Help with svs pb16 ultra chuffing - Page 5 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 63Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 168 Old 02-19-2018, 03:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MIX_MASTER_ICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,069
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2674 Post(s)
Liked: 2479
I had really considered a PB16 Ultra when they initially hit the outlet for $1999. I'm sure glad I didn't. I know I could send it back, but what a hassle it would be wrasslin' this monster for return freight shipping. This makes the Monolith THX Ultra 15 look all the more appealing. These Monolith subs can take whatever you dish out.

Subs>RBH I-12e, I-12. HSU VTF-15H mk2. Monolith THX 12(x2), THX 10(x2). XTZ 1X12. SVS PB-1000(x2). Speakers>JBL Studio 270/235c/230/225c. Sony CS3/CS8/CS5. QA 3020i/3090Ci, 2020i/2000c. Monolith Cinema 5bs. Polk RTiA1/CSiA4. Other Audio>Sony MDR-Z7m2,V6, XB900n,700,XB32,XB31. Sennheiser HD58X,HD4.50,PC37X. HiFiMAN HE4XX. Philips SHP9500. SIVGA SV004. SA HDTwo. HyperX CloudPS4. TB Elite AtlasAero. LG FH6,RK8,RK7,PK5. HK Onyx Studio4(x2).
MIX_MASTER_ICE is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 168 Old 02-19-2018, 05:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
There is no excuse for it to not handle 10hz without major chuffing. My MFW-15 Turbos and eD a5-350's (with TC drivers) handle 10hz with authority and zero chuffing. There really is no good reason for a $2500 internet direct leading brand flagship sub to not be able to handle this.
Sure there's and excuse. It's not tuned or made to handle 10hz sine waves.

My PC12+ has the same size ports and the only time it ever chuffed was during that same 10hz sine wave.

I agree though that SVS should have used larger ports. It's kind of crazy that all of their subs from the 12+ on up use the same size ports despite the ever increasing driver size.
With the ability to put it in 13hz tune, with how huge the box is, and at 174lbs, this thing should easily go to 10hz without chuffing.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
post #123 of 168 Old 02-19-2018, 05:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIX_MASTER_ICE View Post
I had really considered a PB16 Ultra when they initially hit the outlet for $1999. I'm sure glad I didn't. I know I could send it back, but what a hassle it would be wrasslin' this monster for return freight shipping. This makes the Monolith THX Ultra 15 look all the more appealing. These Monolith subs can take whatever you dish out.
I'd take a Monolith 15, any day, over the PB-16.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #124 of 168 Old 02-20-2018, 12:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Kini62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 8,080
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2742 Post(s)
Liked: 2566
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
With the ability to put it in 13hz tune, with how huge the box is, and at 174lbs, this thing should easily go to 10hz without chuffing.
10hz is not 13hz. Simple as that. If SVS said it was flat to 10hz and chuffed then that would be a different story.

Klipsch RF-62II, RC-500, RS-400, SVS PC12+,
Def Tech SC8000
Onkyo RZ820
Roku Ultra, Apple TV, Sharp 70" Quattron
Kini62 is offline  
post #125 of 168 Old 02-20-2018, 04:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hopinater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central VA
Posts: 6,798
Mentioned: 95 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3548 Post(s)
Liked: 11110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motocom View Post
It sounds like the SVS and PSA subs are the worst offenders in port chuffing. Right now I'm leaning towards the Monolith 15" but the warranty process concerns me and they haven't replied to any of my 3 e-mails. Will they send out a replacement amp or driver like SVS or would I need the return the whole darn thing via freight? The PB4000 seems to be noise free so far.
My experience with PSA and SVS subs runs in direct opposition to your statement. I've had multiple PSA subs and my dad has had multiple SVS subs and neither one of us have ever had one chuff. In most cases (but admittedly not all cases) when a sub is making excessive port noise it comes down to poor placement and/or poor setup on the user's part.

I've seen on multiple occasions where someone complaining of port noise gets asked about their set up and they start talking about playing movies at -5 MV while running their subs 10 dB hot with DEQ engaged on top of that. Then they post a graph of the response in their room and the MLP is smack dab in a huge dip or null. Once they got the sub placed right and set up correctly the port noise problem was no longer there. Bass is as much about the room as it is the subwoofer employed.

I'll add that I've seen videos of chuffing subs from JTR, SVS, PSA and Rythmik but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a sub from any of them. They all make good products. As long as you know your bass needs and choose the right sub for the job and actually know how to set it up, you'll be good to go.

