AVS Forum banner

33941 - 33960 of 34021 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Hi,

I would love to see you get a PB3000, with a potential second one in the future. With a room size of more than 6,000^3, the PB3000's would be a great option. The PB3000 has a pro-audio type driver, which is capable of producing a lot of mid-bass SPL. And, the tuning point is about 3dB lower than that of the PB2000. The port tune on the PB3000 is 18Hz, compared to about 21Hz for the PB2000. The lower port tune,combined with a larger cabinet volume, more powerful driver, and more amplifier power, makes a real difference in the new model's output. You are correct that a second identical sub adds +6dB more SPL, averaged across the subs' passband. But, look at the difference between the PB3000, and the PB2000, at every frequency.

SVS 3000 Series Subwoofer Measurements and Conclusion | Audioholics

SVS PB-2000 and SB-2000 Subwoofers Review | Audioholics

The reason I am comparing the PB3000 and the PB2000 is because of the cost difference in Europe. The PB2000 is much less expensive than the PB3000, while the PB3000 is much more powerful. You can also compare both ported models to the SB2000 you have now. The PB2000 is equivalent to more than 3 SB2000's at 25Hz, and is equal to about 4 SB2000's at 20Hz. (As I'm sure you realize, it's the low-frequencies where your current sub is really struggling the most.) The PB3000, on the other hand, is in a completely different class (compared to either 2000 model) at every frequency.

I sort of hate to advise you to spend the extra money for the PB3000, but If I were in your position, that is exactly what I would do. You have a very large room--about the same size as mine. And, I'm just not sure that you would be satisfied long-term if you upgrade to the PB2000 (or to a pair of them). Also, even though you aren't really very interested in the DSP that the PB3000 provides, I think that you may find that it offers you some additional user adjustability that Dirac doesn't offer.

The PB3000's are a lot more expensive in Europe than the PB2000's, but I think they are also a better long-term investment. Most of us require more than one try to get the subwoofage that we finally discover we want. Moving to a PB3000 now, with a second one to follow later, might help to shortcut that process for you. I hope this helps a little!

Regards,
Mike
Thank you for your detailed opinion. It basically confirms what I already reluctantly realized when I compared Audioholics' measurements for my current SB-2000 and the PB-3000. A ported subwoofer, possible joined by a second one later, makes a lot more sense in my room and the PB-3000 seems to be the best long term option in europe. It's a shame that Rythmik, HSU, PSA or maybe even Monoprice are impossible to get for a reasonable price over here. It's my impression that they offer better value compared to SVS these days.

Obviously I'd like to spend as little as necessary, but at the end of the day the desired outcome/result dictates the budget, not the other way around. So, PB-3000 it is! And your reply makes that decision a whole lot easier. Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Having an issue with my 7 month old SB16-Ultra. Randomly the amp resets, usually when changing presets in the app. Last night it just did it when I raised the AVR volume. I will be calling SVS in the morning, but figured I'd reach out here too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Does anyone know how much output & headroom I'd gain by moving from the SB-2000 Pro to the SB-3000? Assuming I get my rattling/buzz issues sorted out, I'd like to know whether moving to the 3000 or adding a second 2000 Pro would net me more output. I know two subs evens things out but I'd like to know about headroom.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,758 Posts
The 3000 has bigger driver, closer to 14 inches (13 7/8) than the stated 13. Two SB2000 pro would provide a larger cone area than a single SB3000. I would suggest moving to the SB3000 and then start saving up for a second SB3000 :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Does anyone know how much output & headroom I'd gain by moving from the SB-2000 Pro to the SB-3000? Assuming I get my rattling/buzz issues sorted out, I'd like to know whether moving to the 3000 or adding a second 2000 Pro would net me more output. I know two subs evens things out but I'd like to know about headroom.
Headroom at what frequency? Down really low (like <30 Hz) they are almost the same (limited by cabinet volume), so dual SB2000's would be better. But 50+ Hz (chest punch zone) the SB3000 is about 3x higher output, so would still have more headroom than dual SB2000's. Best of all would be dual SB3000's as qguy suggests :p. Here's a chart of them (SB2000, not SB2000-pro, but close enough), based on a combo of Audioholics test data, extrapolations, and my own measurements where their data is missing (assumes the duals sit close enough to stay <1/4 wavelength apart at LFE freqs - on opposite sides of the room you'll only get 3dB gain in the upper LFE spectrum so the SB3000 would shine even brighter in comparison):

