Buchardt S400 Mk II vs Sony SSCS 5 in Bass


I am still in the quest for a ideal bookshelf / stand mount as my secondary system. Recently I procured Buchardt S400 Mk II for in-home auditioning a month ago. The top end and midrange SQ is top-notch, airy and rich with dynamics. However, the bass is a bit on the light side to my taste. Although it is rated down to 33hz (- 3 dB) in room, I do not feel the bass is that impactful as compared to the Sony SSCS 5 which is only rated down to 53Hz (-3dB). Both me and my best half could hear more impactful, better-defined double bass notes from SSCS 5 than from S400. I was so puzzled / annoyed by this. Let me lay out the main specs that might affect the bass performance for comparison purpose.

                      Buchardt S400 Mk ii                Sony sscs 5

Woofer          6" paper cone (on top)             5.12" cone (on bottom)

Enclosure      1 rear 8"x5" passive radiator   1 rear port

Bass rating    33 Hz (-3dB)                            53 Hz (-3dB)

Efficiency       88 dB/m/w                               87 dB/m/w

Both were driven by the same components, speaker placements, supported by the semi-sphere silicone footers, and evaluated with the same music. Does the rear port design more effective than the passive radiator? Does the position of woofer affect the bass weight? Can someone, in particular who owned the S400, shed a light on this please?

 

lanx0003

["lanx0003 I sort of shy away from adding a sub, primarily because I do not believe a separated sub could easily match the speed and texture of the main speakers. I had tried at least three times (SVS and REL) but none of the sub. I have tried provide me satisfactory results."]

I’m unaware of any subwoofer that claims measurably superior speed. Since the speaker location is typically the worst location for a subwoofer your dissatisfaction with that subwoofer and even with the sub-bass speaker is predictably understandable.

Consider the majority of full range statement speaker demonstrations are usually accompanied by determined room positioned and system tuned subwoofers providing an indistinguishably low frequency presentation.

lanx0003 , I would not put a lot of stock in what a reviewer says. I own Goldenear BRS, Kef, LS50 meta, Buchardts 400rk2 special editions, and I have a pair of Dali Minuete SE on the way. I have not heard the Dali's yet, but all of my speakers have their plus and minuses, yet I like each one. It does not matter how much you spend on speakers, amps are never perfect. My special 40's are my favorite and I notice no congestion in the mids. 

I can not believe nobody around here talks about Usher BE 718's.

I scored a used pair for twelve hundred, including delivery. I won't even try to describe the to you, but I will tell you that the beryllium tweeter makes them super special in the high frequencies.

And I want to personally challenge you, to find a bookshelf with a better bass response, for the money.

You should do a quick search and read a couple of reviews.

I believe they would stun you and I'm not joking.

@tunefuldude

Thanks for the recommendation. I was surprised that I missed it or maybe I stumbled across but failed to include it in my list. It is quite interesting that Stereophile compared it fairly with the Dynaudio Confidence C1 (which is high on my list) sonically but at a less than half price. I will explore that option.

@dwest1023

It seems that I am wrong about S40 this time since not only you but also others attest there is no midrange congestion issue with it. Will resume the exploration or even a quest on it. Its red birch high gloss finish is simply stunningly gorgeous.

@m-db

This might be another long-debate subject and I do not intend to open the deep discussion on this. I have seen different advocates for the sub. placement. Some people said the corner is the worst but the well-known REL lead designer John Hunter advocates for it. You mentioned by the main speaker is the worst but I have seen others end up with it being the optimal location which also makes sense to me. That is the location I have experimented and chosen after hours of moving it around. Admittedly the issue can be further mitigated or addressed with modern DSP technology but I guess the optimal location is still room dependent.

My point is that, even you have settled with the "optimal" placement, the speed and texture from a separate sub. controlled by its built-in amplification can not be easily matched / integrated with the main speakers controlled by your system amplification. When listening to the music having quick bass tempo, that disparity in speed and texture of tone bet. them just severely bother me. Sandy Gross who has already retired from Golden Ear mentioned it is almost impossible to seamlessly integrate them and they chose built-in subwoofer design instead.