Which sub? Klipsch RW-10d or MartinLogan Dynamo

mmadden28

Hope this is in the right category.

I just picked up one of each of these subs-they were I believe display models. Anyway the Klipsch RW-10D was ~$266 and the MartinLogan Dynamo was about $465. Both are in superb shape-no signs of use so like new.

I have a large family room with cathedral ceilings and opens to the stairwell upstairs as well as to the kitchen. The Kitchen is laminate flooring the family room is carpet. I am limited to sub placement either to the left of the entertainment center or behind the couch (left). The online calculators have me spending over $10k on a sub for my space. not happening.

I realize these subs are not big enough for the space, and I will eventually be getting a more appropriate sub in the future, but since I am no where near figuring out how big or how much I am willing to spend, I figured I would start with some decent smaller subs. I haven't read much about the Klipsch but the little I could find was mostly good. I've seen a lot for the Dynamo, all good. I am also planning to take on a dedicated HT room in the next year or two-so I didn't want to buy a BIG sub for the Family rm if I really didn't need to.

So I have both. I am not quite sure I have them hooked up and tuned properly yet so I am still doing my own listening tests, and I am sure that will be the ultimate decision maker, but I wanted to get a concensus here between these two specific subs, to be sure that I don't pass up a good sub for a lesser one. I expect that I will be returning the lesser sub as I told my wife I would do, but that is still tbd(if thier both great for the $$$). :rolleyes:

Also any suggestsion as to a good source to play to determine sub output and quality? Such as a specific scene to play and an expected result?

How should I set them up? The Klipsch has some EQ settings such as Punch/Depth/Flat--and volume settings-Which should I use to test in order to be a fair comparison?

TouchOfEvil

Never heard the Dynamo before but i do have one of the rw-10d subs. All i can tell ya with that room is play with it alot. My room is about 16x22 and i had a tough time getting it tuned in and in the correct spot.
Depending on where i put it it needed differant settings and if you miss the sweet spot by so much as a foot you miss out on alot of bass.
Once in the correct spot though the sub is packing some real punch.
Good luck and have fun toying with it.

GEBBY44

Both are good subs from what I've heard. The only one of those 2 that I've heard is the Klipsch and it impressed me. Whatever the case, whichever one you decide to get rid of, give me a shout. I'm in Philly and have been looking at both of those as well. Good luck and let us know the end result.

miner

Doesn't the Dynamo have the option of either front firing or down firing? I have only listened to the ML of the two. I did like what I heard. I ended up getting a Dynaudio Sub-20A to go with my Audience 52SE. Close-out price on both. Sub, stands and 53SE for $2000 out-the-door.

bigaudiofanatic

Klipsch I would go with so you BOUGHT BOTH OF THEM

mmadden28

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

Klipsch I would go with so you BOUGHT BOTH OF THEM

Ya lost me on that one...

mmadden28

TouchOfEvil wrote: »

Never heard the Dynamo before but i do have one of the rw-10d subs. All i can tell ya with that room is play with it alot. My room is about 16x22 and i had a tough time getting it tuned in and in the correct spot.
Depending on where i put it it needed differant settings and if you miss the sweet spot by so much as a foot you miss out on alot of bass.
Once in the correct spot though the sub is packing some real punch.
Good luck and have fun toying with it.

Yeah well I am quite limited on placement options--room layout, traffic pattern, etc. I can only hope one works out well where it can go.

concealer404

I just started breaking in my RW-10D last night. I'll let you know how it goes.

But so far... i'll vote klipsch... it's baaaaaddddd beast.

mmadden28

concealer404 wrote: »

I just started breaking in my RW-10D last night. I'll let you know how it goes.

But so far... i'll vote klipsch... it's baaaaaddddd beast.

I see you've already added it to your sig :cool:

mmadden28

What source are you using to test/compare? By source I mean material--music/movies

Shannon W.

