2. speakers
  3. 177470-3610

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
ieales's avatar
ieales
1,201 posts
 

Rel subs are made as well as any commercial subwoofer.

Don't think I said anything about their build quality. My objection to them is the direction the company took. More bling and flash rather than useful features. WAF vs HPF

audiorusty
270 posts
 

Hey ryder,

Not sure if this is the kind of information that you are looking for. In my system I am currently using 2) SVS SB4ooo's, 1) Rythmik F12SE and 1) REL S5 SHO (predecessor to the S812). In my opinion the Rythmik has a slightly better sound than the SVS and both of them are better than the REL. I had to slightly modify the REL in order for it to compete with the other two. Both the SVS and the REL have more output power than the Rythmik. The SVS was easiest to integrate due to its phone app. The Rythmik was a little more cumbersome because you had to make the adjustments at the cabinet and not the listening position and REL does not give you enough tools to properly integrate so I had to slightly compromise the integration of the SVS and the Rythmik to work with the REL. Overall I prefer the Rythmik, but I would move up at least one model size larger if not two, in order to compensate for the lower output power.

rockadanny
1,224 posts
 

Subs are speakers too! So yeah, there are certainly differences between them. I auditioned several, well known accepted audiophile brands and chose which sounded best to me. Different ones may also have different features as well, so there's that too.

2psyop's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
2psyop
1,568 posts
 

audiorusty- Good analysis and I agree. Although my favorite subs are Rythmik, Vandersteen and JL Audio

phusis's avatar
phusis
1,202 posts
 

@mijostyn

I wish I could find the link but is slow mo’s an 18" woofer under a strobe actually wobbling under light power. One side starts moving before the other and goes downhill from there. The excursions are not very far.

I know they wouldn’t make badass, neodymium magnet-fitted 21" pro woofers if wobbling/cone flex was an issue. What’d be an issue for them wouldn’t necessarily be one for us; let’s remember our domestic roofs would fly off over our heads if we where to test such driver at Xvar values, so it’s a practical non-issue with plenty of headroom even. These are very efficient, stiffly suspended drivers that can take from ~1.7kW on up, many of them tested at their limits in horn iterations firing into a compression chamber with uneven pressurization on the cone and huge cone stress to follow, and they eat it up.

I’m sure some drivers can driven to cone flex, but some aren’t all, and at what excursions?

I feel the most comfortable with 12" drivers and you can get to the same place by using multiples. I keep doubling the number until I get what I want. Next stop is 8.

Multiple 12’s can sound great for sure. And for your home setup you mean 8 per channel, right? I was under the impression you’ve implemented 4 per channel already.

I saw Marcus Miller and Mike Stern at the Blue Note in NYC last month and I could feel Marcus’s E string vibrate. It is that kind of authority I would like to get at home. I have great bass, just not that great. I know there are some recordings that can do it like Supertramp’s Crime of the Century or any number of Dave Holland Albums and Jaco albums not to mention Organ works.

Practically speaking I don’t believe you can really overdo bass capacity, unless the sheer volume of cabinetry becomes obtrusive acoustically. Actually, the problem is the other way ’round; the cleaner and more effortless the bass (via more displacement and efficiency) the more it can be enjoyed at proper levels in relation to the remaining audio spectrum - that’s is: you’d gain it "hotter" instead of, perhaps paradoxically, dampening poorer and more meager capacity bass performance.

Some of the vital impact of bass is diminished with central bass nulls (or suck-out) and softer floor constructions that can absorb quite a lot a of bass. In your case a column bass solution would be very appealing.

More to discover