly. It shows peakiness at 45-50 hz and a fairly steep drop off in response both above and below that region. Further, it's distortion measurements are not attractive. It's clearly a budget sub and not a high-performance bass instrument. I suspect it might do better on the bottom end when measured in-room, but that is going to be a hit-or-miss sort of theing depending on room gain, placement, eq, etc.

Unfortunately we do not have the same kind of standardized measurents of the Klipsch sub to compare to, but I'd be surprised if it didn't clearly surpass the PL200 if just about every way.

As far as crossover choices go, it is possible that a crossover of 50 hz or so might work better for a sub like the PL200 because of it's poor upper bass response. With better subs, this is typically not the case.
post #40 of 80
audiophile2k,

I'm not dogging your system, or your sub choice. My buddy has three bics, and I've watched several movies over at his house. I've definitely heard and owned higher end subs, but the bics are still quite enjoyable. They play loud and clean in his room (just not deep). The PL200 sub has made many people happy around here. Enjoy them.

I am curious about what equipment you are using to measure your subs to be flat down to 25hz in your room? Do you mind posting a FR graph from your room? Even if it's a spl meter charted out against test tones in an XLS -- that's cool. I just haven't seen any in room charts of the PL200. If you are just using your ear and believe you are flat to 25hz based on what you hear -- it is an inaccurate guess at best.

You don't have to be an audio expert to post an opinion. I'm no audio expert myself. I appreciate your perspective, just would like to see some info on your testing methods and some data to back up what you've experienced.
post #41 of 80
I used test tones, sweeps, and spl to determine flat vs where the roll off takes takes place. I know mics are not all accurate in the lower region, but that is something that affects almost everyone trying to measure. I have not done any software measurements (other than the receiver). I'm not really trying to argue for the PL-200 over the 12D. Only someone like Capricorn Kid who has both in the same room can say for sure which is better in side by side comparison. According to him, they are VERY similar. I'm just saying the graphs Josh did do not represent what owners and others who have measured the PL-200 have experienced. I don't know if he had a defective unit, there was a flaw in the measurements, or what...I just know those charts do not represent what I and others have experienced.
My comments about the low crossover pertain to any speaker like the 12D, PL-200 and many others that have a fairly well controlled low end, but lose that control after 40 - 60hz. This is where many of the unpleasant sounds in budget subs come from, the upper frequencies. If the upper frequencies of your sub are extremely inaccurate, boomy, and drown out what your sub is doing well, in my mind it just makes common sense to eliminate those frequencies unless it will create a hole between the subs and the mains.
post #42 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiophile2k View Post

I used test tones, sweeps, and spl to determine flat vs where the roll off takes takes place. I know mics are not all accurate in the lower region, but that is something that affects almost everyone trying to measure. I have not done any software measurements (other than the receiver). I'm not really trying to argue for the PL-200 over the 12D. Only someone like Capricorn Kid who has both in the same room can say for sure which is better in side by side comparison. According to him, they are VERY similar. I'm just saying the graphs Josh did do not represent what owners and others who have measured the PL-200 have experienced. I don't know if he had a defective unit, there was a flaw in the measurements, or what...I just know those charts do not represent what I and others have experienced.


You used test tones, sweeps, and spl to determine flat? With what tool?
As to Josh having a defective unit? Perhaps. I had a defective Pioneer SW-8 for my first review of that sub -- anything's possible, and I've asked capricorn kid to measure both of them and post screenprints of the measurements in one of the similar threads here recently. He has an SMS-1 and can post smoothed screenprints of the response from the mic position between the two subs. I'm as curious as the next guy to see the results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiophile2k View Post

My comments about the low crossover pertain to any speaker like the 12D, PL-200 and many others that have a fairly well controlled low end, but lose that control after 40 - 60hz. This is where many of the unpleasant sounds in budget subs come from, the upper frequencies. If the upper frequencies of your sub are extremely inaccurate, boomy, and drown out what your sub is doing well, in my mind it just makes common sense to eliminate those frequencies unless it will create a hole between the subs and the mains.

