Subwoofer Comparison

[Breeze98]

So looking at subs for mainly music. The Monolith THX 10" is well-regarded, especially when discounted, and has been measured to be pretty flat up to 200Hz or so. However, it has less output at 40-60Hz area compared to the level-entry sealed SVS1000 pro, as the chart demonstrates. So wouldn't the SVS be the better sub in a medium room, say 1,300 to 2,000ft3, for mainly music playback? And if opting for ported (as some here advocate, including the OP), would you not be better off with beefier output at 40-60Hz?

I've probably answered my own questions...lolz.. but shame it's only the 10" Mono of that range that gets discounted, in my country at least, while rival subs get pricier.

 

[sonitus mirus]

So looking at subs for mainly music. The Monolith THX 10" is well-regarded, especially when discounted, and has been measured to be pretty flat up to 200Hz or so. However, it has less output at 40-60Hz area compared to the level-entry sealed SVS1000 pro, as the chart demonstrates *. So wouldn't the SVS be the better sub in a medium room, say 1,300 to 2,000ft3, for mainly music playback? And if opting for ported (as some here advocate, including the OP), would you not be better off with beefier output at 40-60Hz?

I've probably answered my own questions...lolz.. but shame it's only the 10" Mono of that range that gets discounted, in my country at least, while rival subs get pricier.

View attachment 178189

*https://www.avforums.com/threads/ho...you-need-in-your-system.2379927/post-30017886

Keep in mind that the Monolith is a ported subwoofer while the SVS SB-1000 Pro is sealed. Being sealed, room gain is in play, and with a 20ft room dimension, that would be about a 28Hz wavelength and below. Free bass!

But to compare more accurately, take a look at the sealed specifications for the the Monolith.

Monolith by Monoprice M-10 V2 10in THX Certified Select 500 Watt Powered Subwoofer - Monoprice.com

Monolith™ by Monoprice™10" THX® Certified Select 500‑Watt Powered SubwooferMassive Output. Low Distortion. THX® Certified.The Monolith™ THX® Certified Select S

www.monoprice.com

Both are reportedly great subwoofers. I love my SVS subs for their tuning apps as much as their performance.

 

[taisho]

So looking at subs for mainly music. The Monolith THX 10" is well-regarded, especially when discounted, and has been measured to be pretty flat up to 200Hz or so. However, it has less output at 40-60Hz area compared to the level-entry sealed SVS1000 pro, as the chart demonstrates. So wouldn't the SVS be the better sub in a medium room, say 1,300 to 2,000ft3, for mainly music playback? And if opting for ported (as some here advocate, including the OP), would you not be better off with beefier output at 40-60Hz?

I've probably answered my own questions...lolz.. but shame it's only the 10" Mono of that range that gets discounted, in my country at least, while rival subs get pricier.

View attachment 178189

Apart from more pronounced 16-40Hz, the Monoprice has a flatter frequency response above this range. More output doesn't mean better.

 

[Tom C]

True, more output doesn’t mean better. But one of the beautiful things about the @sweetchaos spreadsheet is that the subwoofers have been rated for output at a specific threshold for distortion level, so you can use a quantity with quality metric (how much and how good) as the basis for comparison.

 

[Badou]

There's some info i still can't find after days of searching the web :
If you buy 2 or 3 subs instead of 1, and use MSO to tackle room modes and equalization, how the 1 or 2 additional subs will play in the overall maximum SPL ?

For example : if the optimum subwoofer for my room is the PB-2000, if i buy 2 or 3 SB-1000, will it be enouth ? and how can i caculate this precisely ?

 

[Bill Brown]

From my reading and then experience, the first two will definitely add to the extension/max output capabilities, the third a bit less. The fourth, and sometimes the third (mine doesn't), can actually decrease output, somewhat paradoxically. They certainly add to mode mitigation, smoothness, this their primary purpose/advantage.

Adding a third is optimum in price v performance, additional subs with smaller incremental gain (though the increase in smoothness I obtained below). I would definitely rather have 3 less expensive subs than 1 massive.

I don't think any of the simulators are capable of the accuracy required to calculate it precisely, unfortunately. Too many room-specific variables. If I had to bet, though, I would predict that three would be awesome.

You might find my experience in this post illustrative:

Subs & Satellites - can it be done right?