Subwoofers: PSA TV36 iPal X2 ...Speakers: PSA MTM-210T L/R - PSA MTM-210C Center- PSA MT110SR's Surrounds - RSL C34E Atmos... Motion Actuators: Crowson Shadow 8 - X2
Video: Samsung UN65KS9000 4K SUHD - Oppo UDP-203... AVR:Denon X4400... Gaming: XBOX ONE S

Guide to Subwoofer Calibration and Bass Preferences
Hopinater is online now  
post #126 of 168 Old 02-21-2018, 06:05 PM
AVS ***** Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,325
Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5530 Post(s)
Liked: 10651
There are a couple of things that I would like to add to Hop's excellent post. First, the PB16 doesn't really have a tuning point of 13Hz. That was an early marketing statement that didn't hold up. A sub should be strongest right at its port tune, or a little below, and the PB16 measures about the same as a PB13 Ultra at 12.5Hz. I believe that the actual port tune is about 16Hz. Since most people are trying to get into about the mid-teens in-room, a 16Hz port tune (or even 17Hz) isn't bad at all.

Second, what the PB16 does have is max output that is equivalent to a JTR Captivator 1400 from 35Hz down to 16Hz, or a little lower. Probably by about 15Hz, the Cap 1400 starts to pull ahead, but that also isn't bad at all for a 15.5" driver, compared to an 18" driver, from a sub maker whose DSP is intended for maximum low-frequency extension. JTR is the king when it comes to low-frequency output from ported (and most sealed) subs. The PB16 used all of its slightly larger cabinet volume, its bigger stronger driver, and its slightly more powerful amplifier in the low-bass (<35Hz) range where SVS believed that people would appreciate it most. And, they got ~4db more output than the PB13 in that range.

I can attest to the fact that the PB16 has a heavier, weightier sound/feel to it than the PB13, due to that concentration of max SPL in the very low-frequencies, as I have had both models at the same time. There have been a few reports of the PB16 chuffing more easily than the PB13 does, and I believe that is correct. But, I agree with Hop that any ported sub will chuff under the right circumstances, and the number of chuffing PB16's, considering the hundreds sold, has been very small. I have three PB16's, for instance, and none of mine has ever chuffed. But then, they are properly deployed and calibrated.

In order to more completely eliminate the potential chuffing problem, compared to the PB13, the PB16 would have needed an even larger cabinet to accommodate 4" ports. It currently has the same 3.5" ports that the PB13 has, with a more powerful amplifier, and more SPL deliberately concentrated into the very low-bass region. Subs typically chuff near their tuning points, so with more amplifier power concentrated there it can chuff a little more easily than the PB13. But, even then, if the subs are functioning properly, the chuffing seems limited to very demanding material, and is typically only an occasional problem with a few subs.

I try to never encourage other people to buy what I have unless they are specifically looking for encouragement. I believe that, depending on a person's specific goals, there are subs that will produce even more max output at comparable or better prices. And, the alternative choices can be very good indeed. But, for people who like the aesthetics, or the features, or the total SVS package (including brand loyalty, for what that may be worth) the PB16 is still a very fine subwoofer.

Regards,
Mike

Edit: I should probably add that there is a lot more to a good subwoofer than the size of the driver, or it's max output at a particular frequency. All of the professional and owner reviews of the PB16 I have seen have been very favorable with respect to its low-distortion and overall sound quality.

GUIDE TO SUBWOOFER CALIBRATION AND BASS PREFERENCES

* The Guide linked above is a comprehensive guide to Audio & HT systems, including:
Speaker placements & Room treatments; HT calibration & Room EQ; Room gain; Bass
Preferences; Subwoofer Buyer's Guide: Sealed/ported; ID subs; Subwoofer placement.

Last edited by mthomas47; 02-21-2018 at 07:19 PM.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #127 of 168 Old 02-21-2018, 07:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
With the ability to put it in 13hz tune, with how huge the box is, and at 174lbs, this thing should easily go to 10hz without chuffing.
10hz is not 13hz. Simple as that. If SVS said it was flat to 10hz and chuffed then that would be a different story.
I disagree entirely. Why do my MFW-15 Turbos and eD a5-350s exhibit almost zero chuffing during this scene, yet are able to hit 10hz without any issues...?

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
post #128 of 168 Old 02-21-2018, 07:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motocom View Post
It sounds like the SVS and PSA subs are the worst offenders in port chuffing. Right now I'm leaning towards the Monolith 15" but the warranty process concerns me and they haven't replied to any of my 3 e-mails. Will they send out a replacement amp or driver like SVS or would I need the return the whole darn thing via freight? The PB4000 seems to be noise free so far.
I would definitely be leaning towards the Monolith, as well.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
post #129 of 168 Old 02-21-2018, 07:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
imureh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 4,678
Mentioned: 228 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2928 Post(s)
Liked: 3737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopinater View Post
My experience with PSA and SVS subs runs in direct opposition to your statement. I've had multiple PSA subs and my dad has had multiple SVS subs and neither one of us have ever had one chuff. In most cases (but admittedly not all cases) when a sub is making excessive port noise it comes down to poor placement and/or poor setup on the user's part.