We'll both just have to agree to disagree here.
post #43 of 80
Here is a reason we have to compare apples to apples. After going back to look more closely at Josh's data I compared the PL-200 to the other subs he's measured. What everyone is calling a steep roll off for the Pl-200 is actually less than many of the higher priced subs he has measured. From its peak to its 25hz, the PL-200 is down 14db. Oh my god! that is terrible! right? Well look how other speakers measure from peak to 25hz in his test. Epik Empire -19db, Ed A7s-450 -15db, SVS SB12-NSD -12db....etc. You get the idea. You can't take an apples to oranges measurement and then try to apply it to compare two subs. He has measured many highly regarded subs with vicious peaks before. So even though the chart looks bad for the PL-200, when you dig into the raw data it shows what a lot of his measurements show. By the way, his numbers also show clean output of 96.2db @ 25hz, and 82.1 @ 16hz on the PL-200 (again, this is outdoors), so I don't know where you draw the conclusion it will not play low. This just goes to show if you actually dig into the numbers and make apples to apples comparisons instead of just looking a chart that shows a terrible peak, you will actually gain some useful data. All this info can be found in the audioholics subwoofer pdf which shows the raw data of all the subs they have measured. The only Klipsch in that chart is the SW-311. I have no idea how that compares to the 12D, all I know is Klipsch considers the 311 a higher end speaker than the 12D with a price around $1500... but the charts show the 311 is flatter in the upper frequencies but cannot play as low or as loud as the PL-200.
post #44 of 80
Take a look at the 20hz column when sort order is engaged.
http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=systems&col=3&type=0&sort=desc&mfr=-1

As to comparison of other subs - - You'll also note in Josh's Epik Empire review thread that everyone commented that the Epik Empire didn't really react in a preferable manner down low either. It has anun-naturally high roll-off which is designed in to help prevent the drivers from over excursion. This lack of lowest end was also subjectively noticed in the 2011 subwoofer shootout linked in my sig when subjectively compared to higher quality subs. (though the sound quality of the Epik and the lack of being able to establish any clear audible distortion limits helped its score in our meet). As to the Klipsch 311 sub, I know nothing about it and have never heard it, but it does look vastly overpriced to me at MSRP of $1500 and the measurement specs it's shown. Even if the Klipsch RW-12D isn't noticeably above the PL200 at the 25hz you are comparing with - the fact of the matter is that the Klipsch doesn't seem to have an such an undesirable midbass peak. The Epik shows that midbass peak in my room while the Klipsch did not.


15 or 20hz-30hz is very important for fun movie playback
Here's an illustration I made for another discussion regarding typical PA, Pro Audio subs that roll off at 30hz as to why they are missing the boat...Watch this on your system at home. Listen to the room start to activate at 19hz in the clip. Even if your subs won't create the 19hz test sound - you can hear the room activating. That effect is felt on your body and person too, lungs, clothes, hair ect. That LFE effect is very strong down to about 15,16, 18hz or so (some would say lower to 3hz, 7hz, 10, hz, 12hz -- whatever) (- but that hasn't been my experience in the three subwoofer meets I've been to)).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YpXIFfScAU


84dB at 20hz isn't doing what a subwoofer should be doing for movie content. Reference LFE calls for 115dB peaks (and the flatter that 115dB peak is across the frequency spectrum the better) -- but you won't miss it until after you've experienced otherwise, because the typical modern movie theater isn't doing much below 30hz either and many people have no real life comparison to connect to understand what they are missing.
Edited by Archaea - 7/27/12 at 12:56pm
post #45 of 80
I don't disagree with any of that. But that is all slightly off topic. All I was saying that in a typical room, I don't think there will be much difference between the measured response and the subjective listening test between the Pl-200 and the RW-12D. That is where this all started and we won't know an answer for sure until we hear back from Capricorn Kid since he seems to be the only one in a position to actually test both in the same environment. He has already stated that subjectively they sound very similar. All we are lacking are the measurements to see if one measures better than the other. I don't think any sub $300 sub is going to give you reference level at 20hz and below unless you just get really lucky with room gain. And to be honest, a lot of people are not looking for that. I don't listen that loud, and most people don't even when their systems would allow it (for practical reasons). I was surprised the PL-200s reach as low as they do in my space, so I would assume in a smaller sealed room they would do even better down low. I don't think any sub is going to ever get really low and really loud in my house because of its open design...just too much space to pressurize fully (unless I design one of those crazy crawl space horns!) I have felt what you are talking about, but only in smaller rooms with much more expensive subs than $300. While getting an occasional gut message is fun, I don't need it constantly to enjoy my music or movie experience. Even at the lower levels at which I listen my subs do well at "shaking the house", although without that feeling of complete pressurization you are talking about. I hope HT isn't going the way of the car stereo where loud and low are the only goals...no matter how bad it sounds. I like efficient speakers (currently 95db/watt/meter in my HT) but that is mainly so I don't ever have to worry about dynamics and amp power, not so I can make my eardrums bleed. I look forward to hearing what Capricorn Kid has to say, and until then I think we are just having this discussion without any real conclusions on how the two subs compare. As I stated before, I don't think you can go wrong either way if you can get both at $300, and if he can show one is better than the other then I would happily recommend it over the other for that price.

