Vandersteen Sub woofers v Rythmik Subs

I, too, have an issue with my McCormack DNA-1 monoblocks, in that they have pretty low impedance-like yours.
Using balanced, I can only get to 22Kohms. And, I think going lower would be beneficial. So, either I go to unbalanced or have SMc Audio redo their work. I am leaving it for a time when I can reconfigure my wiring.
Until then, I still have the Atma MA-1's and Ayre MXR's, so I am in no hurry. (It's nice to have options).
Bob

The WX-2 seems to be designed for single ended (RCA) only. In that configuration, you can select the 10k input impedance to start with and listen. It does have one lower position below 10k and that is 5k which is pretty much the limits for the WX-2. Make sure of your amps input impedance, because if you go accidentally to low, you can over tax the amp modules in the 2Wq sub. I had this conversation with Richard Vandersteen and got  quite the scolding for suggesting going to low on the impedance selection. He said his warranty would not cover this type of damage to the amp modules, so use caution and a low volume level to start with.

As far as what impedance to match the cross-overs at - I noticed that my amp has an impedance of 10k ohm for balanced connections. Does this mean that I should match up the WX-2 to 10K? I have heard that people often find that they get better results if they go one step lower. so in this case I would go to 7500K? Does the WX-2 go this low?

The HP-5's are really the way to go. If you buy them new, make sure you give them ample break-in time. When I first got mine, new out of the box, they sounded only marginally better than the X-2's. But after 4 to 6 weeks, WOW, did the sound ever open up! It caught me by surprise when I started to notice it. At first I wasn't sure what I had done to improve the system so greatly. But then I remembered. I tried the X-2's again and the sound just closed in. The bloom was gone, air around the instruments and vocals almost totally dis-appeared. I was in a financially constrained condition also, but eventually was able to spring for the new HP-5's. If you ever find a used pair with good batteries, go for it! And good luck!

so got rid of the Samson S-convert and now running strictly unbalanced with my TS connectors, I must say the biggest difference has been the decrease in background noise. On LPs the back ground hiss is barely noticeable and have to get right up to the speaker to hear it - and this is at a decent volume to boot. I did not get a proper sense of differences in sound stage since I have been unable to position speakers for prime listening at this point. But I have been very pleased with the results so far and only wish I would have done this years ago.

Because of this it will help me implement the 2wq subs in a cheaper manner (starting with the WX-2 variable cross-over to figure out the best setting for my amp, then purchasing the fixed cross-overs based off those results) - Although I do wish I could get the HP-5's, it's not realistic for me at this point financially.

Now if I can just find a good deal on a 2wq or two starting on July 1st...
(Financially this would be the optimal time)

Hello wolf_garcia,

     " Moving a speaker around is about as analog as you can get, and I like it."

     Since you seem to enjoy experimenting, I thought you might want to try positioning your REL-Q150e at your listening position then walk around your room listening for the spot you think the bass sounds best.  
    It's a very good possibility that locating your Q-150e at the spot you thought the bass sounded best will provide the same bass quality at your listening position.  
     If the spot makes sense functionally and aesthetically, you may be pleasantly surprised at the sound quality.

Just something to try,
   Tim

As I'm not a DSP user for home audio (or pro audio for that matter, although I utilize graphic and parametric EQ in pro mixing work) as it seems to rob a little of the soul from music (my imagination possibly, and this opinion is based on listening at length to a friend's rig). Note there's a REL Q150e on Ebay for cheap...I have one and it's amazing. I get the swarm idea as it makes perfect sense, but the REL "high level" thing also makes sense, and works for me. I now have my smaller (downfiring 8" speaker) REL in a permanent corner behind the left main, and my Q150e now can be moved away from the corner if I want it closer to the right main speaker, and that offers some other tonal response options I like to hear. Moving a speaker around is about as analog as you can get, and I like it.

