Subwoofer cost

I agree!

And while we are at it why drive anything more than a 50cc scooter, it will take you any where you want to go!

I think all he is saying is that at $500.00 you start to reach the point of diminishing returns. We all know that a $1000.00 piece of equipment is rarely twice as good as the $500.00. In fact if you can get a 10% difference for twice the money many would be thrilled. There are a lot of very capable subs out there for $500.00 and the vast majority of consumers would be very satisfied with most of them. A hobbyest, like most that frequent this forum, doesn't subscribe to that train of thought.

The problem with this line of analysis is that both scales (money, quality) are subjective.

What is the value of $500 vs. $1000 to any individual? It depends on his/her income and assets, as well as his/her attitude towards spending and acquisition in general.

What is 10% or 50% better in sound quality? If that's not subjective, I don't know what is.

So, the proverbial point of diminishing returns is a moving target.

Without a doubt. However, I do still feel that Mr. Human's point is that the vast majority of listeners would be thrilled with a $500.00 sub. Not to put words in his mouth.

Ya, I am not sure where he is coming from. You can buy/build a very good subwoofer for $500, but when you move up the ladder a little say $1500-$2500 you get some serious hardware that have correspondingly more output and SQ...

Your point in reference to Joe consumer is valid, the $500 sub might be plenty in small room.

As usual, the enthusiest in you is showing. You are missing the point. No one would argue that a $500.00 sub is almost as good as a $1500.00 sub. I believe his point is that most people just don't need it. And yes, I know need has nothing to do with it.
I have about $3500 in my sound system and to me that is modest. My friends call it a killer system. Many here would disagree. Most don't come anywhere near that and are thrilled for life with far less. A $500.00 sub is a serious piece of equipment far outside of the HTIB type.

This is a false analysis. Lets assume your running a 7.1 setup, each channel putting out a REAL 100 RMS a channel simultaneously. To get this level of performance, expect to spend at least 1000 bucks for an amplifier that can push 700 RMS simultaneously.

Now when your adding a subwoofer, you are adding the lower frequencies for the other 7 channels. Hence you need a subwoofer that can also push at least 700 RMS simultaneously.

One could argue that you actually need more than 700 RMS of power, because lower frequencies require more watts than upper frequencies.

So it would be entirely reasonable to designate 1050 RMS of power for the bottom frequencies, and 700 RMS of power for the mid and upper frequencies to achieve a nicely balanced setup.

No doubt and that is my point, too. In fact, the vast majority of listeners would probably be puzzled by what some of us spend.

LOL

AMEN!

You have a good point there, not to mention wives.

I've never heard a $500 store bought sub that I could live with. Most subs in that price range leave alot to be desired even in a small system.

Store bought, probably not. But internet like HSU and SVS, there are some pretty nice offerings for $500. My first PB-10 really rocked for $400.

I don't tell people how much any of my equipment costs unless they ask. And other than my HDTV, my sub is the most expensive piece in my system. The reason being that it is the only thing I didn't buy used or on Clearance.

When most people, even people that make 2x what I make ask how much my sub costs, and I tell them, they quickly change the subject, and it only cost $549. But like Kal said, value is subjective.

These same people drive brand new cars, my wife has a 2003 because I want her and my daughter to have something that is safe, roomy, and reliable. But I drive a 1992 car, and I'm just fine with that. Most people would not be. I would rather have a killer sound system than a nice car.

BTW, I"m very happy with my $549 sub in my 2900 cu. ft. room.

To be pedantic the spectral balance of music favors lower frequencies above 40Hz, so if you split up the frequencies you require more total power at low frequencies. At a given speaker sensitivity it takes no more power to reproduce low frequenies.


You're neglecting placement (you're theoretically picking up a 4X output increase for each surface a sub-woofer is near, although with leakage through the walls means the real number is somewhere between that and only 2X - which still gets you an 8X boost for corner placement) and sensitivity differences (small speakers that aren't efficient can be paired with a big sub woofer that is).

I got curious about this once and made some measurements with sub (corner loaded) and center (on a short stand 3' off my screen wall) both with claimed sensitivity a bit over 90dB/2.83V/1 meter and nominal impedance arround 6Ohms. The sub was about 12' away and center 9' away, although this is well beyond the critical distance at which direct sound and reverberant fields are equal so only room size should be significant. The sub is a Citation 7.4 with a 14.5" driver in a ~3 cubic foot ported box and should be typical for reasonably sized subs; the center a Definitive C1 which should be typical for a medium sized MTM speaker. I used my Rat Shack SPL meter with C-weighting so sub-output may be a little under reported . I used an HP true RMS volt meter which is spot on at no worse than -2% against the calibration terminal on my Tek scope which is .17dB. The sub tune is arround 30Hz so the voltage within the sub's pass-band may be over-reported. Any errors led to sub sensitivity being measured as less than it really was. Extrapolation to reference level output disregards thermal compression although the Citation 7.4 uses a JBL pro-sound driver with a 4" voice coil and shouldn't suffer too much arround just 100W.

My mains were actively tri-amplified dipoles that would be too messy to make sense of so I didn't measure them.

I measured .88 VRMS for pink noise at 75dB SPL (at my listening position) from my 6 Ohm center which is .13W. A 101dB peak (reference level Dolby Digital main channel maximum with typical encoder settings) would take 50W. 4dB less efficient speakers (not atypical) would get this up to 125W.

