• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Rythmik L12 Subwoofer Review

3dbinCanada

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
232

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,360
Likes
3,324
I'm aware of the test of their 18" and dual 15" designs. But when I'm interested in a 12" or 13" model, which uses a completely different driver and much smaller cabinet, I simply cannot generalize the results. That's like driving a Porsche 911 and assuming a Cayenne is going to handle the same.

In fact, I find it kind of suspicious that there are no CEA-2010 tests available for the 12" and 13" sized Rhythmik subs, particularly since there are a lot well-designed offerings from SVS, JL, etc. I ended up considering, but not purchasing a Rhythmik because the manufacturer didn't have any directly comparable data to send me (another red flag).
The nice thing about Rythmik is that they provide a relative ranking for all of their subs on their website. So just use that and add or subtract as needed.

Rythmik subs vastly outperform JL Audio subs, especially for the money. Some members at AVS changed from JL to Rythmik and said there was a big difference in both quantity and quality of bass.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,647
Location
California
The nice thing about Rythmik is that they provide a relative ranking for all of their subs on their website. So just use that and add or subtract as needed.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "relative ranking" is simply the difference in dB "output" at 20Hz. It says nothing about the amount of THD at that dB output, nor does it describe the output and THD levels at other frequencies. It's a fairly meaningless piece of information, if you ask me. It's the subwoofer equivalent of saying "the THD was 0.0001%" (yes, at what output level and frequency) or "the frequency response was 20Hz-20kHz" (yes, and at what +/-dB tolerance).

Rythmik subs vastly outperform JL Audio subs, especially for the money. Some members at AVS changed from JL to Rythmik and said there was a big difference in both quantity and quality of bass.

Where is the objective evidence behind this claim? Some people also say SVS subs outperform JL, and I can tell you that neither my SB-2000 Pro of the SB-3000 I bought instead of a Rhythmik outperform my JL Fathom F112.[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:

3dbinCanada

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
232
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "relative ranking" is simply the difference in dB "output" at 20Hz. It says nothing about the amount of THD at that dB output, nor does it describe the output and THD levels at other frequencies. It's a fairly meaningless piece of information, if you ask me. It's the subwoofer equivalent of saying "the THD was 0.0001%" (yes, at what output level and frequency) or "the frequency response was 20Hz-20kHz" (yes, and at what +/-dB tolerance).

Since bass is at the extreme end of human hearing sensitivity, bass can have up to 10% distortion and you will not be able to distinguish it from the actual bass note. ALL Rythmik subs employ servo control which greatly reduces the distortion at output unless you are seriously trying to over drive them. I admit that their chart could hold more information but it is only to be used as a quick reference guide on the output capabilities across their model range. It is useless for a person if they don't own a Rythmik sub or have experience with Rythmik but it is very useful for those who own or have had experience with their subs.
 
Last edited:

Alice of Old Vincennes

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
1,093
Likes
695
I would also go with a ported sub, especially from Rythmik and their servo technology. I have an entry leveL LV-12R rear ported version and that gave me more than enough bass in a room much larger than yours. I set the controls for extension, not max output and I was always told to turn it down.
I use it for both music and movies.
Same problem. Either turn off or turn down.
 

3dbinCanada

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
232

pozz

Слава Україні
Forum Donor
Editor
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
4,036
Likes
6,717
bass can have up to 10% distortion
Please stop uncritically repeating this threshold figure. 10% distortion is -20dB. That's very high and falls well into the main dynamic range of music.

Sure, there's a lot that goes into perception, not the least of which is that many people don't even know what distortion sounds like and have no personal reference for clean sound. It's also no good to have unrealistic distortion expectations for your equipment. But that's no reason to repeat random things like "0.1% is inaudible", "1% is inaudible".

https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?elib=5147
1611149015520.png

Where is the objective evidence behind this claim?
I agree. Rythmik is good, but they provide scant distortion figures and other measurements. Measured group delay for their subs and others according to Data-Bass is roughly the same. This also goes for the CEA 2010 results: good, but there's no evidence of a wide gap between servo and non-servo designs. My impression is that the main effect of the servo system is a more even frequency response across a wider range of levels, and that at least some of the improvements it offers are compensations for driver deficiencies. It would be very informative to compare recent Klippel-assisted sub driver designs with the Rythmik drivers, and we already have the latter because of @hardisj's F12 review.
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,806
Likes
2,405
Location
Massachusetts
Please stop uncritically repeating this threshold figure. 10% distortion is -20dB. That's very high and falls well into the main dynamic range of music.

Sure, there's a lot that goes into perception, not the least of which is that many people don't even know what distortion sounds like and have no personal reference for clean sound. It's also no good to have unrealistic distortion expectations for your equipment. But that's no reason to repeat random things like "0.1% is inaudible", "1% is inaudible".

https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?elib=5147
View attachment 107362

I agree. Rythmik is good, but they provide scant distortion figures and other measurements. Measured group delay for their subs and others according to Data-Bass is roughly the same. This also goes for the CEA 2010 results: good, but there's no evidence of a wide gap between servo and non-servo designs. My impression is that the main effect of the servo system is a more even frequency response across a wider range of levels, and that at least some of the improvements it offers are compensations for driver deficiencies. It would be very informative to compare recent Klippel-assisted sub driver designs with the Rythmik drivers, and we already have the latter because of @hardisj's F12 review.

