or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › HSU VTF15H Donation thread for Data-Bass Testing!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HSU VTF15H Donation thread for Data-Bass Testing! - Page 5

post #121 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legairre View Post

That's your choice, but he still incorrectly listed the Hsu warranty. And it's not just the driver it's the entire sub for 7 years excluding the amp which is 2 years. Also Dr. Hsu has been known to replace a blown amps out of warranty with a phone call.


Trust me if Dr Hsu guarantees that if the amp fails he will replace it within a 5 year period I would add the $200 plus and get VTF-15 because I'm factoring extended warranty with VTF-15 which would bring the price to $1122 shipped. XV15 is $800 shipped with 5/ 5 on warranty definitely a better value.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #122 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Comparing both to the FV15HP though makes me like the Rythmik even more that I did
It makes me feel really good that I made the right choice by spending the extra for the Rythmik as I was also considering the VTF15H and XV15.
post #123 of 233
Thread Starter 
The Numbers look good! They match up well with S&V numbers when you subtract 9db for 2m rms. the XV15 and VTF numbers are damn close. Basically the extra cost of the VTF gets you variable tuning and peq controls. Comparing standard finishes, Imo the black sand texture is nicer and more durable then black matte. Both have nicer finish options, but PSA has the better warranty. I would say its a toss up betwee the 2.
post #124 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys View Post

It makes me feel really good that I made the right choice by spending the extra for the Rythmik as I was also considering the VTF15H and XV15.

The numbers on the VTF-15H makes me feel better about going with my XS30's biggrin.gif
post #125 of 233
Anyone else notice that HSU's CEA 2010 numbers (bottom of the page) seem a little optimistic in comparison to Ricci's? I was adjusting by 6db for the difference in 1m to 2m measurement. Is there something I'm missing?
post #126 of 233
If two subs had the same numbers would they sound the same ? Would one sound smoother or tighter ? I am just curious ... since with midrange there can be big differences.
post #127 of 233
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

Anyone else notice that HSU's CEA 2010 numbers (bottom of the page) seem a little optimistic in comparison to Ricci's? I was adjusting by 6db for the difference in 1m to 2m measurement. Is there something I'm missing?

you subtract 9db going from 1m peak to 2m rms. the cea 2010 numbers are actually fairly accurate.
post #128 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by basshead81 View Post

you subtract 9db going from 1m peak to 2m rms. the cea 2010 numbers are actually fairly accurate.

Thanks. That makes up the difference. I had incorrectly assumed that the RMS was part of the standard redface.gif
post #129 of 233
Thread Starter 
Here are the averages:

VTF-15 1port 16-125hz = 110.95db

2 port 16-125hz = 111.35db

Sealed 16-125hz = 108.27db


XV15 16-125hz = 110.92db
post #130 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by basshead81 View Post

Here are the averages:

VTF-15 1port 16-125hz = 110.95db

2 port 16-125hz = 111.35db

Sealed 16-125hz = 108.27db


XV15 16-125hz = 110.92db

Well I know.I can hear .43 db ! Lol
post #131 of 233

I think the main difference and selling point (just looking at ricci's max output numbers) for the VTF is its extension. I was very surprised to see clean 12.5hz output. That's pretty impressive.

 

I'm a ULF nut, so take it for what it's worth, but I'd spend the extra $200 for that for sure. I've had a pair of LFM1-EXs (ext to 16hz) and now have a pair of Rythimik FV15HPs, and I can tell you that the extra extension is very noticeable in my room.

 

93.5 @ 12.5hz is damn impressive...besting the 18in SI, Dayton HO, as well as commercial subs like the PB13-Ultra and Velodyne DD18.

 

This also means that in-room, you'll like get clean extension down to 10hz, as compared to the XV15's 12.5hz.

 

graph

 

graph

 

So, to me, you get a lot for an extra $200 compared to the XV15. Is it worth it? My answer is definitely yes...if a $1000 is in your price range. If it's a stretch, than the XV15 will not leave you wanting I'm sure.

