Help me decide a subwoofer for music only and high WAF

[JayGilb]

Buy a low profile powered sub and a can of white paint.

 

[Spkrdctr]

The old can of white paint trick? I didn't think of that......

 

[Frewat]

I checked the included chart and looked at the SVS PB 1000 PRO and 25hz it smokes the Arendal big time. No contest, the SVS would be a much better all around sub. Subs that can't play well at 25hz are not really good subs. All the ultra cheap junky subs play 40hz well and then crap out.

He wasn't interested in the PB1000 pro. You should look at the SB1000 pro which is in the same chart that I posted...

 

[Tom C]

So EQing is the same as turning up (or down) the volume for a specific part of the frequency range. So if you already have the maximum amount of power the driver can handle, you won't need more than that to EQ. If you add power and then use it to EQ, your driver will bottom out.

So in effect, when you use EQ to add energy in a specific part, you in effect reduce the total available sound volume.

Example:
Say at maximum excursion of the driver, you can play 100dB at 30hz, and you have enough power to do this. And at 100hz your sub can actually play 110dB.

So the roll-off to the sub and capacity of the driver is so that 30hz is 10dB down compared to 100hz. And you want your subwoofer to have more extension. So you fix this by using EQ to increase 30hz by 6dB. Your sub can still only play 100dB at 30hz, and we already established that you have enough power to do so, so that's fine - you have enough power.

But now 30hz is 6dB higher than before in relation to the rest of the frequency range. So if you now play 110dB at 100hz, 30hz will be 106dB, and your driver will die. So in effect you now have to limit your maximum volume by 6dB to avoid bottoming out at 30hz. Now you can only play 104dB at 100hz, but with the added benefit of more deep bass at that level than before. More deep bass, less maximum volume.

This example makes perfect sense.
But there is, I think, another consideration.
If you want more bass output, you need bigger sub(s), and/or a greater number of subs. If you want more output in the midrange and treble, and your amp is able to drive your speakers to maximum output, you need a speaker system that is capable of higher output. You can add speaker cabinets instead, but that is a specialty area best restricted to certain designs intended specifically for that purpose.
Some of us use EQ to flatten out the frequency response for speakers that don’t come that way out of the box. Yes, it’s better to buy speakers that are already flat from the factory, but many of us already have speakers that are flawed in this regard, and would like to correct them using EQ, informed by the measured anechoic FR. In that case, a person would maybe try to boost a dip in the FR, tailoring the filter to fit the error in FR as closely as possible. Of course, in real life, there is no such thing as perfect, but hopefully you can get close. That wouldn’t necessarily drive the speaker beyond its output capacity. After all, it’s a dip. You’re just trying to bring the level up to where the rest of the FR is being played by the speaker. So, it’s not intuitive to me why you would need to attenuate the entire speaker output by the level of the boost, as is sometimes recommended. Either way, if a dip has high (narrow) Q, it’s probably not worth correcting, as it’s audibility would be low.
Correcting peaks, on the other hand, merely require attenuation tailored to the error, so should only improve headroom. I think there’s an argument to be made for correcting just the peaks in the FR, particularly if there are few dips, and the dips that are there are high Q. If you do correct only the peaks, adding an overall filter lowering the output for the entire frequency spectrum shouldn’t be necessary.

 

[Timcognito]

Are there any objective critera for the WAF? Is the WAF a lineair or logaritmic scale? Is there a minimum? Does a certain WAF apply to all women? Is the WAF depending on the man or the relationship? Is the WAF negociatable with other issues like a new kitchen or more visits to your mother in law?

There are no units of WAF. For married people its kind of like gravity, you know it's there and you have to go to outer space to get around it.

 

[JLGF1]

It's alot better in the rest of the frequency range.

Personally, I would place my bet on the ability of the SVS PEQ to enhance the SQ over slightly more output of the comparable sub (EQ for a sub being crucial for room dependency).

And the 40% lower price (USD) would be icing on the cake (you could buy two SB-1000P's for only $200 more than 1 Arendal 1961). YMMV.

