• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many 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

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,238
Likes
9,371
Like many of the best American ID sub companies, Rythmik is literally a garage startup. The owner of the company is the designer/engineer of the Rythmik subwoofer. His hands are always busy with new models, updating older ones, and providing support. He has one sales and support guy who is also providing constant support. They have one person doing accounting, shipping, and all manner of other housekeeping type work. They have one or two warehouse workers moving product. That's all I'm aware of.

About a year ago I spoke to the owner, Brian, over the phone. The next time L12's were in stock I bought 2 of them and I'm very pleased. A higher than normal crossover of 100 Hz is used to give my LS50's a bit more dynamic range. Tracks which caused visible mid/woofer excursions are tamed.

Would some of you knock off the arguing. It's going nowhere and cluttering up the thread.
 

pozz

Слава Україні
Forum Donor
Editor
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
4,036
Likes
6,827
For those comparing models, these are the Data-Bass CEA 2010 results for enclosure volumes that include the tested Rythmik models.
1611166997002.png


The same, but for max SPL:
1611167800967.png


Rythmik is certainly competitive. Under 20Hz their subs power over many others. I don't have a similar way of comparing group delay, but Rythmik did as well any other reputable similarly-sized model (I checked 5 or 10, nothing systematic).

My post above was in response to those who think the servo systems lends other subjective qualities. At least measurement-wise, I haven't seen indication of that.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,808
Likes
3,749
I'm taking the scientific approach. It's called hypothesis formation.
Asking for data is one thing and there is nothing wrong with it. That's that this site is all about.

But what you're doing is different. You are suggesting that when there's an absence of data, they must be hiding something. Healthy skepticism is a good thing but this is drifting into conspiracy land, which is a plague on American society that seems to be growing lately. Sorry, I had to say it.

No, I am not promoting fanboyism. I'm saying we have no reason to believe the company is hiding anything and has been very forthcoming about their products' performance in general.
 
Last edited:

ex audiophile

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
635
Likes
806
I was only speaking about the subs that have been measured. Going by what's been measured, Rythmik outperforms JL on a price/performance scale. Would you agree with that? I suppose you could say that Rythmik is lying about the performance of their cheaper subs, since they haven't been measured, but I just see that as unlikely, given that their more expensive model measurements match what third party measurements show. Who knows, though.

Subjectively, I've never compared JL Fathoms to Rythmiks, though I have compared the F113 to the Seaton Submersive and JTR Captivator 2400, and the JL was the worst of that group, though it was the most impressive for its size(imo).

Some of it is just physics that dictates that JL subwoofers are almost guaranteed to be overpriced(relative to the best). They're prioritizing size(which limits performance) much more than companies like Rythmik or JTR. Let's look at a Fathom vs competitor example,

JL Fathom 113:
$5,000
19" x 17" x 19"
3000 watts RMS
-3dB @18Hz

JTR Captivator 4000:
$4,200
41" x 21" x 40"
4000 watts RMS(6000 watts for $300 more)
-3dB @10.5Hz

The Captivator also has fantastic distortion and group delay measurements, just like the Fathom, though both are very likely inaudible. The Fathom is very impressive for its size, but the JTR stomps it in terms of price/performance, and (ime) Rythmik generally offers greater price/performance than JTR(now that JTR raised their prices by $600). I suppose you could argue that since we don't have CEA2010 data for the JL, then we can't make any conclusions about these 2 subs :rolleyes:. But come on, do you really think that little sub can deliver more than 108dB(2m anechoic) at 10Hz and with less than 10% distortion?!? The JTR has way more woofage, more power, and all in a box that's 5x the cubic feet. There's no way, and even with the recent $600 price increase, it's still $800 cheaper.

You're right in pointing out that we don't have conclusive proof. But I do think there's enough evidence to say with a good deal of confidence that a similarly priced Rythmik will outperform it's JL Audio equivalent. Same goes for HSU, and PSA. I don't see that as a knock against JL, either. They're not lesser engineers, they just have different priorities that tend to run counter to price/performance(size/finish), and they're going for a more luxurious brand image(similar to Funk Audio).

Perhaps Eric could jump in here to provide more data?
Since we don't hear below 20, why would someone buy a relatively huge box to get lower extension? And given the significant advantages of multiple subs, i cannot imagine anyone choosing one of the giant boxes over 2 boxes of manageable size, each one extending down to 20. There's also the advantage of an 18 band parametric equalizer with microphone included with the Fathoms. Am I missing something here?
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,808
Likes
3,749
Since we don't hear below 20, why would someone buy a relatively huge box to get lower extension?
Good question.

One, any issue with group delay from the port is pushed below the level of audibility.

Two, you gain a lot of output in the area where tactile effects such as pressure are dominant. It gives a weight to music and movies that is absent on higher-tuned subs.
 

raistlin65

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
2,279
Likes
3,421
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
Good question.

