How would a PB2+ compare to a VMPS "Larger"? (1 Viewer)

[EdNichols]

I know there are alot of SVS fans here, I just wondered if any of you may have heard these two monsters. They both have dual drivers, are super heavy, and have large cabinets so it would be neat to know how they might compare. Has anyone heard both?

 

[Craig Chase]

Ed - My last VMPS subwoofers were the Originals from about 9 years ago... The new larger subwoofer does look pretty good... If you followed the shootout with the PB2+ and the pair of Hsu VTF-3 Mark II's, we ran a lot of extensive tests...

For the $$$$$... the New VMPS larger looks pretty formidable... We may be running one in a "best $1200 subwoofer" later this year... If there is enough interest, that is.

I have an Aragon 8008ST that is currently dormant, and at 400 WPC (4 ohms) , it would be a really good match for the VMPS, as the VMPS allows for dual inputs to each active driver...

Is there interest in seeing this test ?

 

[John Doran]

absolutely.

 

[Craig Chase]

John - I will keep an eye out... if there is enough interest, I will see what can be done.

 

[Jesse Sharrow]

I would love to see a $1200 sub shootout.

 

[EdNichols]

I would most definitely love to see this test. From what I have read (or not been able to read) no one has ever officially tested the VMPS subs. Lots of user comments but no hard numbers or unbiased listening comparisons to back up any claims to how good they are.

 

[Rory Buszka]

Limited driver throw might make me consider comparing this only to a SVS PB2-plus. That 12" and 15" woofer don't look like very long-throw drivers.

 

[David*RT]

Absoltely run this test!!

The VMPS subs have loooong been reputed as some of the best at any price. I have yet to hear a customer that has preferred something else over their VMPS sub.

Please, for the love of man, do humanity a favor and run a shoot-out...

 

[Craig Chase]

Rory - What about the VMPS drivers makes you think they won't be long throw.... ???? No flaming... just curious...

And, for the love of humanity... interesting...

It will have to wait until we get done with the UFW-10 and Aperion S-12 test...

But it will be a fun test... Brian Cheyney has been around for a long time !

 

[JimPeitersen]

I would like to see the results of this as well. Without being critical, I would tend to agree with Rory's comments. I've seen/heard a couple VMPS subs first-hand, and while they were impressive ten years ago (as well as being huge), I doubt they are really competitive with today's "super" subs (all things considered - size/price/extension/etc.) Unless VMPS ordered some custom drivers, they always looked like stock Eminence pieces to me. I've always thought they they decided on the "big-box, large and/or multiple drivers, high-eff." design. Years ago, designers had to chose between this type of design and/or a large sealed box design. Now, with much better drivers (long throw, XBL, etc.) and "cheap" amplification (in the kilowatt+ range), designers can build subs that are smaller/cheaper/"better." Just my random thoughts.
JP

 

[Craig Chase]

Put it this way... Rory is right... I think you need to get the "mega woofer" option to get the high output design... which brings its price to $814 plus amp...

 

[EdNichols]

Yes, I think you would want to use the megawoofer option over the standard woofer. It would probably be like comparing the the SVS PC to the PC+ woofer. It is the next step up.

 

[BryanZ]

Actually, the Larger has three drivers. An active 12", an active 15", and a passive 15". If you have a two channel amp you can use (didn't I see a Samson S700 in the 'For Sale' section here for $150?) you can have dual Largers in kit form for $1,158. From my experience (comparing a VMPS Large Subwoofer - similar to the New Original Subwoofer - to a SVS 20-39CSi) the VMPS will be tighter for music and louder for HT. That being said, I doubt you could go wrong with either one.

Craig, I'd love to see the shootout!

 

[Craig Chase]

Bryan - I mentioned the dual inputs above... and I already own an Aragon 8008... 400 WPC into 4 ohms... it should work fine, plus, with my brother as a pro audio manufacturer, I could borrow a cheaper pro-amp... if needed.

I would not do a kit, as that would not be a "fair" test... it will be also be only new component pricing...no used amp pricing, when we discuss what a unit costs.. otherwise, You have to find used SVS prices... etc... and that just sounds like work...

For example, the Larger with soundcoat and megawoofers and a QSC amp would run around $1200... that is a pretty fair comparison...

Two larger VMPS with a suitable amp would be around $2300...

So one PB2+ against One VMPS larger... seems about right.

 

[Mitch_J]

How long until the results of this are in?

 

[Craig Chase]

Mitch - The Aperion is on its way... on loan from Aperion audio... it should be here by the middle of next week... then the fun starts !

 

[Mitch_J]

Craig,
Thanks, Just post it here. I've already purchased an S-12 I just wanna make sure that I was a smart consumer. lol But I like what I hear.

 

[Rory Buszka]

The passive doesn't count as a driver since it is not active. It behaves more like a bass port. The slot-loading to the floor allows a lower-mass diaphragm to be used, which helps transient response. I based my claim of lower cone excursion on the fact that it looks like the VMPS Larger drivers are designed for linear motion over a small distance making up the difference with more driver diameter. Also, I don't know if both drivers are loaded to the passive. It wouldn't make sense to me because then the passive would get overloaded at maximum output and basically be limited by the travel of the surround. In addition, it would be harder to get proper tuning. The carbon-fiber Megawoofer is more rigid with less adverse side-effects such as ringing or breakdown over time. I imagine the Larger would be matchless for music, though.

 

[EdNichols]

Really? In what way?

 

[Rory Buszka]

It's designed through and through for transient response. The short-throw, rigid cones are designed to respond accurately, without imparting sounds of their own. That's the purpose behind the woven carbon fiber material used in the Megawoofer. The slot-loading of the passive radiator creates a "virtual mass loading" on the passive radiator. That way, transient smearing that some people have attributed to heavy-weighted passive radiators is not so much an issue because the mass is not hung on the passive diaphragm itself but instead created by the compression chamber between the bottom of the enclosure and the floor, and the passive cone used is a thin paper cone on a small foam surround. If the downfiring passive radiator were loaded heavily, it would sag hopelessly out of its suspension and be useless, needing replacement. VMPS invented the slot-loaded passive radiator in the 1970s.