 

[sigbergaudio]

This example makes perfect sense.
But there is, I think, another consideration.
If you want more bass output, you need bigger sub(s), and/or a greater number of subs. If you want more output in the midrange and treble, and your amp is able to drive your speakers to maximum output, you need a speaker system that is capable of higher output. You can add speaker cabinets instead, but that is a specialty area best restricted to certain designs intended specifically for that purpose.
Some of us use EQ to flatten out the frequency response for speakers that don’t come that way out of the box. Yes, it’s better to buy speakers that are already flat from the factory, but many of us already have speakers that are flawed in this regard, and would like to correct them using EQ, informed by the measured anechoic FR. In that case, a person would maybe try to boost a dip in the FR, tailoring the filter to fit the error in FR as closely as possible. Of course, in real life, there is no such thing as perfect, but hopefully you can get close. That wouldn’t necessarily drive the speaker beyond its output capacity. After all, it’s a dip. You’re just trying to bring the level up to where the rest of the FR is being played by the speaker. So, it’s not intuitive to me why you would need to attenuate the entire speaker output by the level of the boost, as is sometimes recommended. Either way, if a dip has high (narrow) Q, it’s probably not worth correcting, as it’s audibility would be low.
Correcting peaks, on the other hand, merely require attenuation tailored to the error, so should only improve headroom. I think there’s an argument to be made for correcting just the peaks in the FR, particularly if there are few dips, and the dips that are there are high Q. If you do correct only the peaks, adding an overall filter lowering the output for the entire frequency spectrum shouldn’t be necessary.

If I understood @DanielT correctly, it was a question about a DIY-situation (building a DIY sub), and considerations around this. And specifically about subwoofers.

What you are talking about appears to be correcting the inherent response of a speaker. That's generally not recommended, as unexpected things may happen due to the off-axis response of the speaker. But yes you are correct that EQing smaller inherent dips in a speaker (at least in the upper frequencies) will probably not be problematic from a power context. This is generally not the situation being discussed when people recommend reducing the level when you boost frequencies. It's typically about the bass, and about correcting for the room, not the speaker.

When correcting for the room with EQ, you should generally focus on the peaks and leave the dips alone, especially in the bass (now we're back to power/excursion issues). If you do that, as you say, you don't need to lower the put.

 

[Frewat]

Personally, I would place my bet on the ability of the SVS PEQ to enhance the SQ over slightly more output of the comparable sub (EQ for a sub being crucial for room dependency).

And the 40% lower price would be icing on the cake. YMMV.

The Arendal sub has the same settings and peq (3 bands) capability as the Svs. The difference is that it doesn't have a phone app. The price as well as you pointed out. 40% higher price, over 100% better output from 25hz and even more under that frequency.

I think the problem is that it might be to big compared to the Svs.

 

[JLGF1]

I think the problem is that it might be to big compared to the Svs.

If I'm looking at Arendal 1961 size correctly, 7+ in H and 4+ in D bigger. That would be a fairly significant size difference (particularly depth). With that room, I would be probably go with the one SB-1000P and if the room modes were a problem that the PEQ could not correct, add a second identical sub and only be $200 over budget. YMMV.

 

[Frewat]

If I'm looking at Arendal 1961 size correctly, 7+ in H and 4+ in D bigger. That would be a fairly significant size difference (particularly depth). With that room, I would be probably go with the one SB-1000P and if the room modes were a problem that the PEQ could not correct, add a second identical sub and only be $200 over budget. YMMV.

I agree that it would be better with two subs.

But maybe this is getting out of hand for OP...

 

[MarkS]

Guys: the OP listens at 70dB average volume, music only. He just wants a little more bass than he currently gets out of his bookshelft speakers.

Please stop with the notion that he needs multiple giant subs to accomplish this. He most certainly does not.

 

[JLGF1]

Not sure who you are replying to? Of course, he probably does not need multiple subs (particularly giant ones). However, multiple subs can be about smooth FR just as much as output; depends on the room. Just pointing out that he could almost purchase TWO SB-1000P's for the price of the ONE other finalist. But, starting with one would be the prudent thing to do and my guess would be more than sufficient in this case barring something unexpected. On the other hand, are you the thread monitor?

 

[EJ3]

Recently I turned 40 and was gifted with a pair of Dali Oberon 1 and a Powernode Egde.

