Official SVS Owners/Support Thread. - Page 270

Your statement implies that good response cannot come from just one sub. Not true. Especially when your only worried about a limited number of listening positions.

Right; especially when EQing and peaks are tamed.

The problem is that the need for a smoother spatial uniformity (i.e. bass response from one location to another) is that much stronger in a small room where additional output is not necessarily needed. For example my living room is an elongated rectangle about 10x20'. Those proportions are not "recommended" (but I can't hardly change them can I). With an 8' ceiling that makes the room 1600 cu.ft. and it's not open to any thing else except for a standard door frame. We listen to the HT setup across the width (10') of the room so you've got seating positions covering almost half the room. Bass response cannot be uniform in those conditions, especially with only one sub. That being said with EQ it's tolerable. So I'm pretty sure a second sub would be great in that situation.

The problem is, once I save up enough for a second SB12, I have basically the option of buying it, or sell the first one and upgrade to a single Plus (or save a bit more for a single Ultra). Of course I could just save for a while a treat myself for dual Ultras -- not sure if anyone tried that in a 1600-cu.ft. room -- but the point is, for a given budget, if you want to run duals, you severely restrict the subs you can buy. The bundles such as the dual SB12s or Legato are nice but in the end only do shave about 10% from the total.

Yeah, please do that and let us know how it sounds...................

It must be an out of the world experience...........I guess.....

Nothing, as long as they buy subs in pairs.

Regardless of the size and shape of the room, identical dual subs will do a better job than a single sub.
It seems kind of silly, to poor all your money into one sub and forgo smooth bass reponse.

Again, your assuming you cannot get smooth bass response with only one sub.

Is this Auditor55 with a different account?

You are funny!

^^ rofl

Yet this is a debate worth having and he's fighting for the "extreme dual" side. Duals at all cost. Of course two of the same is better than only one. The problem is always the budget, or else everybody here would probably run quad Ultras or something like this.

If we pose the problem in another way: suppose SVS runs some kind of sweepstakes and you win. Your prize is yours to choose between dual SB12s or a single PB12-Plus. Which one would you chose? Or say... dual PB12-NSDs or a single PB13-Ultra (let's say it's a refurb unit; I'm trying to find a combination that is compelling with roughly the same budget).

I'm all for dual Ultras but that would cost more than all my current HT setup (speakers, sub, AVR and TV combined). Something extraordinary in my professional life would have to happen for me to have that kind of cash laying around.

I already chose a single sb13-plus over dual sb12's and I would do it again. I chose a single pb ultra over dual pb12-nsd's and I would do that again as well.

I kind of have trouble remembering who each member is and who is associated with which sub configuration here. Aren't you the one who just upgraded his dual SB13-Plus to dual PB13-Ultras? What is your upgrade path exactly with SVS subs? Aren't you running duals right now? Hmmm I seem to be mistaken, sorry for that

Let's see...

Brian Fineberg once had a big SVS cylinder but now has the SB12.
Coolcat just got dual PB12-NSDs.
cr136124 had a single PB Ultra and recently got another matching one
eljaycanuck now has ChaseHT SS-18s
stylz25 is probably still hesitating between all of SVS's offerings
...
Ok I give up

You got me right, neutro! Proud owner of two PB13-Ultras here.

And, I just watched X Men First Class with my wife.........oh boy, I really need to buy some nails for the left wall........the Magneto scenes on that movie were too much for that wall. And honestly, I'm not kidding (this time).......

Yessir, he does indeed! (And he's had them for ~16 months.)
Funny: I was flipping through XMFC earlier today, too. More to demo my new PJ than for audio, but I was blown away (again) by the "Magneto LFE"!

I knew from the beginning of the movie (young Magneto scene) that we were set for a nice LFE ride!

Did you guys rent that following the SB12 review?

I don't even know when I'll be able find time to see a movie. And I'm that close to finish Resistance 3 but it's been weeks since I popped anything in the PS3. Now... soo tired... must sleep. At least my GF & daughter don't mind me putting on digitally imported's Liquid D'n'B channel when I wake up. I get my dose of bass this way now.

No he's not. But I think he is giving good advice.

that is a bad assumption. You can definitely get smooth bass response with one sub.

Smooth can mean a smooth frequency response, or it can mean a smooth spatial distribution (across the room). The two are quite often related. But if you do as Brian says and try to optimize for a single listening position, a single subwoofer, properly positioned and EQ'ed, can provide a reasonably smooth frequency response. But it would be much harder to achieve a smooth spatial distribution with a single sub (depending on the room of course).

By the same logic, I could also say buying only two subs is silly because you really need four identical subs to get the best response throughout the room.

Let's see some measurements. Surely you took many of them when setting up your two subs. Should be a nice flat response.

