or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Seaton Sound SubMersive1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Seaton Sound SubMersive1 - Page 291

post #8701 of 9374
You are in no way OT. I am sorry to hear you think that might be off topic. Perhaps one of the self elevated AVS principal members gave you a verbal detention at some point? Anyway, just having a little fun smile.gif

I don't see a reason to add more eq. Your mini dsp can cut or, reluctantly try, and boost. There may be a different part of the software I am unavailable with that affects the eq differently. The major only benefit I would like would be the real time graph you can get with the SMS while moving subs around

I use audyssey (only XT currently) and also a Open DRC-AN from mini dsp. I am still fairly new but have developed a decent response line. Now on to improving decay and modal ringing... :/
post #8702 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTPCat View Post

I currently have an SubM HP+ and a SubM 1000w original and a slave on the way. I currently EQ with audyssey Pro and Denon AVR4311. I am also using REW with miniDSP UMIK-1 and was wondering about adding a velodyne sms-1 that a buddy wants to sell me. Will the sms-1 add anything to my sub EQ? Perhaps provide some easy EQ or placement options? Sorry for being a little OT, but it is in regards to my Seaton subs biggrin.gif
Can you show us a post-Audyssey XT32 frequency response graph? If you're already flat post-Audyssey, there won't be any benefit. If Audyssey doesn't have enough correction capability to fully correct for your room, there could be some benefit. I have a friend who has a 20+ dB peak pre-Audssey. We used an SMS-1 to knock that down which allowed Audyssey to get a flat result.

This was the response with no EQ. Note the HUGE peak at 40 Hz:



This is the response after knocking down the 40 Hz peak with the SMS-1:



This is the response after running Audyssey:



Compare the uncorrected response to the post-Audyssey response. We never could have achieved the final response without the SMS-1. Audyssey has a max cut of about 12 dB. If you don't need that much cut, you probably don't need the SMS-1. However, if you do need to knock down a big peak, the SMS-1 is an excellent tool for that.

Craig
Edited by craig john - 10/28/13 at 6:36pm
post #8703 of 9374
Right but he already has a mini dsp so it seems he can just cut with that. -16db allowance smile.gif
post #8704 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTPCat View Post

I currently have an SubM HP+ and a SubM 1000w original and a slave on the way. I currently EQ with audyssey Pro and Denon AVR4311. I am also using REW with miniDSP UMIK-1 and was wondering about adding a velodyne sms-1 that a buddy wants to sell me. Will the sms-1 add anything to my sub EQ? Perhaps provide some easy EQ or placement options? Sorry for being a little OT, but it is in regards to my Seaton subs biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

Right but he already has a mini dsp so it seems he can just cut with that. -16db allowance smile.gif
He has a miniDSP MICROPHONE, a UMIK-1, not a miniDSP EQ.



His EQ is Audyssey Pro.
post #8705 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTPCat View Post

I currently have an SubM HP+ and a SubM 1000w original and a slave on the way. I currently EQ with audyssey Pro and Denon AVR4311. I am also using REW with miniDSP UMIK-1 and was wondering about adding a velodyne sms-1 that a buddy wants to sell me. Will the sms-1 add anything to my sub EQ? Perhaps provide some easy EQ or placement options? Sorry for being a little OT, but it is in regards to my Seaton subs biggrin.gif
Read this link. I had the same experience with my SMS-1 and finally went Minidsp/dspeaker antimode route.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1449145/im-done-with-the-sms-1-it-limits-the-output-of-my-submersives
post #8706 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post


He has a miniDSP MICROPHONE, a UMIK-1, not a miniDSP EQ.



His EQ is Audyssey Pro.

Oh my bad! I would go for the SMS then. I have found presenting audyssey with cutting peaks prior gave the best results. As opposed to trying after audyssey
post #8707 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post


He has a miniDSP MICROPHONE, a UMIK-1, not a miniDSP EQ.



His EQ is Audyssey Pro.

Oh my bad! I would go for the SMS then. I have found presenting audyssey with cutting peaks prior gave the best results. As opposed to trying after audyssey
Did you read the post right above yours (and especially the link in the post)? If it's true, it's a solid argument AGAINST the SMS-1.


Max
post #8708 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Can you show us a post-Audyssey XT32 frequency response graph? If you're already flat post-Audyssey, there won't be any benefit. If Audyssey doesn't have enough correction capability to fully correct for your room, there could be some benefit. I have a friend who has a 20+ dB peak pre-Audssey. We used an SMS-1 to knock that down which allowed Audyssey to get a flat result.

