SVS vs. Outlaw ? - Page 2

Yeah. I realized recently that I'm much less interested in buying subwoofers based on how it performs at the very bleeding edge (short term bursts) where I do not want to have to run it. If I'm going to have to run a sub harder than what it can do in maximum long term output and where it starts to compress, I need to be looking at a different sub. It's like buying a receiver. Focusing too much on max burst is like only looking at a receiver at where it starts to clip. I don't buy a receiver to run like that either. So data that indicates performance below that seems much more useful.

You're missing my point.

If the user's room is such that the SVS is loud enough to hit satisfying bass levels (and Audioholics considers the sub to be suitable for up to a large room), then focussing on maximum short term burst output for $ should not be the *MAIN* criteria to choose one sub over another.

Good baseline accuracy and distortion are more important to me.

As cel4145 pointed out, if I am going to be hitting the limiter at many frequencies, then the sub wasn't enough in the first place.

I would agree that between two subs that have all the output you would ever want, one should decide on the sub that performs better in other respects, at least if one is purchasing based on overall performance. The thing is, there are very few audio and home theater enthusiasts who have all the headroom that they want. Even among the users in this subwoofer forum, there aren't that many systems that can truly hit THX reference levels, as much as they would love to. Good baseline accuracy and low distortion are nice, but if the difference they make is insignificant, which is the case between the two models we are discussing, then headroom should be by far the leading consideration when buying a sub.

Also, your point about hitting the limiter at many frequencies undermines your own argument. The PB12s out there will be riding the limiter a lot more than any of the LFM-1 EXs. I do agree with cel's argument that you wouldn't want a sub which you would routinely be pushing hard, as that decreases the sub's lifespan and long-term reliability. Again though, realistically that is describing the PB12 as opposed to the LFM, as the vast majority of listening material and loudness levels would sooner reach the outer performance limits of the PB12 than the LFM.

Never once did you mention room size or listening level, which is the ultimate determination if headroom *should* be a leading consideration when buying a sub, so your own argument is faulty. The SVS is capable of room filling deep bass in a moderate sized room, and that's what ultimately matters.

I personally run my subs at relatively sane levels, and I listen far below reference to save my own ears. For me, a sub should sound clean first, and *IF* I need more output, I can add more subs.

Room size is just one factor in order to achieve one's desired output level, and I would agree that the end user's desired output level is of utmost importance- at least, for those purchasing for performance reasons. But, 'desired output level' is certainly a matter of individual taste. If your are satisfied with a modest amount of output and headroom, and whatever sub you are using is not leaving any serious dips in the FR, then there is no reason to get a more capable subwoofer. Personally I like loads of headroom, and even a single LFM wouldn't be enough for me.

Regarding your last statement, you make it sound as if the LFM wouldn't sound clean. You do realize that those CEA2010 measurements are max clean output measurements, as in distortion would be difficult to discern? There is a reason why they selected those particular distortion/output ratios. To phrase is another way, if you were A/B testing these subs, you would much sooner notice the performance ceiling of the PB12 than you would audible distortion from the LFM.

I don't know but what I consider clean and what you guys consider clean are two different things. The SVS sub was under 10% distortion from 20hz and up with a 110 dB sweep. The outlaw was under 10% distortion from 35hz and up with the same sweep. I don't know about you guys but I would not consider the outlaw sub for under 30hz with that high of spl. It is all disortion! Yes, to me over 10% sounds like crap, try measuring it, it sounds awful! I mean how loud would the SVS play at 25 hz if allowed 22% disortion like the outlaw? I mean the outlaw is a clean as the SVS from 35hz and above only, that is no comparsion in my book. You would have to back down the level of the outlaw to get to 10% disortion and now it is not looking as good, is it? I measured many of my subs with 10% THD and I would not want more than that, ever! It would depend on the goals of the OP. I know the outlaw has more output in the midbass but at the expense of higher disortion below 35hz. Turn down the sub to get within the 10% of the SVS to 20hz and then let's compare. If the outlaw is very close then buy it because it is cheaper. I would not buy either because I want 5hz output!

Another way to look at it is this, The outlaw is really clean with 16hz performance at 100 dB sweep and the SVS is very clean with 16hz performance at 105 dBs. Take that to 110 dBs and the SVS has true 18hz performance but the outlaw has way too much disortion at that level(below 32-35hz). Anyways, 100 dBs for 16hz and above for the outlaw price is excellent! The SVS is just better or can play louder BUT it is more expensive, is it worth it? Only we can decide.

BTW, for $150 more I would take the SVS all day, but that is just me. I mean if we use the 20% disortion as clean then just buy the eD sub which can play 120 dBs to 12.5hz at around 20-22 % THD under 30hz as well. 120 dBs is much louder than 100-110 dBs. We have to decide what is important to each of us. When I built the eD DIY subs each one can output 120 dBs with compression and 22 % THD from 12.5 hz to 35hz but very clean above that. So I added 7 more which brings the THD way down and placed them in a room which brings it way down. This ensured me I could be under 10% THD from 5hz and above for my reference movie experience. Of course I did not know the true performance of the driver but I went with the guys here saying how loud and how good it sound so I took that leap of faith!

OK, quick summary, Outlaw has true CLEAN 16hz performance and up at 100 dBs(outside). The SVS has true CLEAN performance from 16hz and up at 105 dBs outside. The SVS has true CLEAN performance at 110 dBs from 19hz and up outside. You tell me which is better.
Edited by MKtheater - 7/17/12 at 7:13am

These numbers make it clear that the LFM-1EX outperforms the PB12-NSD. It also looks better and costs less!

http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=systems

Then there is this review:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/subwoofers/lfm-1-ex-review/lfm-1-ex-measurements

and this:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/subwoofers/pb12-nsd/pb12-nsd-measurements

Similar performance to be sure, but the Outlaw is a bit better, more flexible with multiple tune modes, etc.

You are late to the game. If you read the the preceding posts, you'll see that it has moved far beyond generalizing statements about that data to more nuanced discussion.

The data is clear, the results obvious. Very similar performance, the Outlaw costs less and has more flexible tuning. These are both good choices, good to go either way.

Well, it is close but the outlaw is VERY CLEAN from 16hz and up at 100 dBs and the SVS is VERY CLEAN from 16hz and up at 105 dBs. The SVS is even very CLEAN from 18hz and up at 110 dBs. This sub is down right awesome! The Outlaw gives lots of great performance with great looks for a cheaper cost. Still not as good as the SVS but very respectable. Now if 20% THD sounds good to someone than the Outlaw is a no brainer because now it will hit 110 dBs. Like I said, I have been testing lots of subs and I have narrowed down what THD I like, what frequencies I need and what type of response shape I like. It has been a long journey but worth it. Anyone buying these subs will be very happy. If WAF is a big concern show her the pics of both and pic which she likes better with no regrets, it is that simple to me. If one does not do it for you than add another. The SVS will have more or louder output under 30hz and the Outlaw will have more punch in the chest with both untouched. If one EQ's them than that difference should be minimal.

Since the THD+noise figures are suddenly the issue, I wonder if the difference really matters, as in is it audible? CEA calls it passing THD+noise, and while it is a quantifiable figure, will anyone be able to actually hear the difference in a pod emergence scene or a T-Rex scene? I believe the additional output is certainly noticeable, but I don't think the distortion figure would really matter in actual use.

Maybe I'm reading these wrong, but it looks like the outlaw has more output at almost every frequency tested:





Anyway, I am an LFM-1 EX owner, because of the great deal I got. If I was buying at normal pricing, I would select the SVS based on looks (more compact + love that metal grille) and the lower distortion numbers, although I would probably be looking at other subs for the money or slightly more

I do not think I come close to the limits of my one LFM-1 EX, so I think I'd still be comfortably within the limits of the PB12-NSD if I had one (used in my bedroom).

I guess you guys missed the point of THD and if you drive it higher than the SPL will get higher but it is all distortion. Whether one can hear it or not does not matter. I know I don't like the sound of 10hz, 15hz, and 20hz at over 10% THD so I want it under during any movie just to be sure. You should not compare 20 hz to one another is one has twice as much distortion. Can you hear it? Who knows but now we are taking facts with measurements and adding subjective data. The data shows the SVS is cleaner at the same levels under 35hz, can't argue with that.

Why does CEA call it "passing THD+noise"? Yes, the figure is lower for the SVS, but if it isn't audible then it is moot. One thing for sure, a 4 db boost at 16 hz is audible and adds more tactile feel. Just for fun I looked at some distortion figures for the sealed SVS sub, they are even higher! It seems the sealed version is using boost to extend the low end, resulting in increased ditortion levels. The reviewer seems to say that all sealed subs have increased distortion at the lower frequencies due to the design, interesting.
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/subwoofers/sb12-nsd-subwoofer/sb12-nsd-measurements
Edited by floridapoolboy - 7/17/12 at 9:20am

The Outlaw is only marginally less since its price does not include shipping. The flexible tuning is only useful to a small percentage of people, since it seems from discussion on the owners lists that most people go with the one port open mode.

No one is arguing with the SVS is cleaner, however you are looking at THD, but if you look at distortion type, for the LFM it is largely second harmonic until you get to the deep bass frequencies. As you well know, second harmonic is not nearly as audible as third harmonic and above. One thing is true, at the very deepest bass frequencies higher order harmonic distortion would be far more audible as true 20 and 15 hz tones are difficult to hear, and I don't even think anyone has ever shown 10 hz can be heard at all, so at that point distortion should be all you can hear.

Sealed subs do have higher distortion at the lower frequencies, but only outside. Once put in a room they work better at the lower frequencies where ported subs will still only be good near tune. The Sealed subs will go as low as possible depending on displacement and power. If you guys want to go by CEA THD than the eD sub has about 25% THD at 120 dBs all thw ay to 12.5hz! Best bang for buck for sure! Nah, I would rather keep it under 10%, but that is just me. Again, I have done plenty of measuring to know what I like.