Without a direct response from Capricorn Kid, here are some of his quotes from page 41 of this thread. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1137113/bic-acoustech-h200-subwoofer-aka-pl-200/1200

"I would have got two more PL-200s but I have Klipsch speakers and wanted to try the subs. They sound great in my room but after runningnthem for awhile, I really like the PL-200 a little better than my Klipsch subs. They tend to have a deeper more tacticle sound in my room than the RW-12Ds."

"In my room they have a big peak from 32hz to about 50hz. The SMS-1 really comes in handy to reduce this range and smoothen things out. I think it is a combination of my room and the subs because even my Klipsch subs have the same peak within the same range."
Edited by Audiophile2k - 7/27/12 at 2:41pm
post #46 of 80
Audiophile2k,

Yes, you are correct. our continuation of this conversation is more conjecture than clarity without additional test data.

I think some of the points you counterpointed in your previous post I never made in the first place. I don't think you have to have reference volumes to enjoy a subwoofer. I don't think anyone in this thread is pursuing car audio levels of performance (as that would be a downgrade for many of us in extension, SPL, and sound quality). And lest there be any confusion - having a subwoofer that digs to the deepest frequencies with authority does not sacrifice sound quality in any way (introduce boominess or any other negative) --- proven in every subwoofer meet so far held that I've attended or read information in.

As I advised in the other thread - he should measure the subs in the same exact position with the mic in the same position, also if he 'feels' one pair of subwoofers is deeper than the other, but hasn't measured them then or placed them in the same place and a/b'ed them than the statement means little more than a certain other forum member around these parts who claims you'd have a hard time fighting a tighter subwoofer than the subwoofer he currently owns because he has compared it to an SVS PB13 and feels his current subwoofer is 'tighter' than the SVS with no meaningful specifics given.

Currently Capricorn Kid as the Klipsch in the front of his room and the PL-200 behind his seating position. Of course that can 100% change perception of a sub --- and long term audio memory for any of us is flat out terrible. So the measurements need to be taken to verify under identical conditions. I don't like the fact the SMS-1 only displays such a smoothed response which will somewhat taint the actual reality of the sub's frequency response, but it'll be interesting none the less if he chooses to post. Who knows - I may be very surprised and perhaps I'm not giving the PL200 enough credit.