One, any issue with group delay from the port is pushed below the level of audibility.

Two, you gain a lot of output in the area where tactile effects such as pressure are dominant. It gives a weight to music and movies that is absent on higher-tuned subs.

I've always thought that was the best reason, especially if someone uses their setup for music. And the reason why "ported is not good for music" claims are not very useful sweeping generalizations.

Not saying people can't chase that <20hz feel, though, since I own two 15" PSA ported subs. :)
 

3dbinCanada

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
242
100% distortion means that it is at the same level as the signal, so 0dB. For every order of magnitude you attenuate it, it's -20dB if you're thinking in terms of a THD ratio, or +20dB if you're thinking in terms of a SINAD ratio:
  • 100%=0dB
  • 10%=20dB
  • 1%=40dB
  • 0.1%=60dB
  • 0.01%=80dB
  • 0.001%=100dB
  • 0.0001%=120dB
Etc. Calculator here: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-thd.htm

What kind of distortion are we talking about and where in the frequency range does that lie. Human hearing isnt linear across the frequency range either.
 

ex audiophile

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
635
Likes
806
I get the desire for the lower frequencies, however the PITA factor seems exponentially related to the size of the box(es) and we all have to choose where on that curve is best for each of us. I would argue that the benefits of multiple (smaller) subs are such that having an even response throughout the room is generally more desirable than the occasional rustle of your pant leg. And of course there's the WAF, lol.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,559
Likes
1,703
Location
California
So if I address your speculation with a reasonable answer, as it's not too hard to figure out, will you drop this? Or you just going to use it as an opportunity to continue to argue to suit whatever your agenda is?

Good news, I found some CEA-2010 measurements for a 12" Rhythmik sub! The F12 is reported out in Brent Butterworth's database.

Butterworth reports CEA-2010 as peak values at 1m, Whereas Audioholics reports CEA-2010 as RMS at 2m. So the correction should be Butterworth -6dB (doubling distance) +-3dB (RMS/peak) = -9dB. Using this correction:

1611171631136.png


Ouch. I did this very quickly, so perhaps someone can double-check me (source + math). I'm happy to be corrected.

Edit: Corrected measurement distance for Butterworth/Audioholics (thanks @Sancus for catching this)
 
Last edited:

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,559
Likes
1,703
Location
California
And here are CEA-2010 data exclusively from Brent Butterworth's measurement database (i.e. single source).
Please note that these are CEA-2010 reported as peak values at 1m (so subtract 9dB to convert to data-bass figures)

1611172393687.png


The data here are consistent with the hypothesis that the smaller Rhythmik subs (i.e. the ones not sent to Audioholics) don't necessarily outperform the other widely available subs available in their size range (at least when comparing the common 12" size).

Edit: Corrected measurement distance (thanks @Sancus for catching this)
 
Last edited:

pozz

Слава Україні
Forum Donor
Editor
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
4,036
Likes
6,827

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,926
Likes
7,643
Location
Canada
Butterworth reports CEA-2010 as peak values at 2m, Whereas Audioholics reports CEA-2010 as RMS at 1m.
Butterworth = 1M Peak.
Audioholics = 2M RMS.

Ouch. I did this very quickly, so perhaps someone can double-check me (source + math). I'm happy to be corrected.

-9dB is correct though so it looks like you just confused the explanation :)

But, I'm very confused what this argument is about. Multiple people have noted that JL seems to have the best size/performance, but Rythmik has much better price/performance. Considering you can buy their 18" sealed sub(F18) for less money than the JL E112, this appears obviously correct. Rythmik's size/performance isn't terrible though, the F12 beats all the sealed SVS 12" subs for example.

I too am skeptical about Rythmik's claims of servo superiority, as it doesn't seem to play out in terms of output capability, but perhaps there is some difference in lower output distortion, I dunno. Regardless, though, they seem to make pretty good subs for the money.

I suspect the Rythmik size/performance sweet spot is the E15HP which would be 100.1dB @ 20hz at 17" x 20"(18 w/o grille). Assuming their chart can be trusted, anyhow. But I suspect that it can be, as if you cross-reference the data-bass F18, and Butterworth F12 measurements, the F18 is +8.6db, and 1dB margin of error across 3 completely different testers is pretty fair.

E: I bet the JL f113 is better(couldn't find measurements) than the E15HP, but it also costs $5000 which... really? WTF.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,559
Likes
1,703
Location
California
Butterworth = 1M Peak.
Audioholics = 2M RMS.

Thanks for catching this, @Sancus, I corrected my prior posts to avoid confusion.
But, I'm very confused what this argument is about. Multiple people have noted that JL seems to have the best size/performance, but Rythmik has much better price/performance. Considering you can buy their 18" sealed sub(F18) for less money than the JL E112, this appears obviously correct. Rythmik's size/performance isn't terrible though, the F12 beats all the sealed SVS 12" subs for example.