 

Both great subs and great options.

 

Josh, great job once again. You've demystified the mystery. 

post #132 of 233
Yeah, we should thank not only Josh for this, but also all the guys who contributed money. With the inclusion of this review, this easily makes the VTF15h the most thoroughly reviewed sub in the world. I know josh likes the extension mode, but it seems to me the sub is better behaved in two ports mode, which always seems to be the case with multitunable subs. What's interesting is if you compare the modes of the VTF15h to the modes of the Rythmik FV15HP, the frequency responses are a lot alike except VTF15h is averagely 4 dB shy of the FV15HP. Josh's number also track very well with Hsu's own numbers, they all seem to be around a single decibel apart. As for the inevitable comparisons with the XV15, the XV15 does seem to top it in one metric alone, third order harmonic distortion in deep bass in one port mode. In every other metric, the VTF15h turns in a matching or surpassing report card, especially with compression and long term output. This makes a big difference in anything with loud, continuous bass.
post #133 of 233
Thread Starter 
Dominguez, I agree..however you will need 3 of either sub for the extension below 16hz to be significant. So for somebody looking at 1 or 2 of these subs, your better off focusing on the 16-125hz output.
post #134 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by basshead81 View Post

The Numbers look good! They match up well with S&V numbers when you subtract 9db for 2m rms. the XV15 and VTF numbers are damn close. Basically the extra cost of the VTF gets you variable tuning and peq controls. Comparing standard finishes, Imo the black sand texture is nicer and more durable then black matte. .

The standard finish is actually a satin black, it's nicer looking than matte black. I agree with you on one point, the VTF15h is not really better than the XV15 with respect to extension. A decibel or two more output is negated by the higher order harmonic distortion, in my opinion.
post #135 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by basshead81 View Post

Dominguez, I agree..however you will need 3 of either sub for the extension below 16hz to be significant. So for somebody looking at 1 or 2 of these subs, your better off focusing on the 16-125hz output.

 

I'm not sure at what output 12.5hz starts becoming meaningful...as I'm sure it's HIGHLY dependent on room. But two of the VTF's in my room would be similar to a single FV15HP at 12.5hz. The single FV in MY room was definitely noticeable. However, I know for a fact that 12.5hz can feel much different depending on room setup.

 

To me, this is a win win. Two great subs by two great companies. The VTF, IMO, is filling a space between the XV15 and the FV15HP...and for $200 more, it should. :)

post #136 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post


The standard finish is actually a satin black, it's nicer looking than matte black. I agree with you on one point, the VTF15h is not really better than the XV15 with respect to extension. A decibel or two more output is negated by the higher order harmonic distortion, in my opinion.

 

Did you mean extension, or output?

 

Because there is a difference in extension between the two.

post #137 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post

Yeah, we should thank not only Josh for this, but also all the guys who contributed money. With the inclusion of this review, this easily makes the VTF15h the most thoroughly reviewed sub in the world. I know josh likes the extension mode, but it seems to me the sub is better behaved in two ports mode, which always seems to be the case with multitunable subs. What's interesting is if you compare the modes of the VTF15h to the modes of the Rythmik FV15HP, the frequency responses are a lot alike except VTF15h is averagely 4 dB shy of the FV15HP. Josh's number also track very well with Hsu's own numbers, they all seem to be around a single decibel apart. As for the inevitable comparisons with the XV15, the XV15 does seem to top it in one metric alone, third order harmonic distortion in deep bass in one port mode. In every other metric, the VTF15h turns in a matching or surpassing report card, especially with compression and long term output. This makes a big difference in anything with loud, continuous bass.

