AVS Forum banner

1121 - 1140 of 1943 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
It has to be the drivers that are used in the 1400 and 2400, as you said it wasn’t an issue with the 118 right? The drivers in the 2400 (and whatever other model its used in I’m sure) just sounds and articulates different from the Rythmiks, even with nearly identical FRs (and same location) to match them up better. When I had the 2400, it sounded totally different than the Rhythmik FV15HP that I had at the same time, even with FR’s basically identical post Audy or manually EQ’d. Heck, even the Audyssey twerp tone sounds WAY different on the 2400 compared to any other driver I’ve heard, like was mentioned somewhere on this thread as well. I found this to be very interesting. Even the Audy twerp tone on my SI DS4’s and UM22-18’s sound like the Rythmiks, or very close anyway.

One would sure think, like has been mentioned recently by a few, that setup with nearly identical FR’s, that they would sound very similar, but this is so not the case. It may have to be experienced to be believed.
You are right...you can have same FR for all subs and they all sound different. I've had PSA, SVS, and now Funk Audio subs. I can get same FR from same sub position in REW but yeah they all sound different. Mainly because of different size drivers and ported/sealed differences in my room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: toddct

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,892 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,122
My bass trap comment above had nothing to do with JTR vs Rythmik at all....just saying it would be nice to get most of the room out of the equation. Not only it makes ALL subs sound better but it allows you to hear more of the drivers themselves and less of the room.



While rythmik drivers work best in your room and seems you found the perfect sub for you with or without treatments.....what I'm saying is get some bass traps so you can enjoy your Rythmiks even more! LOL Kinda like a free or rather a small fee upgrade!



Speaking of treatments....I just recently added 2 soffit traps and 3 ceiling panels in the past 2 months. :)


Yep I have 6 GIK 244 panels now in my room. free or cost too!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,369 Posts
I hesitate to say anything at all about it, but has already been talked about, I guess. I loved the low-end cleanness and power of the cap, but for the life of me, I just could not get the midbass clarity and articulation out of it compared to the Rythmik FV15HP, or my SI DS4’s or UM22-18’s I have now (in a ported or sealed cab). I tried everything I could to get it that out of it, including mid bass bumps, diff locations, cranking it up higher and higher etc, all to no avail. I was just so used to the Rythmik sound since I had it before the cap and loved it, so that didn’t help lol.

That said, I did still loved the cap in a lot of ways and it’s a beast. It’s just a different animal compared to the other subs I’ve experienced. Whether that is totally driver related or partially room or both, IDK. Only way to know if one would like it or not or better or less than a different sub is to try it out in your room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
I hesitate to say anything at all about it, but has already been talked about, I guess. I loved the low-end cleanness and power of the cap, but for the life of me, I just could not get the midbass clarity and articulation out of it compared to the Rythmik FV15HP, or my SI DS4’s or UM22-18’s I have now (in a ported or sealed cab). I tried everything I could to get it that out of it, including mid bass bumps, diff locations, cranking it up higher and higher etc, all to no avail. I was just so used to the Rythmik sound since I had it before the cap and loved it, so that didn’t help lol.

That said, I did still loved the cap in a lot of ways and it’s a beast. It’s just a different animal compared to the other subs I’ve experienced. Whether that is totally driver related or partially room or both, IDK. Only way to know if one would like it or not or better or less than a different sub is to try it out in your room.
This is exactly why some people run different subs and cut them off at specific frequencies. Such as sealed subs for 50hz and below and horn subs such as orbit shifter, skhorn, etc for 50hz and up for that midbass slam! That is a potent combination and it can get expensive! Hard to get one sub to do it all!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,379 Posts
Yeah. Typically do, we just got caught up in listening to all the subs and didn’t realize we never saved anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Don't worry, I wish I kept all my measurements, I have to look through old posts to find some. JTR waterfalls show the midbass to be fine as decay times are concerned, it is where the tune is that creates longer decay times. The boxes are really small for 10hz tuned 18 inch subs which creates more port wind as everyone says. Also, lower frequencies are slower and takes longer to decay, so the louder they are the longer you will here them. They will also excite the room in differently too so if you don't fix the room for the subs it will always sound bad. My room has been treated so many times and then I added the high excursion re drivers and I have new rattles and such. PITA, I love it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Heck, even the Audyssey twerp tone sounds WAY different on the 2400 compared to any other driver I’ve heard
Yep, spot on. When I had the FV25 and the 2400 with Tony, Enrico and Ray we all talked about this. The 2400 sounds more like a thump and the FV25 sounds much more like my mains with just a bit more weight. Ray mentioned this in his impressions.

