New SVS Sealed Sub (1 Viewer)

[dany]

I think the defensive is defending his product. When your product gets ragged on or has misinformation about it,you would become defensive.

 

[Ilkka R]

I respect the work you have done for sure. But could you tell which of those gentlemen have used the 10% THD test in their reviews besides Nousaine?

 

[Tom Vodhanel]

>>>Yes, that's correct. But that's still relatively low compared to low frequency gain most rooms have (6-9 dB/octave below lowest room mode)>But the UFW-12's ~110 dB output above 40 Hz WAS measured using a 45 second long sweep as with 2-3 second single sine waves (link to Ed's review). That's why I don't really understand your criticism against my lastest THD tests.>I respect the work you have done for sure. But could you tell which of those gentlemen have used the 10% THD test in their reviews besides Nousaine?

 

[Ilkka R]

No they haven't, but still you used them as a "backup" for your own opinions and methods. But as far as I know, no one except Nousaine has used the 10% THD test.

I think we are now confusing two different things, maximum output at different frequencies before audible distortion, which the new CEA 2010 standard tries to find out, and THD levels at different frequencies at different sound pressure levels (THD sweeps). Nousaine's 10% THD limit falls somewhere in between, since in most cases the CEA standard allows a little bit higher THD/SPL levels.

IMO THD sweeps (30 sec or similar) at different levels (for example 90 dB and up) combined with Keele's 6.5 cycle, 1/3 octave tone bursts (maximum output at different frequencies before audible distortion) would probably be a very good indicator of subwoofer's maximum real world output and THD behaviour.

 

[TimJC]

My head hurts now.


Tim

 

[Jack Gilvey]

Apparently.

 

[SVS-Ron]

Dany,

Sorry your excellent question got lost in the sauce of this heady discussion.

You asked how the SB12-Plus might compare to a big 20-39PCi.

For music (call it 40Hz and up) you might have a tough time telling them apart sonically. For deep/powerful movie tracks though the much larger/vented PCi will run away, particularly below 20hz as you would expect. Of course not all movies have lots of

 

[dany]

Thanks.

 

[LanceJ]

From that Secrets review (emphasized sections are mine; and, I don't own any AV123 gear, I'm just trying to make a point):


To reiterate:
* "a subwoofer designed for music applications."
* "which usually doesn't contain much bass below 30 Hz."

So if a person desires the ultimate sub for MOVIE playback, this particular sub is not for them. And, just because a piece of sensitive test gear picks up on something, doesn't mean the average human ear will too.

I'm not anti-progress, just cranky. And I'm outta here.............

* btw (this is really for audio newbies): to use an extreme example, Cerwin-Vega uses a sort of similar philosophy for their particular category of speakers, particularly their full range models: to keep the price down but SPL levels *up* especially when used with lower-powered/less expensive amps, they design their bass sections to concentrate on where most music's bass exists. That's how for example the large 12" E Series model can attain that 98dB(!) SPL rating but not go as low (they don't provide a +/- rating so I'm going on personal experience with this) as comparably-sized models from other manufacturers with their typical/much lower 88-91dB rating (the dB scale is not linear, so the actual "heard" difference is very large)

 

[Seth=L]

If you like to listen to rap very loud and are out to impress your friends with really loud bass, then yea sure, buy a Cerwin-Vega. If it is music quality bass you want then it sounds like the Sealed SVS is the ticket for those on a budget. Note that this sub has pretty good extension for such a small acoustic suspension enclosure. Everyone one knows that ported subs don't always shine with music.

 

[Seth=L]

SVS Ron,

I have an honest question here. Are there any plans for a dual driver sealed enclosure in the future of SVS. How much of those configurations are patents that you simply can't get around.

 

[Jack Gilvey]

I'm afraid you've missed my point again. I'm well aware of the facts you state from Ed's review, and I agree. My point was, and is, that if people can't hear the effects of the 84dB/oct. HP in the AV123 (and they apparently can't), then why is a slope of less than half that in an SVS model an issue?

This is, of course, why the UFW was brought up in the first place.

 

[dave alan]

Of course, it depends on where the filter is as well as the filter Q, IMO.

I'm not aware of any subjective evidence (unless you are pointing to people who buy a HP protected sub and say it's musical as evidence). As Ed said earlier, there are less than a handful of commercial subs that have no HP protection, much less subjective comparisons with HP protected subs that you can point to.

Still, the GD differences between subwoofers is not decided outdoors or in an anechoic chamber, but rather indoors at the listening position. The in-room FR determines the GD of the system as far as subjective claims go.

This is why it's important to offer selectable corners and Q and flat anechoic extension is much less important. Working with room gain and boundary gain to arrive at a flat in-room response is always better than wrestling a bloated in-room low end, that's caused by a flat anechoic response, with traps and post PEQ.

