AVS Forum banner

10821 - 10840 of 15482 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
As a practical matter, how much actual content is available under 20hz to take full advantage of the 10 hz port tune? I own 2 PSA V3601’s ’s, and it covers well over 90% of the low end very nicely in my sealed basement. If I were to swap these out for dual JTR 4000’s, what benefit could I reasonably expect?
I agree with the others. With a good setup and tune, you will feel more of the deep notes. Some sounds and notes sound fuller, more complete, more substantial. The physical aspects of sub 20 hz content adds an ominous effect for me. Really pulls me into music and scenes.


An example is attached below. These are a couple notes from Hans Zimmer Live in Prague from one of the Interstellar tracks. Notice that these 2 notes (one purple, the other aqua) have an audible (28 and 30hz) and an inaudible component (14 and 15hz). You can't experience the 14hz component of these notes on many subs. On my 2400ULF, it FEELS great and really adds to the experience.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
Thanks to all who responded, and for the specific content recommendation. It would appear to me that forum members here believe they’d be a significant difference, but I’m still unclear about exactly why, since the big JTR’s operate outside the parameters of nearly all content. Would it be due to harmonics? The greater authority in the audible registers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,061 Posts
@David Charles went from a psa V3601&1801 pair to a pair of sealed psa S3601 and posted somewhere that he had noticed bass that he didn’t with his 20ish hz port tuned subs. His sealed 3601’s are nowhere close to the performance of the 4000ulf pair output and extension wise. @imureh (posted above) went from a pair of psa v1801’s to a pair of Rythmik FV18’s and posted his impression here. His FV18 pair is also nowhere close to the performance of the 4000ulf pair output and extension wise.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/3018282-subwoofer-comparisons-impressions.html
There are also some great information there about low tuned subs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
@David Charles went from a psa V3601&1801 pair to a pair of sealed psa S3601 and posted somewhere that he had noticed bass that he didn’t with his 20ish hz port tuned subs. His sealed 3601’s are nowhere close to the performance of the 4000ulf pair output and extension wise. @imureh (posted above) went from a pair of psa v1801’s to a pair of Rythmik FV18’s and posted his impression here.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/3018282-subwoofer-comparisons-impressions.html
There are also some great information there about low tuned subs.
Correct, after 2 years with the v3601 and v1801, which are tuned to 20 hz, I can positively say that the sealed subs give more weight to the bottom end. I would describe this as ear pressure. The vented subs I could feel more on my body, but the sealed subs have more weight. From my hypothesis, I tend to think that because the sealed subs play significantly lower than the ported subs, the inaudible weight is sensed in the room.



Insert a 10 hz ported sub that does not stress at all on 16 hz (while the PSA does) and then realize that it wont even stress down to 10 hz much (when the PSA is flopping in the wind) and you have your answer. Those low, inaudible frequencies add weight to the room.



Yes there is little content below even 16 hz...but I can almost promise that the PSA will not sound as good at even moderate volumes.



My subs are not in the ballpark of the JTR LLT subs, but I can tell a difference with my sealed that extend lower and it just sounds better.


Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,270 Posts
They are not large enough to qualify as LLT subs. I agree about extension and sound better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,270 Posts
For a LLT, oh yeah. Just remember all those sonosubs, mine were 6 feet tall, 26 inch round, with just a single 18!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,809 Posts
For a LLT, oh yeah. Just remember all those sonosubs, mine were 6 feet tall, 26 inch round, with just a single 18!
Man the DIY section is due for a good ole sono sub resurgence. I still have my PVC pipe from my old pair. Wonder if they are still in use anywhere? Can't remember who I ended up selling them to anymore.

Either that, or we need to have another MARTY PARTY!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Sealed with my RE xxx 18s and a 9 dB boost from my LF adjust on my sp1 4000 gives me more TR than prior.
Awwww chit went back to sealed eh? I don't think I'll ever do ported again. Mostly since the Raptors are sealed and space but I prefer sealed nearfield too.

Hey - a @Madaeel sighting!

Your “two brothers/1k sub shootout” was one of the first things i stumbled upon back when i first joined AVS. Still have the bossobass raptor setup I assume??
Haha yah I'll never get rid of them. Though I need a separate concrete bunker just for them ala bassthathz.:eek:

Dude bro! Where'd you come from?!?!? Hope you are well buddy :D
Haha yah I'm good friend. I'm always on just not a big poster. Still can't reason with people.:rolleyes::D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Awwww chit went back to sealed eh? I don't think I'll ever do ported again. Mostly since the Raptors are sealed and space but I prefer sealed nearfield too.



.:rolleyes::D
I think MK is still running ported, perhaps he meant sealed room? (correct me if I'm wrong mk) - I can't imagine him being satisfied with only a pair of sealed subs :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #10,831 (Edited)
As for your point that multiple smaller sealed would be better than one s7201, I would agree with you, multiple subs can provide more even bass at the MLP, however that applies to all subs IMO. But you were talking about the data bass top 10, so we are looking at single subwoofers in this case. To follow that logic the S2 should be discontinued, because multiple S1s would provide better in room response. This seems like goal post shifting, first the s7201 wasn't going to be in the "top 10", now it doesnt
There is no goal post shifting. Two separate points. Re. top 10, clearly stated: yes it's possible S7201 tops S2, but I wouldn't bet on it. The fact that it's an unusual design with the 2 curious "dead spaces" should give one pause about guessing its output IMHO. What causes the designer to resort to this, as opposed to a simpler and cheaper rectangular box?