M7 high pass filter in cast box, with carbon fiber cover, guts are different, especially the battery config for DBS
they are around $2k at retail
i got them when I had 5a and went from a SE power amp to a balanced Ayre, so I cannot comment on sonic change with only the filter as a variable.
i do however trust that RV would not put out a dolled up sonic equivalent...
the change to Ayre and M7 was staggering...
i sold the M7 filters here on agon a few months ago, astute buyer...$1300, they have WEL pigtails....

bstat
the blender can be thought of as a diffuser of sorts i guess
hope you get some quiet time

download the sub manuals and you can read all the cautions on grounds and hots...

you do need to be careful to not fry your sub amp......grounds and hots hyper critical.....

What do you mean by this?
Also, just got my TS plugs last night, so itching to see if a simpler run from the pre-amp to the amp (although now unbalanced) improves sound quality.
I do have an open floor plan in my main listening area which is open to the kitchen/dining room, so I have to deal with blenders, running water, and screaming kids, so not conducive to critical listening (It's actually rare when I get the house to myself...grrrrr...) Hopefully I will be able to do some good tests in the next couple days, however.

@bondmanp  I believe Tomic 601 is referring to the M7 HPA power amps new to Vandersteen's line.

without digging around much on your specific power amp, you are likey to find the unbalanced input sounds better......there are extra parts ( phase inverter, etc) in the balanced path and we can pretty much assume your amp is not a balanced topology internally.....

but listen to both and decide......

you do need to be careful to not fry your sub amp......grounds and hots hyper critical.....

the fixed Vandy filters pale sonically to the M5 or the even better M7

street price xlr and se about the same, but imo xlr much more rare as people usually move in that direction....but not always......

@noble100 and others interested in room acoustics: which other fora are you active in?

I'm interested in discussing and posting some measurements (which Agon doesn't allow) and would live to engage others who share that interest.

Cheers!

BTW if anyone knows someone who could use 100k  X-1 crossovers I will send them for free as I have the M5-HP.  

Nope, the balanced and unbalanced M5-HP crossovers are basically the same price (approx $700 used). The fixed crossovers are much cheaper (say $250).
In my opinion, using balanced connectors would be the best way to go as cable length and composition make less contribution to the sound performance.(Don't take my word for it, PM Ralph at atmasphere).
Bob

If the TS connections sound better than the XLR with the Samson (which is the hope since I will be removing additional stuff) I will be a happy camper since the unbalanced Vandersteen cross-overs are significantly cheaper if I'm not mistaken. (Honestly I would rather buy an extra sub than a cross over - at least to start off with...lol)

Yep 1/4" inch mic/headphone plug same thing as a TS plug (I think TS is used more in the pro audio world) and my amp is a pro audio amp. It's a behringer EP2500, it's got a lot of power and was inexpensive so that's why I bought it. It was pretty loud when I first got it due to the on board cooling fan that sounded like a jet turbine, so I did the fan mod and now it's very very quiet. I remember I bought it with the samson s-convert since it didn't accept RCAs but it did take XLR. I thought at the time that I could benefit from the balanced connections, but I've never done a direct comparison between the XLR and the TS. I just bought those plugs from Amazon, so I will let you know how the comparison turns out.

Tim
it is a TS plug, see Sweetwater.....
one channel, tip and shield

bstatmeister,

     I'm familiar with unbalanced rca and balanced XLR connections but I've never heard of a TS connector.  

     From the Amazon adapter you linked to, it seems you're 'TS' connector is what I consider a'1/4"'  connector typically used for mics and headhones. 
     I'm assuming your amp acepts l+r mono 1/4" plugs, correct.?  Can you tell us the brand and model of your current amp? 
      I'm not stating you're definitely wrong in calling. a 1/4" plug a TS plug, just that I've never heard anyone refer to a 1/4" plug as a TS  plug.
Thanks,
  Tim  

@OP,
The Vandersteen M5-HP crossover comes in XLR config.
If you nail down the setting, you can buy fixed crossovers from Vandersteen for a couple hundred bucks from any Vandersteen dealer, or Johnny at Audioconnection.
B

If I get rid of the samson, looks like I need something like this:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B078R2FBC9/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1526755689&sr=8-2-spons...

