The Philosophy.
An HTF member recently posted a truism about audio enthusiasts. It states that they tend to fall into one of two categories. Those who buy music so they can play it on their stereo, and those who buy a stereo so they can listen to their music. I definitely lean toward the latter group, and ever since my early teens have been an audio enthusiast, because I love music. An interest that would soon evolve to include movies. That interest often involved buying whatever equipment was available right now. What I could afford right now. So, like a lot of enthusiasts, money was often spent on gear that didn’t stick around all that long. I actually owned my first pair of “good” speakers (JBL 4311s) from when I was too young to drive until I graduated from College. That was a decent investment. Then as I entered the working world, the changes came more often. A pair of Mission 707s for a year or two, followed by Klipsch Fortés for about three more years. It was at that time I decided to take a different approach, since my goal is focused more on enjoying what the equipment brings than on the equipment itself.
This different approach was to seek out the best speakers I could find and manage to afford. It involved saving everything I could, and traveling around Connecticut, where I lived at the time, auditioning everything I could find. Ultimately that journey led me to the (then) recently released Thiel CS 3.6 speakers. I’d never heard of Thiel before. Costing $4,000 1992 dollars, they were quite a bit more expensive than I had planned on, but after months of listening, it was clear they were the one to go with. It was a guilt-inducing amount of money to splurge on such a frivolous item. The bright side of the tale is that splurge has brought me years of enjoyment, which continues to this day. The bottom line? If I was to calculate the cost of that splurge over the more than 28 years I have continued to enjoy those speakers on a daily basis, it would average out to less than $12/month. That’s what I call a good investment in something I have enjoyed immensely for nearly 30 years.
The point is, speakers can and should last a long time. So if this is a long-term interest and something where the best audio reproduction that can reasonably be afforded is a priority, speakers are worth some extra effort to get the best possible and keep them for decades. That includes subwoofers. In fact, the subwoofer that was being replaced in my system is an early SVS model. A PB12-Plus/2 that I’ve been using for about 18 years. Another good investment. This leads to what I’ve come to call “The Thiel Rule.” Some things are just worth it in the long run, and going cheap is often ultimately the most expensive option. So, when it’s something that brings enjoyment, it’s worth extra effort, investment, or whatever is needed.
The Search.
A couple years ago I bought my first sealed subwoofer, an SVS SB-2000, to replace the BIC F-12 in my living room system. It was part of a complete upgrade of that system. The common belief is that sealed subwoofers are better for music, but less desirable for movies. While the new sub is definitely more controlled for music, the fact is I found it to be better for everything. Of course, the new sub is a more expensive model than the one it replaced, at three times the price. Still, the SB-2000 is a lower end model and I was surprised by what an improvement it was. What impressed me the most is the fact that it never gets “sloppy” sounding. Even when it’s being driven to its limits. That’s just an inherent benefit of sealed subs. There’s also no chance of “chuffing” or any type of port noise at high levels, since there are no ports. It can be argued that sealed subs have an inherent weakness, which is lower potential output. While that is true, it can be overcome with larger drivers, more drivers and more power. So when I decided to start searching for a new sub in my HT room, I decided it would be a sealed model. I was almost determined it would be one with dual, opposing 15” drivers like the Seaton SubMersive HP+, Rhythmic G25HP or PowerSound Audio S3012. Coincidentally, PowerSound was founded by Tom Vodhanel, who designed my current SVS PB12-Plus/2, and is the “V” in SVS. I wasn’t actually considering a current SVS model.
