Thread from the Axiom forums, "Hsu STF-2, Hsu VTF-3, and SVS PB1+" (1 Viewer)

[paul clipsel]

Craig
I had a CHT15 up to a few months ago when I got the VTF3, and when set up at the same level, position, crossover I could pick which sub was playing every time. The distinctive tone of the Velodyne just was easy for me to pick, not to mention the excess port noise when playing below 40Hz where the Velodyne gave itself away every time.

PC

 

[CurtisSC]

Craig,
Are you saying at that point that it won't matter what sub you get, as long as it has an EQ and proper output? Then why even compare subs? Why buy 4 UFW-10's as opposed to PB2-Plus if you have an EQ?

What happens in three years in irrevelent to the STF-3 and PB1-ISD now.

 

[Craig Chase]

Paul, I have had and tested over 40 subwoofers, and have now Hsu, SVS, Acoustic Visions, and Onix here. The Velo is not a high end subwoofer. I will be happy to discuss anything in subwoofer design you care to.

Curtis, for a smart guy, you amaze me every once in a while with an obtuse question... go look... I said EVERY high end subwoofer. Care to think about that question again?

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis, For $120 and some effort, you can take the performance of the SVS or the Hsu to a much higher level... and do it today.

And no, I don't have stock in Behringer... that was a cheap shot.

I note noone has said he would take the $1000 challenge.

 

[CurtisSC]

Craig....then why did you apply it to the STF-3 and PB1-ISD?

Could you be able to tell the difference between your UFW-10's and a PB2-Plus if properly EQ'd?

The issue is the PB1-ISD and STF-3 sound different.

When EVERY high end sub has an EQ...are you saying they will sound the same?

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis, The STF-3 and the PB1-ISD are similar designs. It would be pretty easy to make them both sound about identical... because the room effect would be eliminated.

This does not mean that there won't be choices in subwoofers, but it will be much easier to get great performance.

Another change you will see... in three years, neither the PB1-ISD nor the STF-3 will seem like they are as big a bargain... as they are today...

Don't be surprised if the subs these guys have then are as powerful, have auto EQ built in, and cost $500...

 

[CurtisSC]

Similar or dis-similar in design, the PB1-ISD and STF-3 sound different. I am assuming this since I have not heard a PB1-ISD, but if it sounds like the 20-39PC+ or the PB1+....then I know it sounds different.

In three years, it would be foolish to think that the current crop of subs will be consider as the great bargains they are now.

Would you be able to tell the difference between your UFW-10's and a PB2-Plus or B4+ if properly EQ'd?

When the high-end subs have EQ's, are you saying they will sound the same in room?

Would you buy a sub for how it sounds before or after you EQ'd it?

 

[Craig Chase]

No Curtis, I am not saying every sub will sound the same. As far as your "knowing" how different the two subwoofers sound... try a double blind test sometime... you will be surprised at just how difficult it is.

Could I hear the difference between the B4+ and the UFW-10's ? Possibly, The B4+ will play a lot deeper, but, if the two were Eq'ed... within limits, it would be difficult.

And I have conducted and participated in dozens of blind tests, and have seen everytime people fall flat on things they "knew".

Yes, I think most high-end subs will have extremely similar sound qualities, like most amps do today.

And I buy a subwoofer for its SQ, and also understand every room needs the subwoofer Eq'ed.

Now... I have answered your questions... try answering mine... it is simple:

What is needed in order for a subwoofer to have good sound?

 

[CurtisSC]

To who? You or me?

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis...forget it, it is obvious you have no interest in what anyone has to say but you. Enjoy ignorance.

 

[paul clipsel]

WOW can't you find the right one, or do you review gear for a living? Ask most dealers and it seems Velodyne has always had a very good rep for all its subs. I had read many good reviews of the CHT15 and foolish or not thats really what I brought it based on. soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?print_page=y&section_id=3&article_id=478&page_number=5&preview=

Now I have read a lot on Hsu and Svs, so with this upgrade I did much more listening and the VTF3 is the end result. I am very happy with the result and I dont feel the need to use an eq because to be honest it sounds great now. That was the thing with the VTF3 straight out of the box it impressed me being so tight.

PC

 

[CurtisSC]

Craig...a very subjective question indeed. There is no right answer. Without clarification, there is no way I could answer it to your approval.

For me...it really does not matter why it sounds good, as long as it does. A good design is needed would probably be the broad answer.

So there is my answer....what it yours?

 

[Jed M]

So Craig has no takers yet? Thats too bad but it is a slow day for traffic. It would be entertaining, not to mention educational, seeing all the fanatics putting their money where their mouth is. Come on, its an easy grand, right?

