or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Klipsch RW-12D pair vs. Jamo Sub 650 pair vs. Dayton Audio Titanic MK III sealed sub pair - Subwoofer G2G
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Klipsch RW-12D pair vs. Jamo Sub 650 pair vs. Dayton Audio Titanic MK III sealed sub pair -...

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Today we compared a pair of discontinued and ridiculously sale priced Jamo Sub 650 (MSRP $900 each - sale price $250 each) and a pair of discontinued and super sale priced Klipsch RW-12D subs (MSRP $700 each - sale price $300 each) at my brother's house --- in the same room under the same setup criteria. As an unexpected bonus we also lined these two systems against KCNitro07's DIY Dayton 15" Titanic MKIII 3.5 cubic foot sealed box pair of subs powered by an Inuke DSP 3000. Aaron, my brother, has a room with very generous room gain, so you'll see in the graphs taken today a bit of extra low end that you may not see in your own room --- take that into consideration when viewing these graphs.

I've previously reviewed both of these subs in my own room.
A pair of Klipsch subs here
A single Jamo 650 sub here


Cliffnotes for those who hate lengthy reads: If you are on a budget you can't go wrong with either a pair of Jamos or a pair of Klipsch subs. They are definately in the same league. They traded punches as to which bested the other throughout our short demo sessions. The Daytons had a bit more headroom, but cost significantly more. By the time you add a pro amp the DIY option is about $1,000. I don't think you can go wrong with any of these options on a budget. Buy for what suits.

KlipschRW-12DandJamo650Sub.jpg


There were four of us that demoed the subs today - Tatersly, KCNitro07, my brother and I. My brother Aaron owns the pair of Klipsch RW-12D, Tatersly brought his Jamo 650 subs, KCNitro07 brought his DIY Dayton setup, and I brought my omnimic. We captured frequency response measurements for each pair of subs at max SPL measurements. The way we determined max SPL on each of the three systems was by level matching the subs playing by themselves to about 74-75dB, ensuring together they played at 78dB - and then turning up the AVR volume 1 dB at a time until we encountered 1 of three anticipated things:

1) Port Chuffing
2) Compression at low frequency end of spectrum - meaning the sub stops getting louder at/aroud 20-25hz, but continues to rise in volume at the upper end of the frequency specturm
3) Mechanical noise indicating limits of sub had been reached

When one of these three things was first encountered we backed off 1dB and averaged 10 frequency response captures to show the max output of each system on full range signals. (in this case omnimic sweeps which definately have infrasonic content, and so they can put a hurt on a subwoofer system probably faster than most real world material. Thus this max SPL frequency responses are based on the omnimic sweeps and are unique to Aaron's room. Your room will affect these sub's max output slightly differently -- but they should remain relatively scaled the same in a different room.

These measurements were taken in Aaron's room with the subs about 9 foot away from the microphone. The mic was placed on the seatback of the main centered listening position. Aaron's room is medium sized and L shaped, open to another living/dining room. A smaller dining room and kitchen are also attached and present a considerable amount of cubic feet to drive -- this is not a sealed room. The way Aaron has his room laid out however, helps the majority of the bass to be concentrated in a small area and in truth Aaron's room offers very generous room gain. Much more than my room, more than KCNitro07's room (KCNitro's DIY gear extends flat FR about 5dB lower in Aaron's room, than his own), more than Tatersly's room, and more than Aaron's other room he previously had his gear setup in which I'd measured last time I was there.

For the FR measurements the mains were turned off. The crossovers were all set to 80hz, the LFE LPF was set at 120Hz and disengaged on the plate amps. Audyssey was used to calibrate distances for both the Klipsch and the Jamo system and then turned off. No EQ was applied to the Jamo or Klipsch system. The subs were dropped in identical spots on L and R of the TV. There is a 55 hz bump on all setups we measured in Aaron's room. That bump is an artifact in the room and not of the subwoofer systems. We were able to cut it out some with the DSP of the INuke pro amp on the DIY setup, but the other systems were not given the benefit of external EQ.