Different sweeps with one sub then two will help us see the great improvement your getting as well.
Edited by brian6751 - 7/5/12 at 12:24pm

Sure 4 subs is even better See a few pages back for that paper discussing the optimal placement for 4 subs. Contrary to 1 or 2 subs, it's in the corners! Then again surely we hit diminishing returns in terms of sound quality - to - price ratio before 4 subs. The question here is whether two subs are better for a given budget (i.e. is the ratio better for 1 or 2 subs); or under which conditions it is.

Another funny way to look at this for proponents of dual-subs: I managed to spend around $700 for my SB12 (including shipping, taxes and piano black finish in Canada). Should I have gone with two $350 subs instead? (That would probably mean some retail Klipsch subs in Canada). I would probably have a better bass uniformity and flatter frequency response. But nothing approaching adequate 20Hz extension. Thus the single-sub did bring me something that duals can't do at my given budget, that is a true subwoofer. Doubling that budget, I could either smooth the response (and add 6dB) or get a step up (say a Plus). I'd guess the Plus would provide me with an altogether different experience than what dual SB12s can provide, wouldn't it?

Anyway I'm looking at it the wrong way. Maybe I should focus on increasing my discretionary spending budget instead
Edited by neutro - 7/5/12 at 12:54pm

I don't disagree with anything you said, but the problem lies in the the poster's implication that you are wasting your money if you only buy one good sub and that you should never run just one sub

What matters is that the frequency response is as flat as possible where you need it. That can be solved with a single sub, careful placement and calibration. In many cases, one well placed sub may be better than two subs where both subs are compromised in location.

There is no hard fast rule that says that dual subs are a must. It all depends on the situation of the user.

Agreed.

I think we're running around in circles now: "to each his own".

Anyway as I said repeatedly I'm nowhere near the point where I can spend money on a sub upgrade yet, but maybe I'll give myself a gift comes next Christmas, so I'm pondering my options. Sure if I get $4k I can get dual Ultras but in my current room and considering I never listen at ref levels, that would be a waste of money I'd say. I'm reading that old thread on the Seaton Sound Forum where JapanDave builds his home theater room and can't stand the pressure the 3 Catalysts and 2 Submersives produce... In my case the optimal situation would probably be something like dual Pluses -- I'd have duals, and the Pluses would provide very good extension vs NSDs. Predictably that would be much more expensive than a single Ultra though, but I could begin with a single one and add another later.

Having just got off the phone with Doug & Jack at SVS, I am now a member of the dual PB12-Plus club. I've read so many posts on this forum that dual subs is the way to go, so I figured I'd do it up right. Besides my single PB12-Plus was lonely! I think that my 17x19 home theater room sounds great with one of these, so I'm looking forward to smoothing out the bass in my room.

Hey, did you get the one that matches your current PB12-Plus?

My current PB12-Plus has the two sides that are black oak panels, so the best I could do is their current black oak with panels all around, so it shouldn't look too much different.

I think everybody has to balance the need for smooth bass versus his budget and output needs. I *had* two small sealed subs but I was never happy with the bass extension I was getting, so I bought one larger sub which solved my craving for more bass depth and visceral feeling. I thought "I'll get one SB13 sub and see how it compares".

I expermented with placement, Audyssey, and did a lot of measuring. I had a huge dip at 50Hz. After trying out the different corners, and playing with the crossover and phase, I was able to minimize the dip to only -4dB, and after calibrating with Audyssey, I was able to attain a +/- 3dB from 25Hz up and useful extension down below 15Hz (only down -5 dB there) across the width of my seating couch.

In my case, even though adding a second sub would have likely widened my sweet spot for flat bass, it was not necessary and the second sub would have to be compromised in where it could be placed

My recommendation is always "buy one sub with all the extension you think you need", measure and listen to your results and THEN consider getting a second one. You can always save up and add a second later, and then you are building on a good foundation. If you are budget limited, you will have to sacrifice something, so you have to choose what works for your OWN situation. That's why generalizations that "dual subs are the only way to go" is never a useful answer as it ignores the actual results. When you want to improve something, you should always quantify where you are at, and THEN only then you can figure out if your improvement is actually meaningful. That is the scientific method and that's the way to maximize your money

I have gone through upgradeitis myself although way further down the food chain. I went from tin horn HT system purchased from Sears 10 years ago to 5.i with NHT Classic3's,2c, and SuperZeroes surround with a Sony SAw2500 sub . The Sony I bought as money ran out and just wanted a sub. I've concentrated on the NHT subs but then read on AVS about the SVS SB12-NSD sub.

I don't know what the numbers, charts mean and frequencies but can someone explain to me why I would want the SVS SB12 over the NHT's. The pricing on the NHT 12d is $610 shipped to me here in Hawaii and the SVS has free shipping as well at $649. That would be the top of my budget.

Is the SVS price a new norm or is this a sale or special right now? Kind of tapped with cash for now but love my system(cept SUB) and NOW after 5 or 6 months of lurking at AVS and listening to my system I realize the sub is very important.