3037943
 
  • Like
Reactions: mthomas47

·
AVS ***** Member
Joined
·
8,970 Posts
Headroom at what frequency? Down really low (like <30 Hz) they are almost the same (limited by cabinet volume), so dual SB2000's would be better. But 50+ Hz (chest punch zone) the SB3000 is about 3x higher output, so would still have more headroom than dual SB2000's. Best of all would be dual SB3000's as qguy suggests :p. Here's a chart of them (SB2000, not SB2000-pro, but close enough), based on a combo of Audioholics test data, extrapolations, and my own measurements where their data is missing (assumes the duals sit close enough to stay <1/4 wavelength apart at LFE freqs - on opposite sides of the room you'll only get 3dB gain in the upper LFE spectrum so the SB3000 would shine even brighter in comparison):

View attachment 3037943

Hi,

I like your graph, and I agree with your advice to get dual SB3000's if possible! There is something that you have said though, in two recent posts, that I think needs to be clarified a little. Identical subs indoors, in less than about a 20,000^3 room, will add +6dB, compared to a single sub. Where it gets confusing, is that the +6dB is only an average across the full operating bandwidth of the subs. So, some frequencies can get peaks of more than +6dB, and other frequencies can have very deep areas of cancellation. But, in theory, if you add up all the +'s and the -'s, they should average +6dB with the second identical sub.

You are correct that "mutual coupling" occurs when two subwoofers are within 1/4 wavelength of distance from each other. Again, in theory, where mutual coupling occurs, the second sub adds +6dB at every frequency, and not just an average of +6dB with the peaks and dips averaged together. So, mutual coupling is a uniform addition of +6dB at every frequency, where simply adding a second sub gives an average of +6dB, but often in a completely random way. That is due to the influence of room modes, which create dips at some frequencies, and peaks at others.

The best example of mutual coupling involves placing two subs side-by-side or one on top of another. Then, the two subs simply act as one subwoofer, with the same frequency response and with +6dB more SPL at every frequency. It can get a little confusing, especially when you try to calculate all of the peaks and dips in your particular frequency response, in order to arrive at the +6dB average. But, this is a well-established audio principle that is often misunderstood or misquoted.

Further confusing things is the fact that a transducer loses -6dB of SPL, for every doubling of distance outdoors, while losing only about -3dB indoors. The +6'dBs and the -3dB's and -6dB's tend to get all mixed together in these discussions. But, trust me! What I wrote in this post is correct. Adding a second subwoofer will net +6dB, as an average across the subs' operating range. It just won't add +6dB at every frequency, unless the subwoofers are very close together.

Regards,
Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Mike, I usually defer to your expertise, but my understanding is a bit different. I agree that mutually coupled subs add 6dB across every frequency, as the sound waves are mostly in phase. But my understanding is that when not coupled, and sound waves are not in phase, such as when the distance between sources is more than 1/4 wavelength, you end up needing to treat it as white noise addition, which is 3 dB on average. If you think about it, if 6dB occurs when two sound waves are perfectly in phase, then averaging in less than perfect / out of phase (even reversed phase) sounds has to result in an average that is less than 6dB.

Here's some measurements on my home setup, with lots of room gain. Below about 35 hz, my subs are coupled and we see 5-6 Hz evenly across the lower spectrum. (the lower 2 lines are the individual subs; the upper green line is combined). They are ~8 feet apart. But above 40Hz, all hell breaks loose, with maybe a few spots more than 6dB and a lot of freqs with little gain and some negative spots as well. Interestingly, there is no gain at all above about 140 Hz, when the subs are roughly 1 wavelength apart. Sample size of one, but it does seem to demonstrate how subs couple below the 1/4 wavelength distance. and just visually, it appears the average gain above 40 Hz is less than the average gain below 40 Hz.

3037958
 
  • Like
Reactions: Craig Peer

·
AVS ***** Member
Joined
·
8,970 Posts
Mike, I usually defer to your expertise, but my understanding is a bit different. I agree that mutually coupled subs add 6dB across every frequency, as the sound waves are mostly in phase. But my understanding is that when not coupled, and sound waves are not in phase, such as when the distance between sources is more than 1/4 wavelength, you end up needing to treat it as white noise addition, which is 3 dB on average. If you think about it, if 6dB occurs when two sound waves are perfectly in phase, then averaging in less than perfect / out of phase (even reversed phase) sounds has to result in an average that is less than 6dB.