TV and I had this discussion in this forum. He scoffed at the idea and pointed to quite a few top brand subwoofer companies as examples to prove that everyone who is anyone designs for flat anechoic response.

It was just about 2 years ago.

Dave

 

[dany]

IMO,the "which usually doesnt contain much bass below 30Hz" is old and in todays music is more and more common having plenty below 30Hz.

 

[SVS-Ron]

"the best subwoofer in the world"

Mr. Defensive here:

Yeah, pretty outrageous that. See Dave, we're always careful to put such things in context that you seem intent on stripping away. All through our site, and any public context I can think of, we go out of our way to ensure that price and size class is considered there. It's a bit premature to see if we're right, (third party testers have long been sought out by SVS) but having put it up against some tough competitors that warrant comparison, so far, we're confident of that statement. When any brand comes within a country mile of the price/performance ratio of a sub in this size/cost niche we'll put our brass balls back in the box. The sensing is, "sinner or saint" designation in PR (or design) seems simply to be tied to what brand's on the masthead for you. That's fine of course, seeing the denial in that regard is the part that's hard for many to swallow.

That "context", and seeing through obfuscation, is key. Sort of like taking into account your newfound "respect" for SVS when it's convenient, but forgetting you recently told the world that our "Powered Cylinders (PC)... really stand for 'Perfect Crap'". Actually one of the more reasonable things you have said about our stuff, or our people over the years. See, this sort of background is helpful, we feel, when someone poses "questions" about competitors to their favorites.

Just to review, you were silent long before and long after when the UFW-12 (touted as an "SVS killer") took a long time to get to market ... and it had far more intrusive HP filters (the term for ours wasn't "evil" true, it's just that our stuff is "choking" on them. Some might equate those two terms.). Yet, even BEFORE this SVS is out you oh-so-innocently ponder what might be wrong with it. Something, anything will do, no matter how much far more egregious examples there might be from brands close to your heart.

You seem like an intelligent fellow, but what baffles many here (it's not hard to read) is if you really feel the public is that oblivious to your bias, or instead, your bias simply makes you oblivious to how blatant this all is.

We don't spend much time here, or other forums these days, too busy (this thread is an exception of late). But when trolls come out of the woodwork, it's only fair that we stop and ensure to members here that "get it"... that we do too. Honest, heart-felt criticism is one thing. You bring something else entirely to the table however.

This is the highly polished "Public Relations" schtick you seem to object to: We're aware of no comparable product that'll outperform it in objective terms based on size or price. Not a dime has been collected on them, or will be, till the first ones ship out in a week, right when we said they would. We didn't so much as mention this launch till mere weeks before that point. This sub is as "flawless" as size and cost allow given it's also on time and on budget.

"Question" that all you want, and the rather straight-forward way we market them too (specifically in terms that make the small sub compromise quite clear). That an OEM has the audacity to call bullshit when we see it might be deemed refreshing in a world where incredible bias so often overcomes genuine expertise.

Everything useful that's going to be said here is probably done. Have at the final word. No one's buying it though (well we might still see a few well-known others like you pop up). Properly designed products clearly have a sliding scale for you, based on the brands attached. If you can't see that, take comfort in the fact that virtually everyone else does.

Ron
SVS

 

[Seth=L]

SVS Ron, any plans for a multidriver sealed subwoofer?

 

[Ilkka R]

I think there would be many 3rd party testers available, but if you require that the testers must use the same specific tests for measuring different variables as you self do, it will be a much harder job to find them. IMO it's not even fair to other manufacturers.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Rest assured Ron, we see it. We always have. Keep up the good work (and I may be making a major home purchase in the next year, complete with an unfinished 3rd level that will be my dream theater. My sub is not picked out yet, but my sub manufacturer is. ).

 

[dany]

Fair to other manufacturers??

 

[Robb Roy]

As you saw earlier, Ilkka and Tom V. disagree about how to best test subs. Ilkka's logic, though, makes several assumptions. First is that SVS will only allow reviewers to test subs if they use the exact methodology as they do. They might not loan a sub for free to someone whose methodology they disagree with, but that doesn't mean the reviewer's methodology has to be exactly the same as theirs (Nousaine, for instance, tests indoors). Another is that a sub will test well with Ilkka's methodology, but not with Tom's. And lastly, that other manufacturers' designs did not take into account the kind of testing Tom, Nousaine, Mullen, etc. perform. If something's unfair, it's Ilkka's statement (which surprises me, because Ilkka has always seemed so rational to me, and the idea it's not fair to other manufacturers is a pretty large leap of logic).

Edit: it occurs to me that another assumption is that other manufacturers will give review loaners to anyone who wants to review a sub, regardless of how it will be tested. I'd bet every manufacturer asks how the sub will be reviewed, and would turn down almost any request if they disagreed with the methodology.

-Robb