Second point, aka "ANOTHER important point" has nothing to do with top 10 ranking, but a subtle point for potential buyers of monster sealed:
1. Ported design, the large cab volume, serves a dual purpose of not just more output, but lower frequency reach/Fb. For example JTR 1400 cannot achieve the low freq. reach of JTR 2400.
2. Sealed design, monster sub serves no useful purpose frequency wise. There is no "tuning frequency" or risk of port chuffing in a sealed design to make size a decisive parameter. JTR S2 "is" two JTR S1's. Does S7201 have better sound than 2 S3601's? Objective evidence would indicate, not necessarily.

So, IMHO for sealed design, multiple smaller sealed's, once you are at this level of spending, have better sound, equal output, equal ultra low freq reach versus a monster-size sealed. A large sealed like JTR S2's or PSA S7201's only advantage is lower cost, NOT better sound. Same cannot be said of vented JTR 2400 vs vented 1400.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #10,832 (Edited)
As for your point that multiple smaller sealed would be better than one s7201, I would agree with you, multiple subs can provide more even bass at the MLP, however that applies to all subs IMO. But you were talking about the data bass top 10, so we are looking at single subwoofers in this case. To follow that logic the S2 should be discontinued, because multiple S1s would provide better in room response. This seems like goal post shifting, first the s7201 wasn't going to be in the "top 10", now it doesnt
There is no goal post shifting. Two separate points. Re. top 10, clearly stated: yes it's possible S7201 tops S2, but I wouldn't bet on it. The fact that it's an unusual design with the 2 curious "dead spaces" should give one pause about guessing its output IMHO. What causes the designer to resort to this, as opposed to a simpler and cheaper rectangular box?

Second point, aka "ANOTHER important point" has nothing to do with top 10 ranking, but a subtle point for potential buyers of monster sealed:
1. Ported design, the large cab volume, serves a dual purpose of not just more output, but lower frequency reach/Fb. For example JTR 1400 cannot achieve the low freq. reach of JTR 2400.
2. Sealed design, monster sub serves no useful purpose frequency wise. There is no "tuning frequency" or risk of port chuffing in a sealed design to make size a decisive parameter. JTR S2 "is" two JTR S1's. Does S7201 have better sound than 2 S3601's? Objective evidence would indicate, not necessarily.

So, IMHO for sealed design, multiple smaller sealed's, once you are at this level of spending, have better sound, equal output, equal ultra low freq reach versus a monster-size sealed. A large sealed like JTR S2's or PSA S7201's only advantage is lower cost, NOT better sound. Same cannot be said of vented JTR 2400 vs vented 1400.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #10,833 (Edited)
Sorry I know it's off topic for JTR, but the merit of a monster-size sealed is to me a very interesting discussion regardless of brand. :) It's not brand but DESIGNS of brands, that intrigue me. I don't follow Seaton closely so someone correct me as needed with respect to price/feature/output/etc., but I keep thinking as an example Seaton F18 with 4000 watts amplifier and 3 F18 modules. https://www.seaton-sound-forum.com/post/new-f18-subwoofer-f18-f18-7829728

JTR S1 is not a good comparison to PSA because of its 33mm Xmax driver. OTOH, the Seaton's driver is 18 incher with 20ish Xmax? If output is similar and cost within reasonable range, this would be a vastly more practical and superior solution than S7201 in the long run. IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
The fact that it's an unusual design with the 2 curious "dead spaces" should give one pause about guessing its output IMHO. What causes the designer to resort to this, as opposed to a simpler and cheaper rectangular box?

.
I'm no expert, but the push pull design can help cancel out even order distortion, I can't remember exactly, but I think TV said that's why they started experimenting with the P/P design, and then found some other advantages during measurements
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,216 Posts
The fact that it's an unusual design with the 2 curious "dead spaces" should give one pause about guessing its output IMHO. What causes the designer to resort to this, as opposed to a simpler and cheaper rectangular box?
It's actually quite interesting.

Sure the designer could have designed S7201 as 1 S3601 stacked on top of another S3601. That won't be special enough for a flagship. Remember, the S7201's existence is to replace the Triax, a 3 driver trio-opposed sub. Therefore, it makes sense to give it more power and even more drivers! :D

In the case of the S7201, the dead space is necessary to mount the drivers and to produce sound. Otherwise, the drivers are just firing into the cabinet. Many push pull design also have the opening to expose the magnet of one driver. Push pull reduces THD. Dual opposed eliminates cabinet vibration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
There is no goal post shifting. Two separate points. Re. top 10, clearly stated: yes it's possible S7201 tops S2, but I wouldn't bet on it. The fact that it's an unusual design with the 2 curious "dead spaces" should give one pause about guessing its output IMHO. What causes the designer to resort to this, as opposed to a simpler and cheaper rectangular box?

