Is There A Big Difference Between Subwoofers From Different Manufacturers


This is likely the last thread I’ll be posting about subwoofers.

I was just wondering if there is really a big difference between subwoofers from different manufacturers if the quality of the subs (which is mostly governed by the specifications) are fairly similar. Also, with the assumption that the set up is properly done to ensure a seamless integration with the main speakers.

There have been many comparisons or experiences on subwoofers shared by members here on this forum, people who upgraded their old sub to a new seemingly superior sub. Or people who added additional subs to the system which contributed to an overall improved bass performance. I’m referring to the former, the comparison between single subs.

To cut to the chase, I understand high quality subwoofers which are essentially higher spec designs will usually produce better performance than lower spec subs. When people upgrade their subs, I assume the new subs are superior in terms of specification, either a larger sub with larger drivers, higher power output of the internal amplifier, lower frequency extension or the combination of any of the above.

Has anyone compared subs which are fairly similar in quality or performance when upgrading from the old sub?

Example. If someone upgraded from a REL T7x to an SVS SB-3000 or SB-4000, I suppose the SVS would be an upgrade since they come with larger drivers, higher power output, everything superior spec-wise. What if the models are closely spec’d? Will the subs sound fairly similar or closer to each other ?

Say, the comparison between

SVS SB-3000/4000
Rythmik F12SE / F15
REL S510 / S812 / Carbon Special or Limited

I presume the subs will still sound slightly different but the difference may not be night and day if the quality or specifications are closely matched?

 

ryder

@ryder , sure. If you compare a range of 12" subwoofers there is a lot of difference. The single most important factor in subs is the enclosure. It has to be stiff, non resonant and heavy. The best spec to compare is weight. The heavier subwoofer is likely to be better. What the enclosure looks like means nothing. The best subs on the market use a balanced force approach. They put two identical drivers opposite from each other in phase. The Newtonian forces cancel and the enclosure does not shake. Magico makes it's subs this way. KEF uses this technique in the Blade. 

I build my own. I can make them heavier and stiffer than any company would care to for cost reasons. There are probably over 100 sub drivers on the market and many of them are excellent and even better than the units used by the manufacturers again for cost reasons. 

REL's system was created to cheaply get subs into peoples system (they don't have to buy additional items). It is a relatively poor way to do it and it fails to take advantage of a subwoofer's best advantages. People using that system should know that there are additional benefits they can grow into and really improve the performance of their system.

Rules of the Road.

Subwoofers have to be in corners or against walls.

Subwoofers have to be in phase with and time aligned with the main speakers.

Crossover should be between 80 and 100 Hz

Multiple subs in a symmetrical array are mandatory (at least two)

Bigger drivers are better. 10" is the smallest that should be used. At least four 10" subs would be needed. Two 12s will suffice.  

Similarly, apart from sound quality the design comes first for me.

 

Okay. I suppose that if I were coming at this from a technical point, I might feel the same. But as an audiophile, the sound quality is my first concern. I learned long ago that when theory and reality collide, reality wins every time.

But even as a designer, SQ should not give way to technical jargon IMO.

My subs are tucked away behind furniture so appearance isn't important.I've had a  Def Tech sub,a couple of Dayton subs, and now two HSUs and one SVS 2000.As you move up the line the cabinets are better quality and overall more attention to every aspect that results in improving sound quality should be obvious, not just bigger drivers and a few dbs lower.

 I really like the SVS app.Adjusting everything from the listening chair is wonderful.I'm far from being tech savvy and it's incredibly easy for me.

It is not just a rigid box design by itself, or throwing more money at it, or the latest app that carves out the contenders from the pretenders. There are three main challenges that we face. The link below and its condensed and edited article extract is one of the best reads on the issues of introducing subs into a two-channel system.

http://ultrafi.com/why-everybody-needs- ... subwoofer/

Why Everybody Needs a Good Subwoofer……And Why a Really Good Subwoofer is so Hard to Find

INTRO

Audiophiles and music lovers are missing out on one of the most dramatic improvements they can make to their audio system: Powered Subwoofers. Most audiophiles won’t even use the word “subwoofer” in public, let alone plug one in to their precious systems. There is a kind of snobbery that exists in the world of high-end audio aimed primarily at receivers, car audio, home theater and especially subwoofers. 