Before I bought my SVS. I bought two of the RW-12D from a local store for $550 each. I brought them home hooked them up and let them sing. By the time three days was over the port noise was so bad I called up SVS and bought one of there PB12+2's and I did a comparison. 1 sub over the 2. Needless to say I had the same money in both so I took the RW-12d's back because the SvS had no port noise and it had so much more bottom end.
Shannon

concealer404

mmadden28 wrote: »

I see you've already added it to your sig :cool:

To be honest, i'm just running it on the Pioneer setup until i get my Adcom setup this afternoon. :cool:

I was honestly not expecting it to be this musical, coming from the S8, which i absolutely love for music, but it's a very fast sub, clear, and although it seems like a common complain, i don't have a problem with port noise. I've only got about 6 hours on it now, so we'll see what happens, but so far, so good.

I've got the filter set at 70hz right now, and it seems to blend pretty well, i'll probably change it again once i get more burn time on it.

I first started with Radiohead - In Rainbows (something you definitely DON'T want overpowering bass for) and it did really well.

Then wen to Avenged Sevenfold to see if it would get mudd during blast beats, and did well on that. And this is in a small room, and i doubt i've got the placement right, haven't messed with it much, won't until it's broken in.

I haven't moved it to the HT setup yet, but i have a hunch it's going to blow my S8s out of the water in that scenario. I'll try to do some side by side testing tomorrow and see what's best where.

As well as get a review up of my revelation going to separates.

hockeyboy

Both! You already have em, might as well use em!

mmadden28

hockeyboy wrote: »

Both! You already have em, might as well use em!

Well, as I said, the wife likely won't allow that.

Besides wouldn't it be better to have two of the same sub? Would it actually work having these two subs together?

mmadden28

Well, so far I am leaning towards the Klipsch. Not sure why-I think it feels more enveloping. Almost like I can't locate it like I can with the ML. I haven't heard any port noise thus far (other than during a freq sweep). Perhaps its because its downfiring into carpet, but the ML is sounding almost muddled. They both definately sound different to me, but then in some tracks very similar-I almost can't decide. At one point I thought I might just keep both, but I think I would much rather sink that extra money into a bigger better sub--no?

I am having trouble finding some good source to determine exactly what it is I am trying to compare. In some cases I like the ML better, but others, the Klipsch.

So far I've listened to some tracks that have some heavy bass in them from Bjork, Blue Man Group, Foreigner, Heartbeat, Kodo 25th Anniversary, and Barbatunde Olatunji Circle of Drums. And so far-Holy crap now I can hear what my system has been missing. I had a sub, but it didn't do nearly what these two are doing. I can't imagine what a bigger better sub would do. I'm just drooling over that day.

I watched a depthcharge scene in U571--I expected more, but I didn't really feel like I was there with either sub. I'll try again tomorrow along with Master and Commander.

Just got done watching Stardust (HD-DVD) with the Klipsch sub. I thought the movie sounded great. The effects and music just sounded awesome. The new sub gave new life to my whole system. Granted it was not all sub that made it sound good (those RTi's with the XPA-5 really sang):cool:, but it certainly added to the experience exponentially. Normally to 'feel' the movie I have to crank the sub up and the main volume. That's usually too loud for the wife (and can actually be uncomfortable at times), but I didn't have to have it up as loud but still 'felt' the movie. AWESOME!
I had the Klipsch set at 0dB volume on the PUNCH setting.

I'll take any suggestions (or thread links), on good sources to use to test these things out. Give me something to demonstrate a 'quick' sub. Give me somethign to demo depth. Something that might sound muddy or boomy, that a quick sub will make sound good. Let me know what I should be listening for. I have noted however that with the new subs, I certainly have heard some new rhythyms and cleaner bass in some tracks, compared to my old sub in which it might have been an almost monotone setady low sound.