The demo songs and two movie clips were all run with the AVR at -12 and the subs 6dB hot. So if the system was balanced the playback would have been at the equivalent of -6dB from reference on the master AVR.

The song list was composed of about a dozen bass heavy songs
AWOLNation - Sail
Black Eyed Peas - Boom Boom Pow
Diana Krall - Peel Me a Grape
Ellie Gouldoing - Lights
Example - Kickstarts (Bar 9 remix)
Flux Pavilion - Got 2 Know
Gorillaz - Dare
Kid Cudi - Day N Night
Lil Jon - Get Low
Pete Belasco - Deeper
Pomp and Pipes - The Vikings
100hz to 20hz Sweep
Bass I Love You

The movie clip list was short - two movie scenes from Inception off a single DVD:
The courtyard explosions clip
The downtown train crash



Klipsch RW-12D
Max SPL Frequency Response Limitation: Compression. The 20hz end of the FR spectrum stopped increasing at the point captured. I did not hear port noise at this point while capturing the frequency response, and at no time did I hear mechanical noise on the driver during the duration of the demo session

KlipschRW-12Dpair-NoEQnomainsmaxSPLbeforecompressionon20hzend-noportnoiseoriginalplacementfacingforward-depthmode-OneTwelthsmoothing.jpg

the Klipsch RW-12D has a built in DSP. Here are the results of the max audibly clean SPL before compression on both punch dsp vs depth dsp mode.
KlipschRW-12D-NoEQnomainsmaxSPLbeforecompressionon20hzend-noportnoiseDepthEQvsPunchEQ.jpg


Positive:
I never heard port chuffing at the standardized volume chosen except for on two occassions - Bass I love you which has 7hz and 15hz notes, and the 100hz to 20hz sine wave which extending to 20hz --- extends below the Klipsch's port tuning.
I did not hear mechanical limits of driver
Seeming possesing the most headroom (or the strongest protective DSP scheme) since we never heard the mechanical limits of the drivers.
LCD DSP, Volume Control, 3 DSP settings (flat, movies, punch) very nice.
Overall very impressive for the $300 sale price. Great budget package overall and regularly available on and off at $300 sale price!

Negatives:
Port chuffing on the two songs
I could tell (or though I could) that these subs seemed to be missing the lows a bit. Pomp and Pipes Organ - nothing. Bass I love you low notes - nothing but air movement/port chuffing.




Jamo 650 Sub
Max SPL Frequency Response Limitation: Mechanical noise and compression. The 20hz end of the FR spectrum stopped increasing at the point capture and at the same time an increase in SPL would create a slightly different sound from one of the drivers -- almost like a rubber surround was not quite moving in a linear fashion beyond this point. Both compression and the slight rubberish/mechanical limitation noise occurred at nearly the same SPL

Jamo650subpair-NoEQnomainsmaxSPLbeforecompressionanddistortionsoundondriver-facingforward-OneTwelthsmoothing.jpg

Here is a comparison of the plate amp's boundary gain function engagement on this pair of Jamo subwoofers. Again this is max output before audible distortion and signal compression at 20hz.
Jamo650SubPair-NoEQnomainsmaxSPLbeforecompressionandmechanicaldistortionon20hzend-NormalvsBoundaryGainmode.jpg

Positives -
Frequency response was better than the Klipsch subs.
*I liked this sub sound better than the Klipsch subs for most of the music on the tracks where they didn't hit or exceed their limits. Unfortunately on the tracks where the sealed design should have shined (like the bass I love you and the 20hz sine sweep track) the AVR main volume was too loud at our standardized volume and drove the sub drivers into distress. Turning it down would have fixed this(or having four instead of two) and at that point one could enjoy the deeper frequency response.
*Pomp and Pipes Organ sounded the best of the day
*small and nice looking - LED light on front and simple Jamo logo look classy.
*Outstanding value at $250 - flat to 20hz in every room I've measured (all three). Just don't expect world beater SPL. (I wonder how four would sound in a bedroom --- taking on Gorilla83's idea. biggrin.gif )


Negatives -
*There is no advantage to not hearing port noise on a sealed design if you have to turn the sub down significantly to get away from mechanical noise at the same SPL as port noise on the competitor.
*On the sine sweep we turned it down to -17 (with the subs 6dB hot (so -11 from reference) and we still heard a bit of driver stress at the 20hz end of the sine sweep. This sine sweep is recorded hot, and it made the DIY subs cry for mercy too. It made the CHT 18.1 pair in the 2012 blind subwoofer meet reach their limits as well at similar volumes -- BUT not all subs will cry for mercy on this track. HSU VTF-15H don't, Epik Empire don't. Once you get into the $1000 subwoofer range you stop hearing this particular track give the subs trouble.
*Gain knob is a sliding LED light --- it looks cool, but it's hard to determine where you are on the amp's gain structure without numbers, or clicks (like most gain knobs).
*Jamo didn't make this system amp limited (which is more my preference -- like the Epiks) This Jamo is driver limited. Meaning the amp will drive the driver into distress. With something like the Epik Empire - no matter what you do you'll never heard audible driver distress. The amp is weaker than the subs. With this Jamo the 650 watt amp is more than capable to drive the driver into distress. The distress on the Jamo sounds different than the distress on the DIY Dayton driver though. On the Jamo it sounds like a rubber surround is out of excursion capability or something (it's a soft change in tone and movement which is audible and sounds a bit like rubber flapping). On the Dayton driver by comparison the distress sound is a metallic clicking.
*This Jamo sub is no where near worth $900 MSRP as compared to other $1000 ID subs.






DIY Dayton Titanic MKIII 15" driver in sealed enclosure
Max SPL Frequency Response Limitation Reason: Mechanical noise. The 20hz end of the FR spectrum was not necessarily done increasing, but a mechanical tick from the driver on each sweep indicated the driver was out of excursion on the omnimic sweeps. The Inuke DSP 3000 amp was not clipping during these sweeps. The INuke DSP was employeed in a quick and nasty EQ setup to help flatten the frequency response. All modifications employed (5 parametric EQ bands) were all cuts. Aaron's room has significant room gain and you can tell from KCNitro07's DIY thread just how much.

DaytonTitanicMKIIIPair-QuickEQappliedviaDSP-maxSPLbeforemechanicalsoundondriver-facingforward-OneTwelthsmoothing.jpg

Positives:
*It's plain this sub has a bit more headroom than the other subs *****
I like the sound on most of the music. This sub seems the loudest for some reason even though we level matched.
Bass I love you was the best on this sub by a significant portion IMO. These things were shaking the floor, couch and recliner on this song. We took turns sitting in the chair that vibrated the most. tongue.gif
This sub more matched the Jamo sub sound in my mind. Both sealed, both fairly similar frequency response - the DIY contender just having a bit more umpf...


Negatives:
***** Wait did I say this sub has more headroom? Why did it seem like less headroom on some tracks than the Klipsch?
100hz to 20hz sine sweep introduced mechanical rattle that made me jump for the remote.
So did the explosions in Inception. In fact we had to turn the movie down by more than 6 or 8dB on the main overall AVR volume to get away from mechanical driver rattle sounds. The Klipsch made no such sounds, and the Jamo wasn't quite as obvious.
It seems the Dayton driver doesn't have much excursion capability before introducing mechanical sounds. An HPF at 20hz is probably wise. This sub isn't as graceful when it encounters its limits -- the metallic clicking sound is pretty obvious.


Here are the three all together at max audibly clean SPL levels as previously defined.

Jamo650SubpairvsKlipschRW-12DpairvsTitanikMKIIIpairallatmaximumaudiblecleanoutputinAaronsroom.jpg

I think in the end the Jamo and Klipsch are more alike than different, and you'd not go wrong choosing either path. The DIY setup cost $1000 and requires a different set of interest, skill, and expertise than just picking up a couple of these mid tier sale priced discontinued subs and dropping them in place.

