Upgrading sub to get a live feel.


I currently have a set of JBL 4319 which has its history as 4310. They are studio monitors and as a result they sound like studio monitors you hear everything, but they lack the physical presence on the low end. They have wonderful mid range and voice presence. I also have a pair of SVS SB1000 to help with the low end. 

I want to eventually upgrade to JBL 4367 with upgraded pair of subs, for this reason, but in the mean time would a sub upgrade be considered before the speakers. 


thewatcher101
@mijostyn, point well taken. Other than the Turbo tie rods and the Bilstein cartridges inside the Boge struts in the back, the car is stock and I intend to keep it that way. I've owned the car for 1/3 of its life. It's not a looker and has over 200,000 miles, but the tech servicing the car keeps it in tip top shape and it's always fun to drive. So now it's time to send it to the spa to get it spruced up a bit.
mcreyn:"You can also continue to believe that your 2.7s extend with any authority to 35 hz, they start to roll off in the 50hz range and will quickly slap the panels when trying to reproduce any type of deep bass. If you would high pass the 2.7s they will sound less dark and sound cleaner after being relieved of trying to handle the deep bass. Did I mention I owned a pair of 2.7s for more than a decade which were run both full range and with an active crossover?
Those that get so myopically focused as to believe there is only, or decide they already know it all, never learn and never develop further."

Hello mcreyn,

      You're likely not aware of how well your 2.7QRs reproduced bass because of the amp or amps you used to drive them. In my experience, they performed better over their entire frequency range with more powerful amps that have high damping factors. 
    The 2.7s are 3-way speakers and actually have a rather large planar-magnetic dipole bass section in each panel (625 sq. inches). I was previously driving mine with an Aragon stereo class AB amp that was rated at 400 watts into the 2.7's 4 ohm load and the bass was decent. Their bass performance noticeably improved when I switched amps to a Class D Audio stereo amp that was rated at 440 watts at 4 ohms and with a damping factor >1,000 and later they produced the best bass I'd ever heard from them when I switched amps again to a pair of D-Sonic class D mono-blocks rated at 1,200 watts each at 4 oms and the same very high damping factors.
    Your statement that "You can also continue to believe that your 2.7s extend with any authority to 35 hz, they start to roll off in the 50hz range and will quickly slap the panels when trying to reproduce any type of deep bass." is definitely and categorically false when the 2.7s are driven by sufficiently powerful amps with very high damping factors. I didn't measure the exact in-room bass extension but, by ear, the 2.7's rated bass extension of 35 Hz seems accurate and there was absolutely zero panel slapping occurring at anytime. I've had that occur on previous Magnepans I've owned and know what that sounds like.
    I think the 2.7's bass by themselves would more than meet the needs and expectations of most, including myself, but it lacked a bit of the visceral bass you feel as well as hear that gives the perception you're listening to live music unless I cranked the volume up to halfway. I don't always like to listen to music that loud so I continued to use the two 12" subs. This worked well but I thought the bass detail, impact, dynamics and blending with the 2.7s could be improved upon.
    I began thinking a pair of more expensive and higher quality subs might improve the performance in these areas but stumbled on the Audio Kinesis Swarm 4-sub DBA concept during my search for a very high quality pair of subs for about $5K or less.  I decided to give the Swarm an in-home free tryout first at $2,800. I think I may have previously mentioned how well the Swarm 4-sub DBA system performed in all the important bass areas in my system.
    You stated: " Those that get so myopically focused as to believe there is only, or decide they already know it all, never learn and never develop further."
    I think my path described above disproves the accusations that I'm myopic, believe there's only one solution, know it all and never develop further. The truth is I was willing to try two different amps of a type I'd never used before, gained practical bass system knowledge and experience by utilizing several different supplemental bass methods in my system such as a single sub, dual subs and even a sophisticated and advanced method using four subs strategically positioned and configured. Now that I've thought and written about some of my audio journey,  I know that none of your descriptions apply and the more fitting description would be open-minded, willing and daring enough to try various methods and gear to gain knowledge and experience. Perhaps I should change my user name to audioadventurer.
     Finally, you stated " If you would high pass the 2.7s they will sound less dark and sound cleaner after being relieved of trying to handle the deep bass. Did I mention I owned a pair of 2.7s for more than a decade which were run both full range and with an active crossover?"
    Were they black and did you sell them to a guy from Indiana that met you in a parking lot in Dayton, Ohio for the $1,200 transaction?  If so, that was me.  Hah!, that would be unbelievable.   Maybe you'd have kept them if you had a better matched amp or amps to drive them.
     I did try running the 2.7s high pass filtered through the Swarm's amp/control unit, trying various crossover settings between 100 and 230 Hz and was expecting the 2.7's to benefit.  I believe I didn't get the typical sound quality gains from high passing the mains because my D-Sonic mono-block amps, at 1,200 watts each, were not overtaxed driving the 2.7s full-range. 


Later,
Tim
Clio09, any 911 can be a valuable car as long as it has not been wreck, is not rusting and has not been modified. You want to use the factory mounting points for speakers and electronics that fit in the factory space. Outboard woofer enclosures are fine. No cutting or drilling metal! If the car is a renegade then the sky is the limit.
Excuse me for the last post. I'm on some pretty heavy drugs right now and my mind is stuttering. The tie rods and struts can always be returned to stock. When was the last engine rebuild? You can always make it a looker again if you put the money into it but for a fun driver you just have to keep up with the basic stuff. 911s from 78 on are all galvanized so you really don't have to worry about the paint that much. It is just an aesthetic thing. The external rubber parts can get pretty moldy if the car was parked in the sun. They are easy to replace with modern rubber. Good that you have an indie you can trust. Not easy to find. Thing about 911s is you can make them go forever:) 
@mijostyn, what engine rebuild, lol, 208k miles (112k with me) and not even a recommendation of a valve job on the horizon (has had a transmission rebuild though). The clear coat is flaking off the trunk lid due to some foreign substance that dripped on it while I had it parked at SFO during a business trip, but other than that I just need to wash it more, lol. Interior is very presentable other than the typical dash cracks and the AC stopped working years ago. Don't really need it around here though. Most techs rave about the 3.2L engines as being among the best Porsche ever made (my tech has a car out there with 450k and one valve job on it). Sure the '68-'73 series looked sexier, but the '84-'89 series cars were always being recommended to me when I looked for a replacement for my '72 Targa.