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
Apart from more pronounced 16-40Hz, the Monoprice has a flatter frequency response above this range. More output doesn't mean better.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
You can't really generalize like that, it all depends on the driver and its implementation. You got to compare the measurements.Will a good 10 inch subwoofer play more accurately at low volume than a good 12 inch? (small room 12 x 13 ft)
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.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!!!
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.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.
@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...@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.
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.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.