Here are the Jamo and Klipsch compared directly (as above) sans the Dayton DIY project FR. Notice that the max audibly clean SPL on the Klipsch is up to 5 or 6 dB louder as the frequency rises in both sub's respective lowest tuning modes. 6dB is a doubling of volume. 6dB is not insignificant. If you want louder subs then you probably ought to purchase the Klipsch subs. That extra loudness comes at a slight reduction in accuracy and flat frequency response however.
Jamo650SubpairvsKlipschRW-12DpairatmaximumaudiblecleanoutputinAaronsroom.jpg

The Jamo and Klipsch are in the same subwoofer class and there is no clear victor in my mind. For movies I couldn't even really tell a difference with our standardized volume from my listening position. I wish we would have had more time and could have listened to more than two quick movie clips. My hypothesis before we even started ended up matching my personal experience at this brief g2g. If you have a large room get the Klipsch pair and take advantage of their extra headroom and strong HPF to protect the driver from overexcursion. You could probably turn them up louder than we did if you didn't worry about compression further reducing your bottom end frequency response because we never encountered any mechanical driver noise indicative of the driver running out of steam (although sooner rather than later you are going to encounter port noise after this SPL point with the Klipsch pair)... If you have a smaller room buy a Jamo pair and take advantage of the flatter, deeper frequency response, and sealed sub sound for music. What defines smaller or larger rooms? I guess that depends on your expectations. None of the systems in pairs that I heard tonight would match my taste for bass in my primary room of 3,500 cubic feet. I like quite a bit more bass than I heard tonight. Though, I'd be happy with any of these systems for a secondary room. I asked my brother what he thought and he said we were playing these systems way too loud. He said he has never turned his system up that loud. I said NEVER? He said NEVER. Remember, for these tests I put the volume dial at -12 and the subs 6dB hot because that's where I most often like to watch my movies. I occassionally like it much louder. cool.gif KCNitro07 most often watches full movies louder than me. biggrin.gif To each his own.

Tatersly had to leave early so I didn't get a full opinion yet from him. I'll be curious to hear what others think. I personally thought the Jamo was preferable for music. I heard KCNitro07 say he liked the Klipsch better for music. My brother said it was a mixed bag.

One more thing I learned. These two systems (Jamo and Klipsch) utilize 12" drivers. I don't think two of these subs would anywhere near equal a single HSU VTF-15H. Let's put that to rest. The $1000 price point for internet direct subwoofers is a big jump from these mainstream $700 brick and morter retail store subwoofers. These are great for the price, but don't fool yourself into thinking you can get two and have as elite an experience. You can't. What you can do is get two subs and still have an enjoyable experience for just about half price of the $1000 ID subs. Frankly, for the average Joe --- this is a pretty good way to go.
Edited by Archaea - 8/26/12 at 1:07pm
post #2 of 43
first of all thanks for this thread. second i dont understand half the terms you said (port chuffing?) and graphs. i am a noob when it comes to ht. just looking for an honest opinion on getting either the jamo or the kliptch

im looking to replace my bic f12. my room is roughly around 18 x 12 i havent measured yet.

i was going for the kliptch at $300 but then i read about the jamo 650 a couple of days ago. never heard of jamo

at $50 less with coupon code than the kliptch, and since the jamo goes lower i guess i should go for the jamo?

will be used primarily for movies, id say 75/25 movies/music.

i will be using pioneer sp budget system, fs51 towers, c21 center and bs21 surrounds, with denon 1712 receiver

whats my best bet? im tired of reading about which $300 sub for weeks. i want to make a decision
post #3 of 43
Thread Starter 
Port chuffing happens when a port on a subwoofer is too small for the amount of air moved near port tune (in the Klipsch case I believe that is around 23 or 24hz.). It sounds like a lot of air being forced through a hole which is exactly what is happening. Or it can occur when a driver is driven hard below port tune. IE in the case of the Klipsch -- you push frequencies to it at loud volumes that are less than 22 or 24hz (whatever port tune truly is). 18x12 is a fairly small/medium room. How loud do you listen. If you listen loud go Klipsch -- If you listen at lower volumes go Jamo.