I think most would end up setting the sub up with both ports open once they had a chance to play around with the sub.
post #138 of 233
I know most don't like to compare ported to sealed subs but I really think it would be great to compare the XS30 to the VTF-15H. For starters its a lot closer dollar wise, also the XS30 has a VERY similar output in the frequency range of 15-35hz as the XV15 but below 15hz and above 30-35hz it will have pretty good output advantages over a XV15. So although not an exact science if it can hang with the XV15 in the 15-35hz but yet has more output below 15hz and almost double the output above 35hz, it would be a great sub to compare with the VTF-15H IMO.
post #139 of 233
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dominguez1 View Post

I'm not sure at what output 12.5hz starts becoming meaningful...as I'm sure it's HIGHLY dependent on room. But two of the VTF's in my room would be similar to a single FV15HP at 12.5hz. The single FV in MY room was definitely noticeable. However, I know for a fact that 12.5hz can feel much different depending on room setup.

To me, this is a win win. Two great subs by two great companies. The VTF, IMO, is filling a space between the XV15 and the FV15HP...and for $200 more, it should. smile.gif

I was under the impression that if the output will not reach 100 or 105db(cant remember off hand) in the lower octaves then it will not be noticed at that frequency. there is a chart floating around that better explains this.
post #140 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by dominguez1 View Post

Did you mean extension, or output?

Because there is a difference in extension between the two.

I mean high output at low extension. In one port mode, they both are pretty even in extension. However, that was taken with the Hsu's Q at .3, and at .7 it might gain a bit more output down low. Blasting sub 20 Hz frequencies with the VTF15h in single port mode with the Q at .7 is not a great idea though, the VTF15h is't absolutely protected from bottoming out in that configuration.
post #141 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by basshead81 View Post

I was under the impression that if the output will not reach 100 or 105db(cant remember off hand) in the lower octaves then it will not be noticed at that frequency. there is a chart floating around that better explains this.

Its called the equal loudness contours, also known as the fletcher munson curve:
post #142 of 233
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post

Its called the equal loudness contours, also known as the fletcher munson curve:

Bing!
post #143 of 233
I've almost posted this in a number of other threads, but can we please look at more than just the CEA numbers? I figured after Tom V, Mark Seaton, Bosso and Ricci himself posted about the problems focusing just on CEA numbers, people would start looking at all the measurements and comments. Josh includes the other measurements for a reason. Start looking at the compression sweeps and associated THD, THD of the CEA tests and how the CEA tests line up with the compression sweeps. Not only will the other measurements show that the CEA numbers are not always relevant to real world use, but will also show other differences in the design choices.
Edited by ironhead1230 - 9/12/13 at 11:33am
post #144 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post

Its called the equal loudness contours, also known as the fletcher munson curve:

Quote:
Originally Posted by basshead81 View Post

Bing!

Except the ELC or fletcher munson curves don't show how much output is needed at different frequencies for it to be "usable" or "significant" in real world use. It has a "threshold" level, but doesn't extend below 20hz and a lot of the data used to create the new ISO cruves are from experiments using headphones. IMO, ULF has a different perception when using headphones than in a room with speakers and I would guess the level of "usable" output varies depending on content and room. Some have done informal tests to see if there is a difference with and without a HPF at or above reference levels, but I don't know of a real world test to determine when ULF becomes "usable" using a very capable, low distortion system with movies / music.
post #145 of 233
It does. It's just not straight forward. If you consider it the equal loudness curve , meaning as you go lower in frequencies you have to boost spl a certain amount for it to sound as loud as the upper frequencies. So this does not change. If you are listening at 75db and a lower frequency needs 15db more to sound equal to 75 than it needs to be 90db. If your listening at 85db it needs to be 100db.
post #146 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

In the bang-for-the-buck category I would say yes. That's pretty much been the case since PSA released their first sub, so it's nothing particularly new. Comparing both to the FV15HP though makes me like the Rythmik even more that I did before.

To be honest, I'm a bit surprised at the driver HSU is using. Not exactly what I had expected in a sub that costs $1000.

Agreed, a real humble-pie kind of driver, although nobody should be surprised; look at all of Hsu's drivers. Josh's commentary focused on this too, like he was taken aback, again a little odd, because hasn't info on Hsu's cheap drivers been around for years? A good spin to put on it is that it's a testament to good engineering, since virtually everyone who's heard the 15H says it sounds great.