those DIP switches win best sound at show after show after show......
but as I have said before, they can be eliminated
just get the M7 amplifiers.....
and for any true DIY tweaker
easy to pull them and solder around....

but ya know

even solder has a sound

@noble100 Sounds like Harvey's office on Suits.😛

Hi hifiman,

     Another independently verified example of how well the distributed bass array system works.
     I'll start the incorporation process for our new company: The hifiman5 and noble100 Home and Business Sound System Consulting Group.
     Please locate and fully outfit our new storefront location, including phones, computers, staff along with fully operational Vandy and Audio Kinesis showrooms.
     I think a June 1st Grand Opening should be our goal.
Thanks,
   Tim
P.S.  I'll need a 65" OLED hdtv, leather couches and chairs, a fireplace and a hot tub in my no less than 30 x 30 ft. corner office with a view.
Thanks,
  Tim

@noble100  +1  Very good advice.  In my modest sized room (13.5' X18') two Vandy subs.  provide a powerful, even deep bass response.  

Hello hifiman5

Yes, I understand and agree with you about how relieving the main amp’s responsibility of amplifying bass signals is beneficial both to the amp’s power output requirements and the overall sound since the amp is then able to devote itself to only amplifying the mid and high frequency signals. This should result in a more effortless and dynamic sound for everything above the bass.
I would just suggest that, if the goal is a matching effortless and dynamic sound for the system bass, more than a single sub is the optimum solution..
In my experience, employing a distributed bass system of at least 2 subs, will deliver the revelatory sound performance in the bass that you accurately described for the mids and highs once an amp is relieved of amplifying all bass frequencies.
Again, however, I advise that using just a single sub will not bring bass response closer to this goal, using 2 will begin the improvement, using 3 will continue the improvement and using 4 subs is the magic number that will allow reaching the goal.
I understand if some are skeptical but the results I describe above are scientifically proven via experiments that have been independently verified not only by acoustic scientists but also by regular people who have purchased and deployed distributed bass array systems such as myself and many others.
I’m just trying to spread the word on how well this concept actually works. My initial opinion of the sound results upon first listen remains the same today: it almost magically produces excellent bass without any DSP, parametric equalizing, room treatments, mics or room correction software or hardware.
My only cautions to bstatmeister would be to not just plunk down his single Vandy sub in a convenient spot arbitrarily. He’ll get much better results following my positioning procedure previously described:

1. Hookup your sub and place it at your desired listening position.
2. Play music that has good and repetitive bass.
3. Walk around your room in a systematic manner listening for an exact spot where the bass sounds the best to you.
4. Once this spot is located, reposition your sub to this exact spot.
5. To test results, sit at your designated listening position and repay the same music.

As you would expect, bass response will be improved as additional subs are added to the room. 2 subs, properly positioned, will give better results than 1. Repeat the above procedure for each additional sub you desire to buy and bass response will continue to improve.
I don’t advise using more than 4 subs unless you enjoy wasting your money. Any gains made in bass response in your room beyond 4 subs will be incrementally much smaller than the obviously more noticeable gains made when adding subs #2-4.
CAUTION: Disregarding any of the above utilitarian advice is at your own peril and may result in the forfeiture of all consultation fees you may have paid.

Love,
Tim
XOX

@noble100   Agree with you that adapters should be avoided but the M5-HP is remarkably transparent.  An important thing to keep in mind is the effect of freeing your main amp from having to produce deep bass.  The treble and midrange open up with more dynamic flow without giving up first class deep bass that the Vandys produce.  

     If one wanted the finest signal integrity and purity for optimum performance from a music based 2-ch system, is it beneficial to use an amp with non-standard connections,  use multiple connector type adapters and use an external crossover with multiple signal affecting dip switches?
     
     I think we all know the answer to this, right?

