Is REL being more 'musical' than SVS a myth, or is there some real science behind this?

[fieldcar]

SVS hopelessly boomy

I will agree that Rel's fixed and permanent filter is "easier" than svs's app based parametric EQ and tunable room gain compensation. Yeah, there is a learning curve, and there is where you're right. Leaving the svs on its factory preset or not using room EQ will result in boomy modes and nulls unique to your room.

 

[GXAlan]

Owner of NHT SubOne, Infinity Servo 210, original SVS 12” sonotube, Outlaw LFM-1, REL R505, Revel B15a, JL Audio Fathom F110, Velodyne Digital Drive 10 among others.

The REL’s speaker level inputs were great in the era before everything having great LFE outputs. Then in the HT era, before proper bass management, it was also great that you could turn the dial to change the balance between the mains + LFE. This was better than most receivers which either forced you to run all or none, Main+LFE, vs LFE alone. These features definitely let you tune the sub in a very impressive and useful way.

REL has a lot of different lines. HiFiNews isn’t the best at subwoofer testing (they only publish at 72 dB) but it lets you compare apples to apples.

The budget REL T1 had 2.4% THD at 30 Hz at 72 dB. The more premium R-505 had 0.98%. So you have to imagine that there will be a volume where the cheaper REL crosses the 10% THD level and the more expensive REL might only be 4% THD. Being in the US, I only got bits and pieces of HiFiNews from the internet. It would good to see if anyone has other numbers from HifiNews for other subwoofers to do an apples to apples comparison.

Once you brought rudimentary room correction (Revel had you use their test CD and a Windows app/spreadsheet to program a PEQ), being able to tame down room nodes made a huge difference.

So I believe the high RELs were genuinely good/musical but at a high price premium being made in the UK (at the time; many today are no longer made in the UK). The cheaper RELs aren’t as great and the inability to tune phase/do EQ also means that they may not perform as well in real world homes until you have bass room correction to help out which will digitally correct the phase to match.

Personally, I find the JL Audio Fathom and Velodyne Digital Drives to be superior to them all and it’s nice to be able to have smaller 10” drivers deliver all of the musical content you need (need bigger for movies, below 20 Hz). The small size makes it a lot easier to move them around in the room and position them which also translates into superior real world results. I am not sure if the smaller woofer allows them to be “faster” or
if that is sighted bias. Most people agree that the room makes a very big difference and I am 100% sure that I have more flexible placement with smaller subs. The Revel 15” sub is great, but you are very limited with positioning in most real world rooms due to size.

JL Audio has a strong track record of customer service and as I understand it, you have infinity years of service capped at $300 for the Fathom line. Velodyne has had a strong track record of customer service but their LiDAR business really did so well that they exited out of the audio market and their top distributor acquired the audio business. I am not sure what the supply chain situation is like today for Velodyne.

 

[Andysu]

This is getting silly. There is simply no reason to introduce any issue of musicality into the physical acoustics of proper setup.

i want see a video , like today with just listening to the subwoofer sub bass "LFE.1 of movie" . i've done some myself . i like see stereophile do one . i have nominated you . so no baking out . pick a movie , make sure the bass management is switched off so it only plays LFE.1 only .

 

[Kal Rubinson]

This is not controversial and can easily be proven with music .

But it is irrelevent.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

i want see a video , like today with just listening to the subwoofer sub bass "LFE.1 of movie" . i've done some myself . i like see stereophile do one . i have nominated you . so no baking out . pick a movie , make sure the bass management is switched off so it only plays LFE.1 only .

Sorry. I cannot comprehend what you are saying.

 

[Tangband]

But it is irrelevent.

No its not. I listen to music to get my emotions involved. I want to hear the tones in a clear way, that the musicians are playing. This is not irrelevant. If we can hear WHAT the musicians are playing, instead of them just making background noise , we can enjoy the music so much more. Im sure John Atkinsson at stereophile would agree.

 

[Tangband]

I will agree that Rel's fixed and permanent filter is "easier" than svs's app based parametric EQ and tunable room gain compensation. Yeah, there is a learning curve, and there is where you're right. Leaving the svs on its factory preset or not using room EQ will result in boomy modes and nulls unique to your room.