I've seen on multiple occasions where someone complaining of port noise gets asked about their set up and they start talking about playing movies at -5 MV while running their subs 10 dB hot with DEQ engaged on top of that. Then they post a graph of the response in their room and the MLP is smack dab in a huge dip or null. Once they got the sub placed right and set up correctly the port noise problem was no longer there. Bass is as much about the room as it is the subwoofer employed.

I'll add that I've seen videos of chuffing subs from JTR, SVS, PSA and Rythmik but I wouldn't hesitate to buy a sub from any of them. They all make good products. As long as you know your bass needs and choose the right sub for the job and actually know how to set it up, you'll be good to go.
Posts like these have been repeated several times and may need to be turned into sticky. People see one or two videos and without understanding the full context on set up, listening levels, etc start bashing brands. It has been said 'ALL PORTED SUBS CAN BE MADE TO CHUFF" If your sub is chuffing you may need to look at how you are running it first before bashing any brand.
mthomas47, Hopinater and Ben Tan like this.

Subwoofers: Dual Rythmik FV18s Rev2 with Paper cone, BOSS Platform mini riser, 2 BK LFE
Speakers: PSA MTM-210 L/C/R - Klipsch 250S Surrounds, PSA MT 110sr Rear Surrounds, 4 x SVS Prime Elevation for Atmos
Video: Epson PowerLite Home Cinema 6500 UB; Room: 2100 cuft sealed on suspended floor
Receiver & Players: Denon X4400H, Oppo UDP-203, Roku Ultra. Apple TV, Minidsp 2X4 HD
imureh is online now  
post #130 of 168 Old 02-21-2018, 08:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
subacabra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Hillsborough, New Jersey
Posts: 2,616
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1729 Post(s)
Liked: 4974
I had two PSA v1500's and two 15v's and not once did I ever experience chuffing, even at near reference levels.
Hopinater and Ben Tan like this.
subacabra is online now  
post #131 of 168 Old 02-22-2018, 01:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
Ben Tan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 927
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 531 Post(s)
Liked: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by imureh View Post
Posts like these have been repeated several times and may need to be turned into sticky. People see one or two videos and without understanding the full context on set up, listening levels, etc start bashing brands. It has been said 'ALL PORTED SUBS CAN BE MADE TO CHUFF" If your sub is chuffing you may need to look at how you are running it first before bashing any brand.
Negatives > Positives.

This entire century has proved that the majority of people are more concerned with the bad without even looking at the good.
If only some people open their eyes (or ears in this case) and see the good outweighs the bad, immensely.
mthomas47 and Hopinater like this.

SVS Ultra Bookshelf + SVS Ultra Center
Prime Bookshelf Surround with Prime Elevation Heights
Dual Rythmik FV15HP
Yamaha RX-A3060 + Parasound Halo A31 + Emotiva A500
Ben Tan is offline  
post #132 of 168 Old 02-22-2018, 01:26 AM
Advanced Member
 
kyzer soze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 901
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 367
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by imureh View Post
Posts like these have been repeated several times and may need to be turned into sticky. People see one or two videos and without understanding the full context on set up, listening levels, etc start bashing brands. It has been said 'ALL PORTED SUBS CAN BE MADE TO CHUFF" If your sub is chuffing you may need to look at how you are running it first before bashing any brand.
Hop and mthomas47 post are always on point.
alwaller, mthomas47 and Hopinater like this.

Ascend Sierra 2's (LCR & side surrounds) + Pioneer atmos modules. 5.1.4 setup
Marantz AV7703
Rythmik FV15HP
JVC DLA-X590R (RS 440) projector
Stewart StudioTek 130 screen
kyzer soze is offline  
post #133 of 168 Old 02-22-2018, 01:55 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MIX_MASTER_ICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,069
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2674 Post(s)
Liked: 2479
Some subs are more prone to chuffing than others. I do find it surprising the PB16-Ultra can be made to chuff pretty badly. SVS subs are usaully rock solid in this department due to their limiters. I can run my dual PB12-NSD's 6-8dB hot at the loudest volume I can comfortably tolerate and even the EOT opening scene doesn't have much port noise.