Second point, aka "ANOTHER important point" has nothing to do with top 10 ranking, but a subtle point for potential buyers of monster sealed:
1. Ported design, the large cab volume, serves a dual purpose of not just more output, but lower frequency reach/Fb. For example JTR 1400 cannot achieve the low freq. reach of JTR 2400.
2. Sealed design, monster sub serves no useful purpose frequency wise. There is no "tuning frequency" or risk of port chuffing in a sealed design to make size a decisive parameter. JTR S2 "is" two JTR S1's. Does S7201 have better sound than 2 S3601's? Objective evidence would indicate, not necessarily.

So, IMHO for sealed design, multiple smaller sealed's, once you are at this level of spending, have better sound, equal output, equal ultra low freq reach versus a monster-size sealed. A large sealed like JTR S2's or PSA S7201's only advantage is lower cost, NOT better sound. Same cannot be said of vented JTR 2400 vs vented 1400.
A sealed subwoofers efficiency increases as the enclosure space grows. Infinite baffle configurations being the ultimate example of this.

Edit to add: the link you have to the f18s goes into the efficiency improvement:

Mark Seaton:

"While the SubMersive HP+ & F2+ can drive 2 enclosures with 4 drivers, with each 18" module being about 90% the volume of the HP/F2 models we are able to get more than double the deep bass capability from a single 4000W amplifier as the F18+ can drive itself and up to THREE (3) slave units!   The 4 total modules represent almost 4 times the box volume which allows us to design in significantly more efficiency gaining more from the same amplifier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
Sorry I know it's off topic for JTR, but the merit of a monster-size sealed is to me a very interesting discussion regardless of brand. :) It's not brand but DESIGNS of brands, that intrigue me. I don't follow Seaton closely so someone correct me as needed with respect to price/feature/output/etc., but I keep thinking as an example Seaton F18 with 4000 watts amplifier and 3 F18 modules. https://www.seaton-sound-forum.com/post/new-f18-subwoofer-f18-f18-7829728

JTR S1 is not a good comparison to PSA because of its 33mm Xmax driver. OTOH, the Seaton's driver is 18 incher with 20ish Xmax? If output is similar and cost within reasonable range, this would be a vastly more practical and superior solution than S7201 in the long run. IMHO.
The Seaton F18 line uses the Ultimax um18-22 driver from Parts Express. While conservatively rated for 22mm of excursion, testing by databass found it to be good for I believe around 27-28mm. It is a beefier driver than the Eminence used in the s7201. Four of the F18s can absolutely outperform an s7201, and the price is significantly more as well:

F18 Master ($2395) and three F18 slaves ($1195) is $5980, shipping is $95 for each for a total of $6360 - this is using the Seaton Sound website for the pricing, there may be some additional discounts for a big bundle like this.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
75" Samsung Q80R QLED, Denon AVR3300, Revel F36, C25, W263, FV15HP x 2, ATV4K, Sony Blu Ray, Harmony
Joined
·
7,740 Posts
Re. top 10, clearly stated: yes it's possible S7201 tops S2, but I wouldn't bet on it.
First, huge fan of JTR products here. However, the only data we have available STRONGLY suggests the 7201 will have substantially more output than the S2. Per PSA's performance data, the 7201 his over 102 dB at 10 Hz with nearly zero compression, meaning it should still be somewhat below its absolute maximum output limits, compared to the S2's 97 dB. 5 dB is a BIG difference in output to doubt which sub plays louder. The 7201 also shows absolutely no compression with over 112 dB at 20 Hz, whereas the S2 has fully compressed i.e 5 dB of compression at this level. Based on the data, there is really no question as to whether the 7201 would have more output. This isn't meant to hurt anyones feelings, or disagree with their belief system that all JTR's are better than any other sub made no matter what, but honestly the 7201 SHOULD handily outperform the MUCH smaller S2. The S2 is likely the best performing sealed sub made for its size. But why on earth would anyone expect it to outperform a sub more than twice the size with more driver displacement, along with higher cost?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
First, huge fan of JTR products here. However, the only data we have available STRONGLY suggests the 7201 will have substantially more output than the S2. Per PSA's performance data, the 7201 his over 102 dB at 10 Hz with nearly zero compression, meaning it should still be somewhat below its absolute maximum output limits, compared to the S2's 97 dB. 5 dB is a BIG difference in output to doubt which sub plays louder. The 7201 also shows absolutely no compression with over 112 dB at 20 Hz, whereas the S2 has fully compressed i.e 5 dB of compression at this level. Based on the data, there is really no question as to whether the 7201 would have more output. This isn't meant to hurt anyones feelings, or disagree with their belief system that all JTR's are better than any other sub made no matter what, but honestly the 7201 SHOULD handily outperform the MUCH smaller S2. The S2 is likely the best performing sealed sub made for its size. But why on earth would anyone expect it to outperform a sub more than twice the size with more driver displacement, along with higher cost?


Those are my thoughts exactly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
10821 - 10840 of 15482 Posts
Top