Tim

Now I remember why I have the samson s-convert. My amp does not support RCA Jack's. Just TS or XLR. I suppose I could buy a plug that converts RCA to TS and give that a whirl?

i would be inclined to run single ended get converters out of tge way..
Conrad Johnson and many, many others do magical things with SE

there are two versions of the 5 filter with different DIP switch, I believe 6-8 or 8-10 positions
more DIP positions indicate a more recent filter but a quick call to Hanford, or competent dealer would tell ya, both are perfectly good
the AQ Fire cables are very good, SKY is better but we are talking small stuff here and that assumes you have Sky level cables elsewhere.....

@bstatmeister  I'll try to answer your questions as clearly as I am able.  The "pigtail" is the interconnect cable coming out of the M5-HP.  You plug your preamp main out interconnect in the one side of the rectangular M5-HP and then the "pigtail" end plugs into the input jacks on the back of your power amplifier.  Before doing all of that plugging in, you need to open the crossover box and find the tiny "dip switches"  In my case my amp has a 100k ohm input impedance.  I have my M5-HP set at one setting below that which is 75k.  The manual suggests that you try to the actual input impedance setting of your amp and one below, I believe.  For me, that one step below gave me the most seamless integration of the subwoofers into my system.

Hope this helps!

PS  I would take the Samson out and use unbalanced cables.  If you need to purchase a good pair of cables, they are around including, of course, here on Audiogon.

What are the differences between the dip switches and the pig tails? Is there a default?
What about the M5-HP with balanced connections? As a nice monkey wrench, my current preamp situation is this:
preamp out with unbalanced RCA into a Samson S-convert, then outputted to my amp with balanced cables. (in this situation i could get the balanced M5-HP, no?)

Am I better off just taking the samosn s-convert out since it's just one more thing that breaks the signal, or am I better off using the samson with the balanced cables, since balanced, when all things considered is better than unbalanced? Thanks for the feedback. Learning lots!

Seems like the biggest differences in the M5-HP are the dip switches and pigtails. My pair have the Audioquest Fire pigtails.

easy the jumpers are actually DIP switches, just know with certainty the input impedence of your amp !

failing that you can use Vandertones and a Multi-meter to get it right !

m5 in single ended do come up used and Randy at Optimal Enchantment in Santa Monica always seems to have an extra used set, as will many Vandersteen dealers

try to get batteries with some years left and Audioquest Sky pigtails :)

Are the M5-HPs variable like the  MX-2? or do you have to order them fixed based off the impedance of the amp?

@bstatmeister - You are 100% on the same page as I was when I started to look for a sub.  I did exactly what you did, picking up one 2Wq, then several months later a second one, placing each in the front corner outside the mains.  And, when the material calls for it, these two subs can shake and pressurize the room quite well, IME.  One thing I would also plan on, is eventually upgrading to the M5-HP crossovers.  Not cheap, but worth every penny, IMHO.

The Ampeg bass stack ( which was a sob to move ) was in the left corner.....

Get yourself a Leica Disto ($59 on Amazon ) and hone your setup

Lol. Does it make a difference? I think RV just said "a corner" for his recommended placement. Not sure he specified right or left if you only have one...

Oh man
as a 2 bit $&@%#++++ hack of a bass player
“ just hammer A till I give ya the look”

cause the real rebel failed to show ( again ) for practice,

why do you guys always put us in the LEFT corner... ?

For me what's most important is to have the best experience possible in the sweet spot. How the bass does in other parts of the room is not as important as that precious, precious sweet spot. I think my game plan is to get 1 vandy sub to start with, then add a second once funds recover. (I will put the first one in the corner behind the left front main, then once I get a second, I will put it in the corner behind the right front main). Based off what I've heard I will not find anything as musical as the Vandersteen sub. Being musical is paramount. Although I enjoy home theater and would love to get the "dishes shaking off the shelves" effect, I really only care about how good I can get my 2-channel  analog system to sound.

