|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 6, 2019 5:12:04 GMT -5
Currently running dual 10" subs with the Emotiva T2 speakers, driven by the Audio Research VT80SE. And I must say, things sound sweet! I'm particularly enjoying piano music. Not only does the piano sound present in my room, but the smoothness with which the keys extend into the bass octaves really adds to the realism. The crossover is set at 100 Hz. and 12 decibels per octave. For whatever reason, this seems to give a more unnoticeable transition between the T2s and the subs than does the 24 decibel per octave setting.
To an extent, the fact that subs are needed at all is something of a disappointment. I had expected the T2s to light up my room in the bass as they had when I did a previous review. But I've found that if I put the T2s close enough to the back wall to couple well to the room in the bass, that they don't image as well as they do farther out in the room. So I'm currently listening to the T2s where they image best and filling in the bass with the dual subs.
The subs are level-matched to the satellites at the crossover point. This doesn't give "Huuuuuuge bass" in the room, but that's not what I want. What I want is natural sound, where acoustic instruments sound real without any particular bass emphasis. And that's exactly what I've got. Bass guitars, drums, and low brass don't "jump out of the mix and bite you," but rather just sound full and natural with spot-on pitch control. To get this blend, it's ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to use a two-sub array. With a single sub, I can hear (and feel) the differences in frequency due to room nodes. Now I could overcome some of the single-sub-boom by placing the sub in the corner (that, in my room, gives a smoother response), but dual subs definitely work better. My next experiment will be to try four subs and see how that works.
How can I afford so many subs? Easy - I buy them at yard sales. Yes, they are mismatched (no two alike), but at 100 Hz. and below, I can't tell the diff. I'm currently running a 10" Klipsch and a 10" Velodyne, and yes, they DO play well together. I paid $20 for the Klipsch and $125 for the Velodyne. The latter was at the top end of my target budget, but it is very well made, works perfectly, and looks nice.
Back to the T2s... When placed in the spot where they image best in my room, the T2s can sound a bit boxy in the midrange. So much so that I may well go back to the Klipsch RP-600M bookshelf speakers on stands. Is the boxiness a part of the speaker's design and bracing, or is it an artifact of the room? I didn't hear any boxiness when I reviewed the speakers previously, but they were closer to the wall during that review and the room's bass reinforcement may have incidentally hid or attenuated the boxiness. More speaker dancing will be needed before I can say for sure whether the artifact is due to the speaker itself or to placement.
The other variables that changed immediately on receipt of the T2 speakers were in the front end. I had been running the Oppo UDP-205 as a streamer and balanced DAC with the Emotiva PA-1 amps on the power-amp end of the system. But I'm now running the Audio Research DAC9 tube DAC and the Audio Research VT80SE tube power amp. Could they be the source of the boxiness in the midrange? I wouldn't expect so, but some experimentation may be required...
Temporarily overwhelmed here, but enjoying the ride all the same.
Boomzilla
|
|
|
Post by simpleman68 on Apr 6, 2019 7:56:16 GMT -5
Hi jcam2881 - But if the latter, then there's a thorny dilemma to face... The speakers have a -3dB point of 35 Hz. But the "lack of bass" that I'm experiencing is at significantly higher frequencies. In the "best imaging" spot, it sounds as if everything below maybe 150 Hz. is not strong enough. Several things come to mind: Much to consider. Just a reminder with regard to keeping it simple. There is a lot in music that is centered around the 150 Hz mark. You may have some room suck out centered around that spot combined with some of the usual comb filtering activated when you pulled them away from the wall.
You're probably not missing the entire spectrum below that point is what I'm saying. The hard past is it's almost impossible/unreasonable to trap bass that low without monstrous and deep traps.