What are the + / - of a sealed sub, vs. ported
And if sealed, down firing vs front.
What do the EQ settings do on the Klipsch?
Left and Right inputs on the Klipsch???
What about the connections on the subs. The ML seems to have more options including a sub line out.is that really important?

I should also mention that while I originally only used my system for HT, since getting the new speakers, avr and amp, I've added music back to the mix-its simply enjoyable again. So I would have to say ( on a time scale) 60% HT / 40% Music. But as far as sub impact, HT is probably more important right now. I am considering a dedicated 2 channel system for down the road.

Thanks

Sherardp

I went from Klipsch KSW12s to the SVS PB12/PLus 2, night and day difference. The klipsch was ok but in the end it sounded boomy to me, where as the SVS didnt. I'd keep saving for the SVS.

mmadden28

Sherardp wrote: »

I went from Klipsch KSW12s to the SVS PB12/PLus 2, night and day difference. The klipsch was ok but in the end it sounded boomy to me, where as the SVS didnt. I'd keep saving for the SVS.

I would think that the KSW12 and the RW-10d are different animals with respect to capability and sound just between each other. I would suspect the rw would certainly come out the winner. Of course I would also expect the SVS to be the victor overall.

But I'm really looking more for opinions between the two I have, not what's the best sub out there to get. I'm sure there are plenty of threads out there on that debate already. I will be getting a better sub eventually, but I am mainly waiting until I get my dedicated HT setup. Its far far easier to justify ~$266 to the wife than $1100 (or she'll want another peice of jewelry :eek:).

mmadden28

Did some more listening, this time with another set of ears. They agreed that the Klipsch was sounding better in my setup. But again, we got mixed votes both ways.

Just got done watching the Beowulf (HD-DVD) with the Klipsch-Holy crap that has some heavy LFE scenes, especially the Dragon scene--Wow! the whole room was shaking!! This disc is definately being added to the test selections.
Well with such a close competition, but favoring the Klipsch, and the fact that the Klipsch is about $200 cheaper-I think I made the decision to stick with the Klipsch. Heck for the price of the ML I could almost get two of the Klipsch's.

Well anyway... back to listening.

Thanks for all the suggestions and comments.

concealer404

Sherardp wrote: »

I went from Klipsch KSW12s to the SVS PB12/PLus 2, night and day difference. The klipsch was ok but in the end it sounded boomy to me, where as the SVS didnt. I'd keep saving for the SVS.

The KSW-12 is OOOOOLLLLDDDDDD tech. They only kept it on the market for so long because mainstream users liked how boomy it was.

The RW-10D is a completely different animal. This thing is continuing to impress me greatly. I may even call this one of the better valued subs out there today. I still have no port noise, it's fast as hell, and has a very respectable low end extension.

Serendipity

I'd go with the Dynamo.

TouchOfEvil

Glad you like it, i am loving mine as well.

concealer404

appadv wrote: »

I'd go with the Dynamo.

Any particular reason? Or just 'cause?

concealer404

mmadden28 wrote: »

Well, so far I am leaning towards the Klipsch. Not sure why-I think it feels more enveloping. Almost like I can't locate it like I can with the ML.
I am having trouble finding some good source to determine exactly what it is I am trying to compare. In some cases I like the ML better, but others, the Klipsch.


I had the Klipsch set at 0dB volume on the PUNCH setting.

I'll take any suggestions (or thread links), on good sources to use to test these things out. Give me something to demonstrate a 'quick' sub. Give me somethign to demo depth. Something that might sound muddy or boomy, that a quick sub will make sound good. Let me know what I should be listening for. I have noted however that with the new subs, I certainly have heard some new rhythyms and cleaner bass in some tracks, compared to my old sub in which it might have been an almost monotone setady low sound.


What are the + / - of a sealed sub, vs. ported
And if sealed, down firing vs front.
What do the EQ settings do on the Klipsch?
Left and Right inputs on the Klipsch???
What about the connections on the subs. The ML seems to have more options including a sub line out.is that really important?