" noble100 ,
I would not discount the Sub 3 until I listened to it. If Mr. V. discontinues a very good sub in favor of a new one, it must be a significant improvement.
And, Vandersteen's use of an external high pass crossover was very much 'thinking outside of the box' 30 years ago, so maybe Johnny isn't exaggerating.
I understand the concept of using multiple subs to eliminate/ reduce room nodes, but perhaps integrating an equalizer can achieve something the same. As I have not heard, nor know how they are set up, I can't say definitely how well/badly they work.
Maybe they will be in the store when I get some time to go later this summer-along with some other Audiogon members.
Bob"

Hi Bob,

     It was not my intention to criticize the Vandy Sub Three at all.  I  stated the Sub Three seems like a very good sub for $2,500 and it appears to be a worthy replacement for the very good but now discontinued 2QW.
      My main point was that no single sub, not even the most expensive and highest quality sub in existence, is capable of reducing the majority of bass standing waves and resultant bass peaks and nulls in any given room.  In fact, using only a single sub probably creates a net increase in   bass standing waves in most rooms. 
     Unfortunately, an equalizer is not able to eliminate, or compensate for, the vast majority of bass standing waves that inevitably result from having a single sub in a room.  The only scientifically proven methods to reduce bass standing waves in any given room are either expensive, inefficient and bulky bass traps on the back end or the moderately expensive, efficient and much more effective method of multiple subs in a distributed bass array configuration on the front end.    
     Again, I think the Vandersteen Sub Three seems like an excellent sub.  However,  I also think using a minimum of 2 and up to 4 of them will provide the best results.     
    My motivation is just to spread the word about how well the distributed bass array system has worked for me and how it will likely work for others in their rooms using their choice of subs. Deploying 2 subs is good, 3 is better and 4 is best.
   Tim                             

" What's the crossover frequency and slope of the Swarm system? I understand the xo is before the Swarm amp and all subs operate in the same frequency range, summing up L & R."

Hi lewinskih01,

   I actually own the Audio Kinesis Debra bass system (a very similar system to the Swarm that I bought from James Romeyn Music & Audio in Utah that he is licensed to sell under the Audio Kinesis brand).  Both systems use the same 1K watt sub amp that contains an active xo with a continuously variable low pass cutoff filter that ranges from 20-200 Hz  that I usually set at 40 Hz.  Sorry, I'm not sure of the slope.  All subs operate flat from 20-100 Hz with 113 db output @ 20 Hz, are 4 ohms, are fed the same l+r summed mono signal, have 10" drivers and can handle 600Wrms. 

     Here'a link to the exact Debra bass system I own:

   http://jamesromeyn.com/old-pages/home-audio-gear/dsa-1-0-distributed-subwoofer-array-5-pieces-4k-usd... 

Tim

Great bass everywhere in the room would not be prime Vandersteen design objective
great bass and the rest at a very optimal listening position is.
hence lots of out of the box  ideas implemented over the many years by RV ... out of the box which is a metaphor for innovation, not more boxes = out of the box....
anyway just a few that work together as a system to create the stereo illusion...
power factor corrected amp optimized for drivers in sub
transfer function of the main amplifier preserved - very important to preserving lower midrange phase integrity
high pass filter adjustable for amp
time and phase coherent
minimum baffle
eq bands not at fractional octaves to address common room nodes ( that one if ya pay attention is way out of equalizer box theory....
push pull aluminum cone sub in the 5 etc
carbon fiber cabinet inside a cabinet..
the list goes on

@noble100 , @enginedr1960,

What's the crossover frequency and slope of the Swarm system? I understand the xo is before the Swarm amp and all subs operate in the same frequency range, summing up L & R.

My system is set up so the sealed subs cross at 80Hz to the mains, which have dual 6.5" midwoofers per side on vented boxes. I'm building new speakers with dual 10" per side in sealed boxes and hoping to reduce the xo frequency to maybe 60Hz.