- Finally, many are concerned about localization of the subs and 80hz seems to be the number people agree on. I also don't think the physics supports this notion. And it is the 90-120hz that I always find the most difficult to get smooth in my room and I don't think I could do it without...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Bill

 

[sweetchaos]

Improvements:
- Added CEA-2010-A data for Arendal 1961 1S and 1V, provided by Audioholics

 

[sweetchaos]

On the topic of choosing either SVS vs Monoprice subs, here's Erin's recommendation:

 

[Zeeb]

Will a good 10 inch subwoofer play more accurately at low volume than a good 12 inch? (small room 12 x 13 ft)

I have almost decided on adding an SVS SB-1000 Pro (12 inch) to my Genelec 8030s.

But I haven't ruled out the Dynaudio 9S (9.5 inch) and Martin Logan Dynamo 600X (10 inch).

The spreadsheet shows max SPLs - Is it fair to say a sub with higher max SPLs will also be more accurate at low SPLs? Or will a 12 inch driver not 'kick into gear' at low volumes as much as a 10 inch?

(I realise in general that low frequencies are harder to hear at lower volumes.)

 

[thulle]

Will a good 10 inch subwoofer play more accurately at low volume than a good 12 inch? (small room 12 x 13 ft)

You can't really generalize like that, it all depends on the driver and its implementation. You got to compare the measurements.

 

[Zeeb]

Ok, so sounds like in practice there isn't an issue with good 12 inch subwoofers being a bit crap at low volumes compared to 10 inch subwoofers.

I've noticed though that 'studio subwoofers' (with balanced i/o and high-pass monitor outputs) tend to have smaller drivers. But hopefully the SVS SB-1000 Pro will allow me to have my sub-bass cake and eat it at low volumes too.

 

[Jshaw81]

Thanks, SC. I was comparing SVS outlet prices at 0900 ET this morning. I got them in my cart and they were gone by the time I wrote my post and got back over there.

I picked up the Starke. I had their black friday sale in my cart all weekend. 2 subs for $838 delivered. Could do worse.

And yes, I was using your spreadsheet to get me there. Thanks much!!!

How do you like the Starke subs? I just ordered two SW-15s a few weeks ago, but for March delivery. Can’t wait to get them.

 

[AudioLover73]

Ok, so sounds like in practice there isn't an issue with good 12 inch subwoofers being a bit crap at low volumes compared to 10 inch subwoofers.

I've noticed though that 'studio subwoofers' (with balanced i/o and high-pass monitor outputs) tend to have smaller drivers. But hopefully the SVS SB-1000 Pro will allow me to have my sub-bass cake and eat it at low volumes too.

I don't see how a smaller driver could possibly have any advantage over a larger driver other than physical size (in general - for example, comparing an SVS PB1000 with a PB2000 as opposed to comparing a really good small subwoofer with a cheap larger subwoofer). Larger drivers are more efficient, handle more power and produce less distortion.

 

[AudioLover73]

I'm tired of hearing people claim that most music doesn't go lower than 30Hz. Sure, maybe the music you listen to doesn't but that may not be true for others. A lot of pop music today dips far below 30Hz. When I set out to chose which subwoofer model to acquire, I told myself that the lowest note I'm after is the low C of a pipe organ (16Hz). I listen to a lot of electronic music, and I can tell you there is a ton of content far below 30Hz. I know of an extremely popular song that dips to 7Hz.

So what do I have now in my music-only system? Well I have 4 SVS PB16 Ultras, and I let me tell you, hearing them is completely different than imagining what they might sound like. Even a single PB16 blew my mind when I listened to it, and I'm no stranger to bass. Without even turning it that high, they shook the kitchen up one floor so violently that a ceramic cup fell and broke, and other random objects fell on the floor. I'm seriously worried about shaking the drywall off.

But having experienced 16Hz at these levels, now I'm wondering what I'm missing an octave below what the PB16 is capable of reproducing. Sometimes I ask myself if I should've gotten a Rhythmik FV18 so that the 7Hz tone wouldn't be silent in that song. I know some of you may be thinking that you can't hear below 20Hz but let me tell you that I can certainly hear below 20Hz, and sure I may not hear a tone at 7Hz, but I would definitely feel the compressing and decompressing of the air in the room, which is a joy to experience.

