B&W DB1D vs REL Subwoofer

[Sator]

15 hours ago, Sub Sonic said:

I’m using  a pair of the 12” sealed (1200CI) models in somewhat undersized (42l instead of around 55l) DIY enclosures to good effect, they both measure well and sound good.

 

Would custom cabinets be an option for you, using the Custom Installation CI1200 or CI1500 models? You could then tailor the cabinet shape/finish to suit your own room/tastes.

 

On further investigation, I've discovered that Paul imports the Rhythmik drivers and amplifiers, then produces a custom cabinet to go with it locally. You don't have to find a local cabinet maker as the Rhythmik website suggests that you do with the Custom Installation options.

 

http://www.redspade.com.au/audio/rythmik.php

 

It certainly might be worth investigating a bit if it is possible to get a subwoofer with a comparative amount of cabinet inertia to a B&W DB1D, similarly non-ported, with opposed-array dual 12" or even 15" drivers, with the same Hyprex Class D amplifier used by B&W, only one possibly even more powerful. 

 

That said, I am more inclined towards buying locally, but you'd probably be foolish not to consider this option.

[Sator]

On 27/08/2018 at 9:03 AM, Ray H said:

I have owned quite a few REL's in the past and now have both REL and JL Audio.

 

 

A question to you as an owner of both a REL and a JL Audio sub.

 

Lifestyle Store also stocks JL Audio. Have I been far too hasty in discounting that brand as being more of an AV special effects' device rather than a serious audio subwoofer? Their top model is even called a Gotham suggesting a Batman "wham-bang-boom-crash" sub. Even the salesman in their store was pushing me more towards a REL, but the JL Audio F113 V2 is within budget. It is within my acceptable size limits, although it is pushing things only slightly when it comes to the weight at a heftier 59kg. Again, it is a Stereophile Class A component (for all that is worth, once again). It also has automatic equilisation that comes with the subwoofer.

[Ray H]

@Sator,

 

To discount JL Audio as a home theatre product is to discount one of the best two or three commercial sub brands for music avaialable at sane prices imo.

 

i owned dual f113’s  and then dual F212’s as well. The F212 is similar in size to the rel 212, but much heavier and twice the price. A pair of f212 is frankly amazing. But room dominating, not to mention the weight....

 

The Gotham g213 is the best sub I have ever heard, and that includes the big paradigm’s, the Wilson benesch torus, the Wilson watchdog etc. A couple of stereophile writers often describe dual Gotham’s as pretty much the pinnacle of bass performance. And even with the potential dubiousness associated with Magazine’s and their commercial affiliations guiding recommendations, I think this is not unrealistic. And I have only heard and owned the v1 versions of these subs. The current V2 versions have better crossovers and more power. 

 

The only sub I would like to hear to see how it compares is the big REL no 25.

 

JL audio and Rel however sound significantly different in the way they produce and portray bass notes. It is best heard side by side to garner which you prefer. In simple terms the jl are very clean, accurate and powerful. The REL’s seem to blanket the room and support ambience and the decay of notes, or an even simpler analogy is they create a wall or blanket of bass where the JL bounce rubber cannon balls of bass around the room. That may sound like home theatre but it works equally well for music because of how clean and accurate it is.

 

Juat to throw another spanned in the works, a similar sub to the b&w is the Martin Logan 212. It has dual drivers and dual amps like the b&w and can be had for around 3.5-4k from stores like Eastwood Hi fi. Lifestylestore also sell it, the rrp is similar to the b&w. It can be brought with the perfect bass optimisation kit which measures in room response and alters the response etc. I suggest it could be a similar but more cost effective option to the b&w. Although I have not heard the b&w to know how good it is or how it compares to the others. It may be worth a listen.

 

i definitely think going to lifestyle or Audio solutions and listening to a couple of these subs in a similar level system to your own will help work out which brand does something you like. Perhaps from there you may be able to get an in home demo of the brand you prefer. I’m certain Vinod at least at Lifestyle would probably support this if you are a regular customer.

 

 

Hope my late night iPhone response makes sense, excuse any typo’s !