Todd
 
  • Like
Reactions: imureh

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,542 Posts
Does anyone have measurements of the subs level matched and FR matched?
Not that I don't believe that it wasn't attempted but it's a lot more difficult than people think.

No smoothing should be used for the measurement curves while doing the matching and the placement of both subs should be identical. Levels must be matched as closely as possible. Ideally the listening would be done blind. Sight bias is a real thing. Hearing studies have shown that trained listeners, such as I'd consider most of the people here, can easily discern minor differences in level and FR shape. The listening tests should be done at a moderate level where it is well within the subs comfort zone. I've been to a few of these listening sessions and GTG's and the volume level always ends up cranked to where a single or even double of any of these subs end up banging off the limiter half of the time. None of the subs will maintain the FR shape from the lower levels used for matching them if they are pushed hard. You may not even know it was happening but it throws out any effort at matching the responses completely. At that point you are listening for maximum output and distortion behavior and differences between products will become readily apparent. Perhaps the levels were kept down in this case but it'd be a first in my experience.

Edit: Let me add that the crossover transition between mains and sub is especially important and is harder than it seems to get the exact same blend with both subs even if they are both technically using a 4th order 80Hz LPF or whatever. The upper bass and transition to the mains has a huge impact on the apparent impact and definition of the bass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,892 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,128
Does anyone have measurements of the subs level matched and FR matched?
Not that I don't believe that it wasn't attempted but it's a lot more difficult than people think.

No smoothing should be used for the measurement curves while doing the matching and the placement of both subs should be identical. Levels must be matched as closely as possible. Ideally the listening would be done blind. Sight bias is a real thing. Hearing studies have shown that trained listeners, such as I'd consider most of the people here, can easily discern minor differences in level and FR shape. The listening tests should be done at a moderate level where it is well within the subs comfort zone. I've been to a few of these listening sessions and GTG's and the volume level always ends up cranked to where a single or even double of any of these subs end up banging off the limiter half of the time. None of the subs will maintain the FR shape from the lower levels used for matching them if they are pushed hard. You may not even know it was happening but it throws out any effort at matching the responses completely. At that point you are listening for maximum output and distortion behavior and differences between products will become readily apparent. Perhaps the levels were kept down in this case but it'd be a first in my experience.

Edit: Let me add that the crossover transition between mains and sub is especially important and is harder than it seems to get the exact same blend with both subs even if they are both technically using a 4th order 80Hz LPF or whatever. The upper bass and transition to the mains has a huge impact on the apparent impact and definition of the bass.
Ricci, the listening of the 2400 ULF was done in my smallish 2100 cuft media room and also not part of a GTG so levels were not high. It was me and Todd and we did our best to match the subs in all aspects. The difference was night and day. We did not save any measurements for the 2400. I have plenty of the FV18 that I have shared with @Marc Alexander and I know he is looking at them closely.
 

·
Premium Member
^^^Respect My Authoritah!
Joined
·
4,949 Posts
Ricci, the listening of the 2400 ULF was done in my smallish 2100 cuft media room and also not part of a GTG so levels were not high. It was me and Todd and we did our best to match the subs in all aspects. The difference was night and day. We did not save any measurements for the 2400. I have plenty of the FV18 that I have shared with @Marc Alexander and I know he is looking at them closely.
Here, let me volunteer you and Todd to bring back his 2400s, and try again.
You're welcome.:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: toddct

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,892 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,130
Here, let me volunteer you and Todd to bring back his 2400s, and try again.
You're welcome.:D
Haha! You know I am up for it but I think @toddct is done moving big subs around for a while...;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: drh3b

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Here, let me volunteer you and Todd to bring back his 2400s, and try again.
You're welcome.:D
Haha! You know I am up for it but I think @toddct is done moving big subs around for a while...;)
I see what you did there drh3b. ;) The 2400 is actually not bad to move around for 2 guys so it's not out of the question. Others much more technical than me would need to do all the measurements, I would be busy with the margarita mix!

However, I'm not sure there is much to gain. Ray has already had the 118HT, the 1400 and the 2400 with myself, Enrico and Marc all participants at various times coming to a similar conclusion. While it was not a very scientific exercise, I think, for whatever reason, the 1400 and 2400 just don't sound their best in his room. How I hear the 2400s in my room is not what I heard in his.