But for now I'm very happy with my PB16s. These will probably be my endgame subs. Visual appearance was a strong factor, so that's why I chose them for their metal curved grills and piano gloss black finish. Otherwise I would have just made them myself or purchased a few Marty flat packs. I've had my eye on Monoprice subwoofers but I don't like what I see in the customer reviews regarding their customer service. I have experienced SVS's customer service, and they go above and beyond what most companies do. If Monoprice would do the same, they could do as well as SVS if not better because it seems that their subs are comparable (some even better), and they offer gloss black finishes on their lower ported models.

Anyway, I really like this spreadsheet. At first I was wondering why 2m RMS wasn't used but then I realized some manufacturers advertise peak numbers, so this would reduce the likelihood that people would be mislead by their specs.

 

[Willem]

I notice in Sweetchaos' spreadsheet that some subwoofers have a far flatter response than others. To me, that would seem to be at least as important as ultimate extension or SPL at e.g. 80 Hz, and yet relative flatness is rarely mentioned explicitly. To give two examples of otherwise somewhat similar subs: the KEF Kube10b has a 13.7 dB lower output at 20 Hz compared to 50 Hz (i.e. 93.4 dB vs 107.1), whereas the SVS SB1000Pro drops down 23.5 dB over the same range (i.e. 91 vs. 114.5 dB).

 

[tecnogadget]

@Willem I wouldn’t care at ALL about subwoofer flatness. I wouldn’t discriminate between 2 subs that have same extension and outputs levels but different frequency response shape, unless one of them is completely wrong, or depending on very specific strategy based on listening space (90% to 95% of the time this isn’t the case for users).

Why ? Because that beautiful frequency response you are looking at is the result of CEA 2010 standard (as if the sub was in the free field). Once you put ANY sub inside a room, its response won’t resemble that graphic at all, room modes will modulate the hell of that response with nasty peaks and dips.

The most important data is how low the sub can hit, and how much dB + distortion the sub can output at different frequencies. After that DSP will be 100% needed to get a pretty frequency response out of any sub inside listening spaces.

 

[AudioLover73]

That’s not frequency response though. He’s basing those numbers off of the sub’s maximum output. The actual frequency response of the sub at “normal” levels is significantly flatter. In this day and age with built-in dsp, there’s little excuse for a sub not to have a flat response.

@Willem I wouldn’t care at ALL about subwoofer flatness. I wouldn’t discriminate between 2 subs that have same extension and outputs levels but different frequency response shape, unless one of them is completely wrong, or depending on very specific strategy based on listening space (90% to 95% of the time this isn’t the case for users).

Why ? Because that beautiful frequency response you are looking at is the result of CEA 2010 standard (as if the sub was in the free field). Once you put ANY sub inside a room, its response won’t resemble that graphic at all, room modes will modulate the hell of that response with nasty peaks and dips.

The most important data is how low the sub can hit, and how much dB + distortion the sub can output at different frequencies. After that DSP will be 100% needed to get a pretty frequency response out of any sub inside listening spaces.

 

[FrantzM]

@Willem I wouldn’t care at ALL about subwoofer flatness. I wouldn’t discriminate between 2 subs that have same extension and outputs levels but different frequency response shape, unless one of them is completely wrong, or depending on very specific strategy based on listening space (90% to 95% of the time this isn’t the case for users).

Why ? Because that beautiful frequency response you are looking at is the result of CEA 2010 standard (as if the sub was in the free field). Once you put ANY sub inside a room, its response won’t resemble that graphic at all, room modes will modulate the hell of that response with nasty peaks and dips.

The most important data is how low the sub can hit, and how much dB + distortion the sub can output at different frequencies. After that DSP will be 100% needed to get a pretty frequency response out of any sub inside listening spaces.

+1...
+1000

 

[FrantzM]

That’s not frequency response though. He’s basing those numbers off of the sub’s maximum output. The actual frequency response of the sub at “normal” levels is significantly flatter. In this day and age with built-in dsp, there’s little excuse for a sub not to have a flat response.

It bears repeating that... however flat the response is in anechoic, once the subs gets in a real room the response shall not be flat.
Maximum SPL and THD are the determinant in subwoofers. Not flatness of FR...

 

[Willem]

I realize that one would need dsp eq to deal with room modes (I use dsp room eq myself), but even so a sub with a drooping response is less performant in an important and challenging part of the spectrum.