Yes .
The measurements of SVS subs in factory preset will because of this show good measurement results, but you dont listen without roomgain.

 

[Andysu]

Sorry. I cannot comprehend what you are saying.

forget about .

 

[tvih]

(edit: oops, looks like I still had unread further replies, but alas...)

SVS is not hopelessly boomy, at least none of the ones I've heard and I've heard most of their current models.

He was talking about the concrete room - in such a room basically almost any subwoofer would be boomy without EQ. Living in a concrete box myself I couldn't use my sealed (non-SVS) subwoofer in my room at all because of the insane room modes - just take a look at this madness:

The overall sub volume even had to be increased after this to bring the lows to par with the main speaker level especially given the Harman curve boost.

After EQ it's fine though, no boominess. I'm still getting upgradeitis about the subwoofer though, and trying to fight it off - my current sub is sealed and can't handle high volumes at 20-30 Hz (I think it hits driver excursion limit at 82 dB because that freq range won't go above that at all and the resulting sound is... nasty... if you try), but then I don't generally use high volumes because of living in a crappy apartment. SVS PB-1000 is what I've had in my shopping cart for days now, given its price (currently 499€ on sale, normally 649€ here) and the fact it can play as loud as I'd ever need to without distorting too much even if I didn't in fact live in a crappy apartment.

 

[Everett T]

(edit: oops, looks like I still had unread further replies, but alas...)


He was talking about the concrete room - in such a room basically almost any subwoofer would be boomy without EQ. Living in a concrete box myself I couldn't use my sealed (non-SVS) subwoofer in my room at all because of the insane room modes - just take a look at this madness:

View attachment 216422

The overall sub volume even had to be increased after this to bring the lows to par with the main speaker level especially given the Harman curve boost. Even trying to find yet another location wouldn't really have helped much because a big factor in the problem is audibility to neighbors, and also this was one position where there were less major dips to worry about.

After EQ it's fine though, no boominess. I'm still getting upgradeitis about the subwoofer though, and trying to fight it off - my current sub is sealed and can't handle high volumes at 20-30 Hz (I think it hits driver excursion limit at 82 dB because that freq range won't go above that at all and the resulting sound is... nasty... if you try), but then I don't generally use high volumes because of living in a crappy apartment. SVS PB-1000 is what I've had in my shopping cart for days now, given its price (currently 499€ on sale, normally 649€ here) and the fact it can play as loud as I'd ever need to without distorting too much even if I didn't in fact live in a crappy apartment.

The good thing about SVS subs is that you can't overdrive them, the built in protection is great. Same with the Monolith subs, just not as great of CS with them. Not sure what their 10 and 12" go for over there, but they're a great alternative with really good distortion numbers.

 

[DonH56]

No its not. I listen to music to get my emotions involved. I want to hear the tones in a clear way, that the musicians are playing. This is not irrelevant. If we can hear WHAT the musicians are playing, instead of them just making background noise , we can enjoy the music so much more. Im sure John Atkinsson at stereophile would agree.

It is irrelevant to the discussion of "musicality" of subwoofers and how to best set them up for your (anyone's) enjoyment. As @Kal Rubinson and others have said repeatedly "musicality" is in the mind and one's perception of sound; accurate sound is readily attained through science. The overwhelming response to the question of REL being more "musical" than SVS, or any other, is that it is a myth.

I cannot speak for JA, though he is an ASR member so you can ask him, but I expect he'd espouse that hearing musicians "clearly" requires accurate playback equipment though you can adjust for taste. Many years of research from folk like Geddes, Olive, and Toole have proven that most people like their systems to be accurate. Nothing I have read in other reviews or measured data indicate to me that REL is significantly more accurate than many other subs.

 

[Tangband]

SVS is not hopelessly boomy, at least none of the ones I've heard and I've heard most of their current models.

It is irrelevant to the discussion of "musicality" of subwoofers and how to best set them up for your (anyone's) enjoyment. As @Kal Rubinson and others have said repeatedly "musicality" is in the mind and one's perception of sound; accurate sound is readily attained through science. The overwhelming response to the question of REL being more "musical" than SVS, or any other, is that it is a myth.