Subs>RBH I-12e, I-12. HSU VTF-15H mk2. Monolith THX 12(x2), THX 10(x2). XTZ 1X12. SVS PB-1000(x2). Speakers>JBL Studio 270/235c/230/225c. Sony CS3/CS8/CS5. QA 3020i/3090Ci, 2020i/2000c. Monolith Cinema 5bs. Polk RTiA1/CSiA4. Other Audio>Sony MDR-Z7m2,V6, XB900n,700,XB32,XB31. Sennheiser HD58X,HD4.50,PC37X. HiFiMAN HE4XX. Philips SHP9500. SIVGA SV004. SA HDTwo. HyperX CloudPS4. TB Elite AtlasAero. LG FH6,RK8,RK7,PK5. HK Onyx Studio4(x2).
MIX_MASTER_ICE is offline  
post #134 of 168 Old 02-22-2018, 01:04 PM
AVS ***** Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,325
Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5530 Post(s)
Liked: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIX_MASTER_ICE View Post
Some subs are more prone to chuffing than others. I do find it surprising the PB16-Ultra can be made to chuff pretty badly. SVS subs are usaully rock solid in this department due to their limiters. I can run my dual PB12-NSD's 6-8dB hot at the loudest volume I can comfortably tolerate and even the EOT opening scene doesn't have much port noise.
I think that part of the reason that the PB16's can be made to chuff is explained in my earlier post. It is tough to compare the performance of a sub with serious SPL down into the mid-teens or below, to a sub which tapers off in the low to mid-20's, though. Ported subs can be made to chuff by heavy demands closer to their port tunes. I don't believe that the NSD's would be producing enough of the very low-frequencies in the intro to EOT to make particularly perceptible chuffing noises.

The very low-frequencies are hard to hit, and it's expensive to try. But, there are some rewards in having subs that can crank out the low-frequency SPL. But, not all low-frequencies are really worth that much. As noted earlier, that 10Hz sine wave at the beginning of EOT is pretty pointless, anyway. I think it's a shame to judge subs based on that.

Regards,
Mike
jamiebosco and Hopinater like this.

GUIDE TO SUBWOOFER CALIBRATION AND BASS PREFERENCES

* The Guide linked above is a comprehensive guide to Audio & HT systems, including:
Speaker placements & Room treatments; HT calibration & Room EQ; Room gain; Bass
Preferences; Subwoofer Buyer's Guide: Sealed/ported; ID subs; Subwoofer placement.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #135 of 168 Old 02-22-2018, 01:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MIX_MASTER_ICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,069
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2674 Post(s)
Liked: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIX_MASTER_ICE View Post
Some subs are more prone to chuffing than others. I do find it surprising the PB16-Ultra can be made to chuff pretty badly. SVS subs are usaully rock solid in this department due to their limiters. I can run my dual PB12-NSD's 6-8dB hot at the loudest volume I can comfortably tolerate and even the EOT opening scene doesn't have much port noise.
I think that part of the reason that the PB16's can be made to chuff is explained in my earlier post. It is tough to compare the performance of a sub with serious SPL down into the mid-teens or below, to a sub which tapers off in the low to mid-20's, though. Ported subs can be made to chuff by heavy demands closer to their port tunes. I don't believe that the NSD's would be producing enough of the very low-frequencies in the intro to EOT to make particularly perceptible chuffing noises.

The very low-frequencies are hard to hit, and it's expensive to try. But, there are some rewards in having subs that can crank out the low-frequency SPL. But, not all low-frequencies are really worth that much. As noted earlier, that 10Hz sine wave at the beginning of EOT is pretty pointless, anyway. I think it's a shame to judge subs based on that. [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG]

Regards,
Mike
Pb12 in my room has solid output well below 20Hz. Output below port tune often causes chuffing. It doesn't have to be extremely low like the opening sweep of EOT. That's why it surprises me that the limiter on the pb16 isn't stopping the output down that low. I know the WWZ grenade scene made the Rythmik lv12r chuff badly at just 3db hot. RBH I12 had no port noise at all doing the same. Of course the RBH has 7" of port area in lowest output mode.

Subs>RBH I-12e, I-12. HSU VTF-15H mk2. Monolith THX 12(x2), THX 10(x2). XTZ 1X12. SVS PB-1000(x2). Speakers>JBL Studio 270/235c/230/225c. Sony CS3/CS8/CS5. QA 3020i/3090Ci, 2020i/2000c. Monolith Cinema 5bs. Polk RTiA1/CSiA4. Other Audio>Sony MDR-Z7m2,V6, XB900n,700,XB32,XB31. Sennheiser HD58X,HD4.50,PC37X. HiFiMAN HE4XX. Philips SHP9500. SIVGA SV004. SA HDTwo. HyperX CloudPS4. TB Elite AtlasAero. LG FH6,RK8,RK7,PK5. HK Onyx Studio4(x2).
MIX_MASTER_ICE is offline  
post #136 of 168 Old 02-22-2018, 07:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Batman61405's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Horsham, PA
Posts: 438
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 215 Post(s)
Liked: 278
PB 4000 FTW!! I was going to get the outlet PB 16 for $1999, but decided not to. Don't feel like moving them around was the bigger reason haha but the PB 16 chuffing claims scared me off. I know its prob not as big a deal as the forums make it out to be though. I put my 4000 through the test and the EOT scene was handled extremely well IMO at -10 avr volume. I always use all ports open so I get he most output I can. The PB 2000 I had was awful that loud. It was scary how badly it behaved during that scene. I know its a sine wave and all that but still.