 

[Craig Chase]

So we are clear, that means you don't know, not that you need to meet my approval. That is ok, very few people do know.

1. Broad frequency response within a defined bandwidth.
2. Bandwidth uniformity to close from the lowest to the upper limits of the design
3. Accurate Transient Response
4. High Output

These design goals are not subjective. And there are a lot more than these... but it is a start.

For two years I have listened to people claim to hear differences in subwoofers, yet they have no idea whether or not the subwoofer was even calibrated properly, or even in a good room location. And blind tests ? Rare, at best.

There are frequent threads regarding subwoofer room responses, in fact, there is one on AVS now, where the guy posted a before and after EQ graph, and it is quite telling.

Paul, I have the UFW-10's here now, and have done blind testing with them. I have a brother and friends who manufacture loudpeakers (pro-audio) ... to us it is a hobby like re-building 65 Mustangs is to other guys. There would be some music that you might be able to pick out the VTF-3... but it would be harder than you think. And against a properly Calibrated PB1-ISD? Nope...

I can tell you that you would be hard pressed in blind testing to tell the difference, because your mind hears now, due to the fact you know which sub you are hearing. If 12 guys were to show up, and take this test, I would be $12,000 richer. Easy money.

As for the CHT-15, it is a good, cheap design for a first subwoofer somebody owns. The driver is about $20 OEM, at the most.

You say you don't need an EQ... ok... at one time you also thought the Velo was great. I have done the VTF-3 Mark II with and without proper EQ. With proper EQ it sounds much better... tighter, less boom... It makes a great subwoofer even better.

In fact... I will do the same test.. give me 12 listeners, let's say, musicians, and an Eq'ed Vs. non- Eq'ed VTF-3 (or SVS)... and all 12 WILL pick the EQ'ed subwoofer.

And so there is no mis-understanding...without the EQ, the SVS B4+ is so-so... very un-even room response... WITH the EQ... it is magic. Paul, you and I have not "met" before... but I can tell you one thing, I love tinkering with these subwoofers, but have no preference for any one company.

In fact... both SVS and Hsu have my amateur reviews on their own websites...

 

[CurtisSC]

What was the purpose of the question in the first place? I read back through the thread and do not see a reason.

I am not claiming to know more than you on any subject, so there is no need to point out my ignorance. You can make your points without asking questions.

The first three goals you listed are for any good speaker design, not just subs. Output could be argued as well for speakers. Again, there is no relevance to why someone prefers the sound of one sub over the other, unless you are claiming that one of the subs did not meet a design goal. What would be more interesting are the design goals and parameters that were chosen for each sub. In any design...speakers, subs, buildings, automobiles, etc., there are trade-offs.

Craig, I do not doubt that an EQ will make a sub sound better, but back to the original point of this discussion, why compare EQ'd subs if they sound the same? Take the subs on their own merit without assistance.

As interesting as your $1000 challenge is, what point does it prove? That those two subs, when EQ'd, sound the same? Since this hobby is based on subjectivity, doesn't it matter more what sounds best to an individual without an EQ?

"I will just buy sub A and EQ it so it sounds right and not worry about listening to sub B." If someone said that, I think most of us would laugh.

In your comparisons, you didn't compare with an EQ on all subs.

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis, The reason I asked you, then explained it to you is quite simple.

The STF-3 and PB1-ISD are close enough in design that a person would be hard pressed to tell the difference in blind testing without the EQ process.

EQ them, and you won't hear a difference.

And this hobby is subjective to people who don't know how designs work. I can assure you that either Dr. Hsu OR Tom V. has a pretty good idea how a design will sound based on objective criteria...

 

[paul clipsel]

WOW I never new it was that poor for a $600 sub.
The Sound and Vision reviewer rated it very well in his 10 sub shootout and never mentioned build problems. But from what you are saying it sounds like it has a pretty cheap build quality. Mind you the VTF-3 for $100 more was a big improvement sound-wise, especially as far as tight and together bass. I was never happy with what I found to be excessive overhang or boom in the CHT15.

PC

 

[Craig Chase]

Paul - People usually are surprised at the cost of components in a subwoofer, or any speaker, for that matter. I have a pair of Onix Ref 3's... $4500 per pair, and the Vifa tweeters are avialable for $50...

If you go to parts express, there is a 15 inch sub, heavier magnet, lower Fs... etc.., than the unit used in the Velo. They charge $70 for buying one, and they bought it from the factory, and paid for all the packing for one unit. Then they make a profit for selling it.. which they should.

Can you imagine what the per unit cost is when you order 5000 at a time, like Velodyne does? This does not make Velo bad... Remember, they take this driver, an amp, build the box, all the other hardware, and they get about $300 for the unit, the rest is in dealer margin and rep commissions... every company has to do that.