Ah, let me clarify. From a pure performance standpoint, we already knew that Rythmik's larger subs (15", 18", 25") are high performing, based on available CEA-2010 data. However, up until this point (at least in this thread), I noticed a paucity of data available for Rythmik's subs (i.e. 12"). I theorized that perhaps Rythmik's 12" and smaller subs weren't especially high performing compared to the competition, and that was why the manufacturer released only vague performance data (in the form of a 20Hz-only output comparison chart for its product line) and was not aggressive about sending the 12" models out for testing. I also questioned whether the servo design offered any particular advantage in this size range vs. other competitor non-servo subwoofers in the 12" or smaller range. Again, if Rythmik's 12" model lineup, each featuring their servo design, was superior to everything else out there, I would expect the CEA-2010 (or other THD vs. freq) data to be blasted everywhere. A number of Rythmik owners didn't like this idea of course.

However, hopefully this discussion is settled, now that it turns out, there are CEA-2010 data for a Rythmik 12" sub. Clearly, there are other 12" subwoofers, none of which featuring a servo, that outperform the Rythmik F12. Some of them, I might point out, are similar in price. For instance:
Hsu VTF-2 MK5 - $539
Outlaw Ultra-X12 - $679
SVS PB-2000 - $899 (and includes a BT app w/3-band PEQ)
So, I'm not even sure if I can agree that Rythmik's 12" subs, specifically, have the best price/performance!

I too am skeptical about Rythmik's claims of servo superiority, as it doesn't seem to play out in terms of output capability, but perhaps there is some difference in lower output distortion, I dunno. Regardless, though, they seem to make pretty good subs for the money.

And this was my original hypothesis - that, at least for the 12" or smaller range, perhaps the servo didn't confer significant advantages over non-servo models, particularly non-servo models that are optimized in other ways.
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,926
Likes
7,643
Location
Canada
So, I'm not even sure if I can agree that Rythmik's 12" subs, specifically, have the best price/performance!
And this was my original hypothesis - that, at least for the 12" or smaller range, perhaps the servo didn't confer significant advantages over non-servo models, particularly non-servo models that are optimized in other ways.

I don't think Rythmik has the BEST price/performance, just better than JL. Your examples are all ported... of course you can build a cheaper, larger ported sub that beats the F12 on output. That is why you add ports to things :p

I don't know of anything similar-sized, sealed, and cheaper that beats it on output. I would be interested if such a thing exists, for sure!
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,336
Likes
6,705
Audioholics has slowed down a lot on subwoofer measurements since the Josh Ricci days. And nobody has really stepped up to do as much enthusiast class subwoofer testing as he did.

Which is unfortunate :(. Would be great to have CEA2010 data for current models once again.
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,336
Likes
6,705
For those comparing models, these are the Data-Bass CEA 2010 results for enclosure volumes that include the tested Rythmik models.
View attachment 107401

The same, but for max SPL:
View attachment 107403

Rythmik is certainly competitive. Under 20Hz their subs power over many others. I don't have a similar way of comparing group delay, but Rythmik did as well any other reputable similarly-sized model (I checked 5 or 10, nothing systematic).

My post above was in response to those who think the servo systems lends other subjective qualities. At least measurement-wise, I haven't seen indication of that.

Yeah, I don't think we're really arguing it's the servo tech that make Rythmik better(price/performance) than JL Audio. It's the bigger/more drivers, and bigger boxes that they use that gives them better price/performance.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,559
Likes
1,703
Location
California
I don't think Rythmik has the BEST price/performance, just better than JL. Your examples are all ported... of course you can build a cheaper, larger ported sub that beats the F12 on output. That is why you add ports to things :p

Ha. I think adding a port is fair game! Especially if we're talking about an additional 6-10dB of usable output in the low end!

I don't know of anything similar-sized, sealed, and cheaper that beats it on output. I would be interested if such a thing exists, for sure!

I guess that's fair. Maybe the F12 does have a niche after all. Although I will say that a used JL E112, readily available, would cost about the same as an F12, which is not readily available used.

Yeah, I don't think we're really arguing it's the servo tech that make Rythmik better(price/performance) than JL Audio. It's the bigger/more drivers, and bigger boxes that they use that gives them better price/performance.

Right, and I was interested specifically in the smaller Rythmik offerings. Yes, Rythmik as a company makes larger/bigger models that outperform more expensive smaller competitors, but that's to be expected.
 
Last edited:

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,808
Likes
3,749
Hsu VTF-2 MK5 - $539
Outlaw Ultra-X12 - $679
SVS PB-2000 - $899 (and includes a BT app w/3-band PEQ)
So, I'm not even sure if I can agree that Rythmik's 12" subs, specifically, have the best price/performance!
Did you really just compare vented subs to a small sealed sub? :facepalm:
 
Top Bottom