Again, just my opinion and based on Ricci's tests. The outlaw sub is great from 16hz and above at 100 dBs. This is very clean and what most here in the DIY section strive for in clean bass performance. The SVS sub hits 105 dBs from 16hz and above with the same clean results! If one does not care about more distortion than the Outlaw sub can hit 110 dBs from 20hz and up. The SVS sub can still be very clean at 110 dBs from 20hz and up. The SVS sub can play louder with more distortion so maybe that 110 dB sweep goes up but now this was not testes so that is only speculation. If it was my money I would buy the SVS only based on these numbers. Now these are outside numbers and inside the THD goes down and the spl goes up. This is a very good thing. Sealed subs will benefit more from lower frequency in room lowering distortion than a ported sub. Having said this the DTS-10 had a high THD at 54hz in it's sweeps but I talked to Ricci who said it was really lower than that but who knows for sure. In room I could not hear the THD at 54hz but I also had duals in a 2100 cubic foot room so I had much less power going into them which keeps THD way down. Basically, the outlaw distortion is at 22% with a higher sweep but you may not hear it. Having said that the SVS had half the distortion at the same sweep so for a little more you know for sure the THD is not heard.

That 105dB sweep doesn't mean he's getting 105dB at 16hz (isn't the sweep level set at 50hz? I forget). According to the max passing SPL chart, the max output at 16hz for the SVS is 93.3 dB with 14.3% distortion...with a max of 94.6 dB at 41.6% distortion.

The sweep level was at 100 dBs, then 105 dBs, then 110 dBs. It was full bandwidth. It shows how the sub reacts to multiple frequencies in short duration. I like this test better than just bursting sine waves into a single frequency. What do you think it was showing?

Guys, what I am saying is you are looking at pure spl, I am looking at spl with THD. You say the THD don't matter because it passed, I am saying then buy the outlaw! It is a good sub(it has to be, Dr. Hsu designed it). I recommend the DTS-10 with 50% THD at 54hz. The OP should just get a used DTS-10 and make the WAF or whoever faint! If it fits in the room!

Well, maybe I'm not understanding the graphs then. I don't understand how you are saying the unit completed a 100/105/110dB sweep and actually put out said numbers at 16hz if the max SPL test shows it can only give out 93dB at that frequency.

From my limited understanding, you need to read the Long Term Output Compression graph with the THD graph:





Reading the LTOC, at the 110dB nominal sweep, at 20Hz the actual output was 99dB.
Reading the THD, at the 110dB nominal sweep, at 20Hz the THD was 9%.
So combined, you could say the PB12-NSD can output 20Hz @ 99dB @ 9% THD using the sweep test. I'm not sure how this correlates to the burst test as reported by CEA 2010.

Looking at the LFM in 2-port mode:
Reading the LTOC, at the 110dB nominal sweep, at 20Hz the actual output was also 99dB.
Reading the THD, at the 110dB nominal sweep, at 20Hz the THD was 26%.
Combined, you could say the LFM in 2-port mode can output 20Hz @ 99dB @ 26% THD using the sweep test.

I hope I got that right. If not, corrections are welcomed.
Edited by jchong - 7/18/12 at 3:53am

This is correct.

You get a gold star.

The THD graphs show the distortion results from the sweeps shown on the long term output compression graph. You cannot know what the output from the system was at any certain frequency on the distortion charts without looking at the long term sweep tests for reference. Those sweeps start at a base 90dB level which is set at 50Hz which is the middle of the bandwidth of interest and are increased in 5dB increments until the subwoofer quits increasing in output or exhibits obvious distress. For the final sweep an increase of 2 or 3dB may be used since a full 5dB is a huge jump in demand from the system. Each individual systems response shape, output limitations and extension will affect the SPL at any other individual frequency away from 50Hz.

If anyone is wondering why not EQ all of the subs into the same response shape to make it more easily comparable...1.) This would be a time consuming and tedious process. 2.) Subwoofers always eventually revert to their raw acoustic response shape when driven to maximum output full bandwidth. 3.) There are greatly varying amounts of extension with some units unable to provide much of anything below 40Hz and some capable down to 15Hz or even lower.

Thanks to jchong/mktheater/ricci for the clarification - that does mean that the SVS is NOT outputting 105dB at 16hz like it sounded mk was saying though.

How should we compare the long term power compression & thd charts to the max output charts for the different frequencies? Which should people take in to more consideration, or should they be considered equally relevant? Of course people will have different priorities so you can't speak for everybody, but which matters the most to you?

Interesting, my unscientific sampling determined that most are using 2 port mode. In my previous house 1 port mode worked best, in my new house 2 port works best. I was getting some port noise in 1 port mode, so I got REW out, did some testing, and 2 port mode worked better here. But anyway, I've seen most folks using 2 port mode (maximum output), and it surprised me since my REW testing at the other house showed 1 port mode to be more accurate.

The short form is that having tuneable ports can matter, as different rooms will have different requirements.

Thanks for chiming in Ricci and giving a bit more details about the test.

How does this long term output compression test differ from the CEA test? I notice it is called "long term" vs the CEA test which is described as "burst".