or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › RW-12d, $299 Again
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RW-12d, $299 Again

post #1 of 61
Thread Starter 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16882780078
post #2 of 61
Quote:

Thanks for posting
post #3 of 61
All of you "$300 budget" sub buyers should be all over this sub when it comes up for this price. As Archaea demonstrated during testing in his house, real in-room response down to 20hz is possible with this sub, making it a rare bargain at this price.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1390563
post #4 of 61
It shows $499
post #5 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mupi View Post

It shows $499

Right above the price:

"$200 off w/ promo code EMCNHJF72, ends 2/15"
post #6 of 61
Yea, that's a pretty good deal. I was trying to hold out for a sale on an outlaw LFM-1 EX. Should I hold out or jump on this one, opinions?
post #7 of 61
I recently got the HSU STF-2, any opinions on how this compares or would match up were I to use the two together? I'd heard the HSU is more musical, but I really am not sure at this point...
post #8 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02Lightning View Post

Yea, that's a pretty good deal. I was trying to hold out for a sale on an outlaw LFM-1 EX. Should I hold out or jump on this one, opinions?

At that price it's a tough question, but there is little doubt that the Outlaw is a better sub.
post #9 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by snatch22 View Post

I recently got the HSU STF-2, any opinions on how this compares or would match up were I to use the two together? I'd heard the HSU is more musical, but I really am not sure at this point...

IMO the two can be made to work fairly well together because their tuning should be not too far apart.
post #10 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

At that price it's a tough question, but there is little doubt that the Outlaw is a better sub.

I don't want to be sorry later.
post #11 of 61
I am literally hovering over the 'check-out' button but all these complaints about the product arriving damaged is really freaking me out....
post #12 of 61
Not a fan of this sub even at the discount. I have heard it and it creaks and groans when pushed hard. I have also heard it chuff during demanding scenes.
post #13 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewTT View Post

Not a fan of this sub even at the discount. I have heard it and it creaks and groans when pushed hard. I have also heard it chuff during demanding scenes.

It also will have considerably higher limits than anything close to it's price (it's discounted price, of course). That's another way to look at it.
post #14 of 61
It did get loud, that for sure. It's just those other factors bugged me. Others may not care...
post #15 of 61
Having higher limits means it will play louder than its competition even before it starts making those bad noises.
post #16 of 61
Do u suggest this sub or go for the pa 150
post #17 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomez81 View Post

Do u suggest this sub or go for the pa 150

I've heard neither although I will get to hear the Klipsch at a friend's place this weekend.

Based on the tests of the PA-150 by Josh Ricci resulting in the chart below, I would tend to go with the Klipsch. Although the output is strong from the PA-150, I really don't like the look of the response curve.
LL
post #18 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02Lightning View Post

Yea, that's a pretty good deal. I was trying to hold out for a sale on an outlaw LFM-1 EX. Should I hold out or jump on this one, opinions?

Hold out! You could also look at the Epik. I think that is $499.
post #19 of 61
How does the lower end sound in this. Gets low per specs, but wondering about quality
post #20 of 61
Newegg - RW-12d SOLD OUT
post #21 of 61
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC60 View Post

Newegg - RW-12d SOLD OUT

$200-off promo code ended today (2/15/2012), anyway.
post #22 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

I've heard neither although I will get to hear the Klipsch at a friend's place this weekend.

Based on the tests of the PA-150 by Josh Ricci resulting in the chart below, I would tend to go with the Klipsch. Although the output is strong from the PA-150, I really don't like the look of the response curve.

I'd be willing to bet the Klipsch's curve is far worse. Here are Josh Ricci's comments on the PA-150:

"The PA-150 offers solid bang for the buck. At only $359 you get a 70lb subwoofer with a 15" driver and a 250w amplifier in an MDF constructed vented enclosure –-not a bad deal in our opinion. It also looks quite good with the gloss black top and silver driver cone and the build quality is pretty good especially considering the cost. There is a single 4" flared vent on the back of the enclosure tuned to about 25hz which should be low enough for light to medium duty home theater applications. The driver is of modest construction but is commensurate with what you should expect from this price range. The motor is moderate size and the voice coil appears to be a 2" diameter. The driver seems to be quite efficient and offers decent excursion or at least enough to keep pace with a 250w amplifier."

I'd go with the PA-150 over the Klipsch any day of the week.
post #23 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

I'd be willing to bet the Klipsch's curve is far worse. Here are Josh Ricci's comments on the PA-150:

"The PA-150 offers solid bang for the buck. At only $359 you get a 70lb subwoofer with a 15" driver and a 250w amplifier in an MDF constructed vented enclosure --not a bad deal in our opinion. It also looks quite good with the gloss black top and silver driver cone and the build quality is pretty good especially considering the cost. There is a single 4" flared vent on the back of the enclosure tuned to about 25hz which should be low enough for light to medium duty home theater applications. The driver is of modest construction but is commensurate with what you should expect from this price range. The motor is moderate size and the voice coil appears to be a 2" diameter. The driver seems to be quite efficient and offers decent excursion or at least enough to keep pace with a 250w amplifier."