1) That's exactly what sold me on mine now that it's broken in. Doesn't matter where i am in the room, there's no sensation of "The bass is coming from right there." It doesn't effect the imaging at all in my 2-channel rig. That was my issue with the S8 when i just had one (i'm sure a lot of it was placement, and a larger room, but still)

2) I don't know what kind of music you listen to, but anything by The Dillinger Escape Plan or Thrice will sound HIDEOUS with a slow sub. Or go towards some techno or whatever. Anything with blast beats would be a good test. I went into listening to this sub thinking that it WOULD be slow, at least compared to my S8s, and not so. If anything, it almost seems faster, maybe because it's got a more responsive amp on it? Larger enclosure, doesn't have to work so hard against it? Not sure exactly why, but i'm not arguing.

3) Sealed subs stereotypically have a faster response, a flatter eq curve, and are supposed to be more accurate for that reason. The issue from a strictly physics standpoint is that the actual driver will have to fight against the positive and negative pressures to generate the sonic output. Not such a big deal in a big enclosure, but with smaller enclosures, you have to start to compensate for that by having a stronger amp, or a driver with a higher excursion, etc. Ported subs have the ability to "mimic" a larger enclosure beacuse of the difference in pressure, but may not have the same eq curve, etc.... really, with today's tech, i doubt it matters much. Just whatever sounds good to you. I run sealed sub enclosures in my cars, ported in the house.

4) The EQ settings are actually pretty much self-explanatory. "Punch" gives more emphasis on the mid to higher range of the sub, to give it that more percussive feel. "Flat" tries to keep it constant from the point of your filter down to whatever it's hitting in your application. "Depth" seems to bring out the lows. Personally, i don't like "punch." And for music, i tend to stay in Flat, depending on what i'm listening to. Depth is AWESOME for movies.

5) The Left/Right inputs are for situations like my 2 channel setup where you don't have an LFE output on your source. Run speaker cables from the amp to the sub, from the sub, to the speakers.

6) The connections are only as important as you make them. I'm happy with what i've got on the KW-10D.

mmadden28

concealer404 wrote: »

...
2) I don't know what kind of music you listen to, but anything by The Dillinger Escape Plan or Thrice will sound HIDEOUS with a slow sub. Or go towards some techno or whatever. Anything with blast beats would be a good test. ...

Hmm what do I listen to--OK here goes....I listen to ALMOST anything, but I certainly have my dislikes. I listen to many metal styles (but not really the cookiemonster anybody a can do it shouting crap of late-just doesn't do it for me. Oh god I'm not getting that old man complex-:can't stand what the kids listent to these days' am I? No there is definately way too much crap and then that crap is bitten by every other crap band out there, Mind you some of the music is good, but the vocals suck)
Anyway, In the Metal arean, I'm a fan of most 80's "oldskool" metal such as Metallica, Exodus, King Diamond/Mercyful Fate, Slayer, Helloween, Hellhammer, Venom, Celtic Forst, Pantera, Ludichrist, SOD/MOD, etc. and some more recent stuff like Slipknot, , and some Goth type stuff (etc. I also like old skool rap such as LL cool jay, Beastie boys, UTFO, RunDMC, Fat Boys, etc. I listen to it all - Floyd, Classic Rock, some oldies (50&60s), Some Disco, 80s stuff (even some junk 80s crap), 'some' grunge stuff, Bluegrass, Classical, and Modern country (Garth, Colin Raye, Carrie, Tim McGraw, Trace, etc). I like some Bone Thugs and Harmony, etc, some Oldskool Gnagsta rap.
I could go on and on...Lets throw some old WWI and II 30s and 40s stuff--songs of the day. I like some Big Band stuff as well.
I'm really liking Drums and flutes, such as Native american, and more recently the Kodo Taiko drums.
I'm really getting more into Classical, and all its various varieties. Oh the sweet sound of a solo violin.
One of my passions in music however is New Age (David Lanz/Paul Speer, etc.) and solo piano (George Winston, etc.) It just takes me away-and doesn't annoy the wife as much as Slayer or Cradle of Filth does.
Oh and Bagpipes-ah yes Bagpipes-THEY WILL BE PLAYED AT MY FUNERAL!.