Finally, I'm still awaiting you to provide information on the specific measuring tools you used to determine you are flat to 25hz in your room with your pl200 pair. I'm not trying to upset you, or drive you out of participation in this thread or enhance my online ego. This is simply a question and my fourth time asking in this thread. If you do not have an answer, then I must assume you are only using your ears and judging on the published manufactorer specs, or perhaps on some frequency response graph you've seen in another room --- which means nothing relevant at all to this dicussion of the two subwoofers. Even if you are only using an SPL meter that's fine. What model are you using? There are adjustment tables to utilize as a sticky in this subforum to ensure the SPL meters relay somewhat accurate information based on model. Can you show me your frequency response points for the various test tones you used? If you are using REW, or Omnimic, or one of the other tools please post a graph. I'd like to see some actual published numbers on the PL200 in room.
Edited by Archaea - 7/27/12 at 4:00pm
post #47 of 80
I appreciate your work with the shootouts and I find that data very useful. I never said I thought you were chasing the SPL crown, or compared your subs to car stereos. It was a blanket statement about a trend I've seen on these forums with a lot of people "turning it all the way up" and being more concerned out "how loud will it go?" over "how good does it sound?" I think you knew this, and to twist it seems a bit disingenuous. I'm down in Joplin and would love to see and hear all those great subs together at some point because there is a severe lack of high end audio sources down here where we can actually hear some of these. I lived in New Orleans until Katrina, and even there we didn't have a huge audiophile community, but at least there were a few places where we could audition something other than what Best Buy carries.
My issue with some of your post is that you tend to make broad statements based on completely different data sets that you've extrapolated to some conclusion. I'm not the only one who says this, looking back at some of your post you've been called out before for doing the same thing in other threads. You simply can't compare two totally different test environments, no matter how much you think your room doesn't add gain. I answered your question about how I came to my conclusions and got my data after the first time you asked. But unless I want to go through the trouble to post a bunch of REW charts then I guess my methods are invalid. But if I did, I know it wouldn't be good enough if it didn't show what you want/expect it to show. You seem to have it in your mind that the PL-200 is the same thing as the F12 you've heard. Do you think all HSU and SVS subs are the same, too? All of this is pointless anyway, because someone who actually has the two speakers in the same environment has "spoken" , although not yet in direct answer to us. Its funny you want to invalidate his experience because of what speakers are in the front and back of the room, but yet you want us to validate your data taken in your room and equate them with ground plane measurements outside!
You said
"Currently Capricorn Kid as the Klipsch in the front of his room and the PL-200 behind his seating position. Of course that can 100% change perception of a sub --- and long term audio memory for any of us is flat out terrible. So the measurements need to be taken to verify under identical conditions."

Please apply this methodology to your own opinions, rather than trying to invalidate the opinions of people who have real experience with the sub in question.
The same room might get you two different kinds of apples, but any in room data compared to outdoor ground plane data taken with different instruments, completely different equipment, etc is not even close. Your data is great and useful for the subs that have been in your room and set up correctly, but NONE of that applies to what someone else has measured in a completely different way. As I've already pointed out, some of the speakers that fared very well in your blind test were shown to have worse peaks that the PL200 in Josh's test. And before you twist that, I'm not saying it can compete with those better subs! Just that looking at Josh's graphs can lead you to some incorrect conclusions.
And I don't even want to have an argument about "my" subs. All of this back and forth is just because I said that the RW-12D and the PL200 were pretty close in terms of quality, so you couldn't go wrong either way. I was not trying to invalidate anyone's opinion. You though, seem to have a habit of using wonky and irrelevant data to try to shout down other people's opinions. And the more you are challenged the more circular your argument becomes. So, to keep this on topic, I'll go back to where we started and won't engage in any more discussion on the topic of the PL200s vs the RW-12Ds unless Capricorn Kid wants to finally weigh in. (I'll be glad to argue about something else, though wink.gif )In my opinion, based on hands on knowledge of the PL200s and all the data I've seen, the RW-12D and the PL200 are going to be very similar subs. If possible I would recommend listening to both. Short of that, I would recommend whichever you can get the cheapest when you are ready to buy. The 12D when at $300 is a bigger bargain compared to its retail price, so if that sort of thing matters to you, you might take that into consideration also.
post #48 of 80
You still haven't clearly stated how you measured your subs flat to 25hz. You've successfully danced around my question on multiple occassions - saying you listened to sweeps, and test tones, without making mention of any servicable tools to capture frequency response. The note that you can hear test tones down to 18hz on the PL200 doesn't mean much of anything. At this point I'll take this exchange to mean you did not measure your subs in your room. Fine. That's no problem. Not many people do, but then again if you haven't you have no idea if you are flat to 25hz or not. If you do have REW posts you could post them and I truely would fully believe they were respective of what you got in your room. There would be no question on that. As to how they would compare to the Klipsch RW-12D that would still be unknown because of the fact you don't have those to measure, and I don't have the PL200 to measure. Capricorn kid is probably the sole person on this forum that can answer that question with measurements in room right now.

I truly mean you no animosity.