Don't try to split hairs over the decision. They are both good sub systems for the money.
Edited by Archaea - 8/26/12 at 6:27am
post #4 of 43
Thanks for all the work you put in Archaea. It was your posts that lead me to purchase a couple Klipsch 12ds. After reading your review on the Jamos, I was starting to wonder if I should return the 12ds and pick up a couple of the 650s. After reading this comparison, I'll keep the 12ds.

I'm no expert at all, but after looking at the graph (shows both Depth and Punch), does it seem that "Punch" mode gives better output at all FR points? I've been running mine in "Depth" mode for movie viewing, but if "Punch" will give more FR (even at the lower end), I will change them over. I guess it can't hurt to just switch between both of them for a couple of days to see how it sounds in my room.

Once again kudos to all your work.
post #5 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradymartin View Post

whats my best bet? im tired of reading about which $300 sub for weeks. i want to make a decision
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

If you listen loud go Klipsch -- If you listen at lower volumes go Jamo.
Don't try to split hairs over the decision. They are both good sub systems for the money.


Thanks Archaea , a great down to earth sub shoot-out, in a price range that won't break the bank.. Now if you go for the jamo its about hundred dollars more, cause its not on sale... But like the Klipsch it will most likely be on and off the super sale price till their all gone forever.
post #6 of 43
Thread Starter 
Looks like the $100 off world wide stereo coupon is expired now as joehonest pointed out.

You can find the Jamo 650 at vanns.com for $300 with free shipping as an alternate price option.
http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/features/549645163/jamo-sub-650?s_c=site_search
post #7 of 43
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by grpape View Post

Thanks for all the work you put in Archaea. It was your posts that lead me to purchase a couple Klipsch 12ds. After reading your review on the Jamos, I was starting to wonder if I should return the 12ds and pick up a couple of the 650s. After reading this comparison, I'll keep the 12ds.

I'm no expert at all, but after looking at the graph (shows both Depth and Punch), does it seem that "Punch" mode gives better output at all FR points? I've been running mine in "Depth" mode for movie viewing, but if "Punch" will give more FR (even at the lower end), I will change them over. I guess it can't hurt to just switch between both of them for a couple of days to see how it sounds in my room.

Once again kudos to all your work.


Punch does seem to give more output at max spl before compression kicks in. (Better? depends on your definition. Flatter FR is depth mode, but when the SPL limits are pressed it appears depth starts looking more like punch anyway --- with apparently about 2dB less max SPL before compression kicks in on the low end of the signal)


Yeah I don't know exactly what to make of that, but it is what we measured so I have no reason to try to hide it. the Klipsch has those custom DSP settings -- perhaps Klipsch has programed some slightly different limiters in on depth vs. flat or natural dsp modes. By comparison you'll notice the Jamo's max spl at 20hz stayed almost exqactly the same before compression and driver noise with or without boundary gain. That's more what I would have expected.


For those that don't know what compression is. Take a look at this chart from a quick google image search for an easy explanation.
paradigm-servo-15-subwoofer-compression-gp-2-meters.gif

You can see the green line is exactly parallel to the lowest frequency test preformed in the blue line, but that the pink FR line and every other line above the pink line 'compresses' the low frequency spectrum of the frequency response. It takes the most power and driver movement to create the lowest frequencies so when a driver starts compressing you know it is at the limits for its natural (or dsp'ed) frequency response on a full badwidth signal. It does not mean the subwoofer can't get louder. I just means that it can no longer continue to increase SPL in a linear fashion.

