Rythmik L12 Subwoofer Review

[Gatordaddy]

Hii guys, I’m new to subwoofers and considering adding one to my two channel system, I have a smaller size room at 13’x15’ with 9’ ceilings and am currently using a pair of the smaller magnepan mg12 speakers. The L12 sounds intriguing given the price point, but I’m trying to understand what benefits there would be moving up to the F12? Thanks

Give the designer Brian a call. From their specs, the F12 produces 1db more SPL and probably has lower distortion.

 

[q3cpma]

Those have a fun looking port, but they're actually not all that small. The 7360a has a 10" driver and is more than twice the size (in box volume) than the sealed 10" subwoofers we are building.

They're generally pretty slim, though (especially when you consider that some of the external volume is used for the handles, "feet" and grill/heatsink). Guess the dimensions must be read side-to-side with the ~25 Hz port tuning with large port cross-section.

 

[sigbergaudio]

They're generally pretty slim, though. Guess the dimensions must be read side-to-side with the ~25 Hz port tuning with large port cross-section.

Genelec are great (expensive but great), but I'm not sure there's anything super magic with this subwoofer. It's a ~60l (2.1ft^3) subwoofer, and perhaps it's somewhat compact for a ported subwoofer(?), but it's not compact compared to a sealed subwoofer.

So this Genelec doesn't do much to dispute the fact that sealed subwoofers can generally be built more compact. Again for comparison, we have a ~30l (1.1ft^3) sealed sub similar bass extension as the Genelec. Does it play as loud? Nope, but there's no free lunch. Hoffman's iron law and all.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Isn't bending and dampening by affixing the other end the usual way to deal with those?

No biggie here, but please check into the difference in meaning for "dampening" vs. "damping". This is a very common thing that many people do, especially in the context of automotive shock absorbers. Sometimes it is desirable to damp an oscillation, or to take into account the amount of damping present in damped harmonic motion.

 

[q3cpma]

Genelec are great (expensive but great), but I'm not sure there's anything super magic with this subwoofer. It's a ~60l (2.1ft^3) subwoofer, and perhaps it's somewhat compact for a ported subwoofer(?), but it's not compact compared to a sealed subwoofer.

So this Genelec doesn't do much to dispute the fact that sealed subwoofers can generally be built more compact. Again for comparison, we have a ~30l (1.1ft^3) sealed sub similar bass extension as the Genelec. Does it play as loud? Nope, but there's no free lunch. Hoffman's iron law and all.

The Genelec are "slim" (363mm), our sealed 10" variant is 155mm. (not trying to advertise, it's just an easy comparison since I'm very familiar with them, seeing as I build them )

Well, rarely anything magic in subwoofers, just talking about the "finding the space for a port that is long enough to avoid port noise borders on the impossible in compact enclosures" part, but seeing your flat subs, I don't think we have the same definition of compact.

 

[LTig]

Interesting.
I have my main stereo speakers as the fronts for the rare occasions I watch a film. They were carefully positioned to minimise room excitation decades ago and the bass if fairly even without correction.
I set them as large and with the sub I had always thought I was, in effect, getting the bass benefit of 3 subs, though two are effectively positioned under the main L and F speakers.
Is that a bad idea? The room response seems pretty good corrected that way.

Sorry for the late answer. If it works it works. Seems your large speakers are really large and do not suffer from IMD due to handling low bass. OTOH it may make sense to highpass the mains and have a listen (after correction of room EQ) wrt to midrange SQ.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Well, rarely anything magic in subwoofers, just talking about the "finding the space for a port that is long enough to avoid port noise borders on the impossible in compact enclosures" part, but seeing your flat subs, I don't think we have the same definition of compact.

Probably not. If I were to build a 60 liter sub I would probably consider a ported setup as well. Down at 30-40l, it's a bit more tricky. And one thing is the cabinet design another is even finding or designing drivers that are suitable. Again, nothing inherently wrong with a ported design, but they will typically be bigger than a sealed one. The main problem with ported designs I guess is that so many don't do them properly, so they end up with a bad reputation.

 

[jhaider]

I guess, but what's the problem with properly ported speakers?

As mentioned previously, size. Also, if you tune really low, pipe resonances.