I'm not claiming my data and graphs in room are identical to Josh's outside data,or any where NEAR as exahustive of testing performed --- but I am showing proof on the two identical/very similar subs that we have both measured that the graphs are more alike than one might think two graphs should be between an outside measured graph and a inside measured graph with little to no room gain showing at 20hz. I'm not just making this up out of the air - I posted two graphs to prove such. And I didn't try to make them match by moving the subs all over the room - I posted the subwoofers FR graphs from May 2011 (they were taken by avsforum member counsil) which is before Josh posted his FR graphs, and we know that Josh didn't make his match mine. As to people pointing this out to me before -- if you are talking about the other thread - it was forum member nuance. We had basically the same discussion that you and I are currently holding. I agree -- one would think - inside graphs shouldn't match outside graphs -- but what do you do about the fact that they seem to match more than mismatch, and that there is certaintly no noticable room gain on these subs in my room? Post 35 and 37 ---

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1394073/rw-12d-299-again/20_20#post_21655206
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1394073/rw-12d-299-again/20_20#post_21655303



You are correct in that I do like listening to my subwoofers loud and I do like quality subwoofers.



You live in Joplin Missouri?

That's a hop skip and a jump away.

Do you ever come to KC? If so please PM me.

If you'd like to hear the following four sets of speakers - you should come up to KC next friday. Forum member carp is hosting a g2g with the following:


ED Cinema 12
JTR Triple Eight
Bill Fitzmaurice DR250
Chase Home Theater SHO10

Also a pair of Seaton Submersive HPs as well as a JTR Orbit Shifter will be in the demo lineup.

Here's the thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1407184/carps-basement-hide-out/80_20#post_22256755


The next time you come to KC I'd be happy to measure one of your PL200 subs in my room. It would take about 15 minutes. If we wanted to make a little contest and you tell me in advance I could most likely borrow one of my brother's RW-12D subwoofers again (he also lives in KC) and we could have a little BIC vs. Klipsch face off. I've got no dog in the fight as I don't own either sub, and I like and enjoy both the BIC and Klipsch products. If the BIC wins I'll buy you a beer. If the Klipsch wins you buy me a beer. If the PL200 is clearly the better sub, or even mostly comparable I will certaintly come back here and acknowledge such.

If you don't want to, or rarely come to KC and you'd just be curious to see how your PL200 measures against other subs I've had in my room you could ship it to me. I'll measure it and pay for return shipping through FedEx ground back to you. If that's something you are interested in, then PM me and I'll provide you my address.
Edited by Archaea - 7/27/12 at 6:29pm
post #49 of 80
I'm not going to comment on any of the stuff relating to what we've already ran into the ground, but I will make it more clear my test method. I thought it was clear when I first answered, but maybe it wasn't. I used sweeps and test tones, measured by a cheapo radio shack spl meter. I hope that puts that to rest for you. Maybe not the best method, but it pretty much confirms what my ears hear and what everyone who owns them confirms. You'll get "flat" to the low-mid 20s, then it just depends on room and placement for exact results. I don't remember exactly where it was at 18hz, but I'm thinking it was around 10db down.

I know I can come off like a *****, but trust me, its all done with a smile on my face. I enjoy hashing out the difference of opinions, even when it frustrates me. I would continue, but we've already gone past the point where we are repeating the same stuff, so no use to go farther.