As a matter of fact, subwoofers are responsible for many people disliking both car audio and home theater, since it is the subwoofer in both of those situations that tends to call attention to the system and cause many of the problems.

The truth of the matter is that subwoofers have fully earned their bad reputation. They usually suck. Most of them sound boomy, muddy and out of control with an obnoxious bass overhang that lingers so long as to blur most of the musical information up until the next bass note is struck. We have all had our fair share of bad subwoofer experiences, whether it’s from a nearby car thumping so loud that it appears to be bouncing up off the road, or a home theater with such overblown bass that it causes you to feel nauseous half-way through the movie. You would think that high-end audio manufacturers would be above all of that, but you would be wrong. In many cases, their subwoofers are almost as bad as the mass-market models because they too, are trying to capitalize on the home theater trend that is sweeping the land.

(1) QUALITY BUILD SUBWOOFER AMP and its POWER SUPPLY IS EXPENSIVE. 

You see, it’s very difficult and expensive to build a good subwoofer. One reason is that a sub has to move a tremendous amount of air, which places big demands on the driver (or drivers). Moving lots of air requires a lot of power and that means an amp with a huge power supply, which can cost huge money.

(2) QUALITY BUILD SUBWOOFER BOX BUILD  IS EXPENSIVE 

Finally, in trying to move all of this air, the driver (or drivers) which operate in an enclosure, create tremendous pressure inside of the box itself. The cabinet walls must be able to handle this pressure without flexing or resonating. Building such a box involves heavy damping and bracing which gets very expensive. When you consider these requirements, you quickly realize that it is virtually impossible to build a really good subwoofer (I mean good enough for a high-end music system) for under $2000. Yet most of the subwoofers out there sell for between $800 and $1200. Manufacturers do this because their marketing research has shown them that that is what people want to spend on a sub, never mind the fact that what people want to spend and what it takes to get the job done right may be two different things. The result is that even most high-end manufacturers are putting out poorly constructed subwoofers that just don’t sound very good.

(3) JUST THROWING MORE-MONEY AT IT IS A MIRAGE, it’s the CROSSOVERS that matter

I don’t want to give you the impression that anyone who really wants to can build a good subwoofer so long as they are willing to throw enough money at the problem, because that really isn’t true either. There are some pretty expensive and well-constructed subwoofers out there that you would never want to plug into your music system because they would most certainly make the sound worse.

Why? Because of their crossovers. 

A crossover is inserted into your signal path in order to remove the lowest frequencies (the deep bass) from your main speakers so that they no longer have to do all of the dirty work. The deep bass will instead be dealt with by the subwoofer.

The #1 benefit of adding a high quality subwoofer to your system is not how it further extends the bass response, but how it can dramatically improve the sound of your existing power amp and main speakers from the midrange on up. That, my friends, is by far the most compelling reason to add a sub to your high-end music system.

Once your main speakers are freed from the burden of making deep bass, they will sound cleaner, faster and clearer, especially in the midrange and midbass. They will also image way better because there will be far less air pressure and therefore resonance and vibration affecting their cabinet walls. And since the power required to make the deep bass is provided by the subwoofer’s built-in amplifier, your main power amp will be free from that burden and begin to sound like a much more powerful amplifier.

The one big problem with all of this is that you need a crossover to roll off the deep bass in your system and achieve all of these benefits.

And the crossover that comes with almost every subwoofer on the market will cause more damage to your signal than can be overcome by these benefits. That is the main reason that audiophiles refuse to consider adding subwoofers, even very expensive onres with well built cabinets.