I guess it means you can't judge a sub by its driver. I hope everybody remembers that (but I know some will only remember it when it's expedient).
post #147 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaviorMachine View Post

Agreed, a real humble-pie kind of driver, although nobody should be surprised; look at all of Hsu's drivers. Josh's commentary focused on this too, like he was taken aback, again a little odd, because hasn't info on Hsu's cheap drivers been around for years? A good spin to put on it is that it's a testament to good engineering, since virtually everyone who's heard the 15H says it sounds great.

I guess it means you can't judge a sub by its driver. I hope everybody remembers that (but I know some will only remember it when it's expedient).

Hsu's drivers are generally not on the cheap side, and you can see this with the VTF2/3 and ULS-15 especially. The VTF15h has a light driver for the sake of efficiency. That's how it gets big output from such little amplification. It's not a driver about xmax, because you just don't need a lot of xmax for low frequencies when you have a big ported box with sizable ports. You can let the ports do all the talking there. Just because a driver doesn't have a lot of excursion does not mean it's bad. What is more important is how well controlled that excursion is.
post #148 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaviorMachine View Post

Agreed, a real humble-pie kind of driver, although nobody should be surprised; look at all of Hsu's drivers. Josh's commentary focused on this too, like he was taken aback, again a little odd, because hasn't info on Hsu's cheap drivers been around for years? A good spin to put on it is that it's a testament to good engineering, since virtually everyone who's heard the 15H says it sounds great.

I guess it means you can't judge a sub by its driver. I hope everybody remembers that (but I know some will only remember it when it's expedient).

Hsu's drivers are generally not on the cheap side, and you can see this with the VTF2/3 and ULS-15 especially. The VTF15h has a light driver for the sake of efficiency. That's how it gets big output from such little amplification. It's not a driver about xmax, because you just don't need a lot of xmax for low frequencies when you have a big ported box with sizable ports. You can let the ports do all the talking there. Just because a driver doesn't have a lot of excursion does not mean it's bad. What is more important is how well controlled that excursion is.

Very good point. And, it functions as a 6th-order vented when both ports are open...which means a very delicate balance between enclosure size, port size/length, driver weight, driver fs, motor strength, and active EQ.
post #149 of 233
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadyJ View Post

Hsu's drivers are generally not on the cheap side, and you can see this with the VTF2/3 and ULS-15 especially. The VTF15h has a light driver for the sake of efficiency. That's how it gets big output from such little amplification. It's not a driver about xmax, because you just don't need a lot of xmax for low frequencies when you have a big ported box with sizable ports. You can let the ports do all the talking there. Just because a driver doesn't have a lot of excursion does not mean it's bad. What is more important is how well controlled that excursion is.

Lol....
post #150 of 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian6751 View Post

It does. It's just not straight forward. If you consider it the equal loudness curve , meaning as you go lower in frequencies you have to boost spl a certain amount for it to sound as loud as the upper frequencies. So this does not change. If you are listening at 75db and a lower frequency needs 15db more to sound equal to 75 than it needs to be 90db. If your listening at 85db it needs to be 100db.

You are describing the meaning of the ELC which I understand, but I disagree with your conclusion that it shows what is "usable." You are assuming the content calls for all frequencies to have equal loudness. That is not always the case. Having equal loudness is not the same as being at a "useful" level. Take a look at these scenes.

http://www.bossobass.com/Bossobass.com/Technical.html

There is plenty of content at 10hz and below but the majority and highest level content is 15hz and above. So obviously according to the ELC, the content below 10hz is not at an equal loudness as the rest, but I don't think that means its useless. The question is if you don't have reference level output below 10hz, at what level are you able to perceive that content and it make a difference. IMO this will depend on the room, person and content being played.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › HSU VTF15H Donation thread for Data-Bass Testing!