Does anyone know why SVS discontinued the downfiring woofer design?

brasil

I have an SVS PB12 plus 2 box with the dual down firing 12.3 woofers. I noticed that they switched designs to resemble more traditional subwoofer enclosures. does anyone know why? I noticed that Ron and other old timers from back in the 03-05 area are no longer with the Company?

VR3

I personally find down firing first subwoofers to have alot less upper bass definition, tone and texture.... You do slightly lose output in the forward firing firing position but you do gain a little more clarity for the more directional frequencies...

The down firing subwoofer is what I would recommend for HT as it seems to have more of a bass piston type sound...

Granted my main experience with down firing subwoofers is indeed SVS - in which maybe SVS's general sound is simply being a bass piston... lol

Either way, Monster Cable owns SVS now and alot of their designs are far different and far more mass market type

steveinaz

I don't know, but the "new" subs have some incredilbly flat response as a result. I think SVS is trying to bury the misconception that they don't make a musical sub.

Maybe Ed (Dr. Spec) will chime in with the technical reasons....

brasil

Thanks for the replies so far. I was not aware that Monster had acquired them. Just wanted to know why they did away with the dual woofer design per enclosure and the down firing woofers. Now I understand a little more.

rooftop59

While I can't speak to the SVS issue as I don't know and have never owned one, the two most "musical" subs I have owned are the ACI Force and HSU VTF-3r, both downfiring. The aci was simply remarkable in tone and texture. It was the most obvious example of a sub improving the entire texture, timbre, and soundstage of the overall musical presentation (I just decided I wanted more bass that a 10 in sealed sub could provide). The HSU isn't much behind, and gives WAY more output overall. YMMV...

ken brydson

VR3 wrote: »

I personally find down firing first subwoofers to have alot less upper bass definition, tone and texture.... You do slightly lose output in the forward firing firing position but you do gain a little more clarity for the more directional frequencies...

The down firing subwoofer is what I would recommend for HT as it seems to have more of a bass piston type sound...

Granted my main experience with down firing subwoofers is indeed SVS - in which maybe SVS's general sound is simply being a bass piston... lol

Either way, Monster Cable owns SVS now and alot of their designs are far different and far more mass market type

Ed dispelled the Monster myth back in January...

"SVS is not affiliated in any manner with Monster Cable. Our President left a position at Monster Cable to come to SVS."

brasil

Additionally, besides the down firing woofer design, they also seized to manufacture enclosures with dual subwoofers as well.

falconcry72

dude, all their cylinders are downward firing.:biggrin:

brasil

falconcry72 wrote: »

dude, all their cylinders are downward firing.:biggrin:

I should have clarified that I meant the box design:)

VR3

Well you have to remember - use to SVS was made in the states, now they are not...

Production costs to make a down firing sub + added materials for the extra parts, holes, wood for the slab for the bottom, extra weight in shipping - it may have just not made sense to do anymore.

falconcry72

brasil wrote: »

I should have clarified that I meant the box design:)

Just being a smarta$$.:cheesygrin:

Syndil

I'm also curious as to why I don't see anyone making bandpass enclosure subwoofers for the home any more, like my PSW-300.

brasil

VR3 wrote: »

Well you have to remember - use to SVS was made in the states, now they are not...

Production costs to make a down firing sub + added materials for the extra parts, holes, wood for the slab for the bottom, extra weight in shipping - it may have just not made sense to do anymore.

I had no idea that they were no longer made in the USA. Are they made in China, now? This makes sense, because my SVS sub weighs 140 pounds, and had to be shipped via freight due to the size and weight.

jon s

Syndil wrote: »

I'm also curious as to why I don't see anyone making bandpass enclosure subwoofers for the home any more, like my PSW-300.

To be frank, the PSW300 is a terrible sub... I have one and it does not hold a candle to its successor, the PWS650. They both retailed about the same price. The PSW300 distorts readily at any volume that is moderately loud. If bandpass subs were that good, other manufacturers would be making them. I think the best overall sub design would be an isobaric design, but the problem is that it is less efficient and requires two active drivers, which means you need a more powerful amp, raising its cost. It's advantage is less distortion and a tighter bass.