Here's some measurements on my home setup, with lots of room gain. Below about 35 hz, my subs are coupled and we see 5-6 Hz evenly across the lower spectrum. (the lower 2 lines are the individual subs; the upper green line is combined). They are ~8 feet apart. But above 40Hz, all hell breaks loose, with maybe a few spots more than 6dB and a lot of freqs with little gain and some negative spots as well. Interestingly, there is no gain at all above about 140 Hz, when the subs are roughly 1 wavelength apart. Sample size of one, but it does seem to demonstrate how subs couple below the 1/4 wavelength distance. and just visually, it appears the average gain above 40 Hz is less than the average gain below 40 Hz.

View attachment 3037958

Thanks for the response! This isn't really so much a matter of my personal expertise as it is a matter of what I referred to as a well-established audio principle. Real experts, such as Dr Floyd Toole, Dr Todd Welti, and Dr Earl Geddes, were among the early trailblazers in audio science. But, I believe that the basic principle we are discussing predates them as well. You can certainly refer to audio texts on this subject, which have been written by real experts in the field.

When two transducers are placed inside a room, they behave very unpredictably at any given frequency. And, as I noted in my post, it can become very difficult to look at a frequency response and add and subtract all of the differences in SPL, when the second subwoofer is added. Your FR is a perfect example of that. Where the two subs are mutually coupled, below about 17Hz, the gain in SPL is uniform and easily visible, although there are still slight irregularities in the combined FR.

It's easier to see the gain in SPL because of the more uniform FR. But, the more uniform FR is caused by pressure vessel gain, which is the strongest form of room gain. Below a certain frequency, in a particular room, PVG provides a more uniform frequency response. Above that PVG frequency, room gain is much less uniform. That subject is addressed in some detail in Section VII-B of the Guide.

Above that frequency, the irregularity in FR makes it very difficult to accurately define the overall SPL increase, although REW estimates the average increase across the full bandwidth as about +4.5dB, in your case. Something that I thought about adding to my post, but didn't because the post was already complicated enough, is that subwoofer placement may be a factor in the total amount of increase that we get with two subwoofers. We should "theoretically" get an average of +6dB with the addition of a second sub, at some specific point in space: our MLP. And, I used the phrase "in theory" when I stated the audio principle.

If we put two subwoofers side-by-side, or stack them, it becomes easy to see the +6dB at our MLP. Once we spread them apart, there may be subwoofer placements in the room where the theoretical increase of +6dB won't occur, even as an average of all the frequencies that the subwoofers can play. We all sort of pick our poison with respect to subwoofer placements, deciding where we want the most SPL increases to occur, and deciding where we are willing to allow a less uniform FR.

That decision about where to put our subwoofers may be heavily influenced by aesthetic considerations, or by practical space limitations due to particular furniture arrangements. But, if those were not factors in our subwoofer placement, we should be able to find subwoofer locations in a given room where the subwoofers are physically separated, and where they average approximately +6dB in overall SPL increase. (Complicating things further, we may also have phase-cancellation between our subwoofers, in some rooms and physical locations, and not in others.)

This is why it is so hard to create audio principles on the basis of individual anecdotal examples, such as yours. But, as with some other audio principles, the theoretical +6dB, from the addition of a second identical sub, is an operating principle which has been well-established in audio science.

Regards,
Mike

Note: I debated whether to say anything about this very complicated subject at all, but decided I should when you restated the +3dB idea in a second post. I hope you know that I didn't comment in order to criticize what you were saying. :) But, I know that a lot of people silently read along on this thread. And, I wanted to keep the basic concept of a second identical subwoofer adding +6dB clear for people. As with many audio principles, this one is simple in theory and complicated in application. But, the theoretical increase of +6dB, from the addition of a second subwoofer, is an important audio concept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Thanks for all the information.

Around 50hz is where I'd like the most gain if I go that route. So if dual identical subs net roughly 6db gain, if I decided I wanted a second sub to just even things out in my room but keep the output about the same as I have now with a single, would that mean I could reduce each sub by roughly -3db? I like the idea of two subs not having to work as hard as one, especially with the driver noise I'm occasionally hearing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Having an issue with my 7 month old SB16-Ultra. Randomly the amp resets, usually when changing presets in the app. Last night it just did it when I raised the AVR volume. I will be calling SVS in the morning, but figured I'd reach out here too.
Definitely reach out to SVS CS and we'll take care of you. Thanks and sorry for the problem!
 