I measured .34 VRMS to produce pink noise at 76dB SPL (at my listening position) from my 6 Ohm corner loaded sub-woofer which is .02W. A 101dB peak would take 6W, 111dB (reference level Dolby Digital LFE maximum with typical encoder settings) 60W.

Mixing in uncorreleated bass from 7 other channels with 10dB less headroom could get me 2.3dB more output which is a factor of 1.7 - meaning I'd need 102W . Using correlated bass would increase my total power requirement 4.6dB which is a hair less than a factor of three to 173W. Both numbers assume there is nothing but bass below the 80Hz sub-woofer XO in the other channels which is completely unrealistic since you need higher frequency energy for the transients to have any impact.

This all assumes that you want/need reference level output which does not work well in overly reverberant rooms (many untreated areas) or with small mid-bass drivers that distort too much to be useable at reference level. Reference -5dB would cut that by a factor of 3, reference -10 a factor of 10.

Obviously things change with small (spouse-friendly) and therefore inherently inefficient sub-woofers. A small design like Sunfire's which produces flat output for a given amplifier input will be inefficient throughout its entire opreating range. A small sealed sub-woofer can be efficient down to its natural cut-off, below which you must boost amplifier output to compensate if you want low bass.

a $200 sub cannot touch a $500 sub in performance and a $1000 sub will kick the $500 subs ass. (if you are buying SUBS that we know are good like HSU, AV123 and SVS...ect)

If you want a little bass get the $200.....if you like great bass get the $500..........if you are a BASSHEAD get the $1000+ subwoofer.

It is really that simple.

A quality driver with reasonable output is $150+; retail price 5-10X parts cost; and that $650-$1500 has yet to pay for an amplifier. At $1150 MSRP with no amplifier the Citation 7.4 was the first sub-woofer I decided I could live with for music.

My last two pairs of speakers have been DIY and the next two sets of subwoofers will be too.

I guess that makes me a basshead.

Does my so-so DLs-5000R in my 640 cu ft room make me a basshead?
I get port noise for some reason.. Dunno how I can drive it so far..

I love how some one just posts something and gets 20(could be more or less) responses without a second post from the OP and things just evolve. Sometimes moving off topic sometimes not. Its funny.

Then you fit where I said you would. "If you want a little bass get the $200.....if you like great bass get the $500..........if you are a BASSHEAD get the $1000+ subwoofer."

You are a person who really doesn't care that much about having reference level bass. I'm talking like 120db at 20hz LOUD!

SO...

Here is your answer you were seeking...

Most of us here are striving for a system that gives reference level sound from the HIGHEST HIGH to the LOWEST LOW. In order to get reference level sound you need to move a lot of air and that takes a lot of power, thus the need for a more powerful subwoofer amp....

100watts per channel is fine for your mains and can do a very good job powering a tweeter and a small midrange woofer......but 300-500-even 1000watts is needed to drive a BIG subwoofer and to push it to a level equal to the mains if you are approching reference level listening...

Your smaller sub probably sounds great to you and that is all that matters regardless of how many watts it is.

You would probably think my 525watt subwoofer is overkill......but to me it is still not enough. I want the walls to shake when a bomb blows up.

For bass.......we want to push 120db max for major scenes...

I can push 105 EASY Right now from my listening position....but that is not enough for me


aka...I'm a basshead

Michael asks a pretty good question, though more specifics would have helped the thread opener. System balance is often ignored at the expense of getting the highest SPL subwoofer one can afford.

His system looks modest, but in reality, it will be a fantastic performer on both 2 channel and Home Theater.

Michael - ACI subs have a knack for "out doing" their numbers. In an apartment, your sub probably has the ability of annoying your neighbors, should you ask it to.

If someone has $2000, and wants a 5.1 system, I would recommend appx. $500 on a receiver, $200 on a DVD player, $800-$900 on speakers, and $400-500 on a sub.

The requirements for your home speakers for REFERENCE LEVEL include...

105dB of clean output capability above 80hz for all full range speakers at all the key listening positions in the room.

120dBs of clean bass capability from the sub(s)...from 80hz down to 20hz

The 100 watt rating on the ACI Quake is probably a very modest rating. I'm sure that sub is a killer.

Here is the sub this guys has....

http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/Revi...ake/index.html

Dimensions: 20" tall, 14" wide and 14" deep
Linear Frequency Response: from 33-150Hz, +/-3db
Crossover Frequency: Adjustable Low Pass: 50-150Hz 12 db/octave, High Pass line level fixed at 80Hz 12/db/octave, High Pass speaker level at 100Hz
Bass Drivers: Proprietary Dual 8" long-throw woofers
RMS Power: Built in amplifier delivers 100 watts RMS at less than 0.5% distortion
Suggested Retail Price: $849
Factory Direct Sale Price: $449


A MAJOR reason WHY you would spend over the $449 direct price....

33hz low end response. In order to get LOWER than that you have to spend more money on bigger drivers, bigger enclosures, and more power.

Heck the suggested retail of that sub is $849!!!!!

I agree with Craig.....the original post needed a lot more information than just saying "Seems $400-$500 gets you into the 200 watt range of power, which is more than enough and should get you a quality driver and enclosure."