View attachment 281538

We live in a townhouse with our two small kids. My hifi interest is not shared with my wife hence the modest setup, but I do love it. Aside from one thing .. bass. Our livingroom is about 30m2. I realize that the Oberons are probably to small for the room, but this is a somewhat happy middleground.

We have discussed adding a subwoofer and she has agreed to fit one in if:

• its small
• is white, preferably matte

I thought she would like REL T/5x but she hates how it looks, so thats a no. Probalby to this forums amusment!

When we visited HiFi-klubben (a hifi store i Sweden) and audiotioned the Oberons 1s they plugged in a Dali Sub e-9 f which sounded good to me and she thought it looked good.
I have never owned a subwoofer, so before I clicked buy I did some research and soon it was evident that the dali sub, on paper, wasnt to good. Instead people suggested SVS and RELs (We live in Sweden, Europe).

So, with the above demands, of small, white and our max budget of ~1000 EUR.

Ive narrowed it down to:

• SVS SB-1000 Pro (710€ in Sweden converted from swedish currency)
• SVS 3000 Micro (1050€ in Sweden converted from swedish currency)

Of these two, which one would you suggest for music only? Im no base head and are not looking to rattle our wall paintings or annoy our nightbour but to have a more rich sound and sound quality. Are SVS primarily a home theater sub or can they fill our needs? I´ve read that SVS needs to be played lound to come alive?

I know close to nothing about HIFI-nomenclature but I downloaded a db-app and stod 2 meters from the speakers and it got up to 70db which I would say is a normal listening volume for us at times. Mostly its much lower as background music.

Perhaps Ive missed some brands to consider?

---

Highlights From TeufelAudio.com​

Why we love this product​

The T 4000 brilliantly circumvents the biggest problem most people encounter with subwoofers - room placement. An innovative flat design allows it to be placed under a sofa or television console or even wall mounted. Now matter where you place it, the T 4000 delivers the bone-shaking bass Teufel is famous for.

Key advantages at a glance​

• Premium flat active subwoofer
• Innovative form makes it easy to place under a sofa or behind a sideboard
• Suitable for surround and stereo sets
• Woofers: 3 x 130 mm
• Down-firing principle
• 150 watts RMS
• Recommended for Cubycon, Varion, LT & Columa sets
• Works with all standard AV & stereo receivers

(4.89 of 5 out of 18)
ALL REVIEWS

Features​

All technologies at a glance

Wireless subwoofer

Downfire-Subwoofer. Der Tieftöner ist zum Boden hin ausgerichtet.
The T 4000 SW bridges the divide between something you can fit in your living room easily and mega bass playback. Its incredibly flat enclosure makes it easy to place the T 4000 out of the way. That small space behind the sofa or coffee table is enough. In fact, the T 4000 is so slender, it can even be positioned under most sofas, wall mounted or used to support your television. Its heavy duty, reinforced MDF enclosure was designed to withstand the weight of conventional televisions making it the ideal audio pedestal.

In spite of its highly convenient dimensions, T 4000 is driven by 250 watts for power to spare. The three driver system, already successfully employed in Teufel’s highly popular System 4 THX model, is used here as well. This ensures balanced playback at THX standards and produces powerful, deep bass all the way down to 35 Hz for home cinema that puts you straight in the action. Even at very high volumes, the long-throw drivers put out extremely little distortion.

The T 4000 is a universal subwoofer that can be combined with just about any home cinema set, even very high-performance models. This means the T 4000 is perfect for accompanying surround speakers or for giving an already complete 5.1 set an extra boost.

Included components​

Subwoofer T 4000 SW (without wireless module)

• 1 × Power cable – Black

Specifications​

• Subwoofer T 4000 SW (without wireless module)
  
  
  
  

  Subwoofer T 4000 SW (without wireless module)​

  A flat subwoofer designed to be placed on a wall or under a sofa or television. A 35 Hz low end ensures ample amounts of bone-shaking Teufel bass.
  • Dimensions
  • Connection
  • Electronics
  • Speaker

Accessories​

Necessary accessories​

Connecting cables are not included with this delivery

• 
  
  

  Subwoofer-Cable 2.5m - C3525W​

  High-end mono subwooer cinch connection cable
  14,99 €

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

it obviously is...but the world is not ready for this discussion.