  • Like
Reactions: xtreme1979

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Does anyone know how much output & headroom I'd gain by moving from the SB-2000 Pro to the SB-3000? Assuming I get my rattling/buzz issues sorted out, I'd like to know whether moving to the 3000 or adding a second 2000 Pro would net me more output. I know two subs evens things out but I'd like to know about headroom.
Headroom at what frequency? Down really low (like <30 Hz) they are almost the same (limited by cabinet volume), so dual SB2000's would be better. But 50+ Hz (chest punch zone) the SB3000 is about 3x higher output, so would still have more headroom than dual SB2000's. Best of all would be dual SB3000's as qguy suggests :p. Here's a chart of them (SB2000, not SB2000-pro, but close enough), based on a combo of Audioholics test data, extrapolations, and my own measurements where their data is missing (assumes the duals sit close enough to stay <1/4 wavelength apart at LFE freqs - on opposite sides of the room you'll only get 3dB gain in the upper LFE spectrum so the SB3000 would shine even brighter in comparison):

View attachment 3037943
Hi,

I like your graph, and I agree with your advice to get dual SB3000's if possible! There is something that you have said though, in two recent posts, that I think needs to be clarified a little. Identical subs indoors, in less than about a 20,000^3 room, will add +6dB, compared to a single sub. Where it gets confusing, is that the +6dB is only an average across the full operating bandwidth of the subs. So, some frequencies can get peaks of more than +6dB, and other frequencies can have very deep areas of cancellation. But, in theory, if you add up all the +'s and the -'s, they should average +6dB with the second identical sub.

You are correct that "mutual coupling" occurs when two subwoofers are within 1/4 wavelength of distance from each other. Again, in theory, where mutual coupling occurs, the second sub adds +6dB at every frequency, and not just an average of +6dB with the peaks and dips averaged together. So, mutual coupling is a uniform addition of +6dB at every frequency, where simply adding a second sub gives an average of +6dB, but often in a completely random way. That is due to the influence of room modes, which create dips at some frequencies, and peaks at others.

The best example of mutual coupling involves placing two subs side-by-side or one on top of another. Then, the two subs simply act as one subwoofer, with the same frequency response and with +6dB more SPL at every frequency. It can get a little confusing, especially when you try to calculate all of the peaks and dips in your particular frequency response, in order to arrive at the +6dB average. But, this is a well-established audio principle that is often misunderstood or misquoted.

Further confusing things is the fact that a transducer loses -6dB of SPL, for every doubling of distance outdoors, while losing only about -3dB indoors. The +6'dBs and the -3dB's and -6dB's tend to get all mixed together in these discussions. But, trust me! What I wrote in this post is correct. Adding a second subwoofer will net +6dB, as an average across the subs' operating range. It just won't add +6dB at every frequency, unless the subwoofers are very close together.

Regards,
Mike
Mike, I usually defer to your expertise, but my understanding is a bit different. I agree that mutually coupled subs add 6dB across every frequency, as the sound waves are mostly in phase. But my understanding is that when not coupled, and sound waves are not in phase, such as when the distance between sources is more than 1/4 wavelength, you end up needing to treat it as white noise addition, which is 3 dB on average. If you think about it, if 6dB occurs when two sound waves are perfectly in phase, then averaging in less than perfect / out of phase (even reversed phase) sounds has to result in an average that is less than 6dB.

Here's some measurements on my home setup, with lots of room gain. Below about 35 hz, my subs are coupled and we see 5-6 Hz evenly across the lower spectrum. (the lower 2 lines are the individual subs; the upper green line is combined). They are ~8 feet apart. But above 40Hz, all hell breaks loose, with maybe a few spots more than 6dB and a lot of freqs with little gain and some negative spots as well. Interestingly, there is no gain at all above about 140 Hz, when the subs are roughly 1 wavelength apart. Sample size of one, but it does seem to demonstrate how subs couple below the 1/4 wavelength distance. and just visually, it appears the average gain above 40 Hz is less than the average gain below 40 Hz.

View attachment 3037958
Thanks for the response! This isn't really so much a matter of my personal expertise as it is a matter of what I referred to as a well-established audio principle. Real experts, such as Dr Floyd Toole, Dr Todd Welti, and Dr Earl Geddes, were among the early trailblazers in audio science. But, I believe that the basic principle we are discussing predates them as well. You can certainly refer to audio texts on this subject, which have been written by real experts in the field.