This was the response with no EQ. Note the HUGE peak at 40 Hz:



This is the response after knocking down the 40 Hz peak with the SMS-1:



This is the response after running Audyssey:



Compare the uncorrected response to the post-Audyssey response. We never could have achieved the final response without the SMS-1. Audyssey has a max cut of about 12 dB. If you don't need that much cut, you probably don't need the SMS-1. However, if you do need to knock down a big peak, the SMS-1 is an excellent tool for that.

Craig
That friend would be me smile.gif. I had an EQ before but without getting into the details, I took it out when I received the HP amp. The new amp started to shut down with bass heavy movie parts because of the way Audyssey was handling that monster peak (again, I have said it before but this is an anomaly with my room, not the norm) . After a lot of talk with Mark S and Craig we realized that I needed another external EQ to tame that peak. So I got the SMS-1 from Craig who did not need it anymore. Craig and Dennis came over, they worked their magic with XT32 and the SMS-1, and the results are what you see above. I am very happy with how the sub sounds now. It blends so evenly with my mains it's just insane. I watched a concert last night and it sounded incredible with the sub. It did not call attention to itself but you knew it was there. Not everyone will need an extra EQ in their system, but I really don't think it's a bad thing if you do.
Edited by MIkeDuke - 10/29/13 at 6:40am
post #8709 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbluemax1 View Post

Did you read the post right above yours (and especially the link in the post)? If it's true, it's a solid argument AGAINST the SMS-1.


Max

I meant in the sense of either just Audyssey or then audyssey and the SMS together. If we start over then hpcat you should go for a mini dsp considering price. You can pay more for an anti mode. Or the Behringer that is like 350.

I personally would never want an SMS. The only way I would ever use it is to see the real-time response when placing subwoofers. I personally like the freedom the many DSP unit gives lots of options.
post #8710 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkeDuke View Post

That friend would be me smile.gif. I had an EQ before but without getting into the details, I took it out when I received the HP amp. The new amp started to shut down with bass heavy movie parts because of the way Audyssey was handling that monster peak (again, I have said it before but this is an anomaly with my room, not the norm) . After a lot of talk with Mark S and Craig we realized that I needed another external EQ to tame that peak. So I got the SMS-1 from Craig who did not need it anymore. Craig and Dennis came over, they worked their magic with XT32 and the SMS-1, and the results are what you see above. I am very happy with how the sub sounds now. It blends so evenly with my mains it's just insane. I watched a concert last night and it sounded incredible with the sub. It did not call attention to itself but you knew it was there. Not everyone will need an extra EQ in their system, but I really don't think it's a bad thing if you do.

That is a job well done! Have you ever thought about implementing a house curve?
post #8711 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

That is a job well done! Have you ever thought about implementing a house curve?
You know, it sounds so good now, I really don't want to mess with. TBH, I would not be brave enough to do that on my own so I am just going to leave it as it is. For all I know a house curve would aggravate whatever room nodes I already have so I have no problem leaving it as is. I do know many people like a house curve but I wisely deferred to Craig and let him set it up the best way he could.
post #8712 of 9374
Hi Mike,

If you want a "house curve", just use Dynamic EQ. Since you don't listen at Reference Level, DEQ will give you a house curve. smile.gif

Craig
post #8713 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Hi Mike,

If you want a "house curve", just use Dynamic EQ. Since you don't listen at Reference Level, DEQ will give you a house curve. smile.gif

Craig
So I will blatantly admit my ignorance tongue.gif. Will the DEQ raise the level of the low stuff or lower the level of the low stuff. Or does it do something else. I seem to remember reading that people like to turn that feature off for some reason. Any explanation? Basically, why would someone want one.
post #8714 of 9374
When you calibrate with Audyssey, you calibrate at "Reference Level." You want to be "flat" at Reference Level. However, as you lower the volume below Reference Level, your human ears become less sensitive to bass. These human hearing sensitivities have long been documented as the Fletcher-Munson Curves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher%E2%80%93Munson_curves

There have been updates and new research regarding these types of curves, but every single piece of research shows that humans can't hear bass as well as the volume decreases. Audyssey have done their own research and come up with their own set of curves, and they've implemented them in their Dynamic EQ system. http://www.audyssey.com/technologies/dynamic-eq Basically, as you turn the volume down, DEQ automatically turns the bass up to offset the decreased sensitivity of your ears.