The 4000 passed that test for me. I always watch movies at -10 mv and knowing the 4000 wont make a weird sound or chuff so much that its clearly audible sealed the deal for me. The 4000 is a beast as well. Duals will be even better once I get the second one up and running.

Id love to have tried the PB 16, but I'm so happy with the 4000 I couldn't do it. Not to mention the extra $$ it would've cost me to get that second one.

No reviews Ive read really mention port chuffing with the 16, unless I missed it, so its prob not that big a deal for 99% of content youd play through it. IMO go with dual 4000s if your listening space/output needs don't need the 16. My PB 4000 hasn't made a bad sound since ive had it, and I love it plus youd save some $$ with the 4000s
Kini62 likes this.

Polk CS20Polk Tsi 500'sPolk Tsi 200'sDenon AVR 3300WSilver Ticket 92'' 16;9 White ScreenBenq HT2050 ProjectorXbox OneWii UPanasonic DMP-BDT 210SVS PB-4000Auralex MoPAD Paragon 4oz Theater Pop Popcorn MachineLogitech Harmony Elite
Batman61405 is offline  
post #137 of 168 Old 02-23-2018, 05:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MIX_MASTER_ICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,069
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2674 Post(s)
Liked: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman61405 View Post
PB 4000 FTW!! I was going to get the outlet PB 16 for $1999, but decided not to. Don't feel like moving them around was the bigger reason haha but the PB 16 chuffing claims scared me off. I know its prob not as big a deal as the forums make it out to be though. I put my 4000 through the test and the EOT scene was handled extremely well IMO at -10 avr volume. I always use all ports open so I get he most output I can. The PB 2000 I had was awful that loud. It was scary how badly it behaved during that scene. I know its a sine wave and all that but still.

The 4000 passed that test for me. I always watch movies at -10 mv and knowing the 4000 wont make a weird sound or chuff so much that its clearly audible sealed the deal for me. The 4000 is a beast as well. Duals will be even better once I get the second one up and running.

Id love to have tried the PB 16, but I'm so happy with the 4000 I couldn't do it. Not to mention the extra $$ it would've cost me to get that second one.

No reviews Ive read really mention port chuffing with the 16, unless I missed it, so its prob not that big a deal for 99% of content youd play through it. IMO go with dual 4000s if your listening space/output needs don't need the 16. My PB 4000 hasn't made a bad sound since ive had it, and I love it plus youd save some $$ with the 4000s
With all ports open there shouldn't be a chuffing issue at all with 10.5" of port area. You must have been really pushing the PB-2000 way beyond it's capability if it was "scary" how bad it sounded. PB-2000 is a rock solid sub with a tight limiter. When I had one I pushed it pretty darn hard, but never had any real issues with bad noises at all. BTW, glad you are happy with the PB-4000 and hope you keep it.

Subs>RBH I-12e, I-12. HSU VTF-15H mk2. Monolith THX 12(x2), THX 10(x2). XTZ 1X12. SVS PB-1000(x2). Speakers>JBL Studio 270/235c/230/225c. Sony CS3/CS8/CS5. QA 3020i/3090Ci, 2020i/2000c. Monolith Cinema 5bs. Polk RTiA1/CSiA4. Other Audio>Sony MDR-Z7m2,V6, XB900n,700,XB32,XB31. Sennheiser HD58X,HD4.50,PC37X. HiFiMAN HE4XX. Philips SHP9500. SIVGA SV004. SA HDTwo. HyperX CloudPS4. TB Elite AtlasAero. LG FH6,RK8,RK7,PK5. HK Onyx Studio4(x2).
MIX_MASTER_ICE is offline  
post #138 of 168 Old 02-23-2018, 06:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batman61405 View Post
PB 4000 FTW!! I was going to get the outlet PB 16 for $1999, but decided not to. Don't feel like moving them around was the bigger reason haha but the PB 16 chuffing claims scared me off. I know its prob not as big a deal as the forums make it out to be though. I put my 4000 through the test and the EOT scene was handled extremely well IMO at -10 avr volume. I always use all ports open so I get he most output I can. The PB 2000 I had was awful that loud. It was scary how badly it behaved during that scene. I know its a sine wave and all that but still.