I'd go with the PA-150 over the Klipsch any day of the week.

That would be your choice and that's fine, but I'd disagree. if you are going to quote Josh, you migh want to note that he also said:

"...the response is rolled off quite a bit below 30Hz.
Looking at the burst output, this unit offers impressive output capabilities at 40Hz and higher. Useful output in room would probably be about 25Hz but the unit offers most of its capabilities at 30Hz and above. This is a great choice for loud music playback if you have a large space and a limited budget but this subwoofer could not provide realistic home theater bass reproduction in a 4000 cubic foot room."

Looking at that response chart, you can see that the response at 20hz is a good 20db lower than the response up about 80hz. This is not a sub that can be eq'd to a decent response as Archaea did with the Klipsch. A good HT sub this is not. Playing loud is about all it is good for and that would really only be only pretty much above 50hz. Not my cup of tea. It has a response like a mid-bass module.
post #24 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

Looking at that response chart, you can see that the response at 20hz is a good 20db lower than the response up about 80hz. This is not a sub that can be eq'd to a decent response as Archaea did with the Klipsch.

mojomike is right.

---with one exception - I didn't EQ the Klipsch for the graphs I took.

I applied no external EQ (no Audyssey, no EQ intervention of any kind) to the Klipsch RW-12D subs for my testing, and the graphs were pretty flat to about 22 or 23hz with the built in depth EQ setting on the Klipsch. My room doesn't give any boost at all according to every sub we've ever had in there, so you can figure that Klipsch did what it did on it's own without any room gain.

From the graphs of the two - the Klipsch sub looks significantly better. Also the 2007 sound and vision subwoofer review put this sub in the same ballpark as $700 internet direct subs like the HSU VTF3, SVS PB12, Outlaw LFM-1EX, and Velodyne. It didn't win, but it wasn't last place either -- meaning it is more equitable to a typical $500+ sub value.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/art...ice-subwoofers

Mojomike linked my test thread in the 3rd post. Check out the flatness of the green line which is the depth setting. If you can beat that for $300 outside of DIY --- I don't know how.

from the Klipsch RW-12D ominimic frequency response thread --

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

I currently am borrowing a pair of Klipsch RW-12D subs from my brother as we used the pair for a room reference during the 2012 KC Blind Subwoofer Meet linked in my signature. I figure as long as I have them available I'll grab some frequency response graphs to show just what the native EQ DSP settings do on these subs. I turned off all external EQ in my Onkyo TX-NR 1007 receiver (no Audyssey, no dynamic eq, mains crossover set to 100hz, sub LFE set to 120hz) and just measured the pair of Klipsch RW-12D sub's frequency response in my 3500 cubic foot room using my Omnimic and their three native EQ settings. Distance calibrations in the receiver were accurately set. The following frequency response graphs are taken with no smoothing but averaged over 10 captures each from my main listening position. The sub placement for these measurements is one on each side of my projector screen facing outward toward the outside room walls. (this configuration is the best/flattest position I've found in my room) Here are how the subs measured per Klipsch DSP EQ setting.
.
.
.
...overlays again using the more common 5dB spacing on y axis

compare that to this PA-150 graph measurement Ricci took.

post #25 of 61
Are the PA-150 graphs in-room or CEA-2010? You cannot compare an in-room response to a ground plane measurement taken with CEA-2010 standards. If you guys prefer the Klipsch (seems like you're bias because your brother owns it), that's fine. You're entitled to your opinions. Also, we all know magazine reviews are nothing but fluff, and are mostly advertising dollars driven, so...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

That would be your choice and that's fine, but I'd disagree. if you are going to quote Josh, you migh want to note that he also said:

"...the response is rolled off quite a bit below 30Hz.
Looking at the burst output, this unit offers impressive output capabilities at 40Hz and higher. Useful output in room would probably be about 25Hz but the unit offers most of its capabilities at 30Hz and above. This is a great choice for loud music playback if you have a large space and a limited budget but this subwoofer could not provide realistic home theater bass reproduction in a 4000 cubic foot room."

Looking at that response chart, you can see that the response at 20hz is a good 20db lower than the response up about 80hz. This is not a sub that can be eq'd to a decent response as Archaea did with the Klipsch. A good HT sub this is not. Playing loud is about all it is good for and that would really only be only pretty much above 50hz. Not my cup of tea. It has a response like a mid-bass module.

I hadn't seen that quote from Josh; I used the one from the data-bass site. Where is that one from? Edit: nevermind I just found it. Doh- My bad.

Again, it sounds like you're comparing an in-room graph to a CEA-2010 standard graph; it's apples to oranges. You have no idea what the PA-150 will do in Archaea's room, even though he says he doesn't think his room offers any room gain (which I find unlikely, but it's possible).