Syndil

jon s wrote: »

To be frank, the PSW300 is a terrible sub... I have one and it does not hold a candle to its successor, the PWS650. They both retailed about the same price. The PSW300 distorts readily at any volume that is moderately loud.

Might check to ensure that your driver has not become separated from its mount, as mine had. Repaired that and it is clean and distortion free.

In theory, I think a bandpass design would be the design of choice for those pairing a subwoofer with a set of full-range speakers that already have decent bass. The bandpass nature may narrow the frequency response, but if you only require a narrow frequency response, a bandpass can be very efficient. I certainly have no complaints with my PSW-300. I find it to be more musical than the DSW Pro 660 I recently installed for a friend. That actually surprised me a bit.

dudeinaroom

jon s wrote: »

To be frank, the PSW300 is a terrible sub... I have one and it does not hold a candle to its successor, the PWS650. They both retailed about the same price. The PSW300 distorts readily at any volume that is moderately loud. If bandpass subs were that good, other manufacturers would be making them. I think the best overall sub design would be an isobaric design, but the problem is that it is less efficient and requires two active drivers, which means you need a more powerful amp, raising its cost. It's advantage is less distortion and a tighter bass.

The only time isobaric should be use is if you can not find/afford a better quality speaker, or if you need a small enclosure. Most car audio subs are now optimized for small enclosures, which is the reason it takes 1000 watts to get what we used to get from 200 watts in the late 80's early 90's. sorry for the thread jack.

Dr. Spec

steveinaz wrote: »

I don't know, but the "new" subs have some incredilbly flat response as a result. I think SVS is trying to bury the misconception that they don't make a musical sub.

Maybe Ed (Dr. Spec) will chime in with the technical reasons....

Front-firing, front-ported box subwoofers are easier to install in custom entertainment centers or even flush with the wall (with the subwoofer in an adjacent space). We have seen an increase in these types of installs in recent years. I'm not saying all of our box subwoofers will always follow this form factor, only that this trend with customers was a motivating factor behind the change from DF to FF.

With respect to woofer firing orientation, there are many different types on the market and I would hesitate to characterize one particular type of firing orientation as superior to the others. I would focus more on the frequency response of the subwoofer than the woofer firing orientation.

steveinaz

Thanks Doc, loving my PB12-NSD with the Harbeth's.

Drenis

steveinaz wrote: »

Thanks Doc, loving my PB12-NSD with the Harbeth's.

Do you run the Harbeth's at full range? If so, don't you have cancellation issues?

steveinaz

Yes, the Harbeths are run full range. I'm having NO issues, now that I've got level set properly. I'm running line-out from my amps preamp loop jacks to the SVS. Crossover around 50Hz. The 7ES-3's are 3dB down at 46Hz. It blends perfectly. The sub sits just to the left of my left speaker, phase set at 0 degrees.

Drenis

Hmm that's interesting. I could never get my old subs to blend properly with my towers crossed @ 50hz. Mind you, the gear was entry level at best. Would love to hear that setup.

steveinaz

I think towers are a lot tougher to blend for 2-channel because they already go pretty low. My first attemp about 7yrs ago was with towers, and I couldn't get the sub to blend right. Maybe if the towers were high passed it would be easier? I theorize that there is alot of frequencies stepping on each others toes with a tower/sub combo---leading to bass muddiness.

I think (my opinion only) a lot of 2-channel folks struggle with subs because the level is too high on the sub. You've have to get it set where the sub is just filling in, and not supplementing existing bass. It took me a couple weeks of tweaking/listening to finally peg it. When you get it right, it'll be almost as if the sub is doing nothing---it's hard to describe---but it'll sound as though your main speakers just go deeper.

kuntasensei

My RTi70s blend nicely with my SVS 20-39CS+ setup, crossed over at 50Hz. Took some playing to find the sweet spot for the crossover point though. Also running my CSi40 at 50Hz now that those three are run off my Adcom. I don't really think downfiring affects anything one way or the other, but it does seem like I need to run my speakers crossed below 80Hz before the SVS blends into the surroundings. Setting my surrounds and heights to run at 70Hz crossover made a WORLD of difference.

steveinaz

Drenis wrote: »

Hmm that's interesting. I could never get my old subs to blend properly with my towers crossed @ 50hz. Mind you, the gear was entry level at best. Would love to hear that setup.