I don't want to put words into Rays mouth but he has been to my house about as many times as I've been to his and I think he would agree that the 2400s sound much better in my room. And overall sound pretty damn good at that. Now don't embarrass me Ray! :D

Todd


Edit: @Ricci, I have clearly missed the point that you are looking for the "why". We might be able to make that happen but it might be a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drh3b

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,542 Posts
Ricci, the listening of the 2400 ULF was done in my smallish 2100 cuft media room and also not part of a GTG so levels were not high. It was me and Todd and we did our best to match the subs in all aspects. The difference was night and day. We did not save any measurements for the 2400. I have plenty of the FV18 that I have shared with @Marc Alexander and I know he is looking at them closely.
Understood.
Clearly you heard a difference, but the why of it that is being grasped at in this thread seems a bit off in left field to me.
I doubt it has to do with the waterfalls / decay rates, 10Hz vs 12Hz tuning, particle velocity / TR, etc...The simple explanation is that there were FR differences, level differences, THD signatures and differences at the crossover to the mains that all add up to a different sound signature. FR and relative levels are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd things I'd consider. However without measurements of exactly the setup as it was setup and listened to that day to analyze, it's speculative at best.

I've played around with a few subs. Subs can and do sound different of course, but it is subtle if they are matched closely and not driven too hard. Some sort of inherent, audible amount of overhang, or sloppiness in the 2400 in the time domain that was magnified to an extent that the sub was unlistenable in your room, but that did not affect the Rythmik to the same extent is highly unlikely, unless it had something to do with: a problem, setup issue, EQ, or a major setup difference between the subs IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,892 Posts
Discussion Starter #1,133
Understood.

Clearly you heard a difference, but the why of it that is being grasped at in this thread seems a bit off in left field to me.

I doubt it has to do with the waterfalls / decay rates, 10Hz vs 12Hz tuning, particle velocity / TR, etc...The simple explanation is that there were FR differences, level differences, THD signatures and differences at the crossover to the mains that all add up to a different sound signature. FR and relative levels are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd things I'd consider. However without measurements of exactly the setup as it was setup and listened to that day to analyze, it's speculative at best.



I've played around with a few subs. Subs can and do sound different of course, but it is subtle if they are matched closely and not driven too hard. Some sort of inherent, audible amount of overhang, or sloppiness in the 2400 in the time domain that was magnified to an extent that the sub was unlistenable in your room, but that did not affect the Rythmik to the same extent is highly unlikely, unless it had something to do with: a problem, setup issue, EQ, or a major setup difference between the subs IMO.


Can’t argue with what you have Ricci. My knowledge is nowhere near yours. May be when and if Marc comes over to Houston this summer we may try and give it a shot and perhaps include a FV25HP in there too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,380 Posts
Understood.
Clearly you heard a difference, but the why of it that is being grasped at in this thread seems a bit off in left field to me.
I doubt it has to do with the waterfalls / decay rates, 10Hz vs 12Hz tuning, particle velocity / TR, etc...The simple explanation is that there were FR differences, level differences, THD signatures and differences at the crossover to the mains that all add up to a different sound signature. FR and relative levels are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd things I'd consider. However without measurements of exactly the setup as it was setup and listened to that day to analyze, it's speculative at best.

I've played around with a few subs. Subs can and do sound different of course, but it is subtle if they are matched closely and not driven too hard. Some sort of inherent, audible amount of overhang, or sloppiness in the 2400 in the time domain that was magnified to an extent that the sub was unlistenable in your room, but that did not affect the Rythmik to the same extent is highly unlikely, unless it had something to do with: a problem, setup issue, EQ, or a major setup difference between the subs IMO.
Josh,

Just. Thank you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,299 Posts
Here, let me volunteer you and Todd to bring back his 2400s, and try again.

You're welcome.:D
More importantly, we need @enricoclaudio to bring back the FV25.

I've been to a few of these listening sessions and GTG's and the volume level always ends up cranked to where a single or even double of any of these subs end up banging off the limiter half of the time. None of the subs will maintain the FR shape from the lower levels used for matching them if they are pushed hard. You may not even know it was happening but it throws out any effort at matching the responses completely. At that point you are listening for maximum output and distortion behavior and differences between products will become readily apparent. Perhaps the levels were kept down in this case but it'd be a first in my experience.