Another thing DEQ does is it gives a small boost to the surrounds. Again, this is due to human hear deficiencies... we don't hear as well to our sides vs. straight ahead. Some people don't use DEQ because they don't "prefer" these changes.

My recollection is that we measured your system with Audyssey DEQ off, and got the graph above. Then, afterwards we turned DEQ on with a 5 dB Reference Level Offset. Unless you've changed something since I was there, you should be listening with DEQ on. My impression is that you "like" what DEQ is doing for the bass and the surrounds, so I don't think we want to turn it off. However, you can try it off if you like. If you want me help you walk through the menus, let me know. smile.gif

Craig
post #8715 of 9374
I haven't changed anything on the audio side. I know better then that biggrin.gif. If it is on now, and I love the way it sounds now, then why mess with a good thing. I am going to leave it as is.
post #8716 of 9374
Wow good info Craig. You can also change to whatever PGM gives the 3 db low end boost. I forget. But that will be a decent and easy solution with DEQ in a partnership. Besides all you got to do is press buttons and make a switch in your AVR menu to do those things you can switch right back
post #8717 of 9374
I think I have a bit too much bass right now with my house curve. I have dynamic EQ on, The low end PGM boost on, and my low shelf filter, and 3db hot. I honestly think I will end up flattening out my house curve a little bit. I don't think I'm anywhere near hurting anything although I would like to know where that Line is. To be honest my gauge is the fact that I haven't tripped the breaker yet. Also I don't listen at reference I sit fairly close in my room is kind of smaller. -11 to -14 is normal so far
post #8718 of 9374

I think the point was that the graphs above don't necessarily reflect how MIkeDuke is currently listening (i.e. with DEQ on) and as a result, there's a house curve created by the boost DEQ applies.  I believe PGM 2 has the 3dB boost bicbw.

post #8719 of 9374
HI,

In looking at Submersives, what is the slave thing? Is Mark making outboard amps for these? Or is an external amp used for a slave model or is the slave amplified by an internal amp of another Submersive?

If I want 4 Submersives, how do you price them and how are the primary and slaves powered (internal or external amps)?

Thanks!
post #8720 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

HI,

In looking at Submersives, what is the slave thing? Is Mark making outboard amps for these? Or is an external amp used for a slave model or is the slave amplified by an internal amp of another Submersive?

If I want 4 Submersives, how do you price them and how are the primary and slaves powered (internal or external amps)?

Thanks!
Hello Bland. Basically, as I understand it, a master slave combo would comprise of a SubMersive with an amp capable of 4000 but instead of just powering one sub, It powers both The other sub is a SubMersive without an amp so the 4000 watt amp would also power that box as well. For your setup, if you want four total subs, you can get two of the "master" kind and then two of the "slave" kind and you would be setup.
Here is a link on Mark's site that explains it a bit more
http://www.seaton-sound-forum.com/post/submersive-hp-f2-masterslave-option-6453864?&trail=20
post #8721 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

HI,

In looking at Submersives, what is the slave thing? Is Mark making outboard amps for these? Or is an external amp used for a slave model or is the slave amplified by an internal amp of another Submersive?

If I want 4 Submersives, how do you price them and how are the primary and slaves powered (internal or external amps)?

Thanks!

Instead of using a 2400 W amplifier for one enclosure with two drivers. Mark puts a 4000 Watt amplifier in one enclosure with two drivers. He then builds an enclosure with two drivers that does not have an amplifier. Then Mark runs two enclosures with all four drivers running off one 4000 watt amplifier. It brings the cost down
post #8722 of 9374
Just to add..

The HP+ (US version) is the SubMersive with the 4000 watt amp everyone is talking about.
When powering a single SubMersive HP +, it delivers 2400 watts into 4ohms so it - very similar or same as the regular SubMersive HP (non + plus edition/version).
When powering dual SubMersives the ohm loads drop to 2ohms and now that same HP+ amp delivers a total of 4000 watts.
post #8723 of 9374
OK... So ~$3600 for a pair of subs. Correct?

Thanks for the info.
post #8724 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunga99 View Post

Just to add..

The HP+ (US version) is the SubMersive with the 4000 watt amp everyone is talking about.
When powering a single SubMersive HP +, it delivers 2400 watts into 4ohms so it - very similar or same as the regular SubMersive HP (non + plus edition/version).
When powering dual SubMersives the ohm loads drop to 2ohms and now that same HP+ amp delivers a total of 4000 watts.