I rarely get to KC, although I might try to arrange a special trip at some point. I run my own computer engineering business, so it makes it hard to get away sometimes. I would love to see a budget shootout! If we can get the F12, 12D, and 200 and whatever else people might suggest in the $200 - $400 range it would be great. I would really like to hear the Submersives since they seem to the consensus pick for the best sub for under $2000. Although it might turn out to be an expensive trip if I like them a little too much. If I sold off all my 2 channel stuff and just consolidated everything to the HT I would probably come out way ahead. Do many of you guys keep separate stuff for music, or do you just run everything through your HT system?
post #50 of 80
Is the 12d normally only 340$ on newegg? Just curious cause it is right now
post #51 of 80
The cheapest it has been on sale is $299. $340 is still a good price for that sub.
post #52 of 80
Yea, I got it for the 299$ about a week ago. I was just surprised to see it for only $340 without any promotion code, thanks.
post #53 of 80
capricorn kid posted the measurement comparison between the Klipsch RW-12D pair and the BIC PL-200 pair
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1364182/list-of-budget-subwoofers-300-and-less/280_20#post_22267268
post #54 of 80
Thanks for the link and the update! It shows we were both right to an extent. The 12D is the better overall choice for more people at $300 shipped and has a flatter overall response. The PL-200 goes a little lower and a little louder with more ease. The in room FR response he is getting is very similar to mine, although I stay flatter a little longer because one of my subs is corner loaded (his are in the combined graph of all 4 together, but not the individual measurements). It also showed the 50hz peak is a real thing in the PL-200, although if that is smoothed out through placement or EQ the two subs share a very similar graph until you get to the very low region, where the PL-200 is a little smoother compared to the 12Ds steep drop after 25hz. Overall though, I agree if I could get either for $300 shipped, I would choose the 12D. Since the PL-200 has an everyday price of $279 shipped, I think that is where I would draw the line, though. I don't think the benefits of the 12D give it much more than a $25 - $50 (depending on exact situation for the buyer) advantage. I would say the most I would recommend paying for the 12D is about $325, any higher than that and the PL-200 would be the choice. Just my opinion now that we have an exact comparison between the two. Thanks for the discussion! Its been a fun debate.
post #55 of 80
That is not accurate, the Klipsch may drop off with a steeper rolloff but the spl is higher. I would not expect either to do much in a movie setting below 20hz because if you turn it up and flatten the response it will all be distortion.
post #56 of 80
to mktheater's point - the graphs that capricorn kid provided were not at max SPL. What makes you think the PL200's get louder? They might, I don't know - but you certainty can't tell that from the graph and I don't know what other metric you are using. What you can tell from the graphs that capricorn published is that the Klipsch RW-12D is clearly a flatter more reference sound oriented subwoofer both down low and up top.

1) why do you think the PL200 goes a little lower? It doesn't.

2) The PL-200's response is not a little smoother down low. Thats incorrect, it rolls off from 50hz on down. It is a ported sub which posses a frequency response rolloff that looks more like a sealed sub, but starting at a disappointing 50hz. You cannot boost below port tune, which means you cannot get more umpf down low on the PL200 (nor could you on the RW-12D -- but the RW-12D is flatter down low to a easily distinguished port tune. Your room is apparently complimentary to the sub, but the sub gives up a significant edge to the RW-12D.

I'm curious as to the PL200's port tune frequency, but with the SMS-1 graphs it is not obvious.
post #57 of 80
Thread Starter 
It's easy to determine the PL200 tuning point from the Data-base graphs. The ground-plane frequency response curve shows a peak at 45hz. The distortion graph shows a corresponding low spot at about the same frequency. That would indicate low excursion at that frequency combined with peak output. That's your tuning point.



post #58 of 80
Thanks mojo, that makes sense.
post #59 of 80
Jesus, you guys would argue with a brick wall. MK, your comments make little sense if you look at Capricorn Kids graphs. To Archea 1) You can't be serious. Just look at the graphs between the two...there is no way you can say the 12D goes lower. Look carefully at the PL-200 graph. Both subs have a slight peak around 28hz. But between 28hz to 22hz the 200 is down about 4db, the 12D is down about twice that...and continues to drop steeply compared to the smooth 15hz to 22hz low end of the 200. So everything I said is correct. The problem area on the 200 is that from 55hz to 80hz it is about 5db louder than it should be compared to the +/-2 or 3db of its fairly flat low end (between 22hz - 55hz). Capricorn Kid and others have commented that when pushed the 12D will distort and have port noise while the 200 is still playing comfortably. So I stand by my statement the 200 will play a little louder and lower, but the 12d has a flatter overall FR. But really that is splitting hairs. But if your goal is just to refute everything everyone has to say rather than giving people good advice based on the data at hand, go right ahead and tell me how wrong I am and the graphs everyone can now look at are also wrong. The guy who has both speakers is wrong. Everyone is wrong but you. There is just not much separating the two subs except the things I mentioned unless you want to make it about your ego and you just can't admit you were not correct in all your assumptions.
post #60 of 80
Quote:
Capricorn Kid and others have commented that when pushed the 12D will distort and have port noise while the 200 is still playing comfortably.

This is not true according to what I read. He said that the RW-12D made port noise at really low frequencies and the PL-200 simply quit trying to produce the sounds. So it wasn't playing comfortably, it just wasn't playing at all because of the HPF. Might be considered a plus that it stops trying when the material gets too low, but it doesn't mean it was playing lower and louder than the RW-12D.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Decent Sub, Very Low Price...