When two transducers are placed inside a room, they behave very unpredictably at any given frequency. And, as I noted in my post, it can become very difficult to look at a frequency response and add and subtract all of the differences in SPL, when the second subwoofer is added. Your FR is a perfect example of that. Where the two subs are mutually coupled, below about 17Hz, the gain in SPL is uniform and easily visible, although there are still slight irregularities in the combined FR.

It's easier to see the gain in SPL because of the more uniform FR. But, the more uniform FR is caused by pressure vessel gain, which is the strongest form of room gain. Below a certain frequency, in a particular room, PVG provides a more uniform frequency response. Above that PVG frequency, room gain is much less uniform. That subject is addressed in some detail in Section VII-B of the Guide.

Above that frequency, the irregularity in FR makes it very difficult to accurately define the overall SPL increase, although REW estimates the average increase across the full bandwidth as about +4.5dB, in your case. Something that I thought about adding to my post, but didn't because the post was already complicated enough, is that subwoofer placement may be a factor in the total amount of increase that we get with two subwoofers. We should "theoretically" get an average of +6dB with the addition of a second sub, at some specific point in space: our MLP. And, I used the phrase "in theory" when I stated the audio principle.

If we put two subwoofers side-by-side, or stack them, it becomes easy to see the +6dB at our MLP. Once we spread them apart, there may be subwoofer placements in the room where the theoretical increase of +6dB won't occur, even as an average of all the frequencies that the subwoofers can play. We all sort of pick our poison with respect to subwoofer placements, deciding where we want the most SPL increases to occur, and deciding where we are willing to allow a less uniform FR.

That decision about where to put our subwoofers may be heavily influenced by aesthetic considerations, or by practical space limitations due to particular furniture arrangements. But, if those were not factors in our subwoofer placement, we should be able to find subwoofer locations in a given room where the subwoofers are physically separated, and where they average approximately +6dB in overall SPL increase. (Complicating things further, we may also have phase-cancellation between our subwoofers, in some rooms and physical locations, and not in others.)

This is why it is so hard to create audio principles on the basis of individual anecdotal examples, such as yours. But, as with some other audio principles, the theoretical +6dB, from the addition of a second identical sub, is an operating principle which has been well-established in audio science.

Regards,
Mike

Note: I debated whether to say anything about this very complicated subject at all, but decided I should when you restated the +3dB idea in a second post. I hope you know that I didn't comment in order to criticize what you were saying. :) But, I know that a lot of people silently read along on this thread. And, I wanted to keep the basic concept of a second identical subwoofer adding +6dB clear for people. As with many audio principles, this one is simple in theory and complicated in application. But, the theoretical increase of +6dB, from the addition of a second subwoofer, is an important audio concept.
Thanks for all the information.

Around 50hz is where I'd like the most gain if I go that route. So if dual identical subs net roughly 6db gain, if I decided I wanted a second sub to just even things out in my room but keep the output about the same as I have now with a single, would that mean I could reduce each sub by roughly -3db? I like the idea of two subs not having to work as hard as one, especially with the driver noise I'm occasionally hearing.
Lots to digest here - but I'll stick to the basics for the benefit of the OP.

SB-2000 = baseline
SB-2000 Pro = baseline + 1-1.5 dB across the board
SB-3000 = baseline + 2-3 dB in the 18-36 Hz octave and +4-6 dB in the 40-80 Hz octave

A 6 dB gain in dynamic headroom is literally a doubling of the SPL. So the SB-3000 has about 2X (not 3X) the dynamic output of the SB-2000 in the mid/upper bass ranges.

Two identical co-located subs will add 6 dB of SPL as compared to one sub - because they are perfectly in phase at all frequencies.

Two identical non-colocated subs in totally different parts of the room will not be perfectly in phase in the modal zone and will average more like +3 dB at most frequencies but the benefit will be a denser standing wave pattern with a smoother overall FR. Using REW to steer the results and adjusting phase on one of the subs will often yield very good results.

As Mike and others have stated/shown in the graphs, when the room transitions to the pressure zone, dual identical subs will start to approach + 6 dB even if they are in separate parts of the room.
 

·
AVS ***** Member
Joined
·
8,970 Posts
Thanks for all the information.

