[bear123]


Hey gang.  Here is the in room response of my PB2000.  Just to give everyone an idea of the setup, the PB2000 is corner loaded in front of the room.  I graphed its response after adjusting phase to get the best results.  Then, I placed the Polk PSW110 in a few different locations, running sweeps and adjusting phase on one, then the other, then both, to find the best response.  Finally, I ended up using neither a 0 or a 180 phase on the PB2000, ending up around 120 to get the best graph(this made a big difference in one of the peaks and nulls).  Here are the results.  

 

     Although many said they don't think two vastly different subs will play well together, I am pretty happy with the results.  There is no eq applied, as I am having trouble with my miniDSP.  All graphs are smoothed 1/12th octave.  The polk is placed nearfield next to our sectional along a wall, about 4.5' out from a corner.

 



 



 

 



Ignore the SPL, I have something screwed up with the calibration so it is reading a lot higher than it really is.  Going to fiddle with it to straighten it out.

 

[bear123]


Here is an overlay of the PB2000 with and without the PSW110 after backing the sub trim down a bit in the AVR:

 

 

[LowerFE]

While the FR looks flat, I think you'll still be missing out on a lot of punch between 40-60Hz. Sure, the PSW110 can produce output between 40-60Hz, but it cannot produce any sort of "punch". Therefore the two together still won't deliver the punch in that range.


I think it is better to try to find another spot for the PB2000 to avoid that big null than to have the little Polk covering it. You should get much more impactful bass with the SVS pumping out the 40-60Hz. That Polk has severely limited output before port noise kicks in, and that would really detract from the PB2000's quality bass.

 

[bear123]


I only have one placement option for the PB2000, so im stuck with the response that it has.  In some quick listening, I think the sound actually improved some, as the Polk did fill in the gap exactly where the PB2000 had the null, and this is right in the Polk's sweet spot of output.  I listened to some music up to -10 and -5, which is quite a bit louder than i normally listen, and it still sounded quite good, with more punch than the PB2000 had on its own.

 

Since the response did improve substantially, this might lead to a PB1000 in the future, as a 2nd PB2000 will not fit in the nearfield location where the Polk is.

 

[Jack D Ripper]


What happens when you turn up the volume quite loud?  I have a guess, but you don't seem to like that sort of thing and should try it for yourself.

 

[bear123]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1519816/pb2000-rew-and-a-polk-psw110-result#post_24409309

 

What happens when you turn up the volume quite loud?  I have a guess, but you don't seem to like that sort of thing and should try it for yourself.

Read my previous post.  The Polk is nearfield, so the gain is not as high.  At -10 to -5 on the master volume, which is much louder than how I listen 99% of the time, it sounded very good and I did not hear any distress from the Polk.  Switching the Polk off presented a very noticeable hole in the bass.

 

     So, for what amounts to zero $(as it is the old sub I replaced), I have a much flatter frequency response with no eq, and perfectly good sound at the levels i listen at and even quite a bit louder.  I don't mind if the Polk won't play cleanly at a level that I will never listen too.  

 

     I know it goes against many peoples beliefs, who feel that two different subs cannot play well together, but in my case, it just was not true.  In fact, before trying this, one of the most knowledgeable members of these forums stated that it would work just fine and would not hold the better sub back in any way, especially if the gain is lowered.  Luckily for me, he was right.

 

However, I do see the point that if someone level matches two badly mismatched subs, and the cheaper sub runs out of steam before the other with someones normal listening habits, that could be a bad thing.  I did notice I had to keep the crossover at 80, I was able to localize at a lower frequency than before with the 2nd sub nearfield.  But at 80 it sounds like it is all coming from my little HSU bookshelves.

 

[eljaycanuck]



Quote:
Here is an overlay of the PB2000 with and without the PSW110 after backing the sub trim down a bit in the AVR:

It's pretty cool how well the two subs play together!

 

[bear123]



Quote:
Originally Posted by eljaycanuck  /t/1519816/pb2000-rew-and-a-polk-psw110-result#post_24409461



It's pretty cool how well the two subs play together!

Thanks, I was pleased with what was essentially a free improvement that did not require any EQ.  If I can get the bug worked out of my miniDSP, the projected FR is flat as a pancake. (Without the Polk, it took +10dB of eq along with some cutting to flatten out that 40-60Hz null.)

 

[cel4145]



Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123  /t/1519816/pb2000-rew-and-a-polk-psw110-result#post_24409449


Read my previous post.  The Polk is nearfield, so the gain is not as high.  At -10 to -5 on the master volume, which is much louder than how I listen 99% of the time, it sounded very good and I did not hear any distress from the Polk.  Switching the Polk off presented a very noticeable hole in the bass.


     So, for what amounts to zero $(as it is the old sub I replaced), I have a much flatter frequency response with no eq, and perfectly good sound at the levels i listen at and even quite a bit louder.  I don't mind if the Polk won't play cleanly at a level that I will never listen too.  


     I know it goes against many peoples beliefs, who feel that two different subs cannot play well together, but in my case, it just was not true.  In fact, before trying this, one of the most knowledgeable members of these forums stated that it would work just fine and would not hold the better sub back in any way, especially if the gain is lowered.  Luckily for me, he was right.


However, I do see the point that if someone level matches two badly mismatched subs, and the cheaper sub runs out of steam before the other with someones normal listening habits, that could be a bad thing.  I did notice I had to keep the crossover at 80, I was able to localize at a lower frequency than before with the 2nd sub nearfield.  But at 80 it sounds like it is all coming from my little HSU bookshelves.

Frequency response is only one fact in bass quality. The other consideration is transient response. You may be trading off some detail resolution for presence in frequencies that were not previously heard.


So I would say that the general principle of not "playing well together" can still apply. It just maybe that using both of them suits your listening tastes.

 

[bear123]



Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145  /t/1519816/pb2000-rew-and-a-polk-psw110-result#post_24411225



Frequency response is only one fact in bass quality. The other consideration is transient response. You may be trading off some detail resolution for presence in frequencies that were not previously heard.


So I would say that the general principle of not "playing well together" can still apply. It just maybe that using both of them suits your listening tastes.

I agree the Polk is probably not providing nearly as clean or accurate bass.  However, I feel like the beneift I get from filling in the huge 50Hz null without eq probably outweighs the difference in the quality of the subs.  Of course, I have a lot of listening to do and have not watched any movies yet.  If nothing else, this provides me with some hard data that adding a second sub definitely smoothed the response, and if I decide matching the subs up better matters, I can fit a PB1000 where the Polk is located.  I got REW and the mic fixed as far as SPL goes, here are the updated graphs.

 



This is what REW is predicting if I can get my miniDSP issue fixed:

 



 

Not sure if i can actually knock that 100Hz peak down as I am crossed at 80, but going to run it to see what it does.

 

[cel4145]



Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123  /t/1519816/pb2000-rew-and-a-polk-psw110-result#post_24411345


I agree the Polk is probably not providing nearly as clean or accurate bass.  However, I feel like the beneift I get from filling in the huge 50Hz null without eq probably outweighs the difference in the quality of the subs.  

What you'll probably have to do is listen to both for several weeks, so you really get to know how they sound together, then switch back to the one for a week or so to get comfortable again and then start to think about which you like better. That's what I would try.


I'm personally more invested in how things sound to me after getting really comfortable with different setups than initial reactions, because even the newness of a thing can bias me in the short term. But that works for me, not necessarily anyone else.