The 4000 passed that test for me. I always watch movies at -10 mv and knowing the 4000 wont make a weird sound or chuff so much that its clearly audible sealed the deal for me. The 4000 is a beast as well. Duals will be even better once I get the second one up and running.

Id love to have tried the PB 16, but I'm so happy with the 4000 I couldn't do it. Not to mention the extra $$ it would've cost me to get that second one.

No reviews Ive read really mention port chuffing with the 16, unless I missed it, so its prob not that big a deal for 99% of content youd play through it. IMO go with dual 4000s if your listening space/output needs don't need the 16. My PB 4000 hasn't made a bad sound since ive had it, and I love it plus youd save some $$ with the 4000s
Great decision.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
post #139 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 06:52 AM
Member
 
mactoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 51
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
Great decision.
Have not gotten any Chuffing from my PB16 yet. Only had it a few weeks but have pushed it pretty hard. Guess we'll see.
I suck at math but I believe that the 3 ports measuring 3.5 in diameter is equal to 28.86 square inches of port.
mactoast is offline  
post #140 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 08:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
kucharsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 6,461
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1775 Post(s)
Liked: 1048
Note the chuffing heard in my video could be heard with all, one or two ports left open; only sealing all ports eliminated it, as you might expect.

To clarify my earlier comment on the ports, the sales "cut away" models of the PB-16 looked like this, with the ports extending far into the interior than making a turn up to the rear of the sub:




In reality, the PB-16's ports are just cut off flush about 8" from the front of the sub - short enough that you can reach in with your arm and feel the inner edge - basically before or just flush with the first interior wall seen in the second photo above.

The curve and upturn are what they use in the ports for the PB-13.

Last edited by kucharsk; 03-01-2018 at 08:19 AM.
kucharsk is offline  
post #141 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 08:45 AM
AVS ***** Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,325
Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5530 Post(s)
Liked: 10651
I don't think that anyone has ever denied that some of the PB16's have chuffed. But then, I know of instances of individual subwoofers from other ID manufacturers also chuffing. The question has never been, do some PB16's exhibit chuffing, or defective amplifiers, or anything else? The question has always been how common those defects are? As others have noted, it's a numbers game: hundreds of PB16's sold, with a handful experiencing chuffing issues. And, lots of user reports like the one above, and a new one on the SVS thread last night (post 27629) where no chuffing at all has occurred.

My own experience with three PB16's has been similar. Enormous ULF capability, with no chuffing on any content at any subwoofer levels. But, that's not to say that I couldn't make them chuff if I tried hard enough. I have heard of a Cap 4000 ULF chuffing under extreme conditions. For people who have had negative experiences with the sub, I'm sorry. I have had a couple of cars that were lemons too, and it wasn't much fun. Fortunately, the free-trial period protects buyers of SVS subwoofers in a way that we aren't protected with many other products.

I definitely believe that PB16's can be a little more likely to chuff than PB13's, since the port diameter is the same, but the amplifier power and excursion capabilities of the driver are greater. And, chuffing can be related to adequate port diameter, since the diameter of the ports determines the quantity of air that can be moved. (Note: the length of the port is more related to the tuning frequency than it is to the ability to move air.) But, the bottom line is that neither the PB13 nor the PB16 is likely to chuff under normal circumstances. And, if you get one that does, just send it back for exchange or refund.

Regards,
Mike
alwaller and Hopinater like this.

GUIDE TO SUBWOOFER CALIBRATION AND BASS PREFERENCES

* The Guide linked above is a comprehensive guide to Audio & HT systems, including:
Speaker placements & Room treatments; HT calibration & Room EQ; Room gain; Bass
Preferences; Subwoofer Buyer's Guide: Sealed/ported; ID subs; Subwoofer placement.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #142 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 04:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by kucharsk View Post
Note the chuffing heard in my video could be heard with all, one or two ports left open; only sealing all ports eliminated it, as you might expect.

To clarify my earlier comment on the ports, the sales "cut away" models of the PB-16 looked like this, with the ports extending far into the interior than making a turn up to the rear of the sub:




In reality, the PB-16's ports are just cut off flush about 8" from the front of the sub - short enough that you can reach in with your arm and feel the inner edge - basically before or just flush with the first interior wall seen in the second photo above.

The curve and upturn are what they use in the ports for the PB-13.
That is really weird, I'd give them a call. I don't know why they'd advertise it that way. Does not seem like them to do that. Maybe a mistake?