The "fanboy" (jokingly, I can find some faults with Genelec too) in me will continue to post this

That’s an absurdly cheap driver (Peerless SLS) for such an expensive subwoofer. If there is a value add with Genelec subs, it is integration with their GLM software. Otherwise, it's abundantly clear from the above they are nothing special.

They're generally pretty slim, though (especially when you consider that some of the external volume is used for the handles, "feet" and grill/heatsink). Guess the dimensions must be read side-to-side with the ~25 Hz port tuning with large port cross-section.

Per Sweetwater the Genelec 7360A is 20.75" x 18.18" x 14.37". I would not call that slim. That's a footprint and cabinet volume large enough to accommodate dual opposed 12's, or even 15's! Such a configuration would offer superior performance across the board (with the right power and signal processing), but have a much higher parts cost and weigh more for shipping.

In fact, about seven feet from me right now there's a similarly-sized subwoofer, which is one of four subs in the system. This sub is 20" wide x 20" tall x either 10" or 12" deep (don't remember, too lazy to get up and measure). The driver is an Aura NS15-992-4A with an underhung 4" voicecoil and enough copper in the motor to reduce inductance to tweeter levels. Power and processing come from a channel of a Crown DCI4|1250n. Compared to the Genelec, which do you think is the higher output, lower extending, lower distortion, sub?

 

[q3cpma]

As mentioned previously, size. Also, if you tune really low, pipe resonances.

Well, I can give you size. But I'd like some proof that these resonances can't be solved.

That’s an absurdly cheap driver (Peerless SLS) for such an expensive subwoofer.

As Neumann's KH120A teardown showed, you can't really guess the actual model just by looking at it. But Genelec isn't known for its use of expensive drivers. Nor is it using badly underperforming drivers.
Their use of PHL woofers in their 1238A or their making a lot of custom drivers (The Ones or midrange for their main monitors) doesn't seem to indicate cost cutting at all cost (heh) to me.

If there is a value add with Genelec subs, it is integration with their GLM software. Otherwise, it's abundantly clear from the above they are nothing special.

Of course there's GLM, but I'd say that the real value is the assurance (maybe just an impression) that everything was done properly, no damaging corner cutting and not stone left unturned. For example, most brands would simply have used more round ports (see SVS PB-3000), which don't really solve the problem of air speed at high SPL.
Sure, absolute performance will be inferior, especially for their subs, but I expect a good reliability and no other shortcoming, personally.

Per Sweetwater the Genelec 7360A is 20.75" x 18.18" x 14.37". I would not call that slim. That's a footprint and cabinet volume large enough to accommodate dual opposed 12's, or even 15's! Such a configuration would offer superior performance across the board (with the right power and signal processing), but have a much higher parts cost and weigh more for shipping.

Compare it with a SVS PB-1000 (19.4"). The 7360A is actually even slimmer than the SB-1000 (14.6").

In fact, about seven feet from me right now there's a similarly-sized subwoofer, which is one of four subs in the system. This sub is 20" wide x 20" tall x either 10" or 12" deep (don't remember, too lazy to get up and measure). The driver is an Aura NS15-992-4A with an underhung 4" voicecoil and enough copper in the motor to reduce inductance to tweeter levels. Power and processing come from a channel of a Crown DCI4|1250n. Compared to the Genelec, which do you think is the higher output, lower extending, lower distortion, sub?

Even with such a big and quite expensive driver, I wouldn't try to guess distorsion of sealed vs ported designs. But I do expect general performance to be way higher; as expected of a dead simple design built via DIY.

 

[Chromatischism]

size.

EDIT: Oh, and phase issues.

Just size. Phase "issues" aren't really issues when they occur at 20 Hz.

http://www.rythmikaudio.com/L12_specs.html

 

[sigbergaudio]

Just size. Phase "issues" aren't really issues when they occur at 20 Hz.

http://www.rythmikaudio.com/L12_specs.html

Yes, this discussion have sort of went off topic, I wasn't talking specifically about this subwoofer anymore, which I guess we're supposed to do in this thread.

Ported subwoofers in general, often matched with main speakers which are also ported - tend to be a bit more challenging to integrate. A sealed subwoofer, and then either sealed speakers or stuffing the ports of your ported speakers, typically easier.