Edit: Let me add that the crossover transition between mains and sub is especially important and is harder than it seems to get the exact same blend with both subs even if they are both technically using a 4th order 80Hz LPF or whatever. The upper bass and transition to the mains has a huge impact on the apparent impact and definition of the bass.
@Ricci as always, you are right on the money. These informal GTGs are time limited and there is really no opportunity for controlled experimentation. However, there was quite a bit of better controlled experimentation in @imureh's room (which spans another thread prior to this one).

Josh, I've been envisioning a subwoofer summit of sorts and would love to have your participation. I have two vastly different spaces and access to a large variety of subs. Downstairs (5.1.2) is wood over concrete slab. ~7,500 ft³, but wide open to the living room & entry (25 ft ceiling) and upstairs. Upstairs is a dedicated room (7.1.4), ~2775ft³ (24½x13⅓x8½) and a bedroom suite (5.1).

Here in SoCal we have access tovmany experienced, critical listeners. My biggest issue is health. I have lifting restrictions and getting subs up and down the stairs is an impossible task on my own. I envision 2-3 days with the testing/measurements taking place prior to blind listening on the last day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
Funny I said something similar to Josh's post not to long ago and was told I was being condescending, arrogant, and my intent was questioned.:rolleyes:
 

·
AVS ***** Member
Joined
·
8,949 Posts
I'm just catching-up on some threads, including this one, and continue to be very interested in how we define differences in various subs, and to what we might attribute the cause of whatever differences we hear and feel among different subs.

But, I think it may be helpful to distinguish between an analytical process that attempts to equalize frequency responses and levels, as exactly as possible, in order to define differences between subwoofers (and causes for those differences), and an audition for the purpose of selecting subwoofers.

Personally, if I were auditioning subwoofers for selection purposes, I would prefer to initially listen to subwoofers, level-matched, but unEQed. I think that some people will have inherent preferences for the native sound signature; mid-bass/low-bass balance; mid-bass TR, versus low-bass TR; deep tone; clarity; or whatever other variable we use when we compare subs. Blind testing would be ideal for that purpose, but may not be a practical approach for many people.

Most of those inherent preferences listed above will be instinctive/intuitive, rather than analytical, as they were in the case of the subs tested in Ray's room. Once we believe that we have what we are looking for in a subwoofer, we can use EQ to further enhance its positive attributes. But, I think that deliberately EQing to as exactly comparable frequency responses as we can, will tend to obscure legitimate differences in the natural subwoofer qualities referred to earlier. And, I think it's easier to attain the final result we are looking for, post-EQ, if we start with something closer to what we like, pre-EQ.

I think that the analytical approach for testing purposes, and the intuitive approach for audition purposes, both serve important objectives, but they may be different objectives. Just a thought! I do agree that we probably shouldn't try to generalize too strongly on the basis of anecdotal observations, though.

Regards,
Mike
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,299 Posts
Clearly you heard a difference, but the why of it that is being grasped at in this thread seems a bit off in left field to me.

I doubt it has to do with the waterfalls / decay rates, 10Hz vs 12Hz tuning, particle velocity / TR, etc...The simple explanation is that there were FR differences, level differences, THD signatures and differences at the crossover to the mains that all add up to a different sound signature. FR and relative levels are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd things I'd consider. However without measurements of exactly the setup as it was setup and listened to that day to analyze, it's speculative at best.



I've played around with a few subs. Subs can and do sound different of course, but it is subtle if they are matched closely and not driven too hard. Some sort of inherent, audible amount of overhang, or sloppiness in the 2400 in the time domain that was magnified to an extent that the sub was unlistenable in your room, but that did not affect the Rythmik to the same extent is highly unlikely, unless it had something to do with: a problem, setup issue, EQ, or a major setup difference between the subs IMO.
@imureh can you link your original thread here please. I am on mobile.
@Ricci, Jeff P. increased the range of the LF Adjust to -18dB, directly in response to our inability to integrate the Cap 1400 in this room. I do believe something aside from "FR differences, level differences, THD signatures and differences at the crossover to the mains" is at play. What exactly(?), has yet to be proven.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
Code:
Madeezy.

Ugh, oh man. Sounds like you may have been hepeated. It happens to the best of us...
Whoa hold on buddy.....I'm the *woman* in that scenario?!! This is why I don't post much cuz my feelins is hurt now. :( Ya know the fact you even know that term means you at one time were the hepeater right? Sexist sommab****.

Btw I'm liking the "Madeezy", sounds like a white rapper from the cold streets of the Northeast. And not cold as in gangsta...just cold cuz of the snow and temps.:cool:
 
1121 - 1140 of 1943 Posts
Top