@noble100 ,
I would not discount the Sub 3 until I listened to it. If Mr. V. discontinues a very good sub in favor of a new one, it must be a significant improvement.
And, Vandersteen's use of an external high pass crossover was very much 'thinking outside of the box' 30 years ago, so maybe Johnny isn't exaggerating.
I understand the concept of using multiple subs to eliminate/ reduce room nodes, but perhaps integrating an equalizer can achieve something the same. As I have not heard, nor know how they are set up, I can't say definitely how well/badly they work. 
Maybe they will be in the store when I get some time to go later this summer-along with some other Audiogon members.
Bob

" noble100 ,
I think Johnny was referring to the integrated equalizer in the new Sub 3.
As far as I know, there are no subs with equalizers incorporated."

Hi gdnrbob,

     Thanks for responding for audioconnection/Johnny.  

     I understand audioconnection/Johnny is a home audio retailer with Audio Connect in N.J. that sells Vandersteen products.  He seems to be justifiably enthused about Vandersteen's soon to be available Sub Three.  It appears to be a very nice sub for $2,500.
     However, implying that incorporating a 7-band analog equalizer in the Sub Three demonstrates 'thinking outside the box' is a bit of a stretch.  The truth is that it's basically a conventional sub with an equalizer added.  
     An equalizer will not be able to eliminate, or compensate for, the vast majority of bass standing waves that inevitably result from having a single sub in a room.  With proper positioning, the best one could expect to achieve would be good bass response at the preferred listening position.  This will hold true for all single sub systems, no matter the cost or competency of the single sub employed. 
     As I understand it, analog equalizers such as those incorporated in the Sub Three and the Swarm's sub amplifier are useful mainly in compensating for any bass 'slap' present in some rooms that is caused by the reflection of bass sound waves off the floor and to the ceiling.

     The above is not just my opinion.  It is a summary of the results of years of scientific research and experiments conducted by acoustical scientists Earl Geddes, Floyd O'toole and Todd Welti, among others.  
     These experts state that deploying 2 subs will result in fewer bass standing waves and better bass response in the room.  Deploying 3 subs will further significantly reduce bass standing waves, 4 subs will eliminate the vast majority and any additional subs beyond 4 will only result in smaller incremental improvements  in bass response in any given room.
     However, utilizing 4 Vandersteen Sub Threes would cost about $10,000 while the complete Audio Kinesis Swarm or Debra 4 sub systems both are priced at $3,000 or less and likely are less intrusive.  

     I'd imagine the Sub Threes would definitely produce more bass than the Swarm system but I'm not certain which system's bass would sound best and, if the Sub Three system did sound best, whether it sounds $7,000 better. 
 Tim     
  

Hi sonicjoy,

     Okay, thanks.  I'll check out the Acoustic Fields website.

     What's great about the Swarm system, when properly set up, is that it requires no room treatments, DSP, equalization,  or room correction mics and software.  It's really kind of magical how eliminating the vast majority of bass standing waves, and the resultant bass peaks and nulls, in the room results in such excellent bass performance throughout the entire room.  I think it's something you have to hear for yourself to really believe.  It sounds too good to be true when just verbally described.  It really took a lot of research and convincing for me to overcome my skepticism and give the distributed bass array system a try.  But I am so grateful I did and now feel like I owe it to other members to spread the word.
     I think this could be considered a type of room treatment because it prevents bass response issues at the root cause, which is likely a lot more effective than trying to compensate or room treat for the inevitable standing waves once they actually exist in the room.  Bass room treatments are typically much larger and less effective than mid-range and treble room treatments in my experience.  
Thanks,
  Tim

nobel100
Thanks for the kind words. I bet your system sounds great. Would love to try the swarm out.

So far we seem to mostly focus on trying to solve the bass problems with loudspeakers(subs). However the other way that seems to get less attention is to fix the room.

Lately I have been hanging out at Acoustic Fields web site learning all about room treatment from the owner Dennis Foley. He has a daily youtube channel. Very interesting stuff that may make you rethink some things you think you know about acoustics in listening rooms as well as recording studios. They design room treatment systems for some of the best recording studios and high end listening rooms. But thats a whole new can of worms and a topic for a new thread.

Cheers.

@noble100 ,
I think Johnny was referring to the integrated equalizer in the new Sub 3.
As far as I know, there are no subs with equalizers incorporated.
B