To do our compression testing I was just increasing the avr volume via the remote until I saw the bottom end of the FR spectrum stop moving up. I'd then adjust it up and down a dB or two several times until I ensured we were at the compression limits as shown in the omnimic real time analyzer.
Edited by Archaea - 8/26/12 at 6:59am
post #8 of 43
Archaea, You made it very clear you ran the tests in PAIRS, but for those of us who plan only to use ONE sub. How should we interpret your findings? Is it just less max SLP levels ?
post #9 of 43
Great test, great write up. Thanks! I also am limited to single sub at this price range so same question about how this all relates to one only.
post #10 of 43
In the chart that the Jamo and Klipsch are being compared directly @ 20hz they are both the same, the Jamo stays flat and the klipsch is rising to +6db @ 50hz.. Would Audyssey XT flatten the Klipsch ?
post #11 of 43
Excellent comparison test Archaea! Clear, concise, well laid out and very informative. That represents a tremendous amount of work, including all the time it takes to do the write-up.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Looks like the $100 off world wide stereo coupon is expired now as joehonest pointed out.
You can find the Jamo 650 at vanns.com for $300 with free shipping as an alternate price option.
http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/features/549645163/jamo-sub-650?s_c=site_search

Just one note on this... because Vann's is now in bankruptcy they are no longer considered an authorized Jamo/Energy/Mirage/Klipsch dealer. That concerned me, so I opted to get a refund instead of an exchange on the Sub 650 I sent back. That doesn't mean everyone should just stop buying from Vann's, but it is something you need to know before placing an order. I'm not sure if it will be an issue in the future, but I wasn't sure it wouldn't be either.
post #12 of 43
After hearing the Jamo/Klipsch side by side, I contend that the Klipsch is better sounding on most of the songs we listened to. The Jamos sounded weak, though we ran them at the same levels. I heard things I don't know how to describe that I didn't like coming from the Jamos. I wouldn't say the Klipsch won by a landslide, but between the two, I'd go with the Klipsch. I also like the look of the Klipsch better than the Jamo.

One thing I have to point out is that while Aaron, Tatertot and I were sitting against the wall in the main listening positions, Archaea was sitting in a chair more towards the center of the room, exactly where you'd expect a null to be. During the organ part of that song that has the organ in it, Archaea kept trying to find where it is in the song because he wasn't hearing anything, but I heard it from my seating position, albeit faintly. I do believe I had the best seating position as my head was next to the mic used for measuring.

I would agree with Archaea, that both of the subs are good contenders for budget subs. They are nearly interchangable for movies, though the Jamos are flatter as the graph shows, you lose some volume in the higher frequencies. I apologize that my review is very elementary, I don't have the experience and know the lingo like Archaea, I just know at the end of the day I liked the Klipsch better.

That being said, back to re-EQing my Daytons, can't wait to get my basement finished so I can have a room thats not open to the rest of the house.
post #13 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Archaea, You made it very clear you ran the tests in PAIRS, but for those of us who plan only to use ONE sub. How should we interpret your findings? Is it just less max SLP levels ?

I would think a single would not have the same graph, I'm sure Mr. Archaea will be demoing the Jamo again and again and again since he has one sitting at UPS waiting to be delivered :P
post #14 of 43
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcnitro07 View Post

One thing I have to point out is that while Aaron, Tatersly and I were sitting against the wall in the main listening positions, Archaea was sitting in a chair more towards the center of the room, exactly where you'd expect a null to be. During the organ part of that song that has the organ in it, Archaea kept trying to find where it is in the song because he wasn't hearing anything, but I heard it from my seating position, albeit faintly. I do believe I had the best seating position as my head was next to the mic used for measuring.