I went around in circles for months, then the pandemic hit and I became engulfed in other problems. But I kept perusing various options, and saving up. There are several dual sealed 15” options I considered, with both drivers on the same side, which makes for a smaller footprint. A tall, narrow subwoofer would be easier to get down the narrow staircase of my ‘50s ranch home. During that time, I became convinced of the value of dual subwoofers, thanks to the… encouragement we’ll call it… of HTF co-owner Dave Upton. The science of incorporating subwoofers into a room is actually extremely complicated. A dive into Room EQ Wizard (REW) and response curves with my living room system was an eye opener, as I moved the SB-2000 around and analyzed the results. Fortunately, my HT room is perfect for what is usually the best implementation of dual subwoofers. Opposing corners. In my case, the front right and back left corners of the room. So I decided to do a little rearranging of the room to facilitate locations in the front right and rear left of the room.
The Final Decision.
After those months of going around in circles on which model to get, I finally decided to abandon my plans for dual driver models and decided instead on the SVS SB-16 Ultra. Part of this decision is due to the obvious over-engineering of this model. I want these subs to last me at least 20 years, and they’ll be subjected to a lot during that time. A lot of the over-engineering of the SB-16 Ultra involved the driver itself. It is an SVS designed 16” model, with a shallow bowl shaped cone made of a fiberglass resin composite. The shape of the cone is somewhat unusual in that the bowl shape has no flat areas like regular drivers do. So it naturally has greater rigidity, which is important to maintain its shape as massive forces are being applied to it by the amplifier. In addition to the cone, the driver incorporates an enormous 8” voice coil. Other consumer drivers of this size have 3-3.5” voice coils. The benefit of this large a voice coil is that the forces being applied are at the mid diameter of the cone, rather than toward the center of it. That might not make a difference in the real world, but I anticipate it can extend the life of the driver over years of demanding use. With that much more voice coil, it will also stay cooler which should result in less dynamic compression from being strained. Subwoofer drivers are subjected to some pretty extreme strains, and the fact SB-16 Ultra driver weighs over 60 lbs. all by itself indicates it’s really built to last. Incidentally, showing SVS’s attention to detail, the drivers for the sealed SB-16 and the ported PB-16 are slightly different. Each is optimized for the specific needs of sealed or ported enclosures. They could have made things simpler and used the same driver for both, but they went the extra step.
An HTF member recently posted a truism about audio enthusiasts. It states that they tend to fall into one of two categories. Those who buy music so they can play it on their stereo, and those who buy a stereo so they can listen to their music. I definitely lean toward the latter group, and ever since my early teens have been an audio enthusiast, because I love music. An interest that would soon evolve to include movies. That interest often involved buying whatever equipment was available right now. What I could afford right now. So, like a lot of enthusiasts, money was often spent on gear that didn’t stick around all that long. I actually owned my first pair of “good” speakers (JBL 4311s) from when I was too young to drive until I graduated from College. That was a decent investment. Then as I entered the working world, the changes came more often. A pair of Mission 707s for a year or two, followed by Klipsch Fortés for about three more years. It was at that time I decided to take a different approach, since my goal is focused more on enjoying what the equipment brings than on the equipment itself.
This different approach was to seek out the best speakers I could find and manage to afford. It involved saving everything I could, and traveling around Connecticut, where I lived at the time, auditioning everything I could find. Ultimately that journey led me to the (then) recently released Thiel CS 3.6 speakers. I’d never heard of Thiel before. Costing $4,000 1992 dollars, they were quite a bit more expensive than I had planned on, but after months of listening, it was clear they were the one to go with. It was a guilt-inducing amount of money to splurge on such a frivolous item. The bright side of the tale is that splurge has brought me years of enjoyment, which continues to this day. The bottom line? If I was to calculate the cost of that splurge over the more than 28 years I have continued to enjoy those speakers on a daily basis, it would average out to less than $12/month. That’s what I call a good investment in something I have enjoyed immensely for nearly 30 years.
The point is, speakers can and should last a long time. So if this is a long-term interest and something where the best audio reproduction that can reasonably be afforded is a priority, speakers are worth some extra effort to get the best possible and keep them for decades. That includes subwoofers. In fact, the subwoofer that was being replaced in my system is an early SVS model. A PB12-Plus/2 that I’ve been using for about 18 years. Another good investment. This leads to what I’ve come to call “The Thiel Rule.” Some things are just worth it in the long run, and going cheap is often ultimately the most expensive option. So, when it’s something that brings enjoyment, it’s worth extra effort, investment, or whatever is needed.