I cannot speak for JA, though he is an ASR member so you can ask him, but I expect he'd espouse that hearing musicians "clearly" requires accurate playback equipment though you can adjust for taste. Many years of research from folk like Geddes, Olive, and Toole have proven that most people like their systems to be accurate. Nothing I have read in other reviews or measured data indicate to me that REL is significantly more accurate than many other subs.

Some facts like roomgain is not irrelevant nor a myth , its very real and you can hear it.
Another thing regarding subwoofers: - good integration to the main loudspeakers are everything.
A very good subwoofer with the worlds best driver, but without a good crossover, will not sound good.

Subwoofers that can be equalised to fit different rooms and with different crossover orders have big advantages when it comes to fixing good integration to the main speakers. I guess we can agree on that. The second order crossover in RELs subwoofers offers a good ability and quick fix for integration with closed main loudspeakers thats unfiltered.

 

[Everett T]

Some fact like roomgain is not a myth , its very real and you can hear it.
Subwoofers that can be equalised to fit different rooms and with different crossover orders have big advantages when it comes to fixing good integration to the main speakers. I guess we can agree on that. The second order crossover in RELs subwoofers offers a good ability for integration with closed main loudspeakers thats unfiltered.

What about the room comprensation settings from SVS? There's nothing about sound below the room transition that doesn't require tweaking. I have large sealed subs in my HT and that fully benefit from room gain and where needed eq from 32hz and up, below is a linkwitz transorm. Room intergration isn't plug and play for 99% of users and takes time and trail and error.

 

[Tangband]

What about the room comprensation settings from SVS? There's nothing about sound below the room transition that doesn't require tweaking. I have large sealed subs in my HT and that fully benefit from room gain and where needed eq from 32hz and up, below is a linkwitz transorm. Room intergration isn't plug and play for 99% of users and takes time and trail and error.

I agree on that . But in a normal domestic room , If you get the loudspeakers including the subwoofers to sound as good as it gets with right placement before any eq , you can gain in sound quality because the dsp corrections below transition freq will be smaller than just setting up your loudspeakers randomly.

 

[DonH56]

Some fact like roomgain is not a myth , its very real and you can hear it.
Another thing regarding to subwoofers: - good integration to the main loudspeakers are everything.
A very good subwoofer with the worlds best driver, but without a good crossover will not sound good.

Subwoofers that can be equalised to fit different rooms and with different crossover orders have big advantages when it comes to fixing good integration to the main speakers. I guess we can agree on that. The second order crossover in RELs subwoofers offers a good ability for integration with closed main loudspeakers thats unfiltered.

Who said room gain is a myth? Did you understand the reference to room modes and SBIR? Many people on this thread understand it quite well, but it applies to every subwoofer (and speaker, and room), and REL does not have some magical design that circumvents it. You seem to be saying only REL uses a second-order crossover and that is simply not true; the standard crossover in AVRs is second-order, and many if not most other subs provide a second-order filter. Nor is it true that that is the best choice for every room and subwoofer; open or sealed rooms as well as ported vs. sealed subwoofers may integrate better with a different crossover scheme.

My sub has continuous phase control, selectable crossover frequencies and slopes, and a single-band (analog) PEQ. It is not a REL. I have three other subwoofers brands around and have owned a couple before that, and all included second-order filters. You are speaking in general but claiming only REL has solved the issue of room gain, is that correct?

I am confused (but not about room gain) - Don

 

[Tangband]

Who said room gain is a myth? Did you understand the reference to room modes and SBIR? Many people on this thread understand it quite well, but it applies to every subwoofer (and speaker, and room), and REL does not have some magical design that circumvents it. You seem to be saying only REL uses a second-order crossover and that is simply not true; the standard crossover in AVRs is second-order, and many if not most other subs provide a second-order filter. Nor is it true that that is the best choice for every room and subwoofer; open or sealed rooms as well as ported vs. sealed subwoofers may integrate better with a different crossover scheme.

My sub has continuous phase control, selectable crossover frequencies and slopes, and a single-band (analog) PEQ. It is not a REL. I have three other subwoofers brands around and have owned a couple before that, and all included second-order filters. You are speaking in general but claiming only REL has solved the issue of room gain, is that correct?