Tatersly, Aaron, and KCNItro07 all sat in the normal couch and recliner seating positions, I pulled up a wooden kitchen chair and placed it in front of the couch and recliner arms. There was definately less bass in tmy seating position then what the guys were hearing in the seats with their heads up against the back wall getting extra bass re-inforcement. That said the Jamo reproduced the 16hz organ notes the best from my particular seat I thought. I was trying to hear something on the Klipsch and asked to play the clip a couple times cause I couldn't hear anything. The Jamo's played the note, and the Dayton's made clicking sounds IIRC. The Jamos were pushed beyond their comfort level on some of the lowest material, but except for a few songs I personally liked their sound better for music. That's why all this stuff is subjective with these two subs being in the same class.. There wasn't a blowout winner here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Archaea, You made it very clear you ran the tests in PAIRS, but for those of us who plan only to use ONE sub. How should we interpret your findings? Is it just less max SLP levels ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by colohtpc View Post

Great test, great write up. Thanks! I also am limited to single sub at this price range so same question about how this all relates to one only.

Two subs typically allows for smoother, more true to the sub's capability frequency response. 1 sub would have been 3-6dB less SPL at max in aaron's room and potentially a bit rougher frequency response because the room's nuances would be harder to overcome with a single sub.

The other thing to clearly note is that these max SPLs and frequency response graphs are specific to Aaron's room. Don't expect that your frequency response and max clean SPL will be identical unless you have an identical room. tongue.gif Well since we know you don't have that - then just consider these frequency response captures as a piece of data which primarily shows its relevance in relation to each other. IE - the Klipsch, Jamo, and Dayton subs in a room --- each less than 1 dB away from the beginning of low frequency compression or audible mechanical limits.




Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

In the chart that the Jamo and Klipsch are being compared directly @ 20hz they are both the same, the Jamo stays flat and the klipsch is rising to +6db @ 50hz.. Would Audyssey XT flatten the Klipsch ?

Yes Audyssey may attempt to flatten the response on the Klipsch. One thing to keep in mind is that Aaron's current entertainment room had a lot of room gain. (a good thing) When you take away some of that room gain the Jamo extends to 20hz, while the Klipsch will begin to fall off at 23hz. This is evidenced by a graph I took of the Klipch RW-12D pair at Aaron's house in his other living room in January of this year. That first room offered less room gain and shows the more natural port tune of the Klipsch with more clarity. (this older graph isn't using smoothing IIRC). Note this measurement is of the same two RW-12D subs in just a different room of Aaron's house. It wasn't captured at any kind of a max spl, but rather just a FR capture.


KlipschRW-12DpairinAaronsroominJanuary2012.jpg
post #15 of 43
Thread Starter 
KCNitro07 -- I laughed when I read tatertot. It's tatersly. tongue.gif
post #16 of 43
I just laughed too when i saw TATERTOT!!....GOOD ONE kcnitro07!
post #17 of 43
My thoughts on the comparison is like this. I'm very new to all the terminoligy and the lingo of sub talk. But i do have good hearing and i think hearing both subs, one after the other, that they both sounded awesome to me. I had never listened to a current, good setup like what we were comparing. I was really very impressed to what i experienced with all that was heard, tested, etc. With my untrained ears....i really could not say that i thought one sounded better than the other. I do own 2 Jamo sub 650's, but if i hadn't had them already, and i had to decide after the comparisons i heard, it could literally be a flip of a coin for me. Thanks to Archaea for all he does.....which is alot!, and thanks to Aaron for supply the room and equipment, and a special thanks to kcnitro07, aka captain obvious for helping me out.biggrin.gif
post #18 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by tatersly View Post

My thoughts on the comparison is like this. I'm very new to all the terminoligy and the lingo of sub talk. But i do have good hearing and i think hearing both subs, one after the other, that they both sounded awesome to me. I had never listened to a current, good setup like what we were comparing. I was really very impressed to what i experienced with all that was heard, tested, etc. With my untrained ears....i really could not say that i thought one sounded better than the other. I do own 2 Jamo sub 650's, but if i hadn't had them already, and i had to decide after the comparisons i heard, it could literally be a flip of a coin for me. Thanks to Archaea for all he does.....which is alot!, and thanks to Aaron for supply the room and equipment, and a special thanks to kcnitro07, aka captain obvious for helping me out.biggrin.gif