 

[DonH56]

Hii guys, I’m new to subwoofers and considering adding one to my two channel system, I have a smaller size room at 13’x15’ with 9’ ceilings and am currently using a pair of the smaller magnepan mg12 speakers. The L12 sounds intriguing given the price point, but I’m trying to understand what benefits there would be moving up to the F12? Thanks

Mainly the amplifier. Drop an email to Rythmik or Enrico (Brian may respond but Enrico handles most of the email traffic these days), but look up the amplifiers on the Rythmik site for the details. The F12 has a little more performance and IIRC goes a hair deeper, but practically speaking (hearing? listening?) it's mostly amplifier features like PEQ and additional flexibility in crossovers and such.

 

[jhaider]

Yes, this discussion have sort of went off topic, I wasn't talking specifically about this subwoofer anymore, which I guess we're supposed to do in this thread.

Erin's review of a similar Rhymik sub was more illuminating, because he measured the driver as well as the package. That model had an excellent driver (huge excursion, excellent motor and suspension linearity over that excursion, and smooth frequency response out to 800Hz) cut off at the knee by misjudged electronics that severely limit the subwoofer's utility. Amir didn't measure the raw driver, but this sub as a whole suffered from the same handicap. I think the goal is to lower distortion, but hobbling integration to lower distortion is not a good tradeoff.

Well, I can give you size. But I'd like some proof that these resonances can't be solved.

There's a burden of proof issue here. The existence of pipe resonances in low tuned ports is obvious and uncontroversial. That they can be "solved" (really mitigated) is the extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof lies with that claimant.

As Neumann's KH120A teardown showed, you can't really guess the actual model just by looking at it.

There were some assertions made, and some people here still like to quote text from Neumann's website regarding KH120 output that is clearly in error because it is (a) implausible on its face and (b) clearly disproven by third party measurements. I prefer to go by what I can see than try to stumble through the fog of marketing.

There's also a lot of mythology around "custom drivers” in audio. It does not make much sense. The OEM drivers are the ones a company puts its own brand on and establish their reputation. So why would they reserve secret sauce for other companies?

For example, a few years back Parts Express sold some buyout Peerless SLS10's originally made for Genelec. PE sold them for $37.50. (you can discover the last selling price by going to the link, navigating to something else, and looking at "Recently Viewed.") The T/S parameters were different from the stock one, but not clearly "better." Xmax is the same. Caveat is, one never knows the origins of such buyouts: they could be overstock spare parts, or QC rejects, or something bought for a product that never sold in expected volumes, or even something ordered for a product that never launched. Still, Genelec’s SLS10 was clearly not a super hot-rodded variant of the OEM driver.

But Genelec isn't known for its use of expensive drivers. Nor is it using badly underperforming drivers.

Their main speakers seem to use pretty good drivers. Their subwoofers seem to use the cheapest thing from a good OEM they can get away with. From an engineering perspective that approach has merit: until overload most “subwoofer sound quality” comes from integration with mains and equalization to the room. That approach would make more sense to me if it led to lower price points.

Of course there's GLM, but I'd say that the real value is the assurance (maybe just an impression) that everything was done properly, no damaging corner cutting and not stone left unturned.

To me, brand name and possibly GLM (depending on how it handles bass management and multiple subwoofers) are the only things that separate this otherwise undistinguished product. That may be enough for enough people to make the product successful, and that’s fine.

Even with such a big and quite expensive driver, I wouldn't try to guess distorsion of sealed vs ported designs. But I do expect general performance to be way higher; as expected of a dead simple design built via DIY.

It wasn’t strictly DIY. The cabinet was built and finished for me by Del Won, who also built many of the Philharmonic Audio cabinets. It's also not the most fair comparison, because I don't think Genelec could sell a subwoofer with this drive unit for close to $2500. The drive unit alone was around $600 or $700, and unfortunately I don't think they've been made for a while. The processor-amp is around $1150 per channel. Adam Audio's old Tensor SW393 used this driver with DSP and similar power. I don't know what SW393 cost but my guess is $7000+. However, any number of reasonably priced current 15" woofers could be used in a closed cabinet of the same exterior dimensions, and given the same cabinet volume, offer superior performance to a average-quality 10" woofer in a meticulously designed ported box driven by 1/4 the power. Build cost would be higher to the manufacturer, and shipping costs would also grow due to the weight increase. It is clear Genelec worked hard to minimize both of those cost centers on this sub, without giving up durability.