Unless those measurements were taken from the same room, they are moot. We'll agree to disagree, but with no hard feelings of course. The Klipsch has a reputation for poor sound quality, but at this price range it's not uncommon. To each their own.

P.S. I'd never recommend the PA-150 sub for a large room. That's just common sense.
post #26 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Are the PA-150 graphs in-room or CEA-2010? You cannot compare an in-room response to a ground plane measurement taken with CEA-2010 standards. If you guys prefer the Klipsch (seems like you're bias because your brother owns it), that's fine. You're entitled to your opinions. Also, we all know magazine reviews are nothing but fluff, and are mostly advertising dollars driven, so...



I hadn't seen that quote from Josh; I used the one from the data-bass site. Where is that one from?

Again, it sounds like you're comparing an in-room graph to a CEA-2010 standard graph; it's apples to oranges. You have no idea what the PA-150 will do in Archaea's room, even though he says he doesn't think his room offers any room gain (which I find unlikely, but it's possible).

Unless those measurements were taken from the same room, they are moot. We'll agree to disagree, but with no hard feelings of course. The Klipsch has a reputation for poor sound quality, but at this price range it's not uncommon. To each their own.

Of course there's no hard feelings. I just like to discuss this stuff for fun.

Here's the link to the rest of Josh's review:
http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=48&mset=46

On the Data-bass site, there are a few different buttons to click that bring up much more in-depth info beyond just the first page. Try this on several of the tests. There is an enormous wealth of data there beyond just the surface.
post #27 of 61
I'm at work right now and don't have the time to compare what Ricci has measured to what I've measured, but I have multiple sub frequency response graphs taken in my room from the two subwoofer meets linked in my signature. The 2011 meet had no EQ applied and is probably most applicable. If somebody has time, compare some of the subs we've had in my room for the meets with what Josh has measured and see how much room gain I'm getting? From what I've seen it's not much of anything. The placement of the subs in the middle front of my room facing forward created a big ~50hz null --- keep that in mind as that was a room artifact which disappears when turning the sub sideways and placing it at 1/3 or 2/3 length distance of front wall.

I'm not a big Klipsch advocate, or any budget sub for that matter. I mention that the Klipsch sub sounds plastik'y and groans when pushed, if you read the comments in my Klipsch omnimic thread you'll see that I just say it's a great value at that pricepoint, but I still recommend higher quality subs without reservation to those who can afford them. My brother's ownership doesn't give me bias - I've heard and demoed about 30 subs in the last 9 months after attending 3 subwoofer meets. If the Klipsch stunk it up - I'd say they did, but they actually did better than I thought they would. From the recent 2012 blind meet I heard a couple people say under their breath that they liked the non-blinded, non-judged, for room reference only --- Klipsch RW-12D audition better than one of the actual blind entries in our testing. The Klipsch is not some miracle at any pricepoint, but in the $300 to $350 range I know of no better offering.
post #28 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

Of course there's no hard feelings. I just like to discuss this stuff for fun.

Here's the link to the rest of Josh's review:
http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=48&mset=46

On the Data-bass site, there are a few different buttons to click that bring up much more in-depth info beyond just the first page. Try this on several of the tests. There is an enormous wealth of data there beyond just the surface.

I'm retarded...I found them. Here's my take, and I fully admit I could be wrong...

Here is the maximum output of the PA-150 measured by Ricci:



And here is what Sound And Vision says about max output of the Klipsch:

How Low Does It Go?
o Bass limit (Flat setting): 20 Hz at 86 dB SPL (maximum 10% distortion)

The distortion is lower with the Klipsch, though they likely didn't follow the CEA-2010 standard, and those might actually be rated specs and not measurements at all, so again it's not really apples to apples. If it still can output 86dB before reaching above 10% distortion when measured according to the CEA standards, then I'll recant my statement and say that its a better buy.

Anyway, while the response looks more linear in Archaea's room with the Klipsch, it's not apples to apples. I'm not claiming the PA-150 is a great sub, but I'm saying that with EQ it has the potential to be better than the Klipsch. So I do disagree that this cannot be EQ'd in-room to be linear. Again, though, without having them both measured under the same conditions I suppose we'll never know.

This is all kind of moot anyway, because the Klipsch costs $300 and the PA costs around $400.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

The Klipsch is not some miracle at any pricepoint, but in the $300 to $350 range I know of no better offering.

I agree.

I too like to discuss this stuff for fun, and I enjoy learning, even when I'm proven wrong. I'm sorry if this is off-topic for this thread.
post #29 of 61
Well, didn't get the klipsch before selling out. Ordered the pa-120 instead.

Still considering the psw505........ But seems dynamic watts much lower than 120.

Appreciate you guys breaking things down.
post #30 of 61
^ Just to be clear we were comparing the Klipsch and the PA-150. I am sure you know that, but just in case I thought I'd reiterate.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › RW-12d, $299 Again