You've got some really great gear to sample soon; I"m stoked to read more about it. I have been meaning to get some reviews up of my great but my time is severely limited balancing work as well as my wife and 4 kids that need me. Scott
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 6, 2019 12:13:01 GMT -5
The 100 Hz crossover with two subs seems to be the golden bullet. Even at 150 Hz. (-6 decibels with a 12-dB/octave crossover slope), the two subs are kicking in some and that seems to do away with the room null. The more I listen the better I'm liking the current setup.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 6, 2019 14:18:56 GMT -5
The 100 Hz crossover with two subs seems to be the golden bullet. Even at 150 Hz. (-6 decibels with a 12-dB/octave crossover slope), the two subs are kicking in some and that seems to do away with the room null. The more I listen the better I'm liking the current setup. Looks like you are having fun. Room issues start in the bass region so one must pay attention to room treatments. However more subwoofers help manage bass nodes. I think you'll find that many mismatched subwoofers have their own issues and so I reccomend matched units.
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 6, 2019 16:48:06 GMT -5
Hi garbulky - I've been waiting for someone to make that comment. May I politely contend the issue? No matter where you put any subwoofer, the room placement excites room nodes. Those nodes can be up to +/- 20 decibels! Now think about how much brand A subwoofer frequency response differs from brand B's. A few dB here and there? The placement has many, many times the effect on frequency response as does the source. Now if we were using totally junky subs, THEN we'd need to contend with box vibration, doubling, cone excursion limitations, and gross clipping or distortion from the plate amplifiers. But if you limit the choices to name-brand subs (and avoid the HTIB models), then different branded subs will work perfectly happily together. The tiny differences you would theoretically gain from having matched subs will be totally erased by placement anyway. I understand that mixing and matching subs goes against everything we think we "know" about speaker matching, but the point is that at the VERY limited frequency range that subwoofers operate at, the devices are far more similar than different. I tried the "mix and match" experiment just to see if it worked. Had it not, then I'd have been in the market for about four to six Airmotiv subs. But so far, I promise that you can NOT hear any difference between the two bass channels. Once the Klipsch and Velodyne subs are level-matched to their respective satellite speakers, they just get the job done with no fuss, no muss. So to summarize - Mixing different brand subwoofers works perfectly fine because: 1. The frequency responses between different brands of subwoofers are far more similar than different 2. The room placement has much more impact on frequency response at the listener's seat than does the frequency response of the subs themselves 3. It's much better to have two mismatched subs than one far higher-quality one 4. Level matching is easy and requires only a cell phone app 5. Used subs are inexpensive, plentiful, and contribute significantly to a system's overall impact 6. Using multiple subs means that each individual one operates at a lower power output creating lower distortion, better pitch definition, and smoother room response Cordially - Boomzilla
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 6, 2019 17:31:50 GMT -5
Hi garbulky - I've been waiting for someone to make that comment. May I politely contend the issue? No matter where you put any subwoofer, the room placement excites room nodes. Those nodes can be up to +/- 20 decibels! Now think about how much brand A subwoofer frequency response differs from brand B's. A few dB here and there? The placement has many, many times the effect on frequency response as does the source. Now if we were using totally junky subs, THEN we'd need to contend with box vibration, doubling, cone excursion limitations, and gross clipping or distortion from the plate amplifiers. But if you limit the choices to name-brand subs (and avoid the HTIB models), then different branded subs will work perfectly happily together. The tiny differences you would theoretically gain from having matched subs will be totally erased by placement anyway. I understand that mixing and matching subs goes against everything we think we "know" about speaker matching, but the point is that at the VERY limited frequency range that subwoofers operate at, the devices are far more similar than different. I tried the "mix and match" experiment just to see if it worked. Had it not, then I'd have been in the market for about four to six Airmotiv subs. But so far, I promise that you can NOT hear any difference between the two bass channels. Once the Klipsch and Velodyne subs are level-matched to their respective satellite speakers, they just get the job done with no fuss, no muss. So to summarize - Mixing different brand subwoofers works perfectly fine because: 1. The frequency responses between different brands of subwoofers are far more similar than different 2. The room placement has much more impact on frequency response at the listener's seat than does the frequency response of the subs themselves 3. It's much better to have two mismatched subs than one far higher-quality one 4. Level matching is easy and requires only a cell phone app 5. Used subs are inexpensive, plentiful, and contribute significantly to a system's overall impact 6. Using multiple subs means that each individual one operates at a lower power output creating lower distortion, better pitch definition, and smoother room response Cordially - Boomzilla My friend, I think you are trying to make cutting corners make sense. Experiment away! It's the joy of this hobby. If I had a bunch of subs I would do the same! But why compromise when you don't have to? Matched subs is where it's at. No need to reinvent the wheel. Remember subs are still speakers. Ever heard two different speakers sound the same? I also haven't heard two subs that sound the same though I will grant you that they are more similar than speakers.