There is a great deal of detail on many subs that include many distortion measurements.

Data-Bass: Subwoofer Measurements (data-bass.com)

- Rich
 

pozz

Слава Україні
Forum Donor
Editor
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
4,036
Likes
6,717

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,308
Likes
6,558
Where is the objective evidence behind this claim? Some people also say SVS subs outperform JL, and I can tell you that neither my SB-2000 Pro of the SB-3000 I bought instead of a Rhythmik outperform my JL Fathom F112.

You can see objective data (CEA2010) here. At a given price point, Rythmik subwoofers do outperform JL subwoofers, and by a decent margin. They generally show comparable distortion/group delay(both low enough to very likely be inaudible), but better distortion limited output. That's not to say that the JL subs aren't impressive though. IMHO, JL Audio is the king of size/performance, while Rythmik is the king of price/performance. Go with what you care about more.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,647
Location
California
Then you'd note that Rythmik has sent many of their subwoofers for testing, unlike some competitors. :)

What's interesting is that I only see CEA-2010 data on data-bass.com for Rhythmik's 15", 18", and 25" subs. There's nothing for subs in the 8" to 13" range. As a reminder, the OP was asking about Rhythmik's L12 sub. 12 stands for 12".

When I contacted Rhythmik direction, they could not provide me with CEA-2010 data for their 12" subs. To me, this suggests that their servo-whatever technology is not effective on subwoofers smaller than 15", and that their 12" subwoofers probably don't perform particularly better than the competition. Perhaps someone has actual objective measurements to share instead of opinions?
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,647
Location
California
You can see objective data (CEA2010) here. At a given price point, Rythmik subwoofers do outperform JL subwoofers, and by a decent margin. They generally show comparable distortion/group delay(both low enough to very likely be inaudible), but better distortion limited output. That's not to say that the JL subs aren't impressive though. IMHO, JL Audio is the king of size/performance, while Rythmik is the king of price/performance. Go with what you care about more.

The OP was asking about the Rhythmik L12. Can you point to where you found CEA-2010 data on the L12 or any Rhythmik 12" subwoofer for that matter? I'd be interested.

Also, can you clarify how you were able to determine that Rhythmik subs outperform JL Audio subs? The link you provided only has CEA-2010 for Rhythmik's 15", 18", and 25" subwoofers and JL's mid-line (not Fathom) 10" and 12" E-series. Not sure how you can draw any conclusions from that, but wondering if you have additional data you could share.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,360
Likes
3,324
What's interesting is that I only see CEA-2010 data on data-bass.com for Rhythmik's 15", 18", and 25" subs. There's nothing for subs in the 8" to 13" range. As a reminder, the OP was asking about Rhythmik's L12 sub. 12 stands for 12".

When I contacted Rhythmik direction, they could not provide me with CEA-2010 data for their 12" subs. To me, this suggests that their servo-whatever technology is not effective on subwoofers smaller than 15", and that their 12" subwoofers probably don't perform particularly better than the competition. Perhaps someone has actual objective measurements to share instead of opinions?
I don't know why you would reach that conclusion??

On performance, the Rythmik website provides a ranking where all the subs are compared at 20 Hz. Yes that's one frequency but it's the bedrock of all their subs, and already more data than the vast majority provide. The differences between their subs of different configurations mostly boils down to output and connectivity.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,537
Likes
1,647
Location
California
I don't know why you would reach that conclusion??

On performance, the Rythmik website provides a ranking where all the subs are compared at 20 Hz. Yes that's one frequency but it's the bedrock of all their subs, and already more data than the vast majority provide. The differences between their subs of different configurations mostly boils down to output and connectivity.

As I wrote before:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "relative ranking" is simply the difference in dB "output" at 20Hz. It says nothing about the amount of THD at that dB output, nor does it describe the output and THD levels at other frequencies. It's a fairly meaningless piece of information, if you ask me. It's the subwoofer equivalent of saying "the THD was 0.0001%" (yes, at what output level and frequency) or "the frequency response was 20Hz-20kHz" (yes, and at what +/-dB tolerance).
 

3dbinCanada

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
232
Please stop uncritically repeating this threshold figure. 10% distortion is -20dB. That's very high and falls well into the main dynamic range of music.

Sure, there's a lot that goes into perception, not the least of which is that many people don't even know what distortion sounds like and have no personal reference for clean sound. It's also no good to have unrealistic distortion expectations for your equipment. But that's no reason to repeat random things like "0.1% is inaudible", "1% is inaudible".

https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?elib=5147
View attachment 107362

I agree. Rythmik is good, but they provide scant distortion figures and other measurements. Measured group delay for their subs and others according to Data-Bass is roughly the same. This also goes for the CEA 2010 results: good, but there's no evidence of a wide gap between servo and non-servo designs. My impression is that the main effect of the servo system is a more even frequency response across a wider range of levels, and that at least some of the improvements it offers are compensations for driver deficiencies. It would be very informative to compare recent Klippel-assisted sub driver designs with the Rythmik drivers, and we already have the latter because of @hardisj's F12 review.

Where do you come up with your figure that 10% distortion is -20dB. Please elaborate.
 
Top Bottom