 

[CDMC]

Hii guys, I’m new to subwoofers and considering adding one to my two channel system, I have a smaller size room at 13’x15’ with 9’ ceilings and am currently using a pair of the smaller magnepan mg12 speakers. The L12 sounds intriguing given the price point, but I’m trying to understand what benefits there would be moving up to the F12? Thanks

I have an L12 and two F15hps. The F series sounds a bit cleaner and dryer. Both are great subs, but if possible, I would recommend the F series, better yet two. I will also suggest you high pass the maggies. I had maggies for 25 years (just sold my 3.5s) and they benefit from being high passed at 80hz.

 

[Dj7675]

I just ordered my 3rd L12. If you have a medium sized room and sealed, this little sub is pretty amazing in particular with multiples. I have 2 rows of seating and want the extra output and the 3rd sub to even out bass across a wider area. I may add a 4th, after seeing how the 3rd measures.

 

[avanti1960]

Why would anyone willingly approach a task with three limbs hacked off and the 4th tied behind the back?

I suppose there are people who prefer to unscrew fasteners with their teeth rather than a screwdriver too...

Why would people paint rusty metal without sanding and priming first? Plopping a subwoofer down in a convenient spot and pressing the magic room correction button is a lazy band aid that most likely will not yield the best results. Say in the first spot you have a peak in the response right next to a null. The room correction will try to boost the null and cut the peak. Boosting to fill a null (or boosting of any kind) puts strain on the amplifier, reduces its maximum volume before clipping and dynamic range. Cutting the peak is effective but still a compromise compared to a smooth response you get from proper location and tuning.
If you take the time to position and tune properly you set up a firm foundation for the acoustic relationships so that any room correction will have an easy job - and you might not need it after all.

 

[RichB]

Why would people paint rusty metal without sanding and priming first? Plopping a subwoofer down in a convenient spot and pressing the magic room correction button is a lazy band aid that most likely will not yield the best results. Say in the first spot you have a peak in the response right next to a null. The room correction will try to boost the null and cut the peak. Boosting to fill a null (or boosting of any kind) puts strain on the amplifier, reduces its maximum volume before clipping and dynamic range. Cutting the peak is effective but still a compromise compared to a smooth response you get from proper location and tuning.
If you take the time to position and tune properly you set up a firm foundation for the acoustic relationships so that any room correction will have an easy job - and you might not need it after all.

I'll be plopping my two E22es (Salk sound) subwoofers where the fit best then measure. I'll use REW to check their performance separately then together. Then, adjust phase and use the on-board PEQ to see how far that gets me. There are a couple of options for positioning the subs.

1) both up front next to the Salon2s
2) 2 up front and 1 rear with my old Velodyne HGS15 as a test.
3) 1 up front left and one rear
4) 1 up front right and one rear.

If 1 works reasonably well, I'm done.

- Rich

 

[jhaider]

Plopping a subwoofer down in a convenient spot and pressing the magic room correction button is a lazy band aid that most likely will not yield the best results.

In the real world, people place subwoofers (note plural) where they fit in the room. Regardless, your reply is out of the scope of my comment. My point was, foreswearing the best tools and necessary steps (“calibration” and “integration” are synonyms) makes no sense.

Also, you talk big but where are the results? You can see mine in my AVR/P reviews at the link below

 

[3dbinCanada]

Why would people paint rusty metal without sanding and priming first? Plopping a subwoofer down in a convenient spot and pressing the magic room correction button is a lazy band aid that most likely will not yield the best results. Say in the first spot you have a peak in the response right next to a null. The room correction will try to boost the null and cut the peak. Boosting to fill a null (or boosting of any kind) puts strain on the amplifier, reduces its maximum volume before clipping and dynamic range. Cutting the peak is effective but still a compromise compared to a smooth response you get from proper location and tuning.
If you take the time to position and tune properly you set up a firm foundation for the acoustic relationships so that any room correction will have an easy job - and you might not need it after all.

I agree with you in principle. There are real life restrictions at play however such as WAF and physical limitations with speaker placement.

 

[3dbinCanada]

The problem with large vents is large pipe resonances.

Do you expect to hear a peak in output at the so called pipe resonance? If so your forgetting at that point that driver output is not contributing to the bass output. If you doubt that, please check databass.com and review the measurements of Rthymik's ported subs. Databass does a much more thorough review than whats found here.