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 7, 2019 5:02:48 GMT -5
...But why compromise when you don't have to?... Sorry, you've missed the point. Using the different subs is NOT a compromise. I realize that such a claim is hard to swallow, but I contend that it's true. I think that this, ultimately, may have to be one of those things one has to hear to believe. It seems counterintuitive, but from what I've been able to determine, different brands of (mid to high-quality) subwoofers are indistinguishable from one another in use. I accept that this is (and will continue to be) a minority opinion, but I trust my ears before other people's theories - especially if those "other people" haven't even heard the evidence. I've owned matched pairs of subs before (several, in fact, in different driver-sizes and different brands). My current mismatched pair of subs sounds just as good as any of the previous matched sets. Truth.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 7, 2019 12:29:45 GMT -5
...But why compromise when you don't have to?... Sorry, you've missed the point. Using the different subs is NOT a compromise. I realize that such a claim is hard to swallow, but I contend that it's true. I think that this, ultimately, may have to be one of those things one has to hear to believe. It seems counterintuitive, but from what I've been able to determine, different brands of (mid to high-quality) subwoofers are indistinguishable from one another in use. I accept that this is (and will continue to be) a minority opinion, but I trust my ears before other people's theories - especially if those "other people" haven't even heard the evidence. I've owned matched pairs of subs before (several, in fact, in different driver-sizes and different brands). My current mismatched pair of subs sounds just as good as any of the previous matched sets. Truth. I agree it's important to go by your experience because that's what matters. I would be interested in hearing what four subs would do in your room. I think the effect may be quite impressive!
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 7, 2019 14:39:13 GMT -5
Actually, even the two subs sound pretty good! I'll pick up two more when I find them.
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 7, 2019 14:51:58 GMT -5
On the road to an out of town gig. Back next weekend.
|
|
|
Post by geeqner on Apr 8, 2019 17:06:15 GMT -5
...But why compromise when you don't have to?... Sorry, you've missed the point. Using the different subs is NOT a compromise. I realize that such a claim is hard to swallow, but I contend that it's true. I think that this, ultimately, may have to be one of those things one has to hear to believe. It seems counterintuitive, but from what I've been able to determine, different brands of (mid to high-quality) subwoofers are indistinguishable from one another in use. I accept that this is (and will continue to be) a minority opinion, but I trust my ears before other people's theories - especially if those "other people" haven't even heard the evidence. I've owned matched pairs of subs before (several, in fact, in different driver-sizes and different brands). My current mismatched pair of subs sounds just as good as any of the previous matched sets. Truth. I think that I would further qualify your statement about mis-matched subs to add: PROVIDED that they are: - OF similar construction (BOTH Acoustic Suspension / Bass Reflex / Passive Radiator / etc - otherwise, one is likely to be considerably more "boomy" / spiky frequency response than the other) [?]
- OF similar sensitivity (otherwise, they would only "match-up well" performance-wise at ONE particular volume setting) [?]