Around 50hz is where I'd like the most gain if I go that route. So if dual identical subs net roughly 6db gain, if I decided I wanted a second sub to just even things out in my room but keep the output about the same as I have now with a single, would that mean I could reduce each sub by roughly -3db? I like the idea of two subs not having to work as hard as one, especially with the driver noise I'm occasionally hearing.

You are very welcome! That's not exactly how it works, in terms of reducing the volume of each sub by -3dB. Think of it this way. When any system of auto EQ calibrates your subwoofers, it treats all subs in the system as a single audio channel. So, whether you have one sub or 8 subs, those 8 subs are calibrated to play at the same volume level as all of your other audio channels (center channel, front left, front right, etc.), using a 75dB test tone.

After calibration, most people will want to add bass by increasing the volume of the subwoofer(s), relative to the other audio channels, because we don't hear bass frequencies as well as those in our normal hearing range. If, in the past, you added +6dB to your single sub, through some combination of sub gain and AVR trim, you will still need to add +6dB to each sub, to achieve the same bass volume that you had before, because your AVR is treating the pair of subs as a single audio source.

In general, the advantage of having dual subs is at least twofold. (Not counting the advantage of better bass envelopment.) One advantage is to obtain a smoother frequency response. The second is to obtain a nominal (or theoretical) increase in headroom, which will reduce the potential for distortion, or for other unpleasant audio effects. As noted, the addition of a second identical sub can theoretically net +6dB in SPL, when the SPL is averaged across the full operating bandwidth of the two subs. So, you will always have more headroom, and depending on the specific frequency involved, you may get the full +6dB.

Part of what makes all of this a little bit confusing is that we don't always put our subwoofers in optimal positions in a room. As noted earlier, aesthetic considerations, and furniture arrangements, often don't allow for optimal subwoofer placement. I have seen examples of rooms averaging approximately +6dB of SPL increase from the addition of a second sub, and I have seen other examples where the average is closer to the +4.5dB that @Magellan55 illustrated in his graph. Subwoofer placement is the key, and that takes a process of trial-and-error.

Typically, if there are specific frequencies that you want to emphasize, such as the mid-bass frequency you mentioned, you can make that one of your priorities when you experiment with subwoofer placement. As Ed said, phase-cancellation can often be an issue even between two identical subs, and if it is, where that cancellation occurs is something that you can chart with REW, and correct for with your phase or distance settings. As a general rule, the smoother the overall FR, the more likely you are to obtain the theoretical +6dB average increase in SPL from the addition of a second subwoofer.

One final thought on this subject, for people reading along, is this. As Ed noted, there will always be some phase-cancellation, even between two identical subs. (It will just be worse with non-identical subs.) Where that phase-cancellation occurs, and the severity of it, will vary at different locations in the room. (For instance, it will be much worse at the exact center point of a square or rectangular room.) But, there may not be severe phase-cancellation at the single point in space which constitutes the MLP. Or if there is, it may be easier to adjust for that cancellation at a single listening position.

EQing multiple subs for that point in space is a very different proposition than trying to achieve a perfectly flat FR, with an average of +6dB of additional SPL from the second sub, at multiple listening positions. As long as we keep that idea in mind with our subwoofer placement, we can often achieve a very satisfactory FR, and the additional +6dB of headroom we were hoping to obtain, at the frequencies where it is most desirable to have it.

Regards,
Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
Part of what makes all of this a little bit confusing is that we don't always put our subwoofers in optimal positions in a room. As noted earlier, aesthetic considerations, and furniture arrangements, often don't allow for optimal subwoofer placement. I have seen examples of rooms averaging approximately +6dB of SPL increase from the addition of a second sub, and I have seen other examples where the average is closer to the +4.5dB that @Magellan55 illustrated in his graph. Subwoofer placement is the key, and that takes a process of trial-and-error.
I placed my subs strictly based on aesthetics (and in fact went with sealed vs. ported based on aesthetics) and as REW shows, I benefited by +6db below ~42hz. In my 7,000^3+ room, my bass naturally peaks at 16hz, which is nice. I have two more 4" thick acoustic panels to hang this week, then I will re-run REW.

No matter which sub you choose, I would always recommend buying two of them.
 

Attachments

·
AVS ***** Member
Joined
·
8,970 Posts
I placed my subs strictly based on aesthetics (and in fact went with sealed vs. ported based on aesthetics) and as REW shows, I benefited by +6db below ~42hz. In my 7,000^3+ room, my bass naturally peaks at 16hz, which is nice. I have two more 4" thick acoustic panels to hang this week, then I will re-run REW.