My bad...I'll get that name correct next time! biggrin.gif

And you're welcome!
post #19 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcnitro07 View Post

My bad...I'll get that name correct next time! biggrin.gif

It's too late now. He'll forever be known as 'tot'... tongue.gif
post #20 of 43
Heres some crazy ideas... Can the Klipsch be sealed, then it should be perfect., would sealing the port lower the deep end?? The jamo 12" driver is the weak link, but you could easly buy a better replacement driver, that would fix the jamo.. Sealing the Klipsch would be the most cost affective, as a new driver for the jamo would be a hundred plus bucks for something good..
Edited by joehonest - 8/27/12 at 3:52pm
post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehonest View Post

Heres some crazy ideas... Can the Klipsch be sealed, then it should be perfect., would sealing the port lower the deep end?? The jamo 12" driver is the leak link, but you could easly buy a better replacement driver, that would fix the jamo..

It's not as simple as that...

Sealing the Klipsch will likely kill low end extension because it will roll off higher in frequency... IF (and it's a big if, but some drivers do well in both sealed and ported boxes) the driver would work well in a sealed box, the volume of the box would be larger than it should be if it were sealed, so the driver will be overdamped which could cause cone excursion issues. You could add wood blocks/bracing inside the enclosure to reduce the internal volume, but without measuring the T/S parameters of the driver you won't know 1) if the driver will even work well in a sealed box and 2) what target volume to shoot for.

With the Jamo... Buying a better driver, assuming you find another that works optimally with the given enclosure volume and amplifier (which has unknown boost/filter circuits), kind of kills the whole "good deal" part of it.

In that case, just buy a better sub...
post #22 of 43
Thread Starter 
well said alphaii
post #23 of 43
So most of the best subs are EQed with the plate amp, its not all just mechanical, driver + box, but also EQing..Is that cheating wink.gif
post #24 of 43
Thread Starter 
nope --- that's what makes them 'better subs' wink.gif
post #25 of 43
The Klipsch is a BIG box, sealing the port would do more harm than good ??
I would think someone would of tried it by now..
post #26 of 43
Thread Starter 
no typically you want smaller boxes for sealed. The klipsch box should be smaller if sealed (less airspace) to help prevent overexcursion on the low frequencies.

A driver at port tune moves very minimally. The box tune itself aids the driver in creating most of the sound at that tune. This fact that 1) the Klipsch driver will move minimally at lower frequencies, coupled with the fact that 2) the built in Klipsch sub DSP generated high pass filter effectively prohibits lower frequencies than the Klipsch's port tune making it through are the two likely reasons why the Klipsch driver never exhibited mechanical noise limits while the Jamo and DIY drivers did.
Edited by Archaea - 8/27/12 at 4:44pm
post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

no typically you want smaller boxes for sealed. The klipsch box should be smaller if sealed (less airspace) to help prevent overexcursion on the low frequencies.
A driver at port tune moves very minimally. The box tune itself aids the driver in creating most of the sound at that tune. This fact that the Klipsch driver will move minimally at lower frequencies, coupled with the built in Klipsch sub DSP which effectively prohibits lower frequencies from port tune making it through is why the Klipsch driver never exhibited mechanical noise.

Its almost rocket science...
post #28 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

A driver at port tune moves very minimally.

This is correct. wink.gif
post #29 of 43
Thread Starter 
yes you and luke kamp opened my eyes to that fact at one of the subwoofer meets! tongue.gif

it seems counter-intuitive to me, but I've seen that effect in action as proof.
post #30 of 43
Good thread, Archaea. Now I can add the close out Jamo to my close out Klipsch and close out Energy (and BIC F12) under $300 reco's.

Seems like all the good econo subs are getting waxed!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Klipsch RW-12D pair vs. Jamo Sub 650 pair vs. Dayton Audio Titanic MK III sealed sub pair - Subwoofer G2G