What I been saying for over a year now. And Tim. And everyone with a DBA. Two more will be even better. What matters most with subs is how many, not which ones.
Are big subwoofers viable for 2 channel music?
In thinking about subwoofers to get for a large future listening space
(30' x 30'). So far there seems to be a lot of great options for smaller
subs for music.. such as the rel s812. Now my main focus will be music
but I do plan to do some home theater on the system and I do enjoy subs
that reach low and have strong but clear sub-bass. Would a large sealed
sub still be able to provide clean tight bass that digs low and thus
satisfy both duties. Can it ever match the speed and precision of a pair
or more of rel 812s? Something like PSA S7201 or Captivator RS2?
A realize a smaller sub has a smaller moving mass and thus for a given level of power would be faster than a bigger sub with a bigger moving mass (driver mass). But a large sub would have to move less to achieve the same SPL and would reach lower.
Anyhow what do you guys think? Thanks.
A realize a smaller sub has a smaller moving mass and thus for a given level of power would be faster than a bigger sub with a bigger moving mass (driver mass). But a large sub would have to move less to achieve the same SPL and would reach lower.
Anyhow what do you guys think? Thanks.
Showing 8 responses by millercarbon
Understand a smoother response from 4 subs before cal puts less stress on the filtering algorithm, No that's missing the point. Equalizing or getting flat response is only part of the problem. Another equally important factor is smooth bass is fast articulate bass. That's because bass energy is in the room whether its measured flat at your EQ location or anywhere else. To get flat bass with EQ always requires turning it up somewhere. Even if its not EQ'd louder still there's extra bass energy somewhere in the room for the simple fact that's the way bass works- there's always reinforcement somewhere, cancellation somewhere else. Nulls and sickouts aren't a problem. Reinforcement is, because that extra bass energy hangs around taking time to dissipate which until it does results in muddy bass. This probably more than anything else is why DBA bass is so exceptionally fast and articulate. More subs is diminishing returns only because once you have reduced one set of really big modes to two smaller ones they're half as big. Then form 2 to 4 half as big again. To cut them in half again means doubling to 8 which as Duke says is grounds for divorce. But I went from 4 to 5 and it sure did not seem like diminishing returns to me. In any case the returns are relative to DBA not EQ, which is apples and oranges. |
Maybe that's why the Tekton subs work so well. DBA stands for distributed bass array. DBA says nothing about what or where, only that the bass is distributed among many drivers in different locations. One of the early papers even discusses four subs stacked on atop the other. Two Tekton subs is 8 woofers is more than my 5 is totally a DBA. Someone saying a BDA is not that great compared to Columns, when two columns is a DBA, is only showing they don't quite get the concept of a DBA. More is always better. Been saying that about a hundred times now. |
Oh, he’s right all right. You simply disagree. That doesn’t make him wrong. In this case it makes you wrong. Probably your shoddy reasoning led you astray. Just look at what you wrote: Duke’s (and Earl Geddes’) findings on this are by all accounts scientifically sound and very well thought out, but the whole concept, through your promoting it not least, revolves from a mindset of rigidity and reductionism that fails to give leeway to views, and not least experience of opposing nature. Well, yeah, it takes feelings and "views" out of the equation. That is kind of the whole point of science and logic. You could look it up. Only, why bother? The beauty of science and logic is anyone can learn to use them. They work very different from what you do, twisting words around trying to score rhetorical points. But unlike your word games they do in fact actually work. |
Everything Tim posted is right, especially this one bit here: You will not be able to localize any of the deep bass coming from any of your subs but you'll still perceive the deep bass as stereo, with the deep bass seeming to originate from the proper instrument in the sound stage image illusion. This seems almost contradictory. But it is true. Emphatically. My system https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 is set up with 2 Dayton amps and I have tested all possible setup combinations- including stereo and mono. There is no difference running stereo vs mono. In fact just about everything else makes a difference EXCEPT stereo/mono. Yet this is emphatically NOT to say the bass does not SEEM to be in stereo. There is a whole recording angle involved here I'm not even going into. Just read the comments I have made and the comment Mike posted after his visit. The bass comes from everywhere and nowhere, and is perfectly integrated with the sound stage. Recording after recording the bass with my DBA has all the character and imaging as everything else from the midrange on up- whether or not the subs are run stereo or mono. Trust me on this- not only do the subs disappear, but when you get it right all the speakers and the whole freaking room disappears. |
luisma31- And again I'm not trying to promote my subs, PSA, rhytmik, excellent gear which I respect, but (again) quantity (4 or more) and ability to integrate them is more important than the actual brand. millercarbon, first post- With subs it is not a question of which. It is a question of how many. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 luisma31 again- Miller's 1st reply was right on target luisma31- Just that Duke of Audiokinesis if I'm not mistaken was the 1st "commercially" to approach the array, the concept and theory comes from Geddes I believe? Not sure he was the first, or even if he is the most prolific supporter, but around here he may as well be. The distributed bass array concept is not new. It has been around a couple decades now. Probably was Geddes who "discovered" it. As with so many things on this subject Duke has nailed the many reasons why so important a revolution in audio has yet to gain much traction with the masses. DBA doesn't fit the standard bigger/newer/more powerful marketing mantra. DBA doesn't provide any advantage to any particular manufacturer or design. DBA doesn't help sell at all, because think about it, what manufacturer is gonna come out and say woweee! Our sub is so good you need four of them! Right. DBA is hard to understand. There's guys here had it explained to em a hundred times now, still don't get it. The one thing DBA has going for it is, it actually works. Been just over a year now that I've had mine. A lot of research was done first. One of the bigger surprises was yes, this guy Geddes, figured this out as part of a Phd dissertation. Painstakingly measured and mapped out bass response in a whole bunch of room with a whole bunch of speakers. Took the raw data, applied the physics, figured it out. Genius! The physics of DBA is rock solid. At one point in the planning stages of my DBA project Duke thanked me for having the faith to do this. But as I told him then there was no faith involved. It is a matter of pure logic. This is the most rock-solid speaker project a guy could ever hope to find. There simply is no way of screwing it up. You build four, or more, and it just works. Its only when you try and do it with one or two that you have problems. Impossible, insurmountable problems. Literally impossible. Yet even now there are those who persist in pushing the same flawed paradigm that always and everywhere leads only to failure. With subs its not a question of which. Its a question of how many. Its not often a doctoral thesis can be boiled down to something so simple. But there you go. Thank you, Dr Geddes! |
OP must have missed the very first post. Tim and I are on the same page. In fact we have almost identical subs. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 Main difference is I built mine, with help from him and Duke, while he bought Duke's Swarm. Also I have an additional 5th sub, the Talon Roc. Which is how I know the more the better. Like the first post said, its not a question of which, its how many, and the more the better. Subs in a system are like horsepower in a car- more is always better. |
With subs it is not a question of which. It is a question of how many. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 Get whichever ones float your boat. Just be sure to get four. Or more. |