- OF similar size (BIGGER usually = MORE LOWER) [Both 10-inch = CHECK]
THEN the room probably becomes the next biggest factor in the overall performance envelope
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 15, 2019 6:29:41 GMT -5
Hi geeqner - Interesting qualifications... Let's discuss them? The idea that the subs must match in box design (acoustic suspension, passive radiator, ported, etc.) I disagree with. Why? Because the room, again, has 10x more effect on the frequency response at the listening position than does the box design. If I can move a sub one foot forward or back and change its sound in the room significantly (and I can), then does the actual anechoic output of the sub matter at all? I contend that it doesn't. Again, assuming that I'm buying quality subs to start with and not plastic HTIB junk, then the sub was designed in the first place NOT to have "one-note-bass." Any sub from a reputable name-brand meets this criteria. The second idea, that the subs must have similar sensitivity, I think that I also slightly disagree with. After all, a subwoofer that is sold as a separate item (not one designed for a specific set of companion speakers), must be able to work with just about any satellites that the owner wishes to use the sub with. Therefore the sensitivity curve of the differently-branded plate amplifiers must be very similar. In fact, my experience so far (with three non-identical subs from different companies) seems to bear this out. Once I calibrate the subs to the satellites, they all sing together. And the SPL that I use to do the calibration doesn't matter, so far as I can tell. I've calibrated from the listening position at 100 dB (my wife forbids me to do this again), 85 dB, and 75 dB. All worked equally well. The last idea, that the subs need to have similar driver size, I'd also (at least partially) question. In theory, an 8", 10", 12", 15", and 18" sub can all sound equally "quick" depending on the designer's choices of box, driver, and amplifier. Now in theory, all of those driver sizes COULD provide equally deep bass extension as well, although the smaller the driver, the higher the distortion (for a given SPL), and the more limited the ultimate output volume. But even small cones in small boxes can go very deeply in frequency response given sufficient power and a driver with sufficient excursion (remember the Carver subs?). It's fair to say, though, that generally the bigger drivers (in bigger boxes, and selling for higher prices) can plumb the depths better than smaller ones. But in general, yeah - similar sized drivers probably have the best chance of working well together. My goal is to create a "redundant array of inexpensive subs," or a RAIS... To maintain similar voicing, I plan to buy all the same size drivers (I chose 10" due to its high availability and low price). I'm currently running a Velodyne, a Klipsch, and an Emotiva. They sing well together. I'll pick one more up when I see a cheap one. They'll be run in stereo mode with two on the right and two on the left. Since inexpensive 10" subs typically don't come with phase dials, I'll need to place the subs in close proximity to the satellites (and to each other) to maintain phase. I may stack the subs vertically rather than to move them horizontally in the room. The other option would be to place them equidistant from the listening position with the outboard ones farther from the back wall than the inboard ones. The issue with the latter placement will be that the outboard subs may be too far out into the room and become a traffic hazard for walking in the room... If I remember the math right, each of the two subs per channel will need to be set 3dB lower in amplitude at the crossover point than the satellite? In other words, if the satellite is set to 80 dB at the reference level and at crossover frequency, then each of the two subs for that channel should be set for 77 dB? That would make the sum of the two subs match the satellite? It's been awhile since I did that calculation, and it's made harder by the fact that the SPL is a log scale, not a linear one. Keith L? And another idea just hatched for me. Up to now, I've been using a sine wave set to the crossover frequency to match the satellites and subs. That isn't a good idea. If I calibrate the subs to the satellites at only the specific crossover frequency, then if one of the subs just happens to be in a position where it reproduces the crossover frequency at plus or minus 10dB due to a room peak or null, then that sub will be too soft or too loud at other frequencies. It would be a better idea to use pink or white noise over a broader spectrum to match the subs and satellites. Somebody suggested this to me earlier, but I didn't understand why. Now I do. Boomzilla
|
|
|
Post by fbczar on Apr 15, 2019 8:29:24 GMT -5