So does that cover almost everything. I don't care for Dance club (except to maybe test the sound system), electronica, some 80s trash (I don't know how else to categorize it I suspect it's due to those being my tween years and going through some close mindedness about music phases). And as mentioned some of today's trash metal- I want to call it Angst metal), No emo stuff for me. Don't care for the old school country "my dog just died and my wife ran away sorrowful stuff. I don't care for what I remember of the Lawrence Welk show or HeeHaw.
All in all I'll give anything a listen-and some stuff has to grow on me, but some stuff just irks me everytime.

I think I'll add that list to my profile for future reference. maybe put some more detail in.

But as I said in other threads (and probably this one), with my new setup I am rediscovering music again and discovering new bands and music styles that just sound so much better now. I am getting a truer sense of appreciation of the music rather than what I am used to hearing. Heck even TV commercials sound better anymore. Love shows like AI-they just sound good anymore. I am sure there is a lot out there yet to discover, and I am latching on to some of the reviews and suggestsions made in these forums for that kind of enlightenment.

concealer404 wrote: »

3) Sealed subs stereotypically have a faster response, a flatter eq curve, and are supposed to be more accurate for that reason.

Thats what I'm trying to figure out. "faster response"? meaningless words to me. I need to hear what a fast and slow response sounds like to understand. I am sure I can't do that until I actually hear it. I think I got the muddy and boomy concepts, but-I'll check out the bands you mentioned-any particluar tracks?

concealer404 wrote: »

4) The EQ settings are actually pretty much self-explanatory. "Punch" gives more emphasis on the mid to higher range of the sub, to give it that more percussive feel. "Flat" tries to keep it constant from the point of your filter down to whatever it's hitting in your application. "Depth" seems to bring out the lows. Personally, i don't like "punch." And for music, i tend to stay in Flat, depending on what i'm listening to. Depth is AWESOME for movies.

I guessed as to what they meant-like you said 'self explanatory', but not really knowning what they do to the sound is what bothers me. Since there is no EQ off option, what setting would make it about the same as a sub that doesn't have an EQ?When trying to compare this to the ML, I could say on one hand that the Klipsch goes lower on the same source, but that really may only be becasue the EQ setting does it. Now the fact that the Klipsch can adjust its sound without my having to tweak anything on the AVR is simply awesom in its own. And that I can save them into presets is cool too.
I just want to do a fair comparison between the two.

concealer404 wrote: »

5) The Left/Right inputs are for situations like my 2 channel setup where you don't have an LFE output on your source. Run speaker cables from the amp to the sub, from the sub, to the speakers.

Sorry, I actually meant the right and left line level inputs. The ML has them two. I am using the left line level input for the LFE (it stated in the manual but not printed on the sub itself). I suppose thats for an AVR that has dual sub outputs??

concealer404 wrote: »

6) The connections are only as important as you make them. I'm happy with what i've got on the KW-10D.

The Klipsch has the L&R line level in (L is also LFE)for as well as the speaker level ins and outs. The ML has line level ins and OUTs for LFE, L, and Right. It also have the Speaker level ins and outs. I just read themanual on that and it appears that you can use preamp line levels into and out of the sub as opposed to speaker levels when setting up a two channel rig. I've only seen the speaker wire option, and since I'm not overly concerned about two channel setup right now, I think that that feature is really not that important to me right now. Interesting though.
The Klipsch has what I need for now. The LFE as well as the speaker level for a future 2 channel setup. So its 99% likely that is what I am going with.