I am confused (but not about room gain) - Don

Most AVRs have a fourth order 24 db/oct crossover for the LP crossover to the subs , and a second order ( 12 db oct ) HP crossovers for the main loudspeaker. The THX standard says that the main front loudspeakers shall be identical and closed.
The second order ( 12 dB/oct ) HP crossovers in THX AVRs combines with the natural roll off, of the main fronts . Because the mains front loudspeakers is closed, they roll of naturally with 12 dB/oct . Combining two 12 dB/oct crossovers, one electrical to the main loudspeaker, and one the natural roll off, makes together a 24 db/oct slope.

So - the THX 24 dB LP ( for subwoofers ) and 12 + 12 dB HP for the main speakers makes a 24 / 24 crossover - a fourth order crossover = good integration.

 

[A Surfer]

No need to be confused.

Most AVRs have a fourth order 24 db/oct crossovers for the LP crossover to the subs , and a second order ( 12 db oct ) crossovers for the main loudspeaker. The THX standard says that the main front loudspeakers shall be identical and closed.
The second order ( 12 dB/oct ) HP crossovers in THX AVRs combines with the natural roll off, of the main fronts . Because the mains fronts is closed, they roll of naturally with 12 dB/oct . Combining two 12 dB/oct crossovers, one electrical to the main loudspeaker, and one the natural roll off, makes together a 24 db/oct slope.

So - the THX 24 dB LP ( for subwoofers ) and 12 + 12 dB HP for the main speakers makes a 24 / 24 crossover - a fourth order crossover = good integration.

You do realize that you are treating a well regarded forum member with extensive experience and technical credentials as if they are somebody who needs to be taught. Not to be rude, but what are your credentials that make you feel that you need to teach others?

 

[Everett T]

No need to be confused.

Most AVRs have a fourth order 24 db/oct crossovers for the LP crossover to the subs , and a second order ( 12 db oct ) crossovers for the main loudspeaker. The THX standard says that the main front loudspeakers shall be identical and closed.
The second order ( 12 dB/oct ) HP crossovers in THX AVRs combines with the natural roll off, of the main fronts . Because the mains fronts is closed, they roll of naturally with 12 dB/oct . Combining two 12 dB/oct crossovers, one electrical to the main loudspeaker, and one the natural roll off, makes together a 24 db/oct slope.

So - the THX 24 dB LP ( for subwoofers ) and 12 + 12 dB HP for the main speakers makes a 24 / 24 crossover - a fourth order crossover = good integration.

What does THX have to do with it? Asymmetrical slopes can be achieved with even one order and can keep phase in check. All of these things you mention can be addressed with avrs, avps, and any of the numerous DSP products available. Heck the base minidsp is $100 and it's processing is on par with mid level avrs.

 

[Tangband]

You do realize that you are treating a well regarded forum member with extensive experience and technical credentials as if they are somebody who needs to be taught. Not to be rude, but what are your credentials that make you feel that you need to teach others?

Im sorry, I dont want to be a teacher for someone who probably knows better . Didnt mean to offend someone.

 

[Chrispy]

The knowledge how roomgain works seems low in this thread .

1. A closed box subwoofer falls 12dB / oct below the box resonance freq . In a normal room with concret walls, the roomgain will be almost + 12 dB/oct - making the response flat with REL subs thats closed boxes - and SVS hopelessly boomy .

2. REL :s subwoofer are all bassreinforcement loudspeakers . They have a 12 dB/oct crossover, making them perfectly fit unfiltered closed box main loudspeakers . Because its inverted - this forms a 12 dB HP and 12 dB LP crossover at the main closed box loudspeakers resonanse freq.

This is the reason REL sounds good with normal unfiltered main loudspeakers.

The subs from REL with passive radiators also have a clever HP crossover just below the passive radiators tuning point - protecting the drivers and this will also give lower distortion .

A normal room with concrete walls? What, you live in a prison? Room gain will vary with room quite a bit. Some will have rooms with almost no room gain, just funky modes. SVS is not hopelessly boomy, but your setup abilities might be.....Rel is overpriced and underperforming.