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
post #143 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 05:35 PM
AVS ***** Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,325
Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5530 Post(s)
Liked: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
That is really weird, I'd give them a call. I don't know why they'd advertise it that way. Does not seem like them to do that. Maybe a mistake?
Hi,

From what I understand, the early prototype had the curved ports, but the tuning frequency was lower than the engineers wanted. When they made the switch to the shorter straight ports, they got the port tune that they thought worked best for the subwoofer. I know that they showed a cutaway version with the curved ports at the show that introduced the sub. It looked cooler than the straight port subwoofer, but there is no performance advantage, in this case.

Again, as I understand it, the driver; port diameter, lip shape, and length; amplifier; cabinet volume; and DSP all have to be in the proper balance for a particular port tune. And, the length of the port would only affect the depth of the tuning point and not the amount of air moved by the subwoofer. It's mainly the amount of air moved, combined with some other factors, such as turbulence from the lip shape, which would affect port chuffing.

Regards,
Mike

Edit: I decided to edit this in case somebody asks why they wouldn't want an even lower port tune? I am just speculating here, but I believe that every subwoofer designer has to make compromises regarding where he wants his port tune in order to accomplish his specific objectives. If they had gone for an even lower port tune, they would probably have had to give up some SPL somewhere else. In the case of the PB16, I believe that the designers wanted to obtain a symmetrical increase of ~4db more output than the venerable PB13, from about 35Hz down to about 15Hz. And, that's just what they got.

In reaching for that 15Hz to 35Hz increase, they probably thought that movie buffs would appreciate the extra low-bass SPL more than they would additional SPL in the mid-bass range. Different subwoofer designers have different philosophies about that sort of thing. In my case, they were exactly right. That is where I wanted the extra SPL. FWIW, an increase of 4db in SPL, from about 30Hz down, is perceived as a loudness increase of about 80%. So, the +4db was pretty significant.

GUIDE TO SUBWOOFER CALIBRATION AND BASS PREFERENCES

* The Guide linked above is a comprehensive guide to Audio & HT systems, including:
Speaker placements & Room treatments; HT calibration & Room EQ; Room gain; Bass
Preferences; Subwoofer Buyer's Guide: Sealed/ported; ID subs; Subwoofer placement.

Last edited by mthomas47; 03-01-2018 at 06:02 PM.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #144 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 05:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MIX_MASTER_ICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 5,069
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2674 Post(s)
Liked: 2479
Those curved port tubes on the pb16 prototype look very similar to the monolith.
MIX_MASTER_ICE is offline  
post #145 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 07:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
That is really weird, I'd give them a call. I don't know why they'd advertise it that way. Does not seem like them to do that. Maybe a mistake?
Hi,

From what I understand, the early prototype had the curved ports, but the tuning frequency was lower than the engineers wanted. When they made the switch to the shorter straight ports, they got the port tune that they thought worked best for the subwoofer. I know that they showed a cutaway version with the curved ports at the show that introduced the sub. It looked cooler than the straight port subwoofer, but there is no performance advantage, in this case.

Again, as I understand it, the driver; port diameter, lip shape, and length; amplifier; cabinet volume; and DSP all have to be in the proper balance for a particular port tune. And, the length of the port would only affect the depth of the tuning point and not the amount of air moved by the subwoofer. It's mainly the amount of air moved, combined with some other factors, such as turbulence from the lip shape, which would affect port chuffing.

Regards,
Mike

Edit: I decided to edit this in case somebody asks why they wouldn't want an even lower port tune? I am just speculating here, but I believe that every subwoofer designer has to make compromises regarding where he wants his port tune in order to accomplish his specific objectives. If they had gone for an even lower port tune, they would probably have had to give up some SPL somewhere else. In the case of the PB16, I believe that the designers wanted to obtain a symmetrical increase of ~4db more output than the venerable PB13, from about 35Hz down to about 15Hz. And, that's just what they got.

In reaching for that 15Hz to 35Hz increase, they probably thought that movie buffs would appreciate the extra low-bass SPL more than they would additional SPL in the mid-bass range. Different subwoofer designers have different philosophies about that sort of thing. In my case, they were exactly right. That is where I wanted the extra SPL. FWIW, an increase of 4db in SPL, from about 30Hz down, is perceived as a loudness increase of about 80%. So, the +4db was pretty significant.
That doesn't make much sense to me, longer ports would certainly result in deeper bass with way less chuffing.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
post #146 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 08:22 PM
AVS ***** Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,325
Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5530 Post(s)
Liked: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
That doesn't make much sense to me, longer ports would certainly result in deeper bass with way less chuffing.
I believe it would actually be the opposite. Going lower would require more low-frequency amplifier power and would increase the likelihood of chuffing. There is only so much potential SPL available from a given subwoofer, as described above, and designers have to decide how they want to distribute that SPL. A lower tuning point would have put even more strain on the 3.5" ports, and they wouldn't have been able to move enough air to compensate for that lower tune.