Your VTF-3 KILLS the Velo... In fact, If you were to ever read the "subwoofer Shootout" thread I had on AVS... It compared favorably to the Velo FSR-18 I used to own.


CURTIS ... Getting back to you. In my shootout thread you asked me several questions about methodology (and I went back to check on these):

1. Did you follow Dr. Hsu's set up advice?
2. Did you try both port Configurations?
3. Which direction did you face the ports?

I considered every question legit, and answered each one.

You also made this statement :"This test has mostly been about max SPL's"

I mentioned SPl's in 5 out of 300 posts, of mine, and over 1100 in the entire thread.

Markotran mentioned SPL's in 22 posts.

And your quote above was right after I had mentioned that this was not a test about "blowing things up" as DDavidson had suggested. Since Marko was not conducting the test, and Davidson was obviously referring to my descriptions of movie effects, while ignoring the 30 music discs we blind tested, your "max spl" quote WAS a direct shot at me.

My point? Simple, I was never bothered at all by any questions asked about my review, and answered literally hundred's of them. YOUR review was posted, with "unblind" testing, and deserves some scrutiny.

You say you can hear differences in the two subwoofers. Anyone who knows you and has read your stuff knows you are "pro-Hsu", and will pick Hsu in an "unblind" test every time. If you re-read the shootout thread, I had both the VTF-3's and the PB2+ properly calibrated. And I clearly stated that for most music, they were equal, and that it was only in music with sub 20 HZ bass (rare) that the PB2+ was superior.

The measurements bear that out.

This test we did started on February 5, and the blind listening was done on February 16... Then measurements were done and posted. Then the blind listening results were posted by my son. Until then, I did not know which subwoofer was which in the blind testing, though the measurements gave me a good idea.

What happened then ? Several Pro-Hsu advocates started talking about other, unsubstantiated tests in which the VTF-3 Mark II "beat" the PB2+. I found this somewhat hard to believe because I had received mine from the first shipment of the VTF-3 Mark II's, but did not comment.

I also, at that time, did blind testing between the 25-31 PC+ and the VTF-3 Mark II, and preferred the sound of the Hsu. Unlike what you had done last year (with the 20-39+), I did all tests blind, to remove possible bias.

I was surprised to get conflicting results between the two... Why would the PB2+ sound better than the 25-31 pc+?

It was later that I found that SVS's supplier of the db-12 had made improvements in the design. To say that Tom V. was surprised I had noticed that in blind testing could be an understatement, and remember, this was not an announced change, I had NO idea they were new drivers.

So - What has this to do with your review? I am trying to give people an understanding about what a good subwoofer should do. A review like yours will do three things:

1. Make Hsu guys smile
2. Make SVS guys cringe
3. Give the uninformed a false idea.

Does it bother me that you refer the Hsu over the SVS? Nope. Since the shootout, I have sent over 50 people to each company to buy subwoofers, based on room size and their own personal preferences. For example... If a guy writes me wondering if the STF-3 will work in his 20 by 14 foot room, I won't talk SVS, and Vice Versa... and if a guy asks about both, I do try to get him to try to listen to both...

But, whether anyone like this or not... you took your subwoofer of choice and from a company you love, and another from a company for whom you are ambivalent, at best, and "tested" both products. And, what a shock ! The company whose product you love wins !

If a guy wants to do this by himself, great. But Curtis, you posted that you were going to do this test before you actually did. Some might even call that advertising.

And I can guarantee you that If I were to do a reverse of this test, the wolves would be at the door.

Now... To why this whole EQ idea is becoming important... the first step to learning is being open minded, and not trying to protect your position... I have already done a lot of listening (DDavidson, are you paying attention? I said listening) to Hsu, SVS, Acoustic Visions, etc... with and without EQ ... and it is going to make a huge difference because... right now, the biggest difference between, for example, a PB1+ and a VTF-3 is the ROOM. Placement in the room causes more of an effect than any other factor, bar none.

And, in a room like yours, where (as you stated) you cannot use the best location for a sub, EQ is the other logical fix. Period. That is not an opinion, it is fact.

And getting back to my blind listening challenge between the PB1+ ... I have received several private messages from guys claiming the SVS "walks all over" the Hsu... I will respect their privacy, but again, THEY are invited to this little blind test...

All I need is 6 SVS guys and 6 Hsu guys who think you can tell the difference blind... bring your wallets, guys...

 

[CraigRogers]

Damn...my little write up caused this much ruckas? Makes a guy want to just keep his mouth shut rather than share his thoughts with everyone.

:frowning:

Craig (the other one)
aka 'spiffnme'

 

[qualen]

Ruckas? What ruckas? All I see is a few guys expressing their views in a civilized manner.