What's the -3dB bass extension on the towers? 50Hz sounds too high....

steveinaz

I think another important aspect that is hardly mentioned---it's the psycho-acoustical aspect. I think bass should be tuned to be commensurate with the type of main speakers you're using. I think it's an unnatural "illusion" for small bookshelf to put out 50" tower bass---you know what I mean? The bass reproduction (strictly MY opinion) should closely match the mating speakers. I realize this is an "out of the fray" observation, but it seems more realistic to me to match bass output level to what you would expect the speaker to be able to pull off.

heiney9

If the speaker could "pull it off" then you wouldn't need a sub

The reason for a sub is to augment the lower register where a small speaker can't go. I agree bass can be overdone, but IMO, it has nothing to do with the visual and or physical size of a speaker. IE, because it's a small bookie it can't hit that low so be sure and tune the sub higher.

I also agree, it's a delicate balance to get it to sound natural and blend well. But it shouldn;t have anything to do with the visual and size perceptions of a small speaker.

Just my observation

H9

Drenis

steveinaz wrote: »

What's the -3dB bass extension on the towers? 50Hz sounds too high....

I have the A9's Steve. Lower -3dB is 30hz. However some reviews show in room freq. response rolling off just under 50hz.

Honestly these exceeded what I thought a tower could do. However, I feel as if there IS more if I could cross the 3 woofers @ 50hz and they not have to work as hard. People say to cross them @ 80hz but the crossover has a native low pass of 120hz to the woofers. Seems like a waste @ 80hz.

I'm still somewhat uncomfortable with a sub integrated in house now from this experience. It's why I sold my 2 Velodynes. In a car I seem to get it bang on...

steveinaz

If this is a 2-channel system, I'd start at 40Hz, and if anything work my way down (if you're not high-passing the mains). FWIW. In reality, with it only 3dB down at 30Hz (assuming good room gain/performance) a sub might be a waste of time.

rtart

brasil wrote: »

I have an SVS PB12 plus 2 box with the dual down firing 12.3 woofers. I noticed that they switched designs to resemble more traditional subwoofer enclosures. does anyone know why? I noticed that Ron and other old timers from back in the 03-05 area are no longer with the Company?

I've owned many of SVS's designs, from 1, 2 and then 4 cylinders, to a single PB12-Plus/2 to a pair of the Plus/2's now. I've auditioned a lot of different subs, including some DIY designs with up to 8 12" drivers. I chose the pair of SVS PB12-Plus/2 becasue of their performance in my HT. I control them with a SMS-1 and let the actual frequency response speak for itself.

To answer your question about down firing vs. front, I actually removed the bottom baffles from my units and laid them on their sides, as front firing boxes. The ports stayed in the same orientation, facing the same direction as before. the subs were in the same spot as before. I did not see any appreciable difference in either sound quality or measured frequency response. Low freqs are fairly non-directional, and as you go lower, it's more and more difficult to identify where the sound originates. At 110Hz plus, it is possible to hear where the sound originates, but my setup is crossed over at 90Hz.

I called the guys at SVS before doing this and was told to expect what actually happened. They were right.

So, back to your original question, a front firing sub simply requires less material to build. The baffle board under a down firing sub is a big chunk of wood, and adds to build and shipping costs. Since the sound difference seems negligible, the decision to save is a good one. I personally prefer the looks of a down firing sub, since the side exposed isn't a speaker grille or raw driver, but others may disagree.

rooftop59

rtart wrote: »

So, back to your original question, a front firing sub simply requires less material to build. The baffle board under a down firing sub is a big chunk of wood, and adds to build and shipping costs. Since the sound difference seems negligible, the decision to save is a good one. I personally prefer the looks of a down firing sub, since the side exposed isn't a speaker grille or raw driver, but others may disagree.

That makes a lot of sense. I definitely prefer the look of my downfiring HSU, and it really helps with little rugrats starting to roll around :eek: But some dudes just love to stare at that single big naked woofer. To each his own I suppose...