70movies/30music, 10x13 room, 8' ceiling,reasonable listening volume but could play loud if I wanted.

I live on Kauai and anxious to hear the T-Rex once again walk through Jurassic Park as he did just up the road from where I live 20 years ago;)

Thanks for your help ahead

the price on the SVS is the normal price and their subs rarely, if ever, get discounted.

On paper, the NHT is comparable to the SVS. The number specs show that the SVS provides a bit more very deep bass (-6dB is at 21Hz (measured) for the SVS. The NHT is spec'ed at 25 Hz, so the SVS gives you a wee bit more). The SVS also has superior high end bandwidth (in case you need to blend with very small satellites)

Now, the primary reason you should choose the SVS is that it's a proven entity, Audioholics provides the most comprehensive technical reviews of all the websites, and they put the sub through the wringer and the result is that the sub is a well balanced performer. It's almost a textbook example of how to make a small sealed sub. The only other subs that are known to be superior are either larger or a lot more expensive. For the end user, SVS always makes their subs bulletproof, even if you drive it hard, it is electronically governed to make sure it doesn't damage itself. Subjectively, the SVS also does well, so it's just a "can't go wrong with this" choice

NHT makes good stuff, I've been a longtime fan, but nobody has put the sub through the same analysis. so we really don't know how good it is or if it actually even lives up to its stated specs. I know that their past subs have been hit or miss, so until Audioholics can actually get their hands on one, all we can say is that the NHT has the potential to be a good alternative, but there are lots of subs that were potentials but fall short of their stated specs or exhibit some anomalies when the objective measurements are actually done.
Edited by warpdrive - 7/6/12 at 6:48am

Just to nitpick: the SB12 is rated from 24 to 270 Hz in a +/- 3dB range (i.e. a 6 dB-width flatness range) by SVS. The 21 Hz figure comes from Audioholic's recent review, and is *not* the -6 dB point: it's the -3 dB point (they quoted 21-300 Hz as the 6 dB width flatness range). The point is, the SB12 almost reaches 20 Hz at -3dB in a quasi-anechoic setting. Of course, in-room is lower especially for small rooms.

The NHT sub (I assume you're speaking about the B-12d) seems really close to the SB12 in terms of design. Both use a 12-inch driver and a sealed 14" cube cabinet. The NHT use a 500W BASH amp (BASH amps were used in the SVS subs previously); whereas the SB12 uses a 400W Sledge amp which is supposed to be "conservatively rated". Aesthetically speaking, the NHT is gloss black, which is an option on the SB12 (costs $30 more); however the SVS's curved metal grill looks much nicer I think. Seeing the B-12d brochure, the -3dB point is at 27 Hz. I assume these measurements were done on ground plane outside (quasi anechoic setting), but this is not specified. So you'd realistically get a bit more extension with the SB12, but this is probably due to the deep bass EQ boost on the SB12 which is documented in the Audioholic review. Peak output looks a bit higher for the NHT probably due to the slightly more beefy amp. But if you're after raw output, a sealed box is not the right choice anyway; you'd better spend a few bucks more on the PB12-NSD instead.

EDIT: price of the gloss option on the SB12 is $30, not $50.
Edited by neutro - 7/6/12 at 8:51am

You are technically correct.....but here's how I look at it.

The measured 21Hz is within the 6dB window, and since the SVS is pretty much flat from 30Hz up, it really is -6dB@21Hz compared to the output at 40, 50 or 60Hz because that's what you are going to hear. I think playing these number games with +/- dB windows is kind of misleading, the window should be specified with 50 or 60Hz as the anchor point because that's pretty much the midband of the subwoofer. It gives a more honest appraisal of what the sub is actually putting out in the low end.

Of course we should be using 21Hz figure rather than the 23Hz spec'ed because we know this is the honest reality now.

The NHT is only spec'ed to 27Hz at -3dB, so either way, the SVS definitely has more real world extension. It's not specified whether this is a true anechoic measurement
Edited by warpdrive - 7/6/12 at 10:44am

You're absolutely right on this, it's the -6dB point from the peak output.

Perhaps. In the case of most SVS subs, it seems natural to see it that way. But I think other subs exhibit rather strong peaks at mid-bass, so the peak value is not representative of what you hear either, hence the +/- 3dB nomenclature: the peak would be at +3dB from a level close to what we could call an average, and the -3dB point would typically occur at the end of the sub's range. Since SVS's response is quite flat the "-3dB" point looks much more like -6dB from the average/plateau since there's almost no peak to speak of.

Well these figures are just a way to compactly convey the data found in this graph...

I think the two subs will ultimately be very similar in-room. They look basically the same without the grille, they cost about the same, their performance will be similar (maybe a little more punch for the NHT and a little more extension for the SB12). In fact I'm a bit surprised that NHT is able to make a sub with those specs at this price; typically only ID makers achieve that.