GUIDE TO SUBWOOFER CALIBRATION AND BASS PREFERENCES

* The Guide linked above is a comprehensive guide to Audio & HT systems, including:
Speaker placements & Room treatments; HT calibration & Room EQ; Room gain; Bass
Preferences; Subwoofer Buyer's Guide: Sealed/ported; ID subs; Subwoofer placement.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #147 of 168 Old 03-01-2018, 09:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
That doesn't make much sense to me, longer ports would certainly result in deeper bass with way less chuffing.
I believe it would actually be the opposite. Going lower would require more low-frequency amplifier power and would increase the likelihood of chuffing. There is only so much potential SPL available from a given subwoofer, as described above, and designers have to decide how they want to distribute that SPL. A lower tuning point would have put even more strain on the 3.5" ports, and they wouldn't have been able to move enough air to compensatie for that lower tune.
They really should have used 4" ports, and my experience with subs is the opposite of this. I cannot imagine 3.5" ports that are only 8" long is enough port area for such a big driver and low tuning point. It really does appear to be design oversight.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".

Last edited by blake18; 03-02-2018 at 03:24 AM.
blake18 is offline  
post #148 of 168 Old 03-02-2018, 03:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
kucharsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 6,461
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1775 Post(s)
Liked: 1048
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
Hi,

From what I understand, the early prototype had the curved ports, but the tuning frequency was lower than the engineers wanted. When they made the switch to the shorter straight ports, they got the port tune that they thought worked best for the subwoofer. I know that they showed a cutaway version with the curved ports at the show that introduced the sub. It looked cooler than the straight port subwoofer, but there is no performance advantage, in this case.

That's exactly why they told me they went to the straight ports; the tune was too low with the curved ports.
mthomas47 likes this.
kucharsk is offline  
post #149 of 168 Old 03-02-2018, 06:11 AM
AVS ***** Member
 
mthomas47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 8,325
Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5530 Post(s)
Liked: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
They really should have used 4" ports, and my experience with subs is the opposite of this. I cannot imagine 3.5" ports that are only 8" long is enough port area for such a big driver and low tuning point. It really does appear to be design oversight.
I also wish that they had gone with 4" ports. But, it wasn't an oversight, it was a deliberate marketing decision. The 4" ports would have required a bigger cabinet, and the PB16 cabinet size was right at the limit of what they wanted from both a sales and shipping standpoint. Nothing requires any of us to agree with that decision, but they may have known what they were doing since sales of the 16's have been brisk.

Personally, I would like to have seen 4" ports, a slightly larger cabinet volume to accommodate the greater port diameter, a lower tuning point, and a 2000 or 2500 watt amplifier. But, that's just me.

As far as the length of the ports, I know that the tubes extend for most of the length of the cabinet, so they are at least 18" long and may be closer to 24".

Regards,
Mike

GUIDE TO SUBWOOFER CALIBRATION AND BASS PREFERENCES

* The Guide linked above is a comprehensive guide to Audio & HT systems, including:
Speaker placements & Room treatments; HT calibration & Room EQ; Room gain; Bass
Preferences; Subwoofer Buyer's Guide: Sealed/ported; ID subs; Subwoofer placement.
mthomas47 is offline  
post #150 of 168 Old 03-02-2018, 07:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
blake18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,086
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 635 Post(s)
Liked: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthomas47 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake18 View Post
They really should have used 4" ports, and my experience with subs is the opposite of this. I cannot imagine 3.5" ports that are only 8" long is enough port area for such a big driver and low tuning point. It really does appear to be design oversight.
I also wish that they had gone with 4" ports. But, it wasn't an oversight, it was a deliberate marketing decision. The 4" ports would have required a bigger cabinet, and the PB16 cabinet size was right at the limit of what they wanted from both a sales and shipping standpoint. Nothing requires any of us to agree with that decision, but they may have known what they were doing since sales of the 16's have been brisk.

Personally, I would like to have seen 4" ports, a slightly larger cabinet volume to accommodate the greater port diameter, a lower tuning point, and a 2000 or 2500 watt amplifier. But, that's just me. [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG]

As far as the length of the ports, I know that the tubes extend for most of the length of the cabinet, so they are at least 18" long and may be closer to 24".

Regards,
Mike
Ah, I see, I thought they were shorter. Though it would seem they are shorter than the PB-13 ports, which is odd. I actually wouldn't consider the PB-16U because of how badly they chuff during ultra low frequencies, but that's just my preference.

Lumenlab "Community driven video lab".
blake18 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off