The Search.
A couple years ago I bought my first sealed subwoofer, an SVS SB-2000, to replace the BIC F-12 in my living room system. It was part of a complete upgrade of that system. The common belief is that sealed subwoofers are better for music, but less desirable for movies. While the new sub is definitely more controlled for music, the fact is I found it to be better for everything. Of course, the new sub is a more expensive model than the one it replaced, at three times the price. Still, the SB-2000 is a lower end model and I was surprised by what an improvement it was. What impressed me the most is the fact that it never gets “sloppy” sounding. Even when it’s being driven to its limits. That’s just an inherent benefit of sealed subs. There’s also no chance of “chuffing” or any type of port noise at high levels, since there are no ports. It can be argued that sealed subs have an inherent weakness, which is lower potential output. While that is true, it can be overcome with larger drivers, more drivers and more power. So when I decided to start searching for a new sub in my HT room, I decided it would be a sealed model. I was almost determined it would be one with dual, opposing 15” drivers like the Seaton SubMersive HP+, Rhythmic G25HP or PowerSound Audio S3012. Coincidentally, PowerSound was founded by Tom Vodhanel, who designed my current SVS PB12-Plus/2, and is the “V” in SVS. I wasn’t actually considering a current SVS model.
I went around in circles for months, then the pandemic hit and I became engulfed in other problems. But I kept perusing various options, and saving up. There are several dual sealed 15” options I considered, with both drivers on the same side, which makes for a smaller footprint. A tall, narrow subwoofer would be easier to get down the narrow staircase of my ‘50s ranch home. During that time, I became convinced of the value of dual subwoofers, thanks to the… encouragement we’ll call it… of HTF co-owner Dave Upton. The science of incorporating subwoofers into a room is actually extremely complicated. A dive into Room EQ Wizard (REW) and response curves with my living room system was an eye opener, as I moved the SB-2000 around and analyzed the results. Fortunately, my HT room is perfect for what is usually the best implementation of dual subwoofers. Opposing corners. In my case, the front right and back left corners of the room. So I decided to do a little rearranging of the room to facilitate locations in the front right and rear left of the room.
The Final Decision.
After those months of going around in circles on which model to get, I finally decided to abandon my plans for dual driver models and decided instead on the SVS SB-16 Ultra. Part of this decision is due to the obvious over-engineering of this model. I want these subs to last me at least 20 years, and they’ll be subjected to a lot during that time. A lot of the over-engineering of the SB-16 Ultra involved the driver itself. It is an SVS designed 16” model, with a shallow bowl shaped cone made of a fiberglass resin composite. The shape of the cone is somewhat unusual in that the bowl shape has no flat areas like regular drivers do. So it naturally has greater rigidity, which is important to maintain its shape as massive forces are being applied to it by the amplifier. In addition to the cone, the driver incorporates an enormous 8” voice coil. Other consumer drivers of this size have 3-3.5” voice coils. The benefit of this large a voice coil is that the forces being applied are at the mid diameter of the cone, rather than toward the center of it. That might not make a difference in the real world, but I anticipate it can extend the life of the driver over years of demanding use. With that much more voice coil, it will also stay cooler which should result in less dynamic compression from being strained. Subwoofer drivers are subjected to some pretty extreme strains, and the fact SB-16 Ultra driver weighs over 60 lbs. all by itself indicates it’s really built to last. Incidentally, showing SVS’s attention to detail, the drivers for the sealed SB-16 and the ported PB-16 are slightly different. Each is optimized for the specific needs of sealed or ported enclosures. They could have made things simpler and used the same driver for both, but they went the extra step.
Last edited: