Originally Posted by BeeMan458
If not pushing the benefit of a 90HP Yamaha outboard, if the transom will handle it, why upgrade to a 225HP Yamaha outboard? The answer, because a 225HP Yamaha is much more fun than a 90HP outboard and why push a 90HP engine in the first place? And the answer comes back, because it's fun.
Hobbies are not about rational logic. Hobbies are about emotion. Bigger, badder, faster, kicking butt on the field of honor. Why push a small subwoofer when it's ill equipped to do what we all really want; big bass that let's you know, who's your daddy? Let the Big Dogs run. And if the WAF will allow, go for the Big Dog sound cause you know you want to.
As was recommended, go with a FV15HP and when you have broken down your wife's resolve, as suggested, get a second one and if parenthetically, you cannot get a second subwoofer, go with the Ultra.
Easy for you to say bee, you have pretty much committed to upgrading to almost every ID company since joining this forum, and are still rocking the Klipsch's.
We don't know room, sub placement, frequency response, listening levels, if he can measure, other equipment.... In fact all we know is he doesn't turn up sub loud, and everyone says drop $$ on more output. Perhaps $2000k could be better appropriated in the A/V experience.
If his wife won't allow two large subs, maybe she will allow two smaller sealed subs. If output is not a concern, well frequency response should be. I am on the bass is bass bandwagon though. I find frequency response and time domain with low distortion outweigh driver topology in sq but ymmv.
This post by bossobass pretty much sums up my findings to give some perspective from where I am coming from.
"Not only do like (analog) instruments have differences in FR, different players can change the FR of the same instrument by the way they play it.
Before Van Halen attained platinum popularity, they opened for Ted Nugent when he was a headliner. Early on, Eddie was doing a sound check when Nugent happened to walk in and was blown away by the "sound of Eddie's guitar". Nugent asked Eddied if he could play the guitar and Ed said "Sure, here ya go". Nugent said "After a few minutes, I realized that the guitar sounded like Ted Nugent… it wasn't the guitar, it was the player".
Of course, that example involves an electric instrument. With a violin, the difference in presentation can be extremely obvious when the same violin is played by different musicians. In that case, where the players and listeners are in the same positions, HD, delay/phase, dispersion, reflections and all of the nuance items people get hung up on are irrelevant. The relevant and dominant differences are attack, vibrato and frequency response, or, more correctly, spectral content, which I see as FR. The attack, vibrato and spectral content is what changes when different musicians are coaxing sound from the same instrument.
By 'clean', I mean that we are assuming playback of recorded sound and attack, decay and non-linearites are equal. For many DIYers, systems are built that absolutely coast with acoustic music playback. This eliminates all non-linearities except for FR non-linearity.
It's been said many times; the rooms influence will completely swamp the nuance list most labor over. So, if there's a G2G and none of the full bandwidth subs are pushed beyond their limits and content/placement/FR is basically the same, what is the result? People guess wrong at which sub is which because of biases. That's because there is no difference.
Now, if one sub rolls off at 35 Hz and the other is flat to 10 Hz and playback with content to 10 Hz is used, only a deaf person will miss which is which. Distortions are easily detected as in when one sub simply cannot handle the playback level that other subs can and those choices are easy as well.
So, If the low Q, short throw driver-to-500 Hz is crossed at 80 Hz and has the same FR at the LP as the mid Q, long throw driver-to-100 Hz which is also crossed at 80 Hz, there's no chance blind listeners will tell which is which with any consistency, assuming 'clean' operation. When pushed, the former will change FR to favor its top end advantage (with limiters, otherwise it will make bad noises) and the latter will not and the difference in FR will be easy to discern.
The trouble begins when the listeners explain what they're hearing. Air, space, tight, muddy, authority, thin, fat… all those adjectives that don't have anything to do with why there's a difference, are thrown around until your head explodes.
I would like to note that all of this is a learned art. For most listeners, cranking the bass 10dB hot is a good thing. Remember, as mentioned earlier, that running the sub hot is changing the FR, because, as in any discussion of transient response, the whole systems bandwidth is the FR and thus the transient response. My point is that focussing on the subwoofer driver because it has a wider bandwidth on the top end and/or higher sensitivity is irrelevant when the crossover is set to 80 Hz or thereabouts. Keeping the FR flat and affecting small bumps in slices of the sub bandwidth is normally completely lost on the average listener. As you experiment with subs, you find that you can discern smaller and smaller changes in FR.
Where it concerns subwoofers, transient response is dominated by the LPF of the crossover. Assuming clean operation, subjective differences are differences in FR called a myriad of irrelevant things. That's my experience. Any evidence to the contrary is welcomed.
Bl^2/Re is not a metric I use. Sensitivity, motor strength and top end capability are parameters that will change each other... a dog chasing its tail. Balance is the key and, as Nousaine said long ago, "Bass is bass"."