No matter which sub you choose, I would always recommend buying two of them.

Hi,

I agree with you that it is almost always advisable to purchase dual subs, if possible!

I think that your results graphically illustrate what we have been talking about. Many people are limited in their subwoofer placement for aesthetic or other reasons. But, even with potentially sub-optimal placement, you were able to achieve close to +6dB of SPL increase, from the addition of the second subwoofer, when you average the results across the full-frequency band. You had to apply room EQ, which should always be the case. And, you had to experiment with phase, via your distance setting. But, once you did that, you achieved very close to the theoretical +6dB increase in SPL.

It's much harder to see the SPL increase, where the starting FR is less uniform, which is why the <40Hz portion of the graph stands out. But, you can come fairly close if you really work at it. And, the REW table at the bottom of your graph gives you a decent approximation of the average SPL increase from the addition of the second sub.

I think you have a very nice looking frequency response there, and the additional 4" acoustic panels should help. One of the things that we don't talk about very much is "ringing" due to excessive reverberation times from hard surfaces in the room. But, the reduction of ringing or "slap echo" can make a real difference in our audio quality. You may see improvements on your FR graph, from the addition of the new panels, but I would also expect you to hear audible improvements which transcend your frequency response.

Regards,
Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
I have just ordered a SVS SB-2000 pro and have a question about the auto standby feature.

On the previous model, I think you could see if the subwoofer was in standby or active mode by looking at the status light in the front of the subwoofer.
I cannot see any status light on the Pro version, so is it not possible to detect if the subwoofer is on standby or active?

I am a bit worried since I've heard the auto standby feature might not work very well with Yamaha receivers (I have a Yamaha RX-V685).

It would therefore be good if I can easy detect this. Is it possible to detect this with the phone app?

Thanks
/Jugge
Below are some comments on the power status function of the 2000 Pro series:

Auto/On

Press this button to select “ON” which keeps the subwoofer on continuously so it will not go into Standby mode. The three center LEDs will be illuminated in “On” mode.

Press again for “Auto” and only the outer two of the above LEDs will be illuminated. The subwoofer will go into standby after 10 minutes if there is no audio signal and power consumption will drop to <0.5W. The auto-on wake-up voltage is quite low - around 3-4 mV. So provided your speakers are all set to Small, there should be no issues waking up the subwoofer with any AVR.

One visual element that does happen when the subwoofer is kicked into “ON” from “Standby” is the LED bar will light up and the “+” and “-“ lights will go from 50% to 100% brightness for about 10 seconds and then drop back down to 50% during audio playback, unless the user is actively manipulating the menu options (then it will stay at 100% brightness).
 
  • Like
Reactions: sampleheadz

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,779 Posts
Review of PB2000 Pro is out-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
Review of PB2000 Pro is out-
I was just about to post the same. An overwhelmingly positive review and what seems to be a big step up from the PB-2000. I know this sub has been out for a while with lots of great user feedback but good to see a comprehensive review with measurements from a reputable source. The PC pro has the same driver and amp but didn't get an enclosure change whereas the PB pro did. I wonder if the PC pro still measures pretty much the same as the PB pro as did the prior generation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
I was just about to post the same. An overwhelmingly positive review and what seems to be a big step up from the PB-2000. I know this sub has been out for a while with lots of great user feedback but good to see a comprehensive review with measurements from a reputable source. The PC pro has the same driver and amp but didn't get an enclosure change whereas the PB pro did. I wonder if the PC pro still measures pretty much the same as the PB pro as did the prior generation?
The PB-2000 Pro and PC-2000 Pro measure very closely with respect to FR and CEA-2010 output data. Whichever form factor works best in your particular room and application should be the primary decision factor between the two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: confinoj

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Hi, I have a few questions here. My room size is 18ft X 14.7ft and 11.5ft high (volume around 3000ft3), I have 2 PB2000 (not the pro). I aligned all subwoofers using mini dsp and I can get pretty much flat response 20Hz-120Hz +/- 5Db. My questions is even the bass can go very deep, I feel the bass not tight enough, and I run REW and checked the decay time 20Hz-40Hz still over 1000ms. I am thinking to change to sealed sub, either 2 SB3000 or 3 SB2000. Anyone here maybe can give me a suggestions. By the my room already have some acoustic treatment already. thank you.
 
33941 - 33960 of 34021 Posts
Top