I prefer the term "abusive"

Well I understand that people value aesthetics.
Even as a tech-freak, I would not plaster my living room with speakers that I consider ugly, no matter the technical excellence behind it.
After all, most of the time they are offline and thus just an object you look at.

The new butt-ugly grey/yellow Focal Arias or some high gloss "plasticky" looking SVS subwoofers are prime examples of things I'd never put in my living room.

So I can understand a wife having some concerns regarding the decorum (I.e.: please buy a white sub and please don't overdo it in the size department).
Everything beyond that: I don't think one should restrict one's partner's hobbies that much (unless it's a threat to healthy finances, obviously).

@topic:
Regarding the APP of subwoofers: my Arendal was supposed to have one, frankly: Subs are "set once and forget it", unless you change it's position in the room.
So I do not see much value of such an app, especially not with the rather good controls on the Arendal.
My tip: don't over-value something you might never actually use.

 

[StefanSweden]

Have you seen the arendal in real life? I own a 1723s and it blends nicely in the room. I think if you move that piece of furnature just slightly to left it will fit next to it. Then the driver is facing the corner and you won't see the 'ugly' black grille. And the satin white is really nice. It does require 8cm of space next to the driver if I remember correctly.
Like others have said the svs micro3000 is also pretty good. I've heard it at a friend of mines. And it will deliver plenty for music and your Oberon's. The 1961 is pretty much overkill. But personally I don't really like the glossy finish.

As I´ve read this thread many times I have to tell you that I was somewhat mislead by the pictures of Arendal 1S. In most pisctures it looks monolithic and "towering". But when looking at the size specs its actually quite small and the original looks could play to its advantage. It grows on me compared to the SB-1000 Pro when it comes to apperance. I guess it would be easier to "hide" the svs. Personally I think high gloss is cheesy and the Arendal looks more stylish (IMHO). Need to do a mock up sample of both to get a better understanding.

I guess both subs will sound "the same" to my untrained ear and I would be happy either way. Just need to ponder wheter the extra money is worth it.

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

As I´ve read this thread many times I have to tell you that I was somewhat mislead by the pictures of Arendal 1S. In most pisctures it looks monolithic and "towering".

My Arendal is satin white too. I would not call it "small" by any stretch. *chuckles*

The surface looks and feels great, I do not know if the surface of the smaller 1961 series is the same.

I got the 1723, because... well.. there is no replacement for displacement.
It's hilariously overkill for my purposes.... (apartment, 17m² room) like ... "UNLIMITED POWER!" :'D

 

[dasdoing]

please buy a white sub and please don't overdo it in the size department

this one is totaly ok,
but the term WAF sounds much more "dominant" than that....but I might understand it wrong

 

[Spkrdctr]

Checking the Arendal website, the 1961 sub does not have an app for your phone, you have to go up to the more expensive sub to get it. This is a huge issue. I would not recommend getting that sub. So, I would look at the SVS line. You get better features. There is a reason why SVS is such a big company. Good product and great value. I would not get a sealed sub, but you can do what you want. I think any SVS sub will add fantastic depth to your music. I'm surprised you have not bought one by now. Just tell the wife that you are turning your place into a man cave. That should reassure her that you will not make it look too bad!

 

[sigbergaudio]

Checking the Arendal website, the 1961 sub does not have an app for your phone, you have to go up to the more expensive sub to get it. This is a huge issue. I would not recommend getting that sub. So, I would look at the SVS line. You get better features. There is a reason why SVS is such a big company. Good product and great value. I would not get a sealed sub, but you can do what you want. I think any SVS sub will add fantastic depth to your music. I'm surprised you have not bought one by now. Just tell the wife that you are turning your place into a man cave. That should reassure her that you will not make it look too bad!

How is not having an app for the sub a huge issue in OPs use case?

 

[bodhi]

My Arendal is satin white too. I would not call it "small" by any stretch. *chuckles*

The surface looks and feels great, I do not know if the surface of the smaller 1961 series is the same.

I got the 1723, because... well.. there is no replacement for displacement.
It's hilariously overkill for my purposes.... (apartment, 17m² room) like ... "UNLIMITED POWER!" :'D

Yeah, I demoed one and it's not small at all. But in white it kind of disappears next to a white wall.