Hi geeqner - Interesting qualifications... Let's discuss them? The idea that the subs must match in box design (acoustic suspension, passive radiator, ported, etc.) I disagree with. Why? Because the room, again, has 10x more effect on the frequency response at the listening position than does the box design. If I can move a sub one foot forward or back and change its sound in the room significantly (and I can), then does the actual anechoic output of the sub matter at all? I contend that it doesn't. Again, assuming that I'm buying quality subs to start with and not plastic HTIB junk, then the sub was designed in the first place NOT to have "one-note-bass." Any sub from a reputable name-brand meets this criteria. The second idea, that the subs must have similar sensitivity, I think that I also slightly disagree with. After all, a subwoofer that is sold as a separate item (not one designed for a specific set of companion speakers), must be able to work with just about any satellites that the owner wishes to use the sub with. Therefore the sensitivity curve of the differently-branded plate amplifiers must be very similar. In fact, my experience so far (with three non-identical subs from different companies) seems to bear this out. Once I calibrate the subs to the satellites, they all sing together. And the SPL that I use to do the calibration doesn't matter, so far as I can tell. I've calibrated from the listening position at 100 dB (my wife forbids me to do this again), 85 dB, and 75 dB. All worked equally well. The last idea, that the subs need to have similar driver size, I'd also (at least partially) question. In theory, an 8", 10", 12", 15", and 18" sub can all sound equally "quick" depending on the designer's choices of box, driver, and amplifier. Now in theory, all of those driver sizes COULD provide equally deep bass extension as well, although the smaller the driver, the higher the distortion (for a given SPL), and the more limited the ultimate output volume. But even small cones in small boxes can go very deeply in frequency response given sufficient power and a driver with sufficient excursion (remember the Carver subs?). It's fair to say, though, that generally the bigger drivers (in bigger boxes, and selling for higher prices) can plumb the depths better than smaller ones. But in general, yeah - similar sized drivers probably have the best chance of working well together. My goal is to create a "redundant array of inexpensive subs," or a RAIS... To maintain similar voicing, I plan to buy all the same size drivers (I chose 10" due to its high availability and low price). I'm currently running a Velodyne, a Klipsch, and an Emotiva. They sing well together. I'll pick one more up when I see a cheap one. They'll be run in stereo mode with two on the right and two on the left. Since inexpensive 10" subs typically don't come with phase dials, I'll need to place the subs in close proximity to the satellites (and to each other) to maintain phase. I may stack the subs vertically rather than to move them horizontally in the room. The other option would be to place them equidistant from the listening position with the outboard ones farther from the back wall than the inboard ones. The issue with the latter placement will be that the outboard subs may be too far out into the room and become a traffic hazard for walking in the room... If I remember the math right, each of the two subs per channel will need to be set 3dB lower in amplitude at the crossover point than the satellite? In other words, if the satellite is set to 80 dB at the reference level and at crossover frequency, then each of the two subs for that channel should be set for 77 dB? That would make the sum of the two subs match the satellite? It's been awhile since I did that calculation, and it's made harder by the fact that the SPL is a log scale, not a linear one. Keith L? And another idea just hatched for me. Up to now, I've been using a sine wave set to the crossover frequency to match the satellites and subs. That isn't a good idea. If I calibrate the subs to the satellites at only the specific crossover frequency, then if one of the subs just happens to be in a position where it reproduces the crossover frequency at plus or minus 10dB due to a room peak or null, then that sub will be too soft or too loud at other frequencies. It would be a better idea to use pink or white noise over a broader spectrum to match the subs and satellites. Somebody suggested this to me earlier, but I didn't understand why. Now I do. Boomzilla Boom, How do you deal with the slope differences between ported and sealed subs? I know you like what you hear, but have you compared mismatched subs to matched ones? I have a pair of Kresisel DXD12012 sealed subs which are amazing for music as well as movies. I would think that adding subs of lesser ability to my system would have the effect of downgrading the quality, if not the quantity of bass. I think it holds true in any music system that the least capable component sets the ultimate performance level of they system. Of course, the same can be said for the quality of the source.
|
|
|
Post by geeqner on Apr 15, 2019 10:02:15 GMT -5
[Geeqner] Sounds like somebody got back in town in the mood for a good (productive?) argument - See my responses in GREEN ITALICInteresting qualifications... Let's discuss them? The idea that the subs must match in box design (acoustic suspension, passive radiator, ported, etc.) I disagree with. Why? Because the room, again, has 10x more effect on the frequency response at the listening position than does the box design. If I can move a sub one foot forward or back and change its sound in the room significantly (and I can), then does the actual anechoic output of the sub matter at all? I contend that it doesn't. Again, assuming that I'm buying quality subs to start with and not plastic HTIB junk, then the sub was designed in the first place NOT to have "one-note-bass." Any sub from a reputable name-brand meets this criteria. I agree that the room may have a greater influence However - the fact remains that subs of different designs may have SIGNIFICANTLY different Output Curves WRT BOTH Frequency Response AND as Output Volume changes. -Ported designs tend to provide more output at lower Input Levels (cone moves more freely), but as a trade-off, they can tend to "ring" more at higher levels than other designs -Sealed / Acoustic Suspension designs tend to require "more juice to set them into motion" and the enclosed design tends to dampen-out undesired excessive / continued excursion of the cone So, as either the mains Volume changes and/or as the music frequency changes; what works well at one level MAY get thrown "out of whack" at some other level. I believe that with multiple subs, those IMBALANCES are likely to become noticeable. (at least more-so than a SINGLE, properly set-up Sub, or matched subs)
The second idea, that the subs must have similar sensitivity, I think that I also slightly disagree with. After all, a subwoofer that is sold as a separate item (not one designed for a specific set of companion speakers), must be able to work with just about any satellites that the owner wishes to use the sub with. Therefore the sensitivity curve of the differently-branded plate amplifiers must be very similar. In fact, my experience so far (with three non-identical subs from different companies) seems to bear this out. Once I calibrate the subs to the satellites, they all sing together. And the SPL that I use to do the calibration doesn't matter, so far as I can tell. I've calibrated from the listening position at 100 dB (my wife forbids me to do this again), 85 dB, and 75 dB. All worked equally well. Sensitivity usually has to do with the selected Driver(s), the design of the enclosure, AND any associated Amplification. I know that in your case, you are discussing AMPLIFIED subs - which often have electronic adjustments that can affect their Input / Output profile, which is similar to but different from the "true" definition of "Sensitivity" when applied to passive drivers. But again - I am no "expert" in Amplified Subs, but I DO know that such Subs from different manufacturers are designed with WIDELY varying drivers and amplifier designs, and some have much more flexible "tuning controls" than others. As a way of over-simplifying this - I would state that once again, without some PRETTY MAJOR "fiddling", you realistically open yourself up to a setup that COULD work well at one output level, but then as your mains control changes, the differences between mis-matched subs would become more pronounced. And one thing that gets noticed in a Stereo Sound System is IMBALANCE.
The last idea, that the subs need to have similar driver size, I'd also (at least partially) question. In theory, an 8", 10", 12", 15", and 18" sub can all sound equally "quick" depending on the designer's choices of box, driver, and amplifier. Now in theory, all of those driver sizes COULD provide equally deep bass extension as well, although the smaller the driver, the higher the distortion (for a given SPL), and the more limited the ultimate output volume. But even small cones in small boxes can go very deeply in frequency response given sufficient power and a driver with sufficient excursion (remember the Carver subs?). It's fair to say, though, that generally the bigger drivers (in bigger boxes, and selling for higher prices) can plumb the depths better than smaller ones. But in general, yeah - similar sized drivers probably have the best chance of working well together. I hear ya' here - I KNOW that some smallish to mid-size subs "punch above their weight" (size). But I would still avoid gross mis-matches due to simple physics; that in subs - larger can usually go lower.
My goal is to create a "redundant array of inexpensive subs," or a RAIS... To maintain similar voicing, I plan to buy all the same size drivers (I chose 10" due to its high availability and low price). I'm currently running a Velodyne, a Klipsch, and an Emotiva. They sing well together. I'll pick one more up when I see a cheap one. They'll be run in stereo mode with two on the right and two on the left. Since inexpensive 10" subs typically don't come with phase dials, I'll need to place the subs in close proximity to the satellites (and to each other) to maintain phase. I may stack the subs vertically rather than to move them horizontally in the room. The other option would be to place them equidistant from the listening position with the outboard ones farther from the back wall than the inboard ones. The issue with the latter placement will be that the outboard subs may be too far out into the room and become a traffic hazard for walking in the room... I originally thought that your goal was to "simplify" your system. It sounds (no pun intended) like an interesting experiment - using MORE than (2) subs could tend to "null-out" the differences between the selected units and may help to exploit the strengths of certain ones while playing-down the weaknesses of others [or the whole thing COULD be an epic failure, but it's YOUR money and YOUR time, so "what the heck - TRY it". Got my fingers crossed for pleasant surprises. (Guess you got the moniker "BOOMZilla" for a reason, eh? ) [But epic failures can also be fun in their own way - so long as the "magic smoke" stays in the wires and equipment where it belongs...]
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 15, 2019 11:39:34 GMT -5
In fact, I HAVE used matched subs before - Three pairs, in fact.
I first had a pair of PowerSound Audio 15" ported subs. In my room, these were the most successful. They could sound apocalyptic for both movies and with pedal organ tones, while still not calling attention to themselves in "normal" music listening. I sold them because I wanted to experiment with bigger cones.
My second matched pair was a duo of Klipsch 8" ported subs. I used them as risers for my Thiel 1.2 speakers, and they did sound VERY good, although not going too low. I sold them because I wanted a touch more bass extension.
My third matched pair was a pair of PowerSound Audio 15" sealed subs. Although I could equalize these to go lower than any sub I'd tried before, using the DSP to get there seemed to also affect the high-pass sound to the satellites. I didn't care for the DSP, although the subs were great.
I also (very briefly, so I'm not really counting them) had a pair of Emotiva BasX 12" subs during the review of their surround speaker system. The inexpensive BasX subs were world-beaters, and I've been disappointed ever since that I sent them back (and then Emotiva discontinued them). Those little puppies had it all - punch, extension, and awesome response even at the crossover point.
I've also had two single subs that were profoundly noteworthy - a Martin Logan that I bought at a yard sale (and that I should have kept), and a Definitive Technology "Triton." The latter was a dreadnaught.
Now all that said, no, my RAIS array isn't as extended in the bass as any of the "good" subs, but having a plethora of the small subs DOES noticeably smooth out the bass in my room. Given the choice, I'll stick with the small ones. Once I get a fourth and find the best locations I'll post a photo so you can all laugh at me! LOL
Will I tire of the multi-sub experiment? Probably - it's my nature. But I'll enjoy playing with them while I have them AND I've spent virtually nothing while having the fun. Besides, at the end of this, I've got a bunch of audio amigos who would LOVE to have a cheap sub. Time will tell...
|
|
|
Post by geeqner on Apr 16, 2019 12:56:46 GMT -5
Boom - Have you ever had a (Recent) chance to audition one or a pair of REL T-Series or better? If not, and the opportunity presents itself - I would HIGHLY recommend it. (I'm not a Super High-End guy - but I have heard a few demos with several different sets, and was AMAZED at the results for MUSIC. They do not seem to pack as much Power on the "spec-sheet" as some others, but it seems that Subwoofers is what gave REL their name and they really seem to understand it.
If I came into some decent but realistic money to upgrade my present system, speaker-wise - my "dream" would be either of the following: -ADD A matched pair of REL T9i or better -or- -Get a set of GoldenEar Triton Reference speakers that have MATCHED, amplified subs built-in
OTOH - I HAVE been pleasantly surprised at what can be achieved at cheap prices - My computer speaker system is from Corsair SP2500 has a pretty decent amplified sub and bi-amped satellites, all for around $250 and does a pretty decent job for games and music with the speakers mostly used for near-field applications
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,744
|
Post by klinemj on Apr 16, 2019 18:10:37 GMT -5
Will I tire of the multi-sub experiment? Probably - it's my nature. Yes indeed it is! LOL! Mark
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 19, 2019 6:03:00 GMT -5
I had the pleasure of a brief garbulky visit yesterday. The system wasn't at its best because there are a number of new components in the chain to be reviewed, and I've not had time lately to optimize their interactions. Other than a brief dalliance with the third subwoofer in the system, I haven't taken time to calibrate it yet via measurement, so only the first two are active at this time. The T2 speakers are, similarly, not yet fully broken in, and are still reticent in the bass unless positioned within inches of the wall behind them. The Audio Research tube components have a manufacturer-recommended 400 hour break in time, and I haven't made that step either. It's sounding to me, so far, that a little tube sound in the system is a good thing, expanding the soundstage and such, but that more than one tube component at a time seems to soften the transients. This may be an artifact of not having that 400 hour warmup, but it may not. I think I'm going to have to resort to "background music" in the house until the warm-up time is achieved. This isn't my first choice, but if that's what the manufacturer specifies as their recommended break-in, then it's unfair to write up the component without hearing it at its best. Once the review gear has returned home, I think that the next configuration I want to try will be my 12-watt tube mono blocks driving the Klipsch RP-600m monitors with a 4-subwoofer array.
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 19, 2019 19:51:54 GMT -5
WHOA!! I hit the sweet spot tonight! I first found a place where my new Emotiva T2s gave both some of the best imaging AND some of the best bass I've heard in my room. I've been doing garbulky-style "speaker dancing" with these things for the past two weeks, and just now found this spot. But when the T2s open up, they OPEN UP! I also discovered that too much tube goodness is just too much. With both a tube DAC and a tube power amp in my system, the sound is just TOO laid-back. The only way this could work is if I had some speakers thet the magazines euphemistically call "airy in the treble" (think just about any product by Bowers & Wilkins). With such speakers, the two tube components would almost sound neutral. But with any of the three sets of speakers I have on hand (Emotiva T2s, Klipsch RP-600m's and Klipsch Heresy HWOs), I had to pair a solid state DAC with the tube power amp to get the sound balanced. But balanced it WAS! Not only did the tubes give the speakers a significantly wider and deeper sound stage than with an all solid-state front end, but also the imaging (with the T2s in their sweet spot) became almost holographic. Thunderous bass with even the softest details placed accurately on the sound stage, clearly intelligible, and startlingly realistic sounding. This is the best I've heard in my room for being able to hear one instrument playing really loudly with another playing really softly, and being able to clearly (REALLY clearly) hear both at the same time. Amazing. What fun!!
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 19, 2019 19:59:33 GMT -5
WHOA!! I hit the sweet spot tonight! I first found a place where my new Emotiva T2s gave both some of the best imaging AND some of the best bass I've heard in my room. I've been doing garbulky-style "speaker dancing" with these things for the past two weeks, and just now found this spot. But when the T2s open up, they OPEN UP! I also discovered that too much tube goodness is just too much. With both a tube DAC and a tube power amp in my system, the sound is just TOO laid-back. The only way this could work is if I had some speakers thet the magazines euphemistically call "airy in the treble" (think just about any product by Bowers & Wilkins). With such speakers, the two tube components would almost sound neutral. But with any of the three sets of speakers I have on hand (Emotiva T2s, Klipsch RP-600m's and Klipsch Heresy HWOs), I had to pair a solid state DAC with the tube power amp to get the sound balanced. But balanced it WAS! Not only did the tubes give the speakers a significantly wider and deeper sound stage than with an all solid-state front end, but also the imaging (with the T2s in their sweet spot) became almost holographic. Thunderous bass with even the softest details placed accurately on the sound stage, clearly intelligible, and startlingly realistic sounding. This is the best I've heard in my room for being able to hear one instrument playing really loudly with another playing really softly, and being able to clearly (REALLY clearly) hear both at the same time. Amazing. What fun!! Great! What position was that?
|
|