Really? I humbly question smile.gif
I thought it was upgraded to the 4kw speaker power amp?
post #8725 of 9374
Well I did a little researching on Mark's forum and this one. I am still not sure if it's a 2.4 or 4.0amplifier. It doesn't really matter because the master slave set can get within one dB of two HP or two F2 submersives

Mark did refer to it as a 4000 W amplifier. But it's possible he was doing so in reference to the two Ohm load capability. And in fact it just has upgraded circuitry to handle the two ohm load capability as well as the extra signal output.
post #8726 of 9374
I think for my room... 17 X 26 X 9, I might need 4 or 6 to get to the ULF.
post #8727 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

Well I did a little researching on Mark's forum and this one. I am still not sure if it's a 2.4 or 4.0amplifier. It doesn't really matter because the master slave set can get within one dB of two HP or two F2 submersives

Mark did refer to it as a 4000 W amplifier. But it's possible he was doing so in reference to the two Ohm load capability. And in fact it just has upgraded circuitry to handle the two ohm load capability as well as the extra signal output.

The HP+ (US version) amp is the SP1-4000 model from http://www.speakerpower.net
Note it's 2400 watts in 4ohms and 4000watts in 2 ohms

I believe the regular Hp amp is the SP1-2400 model.
post #8728 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlpowell84 View Post

Well I did a little researching on Mark's forum and this one. I am still not sure if it's a 2.4 or 4.0amplifier. It doesn't really matter because the master slave set can get within one dB of two HP or two F2 submersives

Mark did refer to it as a 4000 W amplifier. But it's possible he was doing so in reference to the two Ohm load capability. And in fact it just has upgraded circuitry to handle the two ohm load capability as well as the extra signal output.

Nothing confusing going on. As noted in the detailed thread on our forum, the HP+/F2+ amplifier delivers the same output from a single cabinet as an HP/F2. The HP+ has ~2x the current capability to drive a second, passive SubMersive cabinet when connected using the 4 conductor SpeakOn connector as seen here:


As mentioned by yourself and others, the "+" option makes it more practical and financially justifiable to add more SubMersives to the room while also allowing enthusiasts to break up the total costs over time by adding units when appropriate. I have many customers purchasing 2 HP+ or F2+ units now with the intention to add 1 and then 2 slave units in the future with much lower future upgrade costs vs. purchasing another amplified unit.
post #8729 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

Can you show us a post-Audyssey XT32 frequency response graph? If you're already flat post-Audyssey, there won't be any benefit. If Audyssey doesn't have enough correction capability to fully correct for your room, there could be some benefit. I have a friend who has a 20+ dB peak pre-Audssey. We used an SMS-1 to knock that down which allowed Audyssey to get a flat result.

This was the response with no EQ. Note the HUGE peak at 40 Hz:



This is the response after knocking down the 40 Hz peak with the SMS-1:



This is the response after running Audyssey:



Compare the uncorrected response to the post-Audyssey response. We never could have achieved the final response without the SMS-1. Audyssey has a max cut of about 12 dB. If you don't need that much cut, you probably don't need the SMS-1. However, if you do need to knock down a big peak, the SMS-1 is an excellent tool for that.

Craig

Thanks for the response Craig - I can't post any graphs as I am working in Los Angeles this week and didn't bring them with me eek.gif. All of my measurements thus far are only with the HP+ in the system as the original HP was purchased recently and is sitting waiting until I receive the slave at which time I will begin working at optimal placement of all 3 subs. If I recall correctly my response after audyssey for the HP+ is pretty flat so I am really trying to smooth out the bass throughout the room and get a little better output in my non-sealed den that has one side open to a very large area. Hopefully, the slave will arrive next week and then the journey begins. Do you think the sms-1 would help in finding best placements or should I just measure with REW after each placement?
post #8730 of 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTPCat View Post

Do you think the sms-1 would help in finding best placements or should I just measure with REW after each placement?

I'm not Craig but I do have multiple SubMersives and recently (10 days ago) had reason to find them new locations in a new room. When I was placing my subs, I placed them on teflon sliders, started up OmniMIc, kept it running and watched as I (slowly) slid the subs around the room. REW (or XTZ) would provide the same functionality for this purpose. While SMS might serve a similar function, I prefer the displayed granularity of REW/OmniMIc/XTZ.

My $0.02
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › Seaton Sound SubMersive1