 

regards,

 

Ray

Edited August 28, 2018 by Ray H

[Sator]

Thanks for your input. All food for thought. I've read the Stereophile rave reviews of the JL Audio subs many times over many months, albeit with a pinch of salt, as one should always do. The greatest concern has always been that they might be heard too much. I read that the REL 212/SEs disappear better and integrate more seamlessly than the JL 212s, but that was probably not an A-B comparison in the same acoustics with both being equally well set up. The JL Audio DARO has an integrated 18 band one-sixth-octave DSP equalisation system, much better than the five band system offered by B&W. You don't need an external app or computer to run DARO, and the mic comes with their subs.

 

I've studied the Martin Logan specs. In principle a good idea because subwoofers used to be too slow to integrate with electrostatics. It's only since technology has improved that it's become possible to match subs with electrostatics. If it can integrate with an electrostatic, it should integrate with anything. Problem is that their EQ system is Windows-based, with no Mac version and costs extra.

 

As for auditioning...as discussed, it's really unclear what the benefits are with subwoofers since it depends too much on the acoustics of the room and how meticulously they are set up. Lifestyle Store is 5 minutes away, and they know me, so I might drop in one day this week and chat with them. If nothing else it will guide me about the technical details of source integration with Devialets.

Edited August 28, 2018 by Sator

[Ray H]

I didnt realise it was to match with Devialets.

 

Kind of surprised Devialet havent come up with some matching subs themselves up to this point.

 

Im sure Lifestyle will have matched subs to the devialets at some point and will advise accordingly.

 

Interesting about the PBK for the Martin logan subs not doing MAC, wasnt aware of that. It is quite a cheap kit though and most dealers when buying a 5+k sub will likely add it in or loan you the store demo kit IME.

 

Good luck with it, should be an interesting system with the subs. I can see why the B&W and REL would be of interest at least aesthetically, you can at least match the white colour.

[Sator]

Dropped in briefly to Lifestyle Store today. Have set up a demo comparing REL S/5 SHO vs G1 Mark II vs JL Audio f113 tomorrow evening along with the same model Devialet 220 and Dynaudio C2 speakers in my set-up. Reason for choice of models: because they had stock of these models (no REL 212/SE or JL Audio f112 at hand). Will have my AudioTools app ready to measure in-room frequency response plots against pink noise. It will also be interesting to see if they are any good at setting up subwoofers. Jim Smith goes on about how he is often disappointed at how badly audio salespeople do this sort of thing.

 

Particularly sobering was having a go at moving a 60kg JL Audio f113 around on my own. It is a struggle and it would be a massive pain to spend hours moving it around to measure frequency-response curves in-room. I couldn't even imagine do that with the 163kg JL Audio Gotham models. I imagine 95% of people who buy stuff like that do it to show off their wealth only to plonk it wherever it will fit without the slightest consideration for room acoustics while expecting the EQ function to "fix" any resultant problems. Most people would be better off buying two much smaller models and spending time optimising the placement in their acoustic environment. The store says they send someone out to set it up for you, but I do wonder how well stores do this because I already probably knew more about measuring real-time in-room acoustic responses than they did.

 

A word of note for those interested. RELs have an unusual way of connecting the subwoofers to the main speaker outputs of your pre-amp. The problem, at least in theory, is this leaves you totally dependent on the low pass filter on the sub to integrate with the main speakers. The whole beauty of running subs on a Devialet is that it has a built-in high pass filter, however, it can only be activated when connecting to the subwoofers through the Devialet's RCA output. 

[Snoopy8]

7 hours ago, Sator said:

It will also be interesting to see if they are any good at setting up subwoofers. Jim Smith goes on about how he is often disappointed at how badly audio salespeople do this sort of thing.

You already know more about setting subs than many people here and will beat the sales person. Speak to their contractor who does installation and you may find one who does sub setup?

7 hours ago, Sator said:

Particularly sobering was having a go at moving a 60kg JL Audio f113 around on my own. It is a struggle and it would be a massive pain to spend hours moving it around to measure frequency-response curves in-room.

Use furniture Glides under the subs to find best position.

** ----

One more thing, when comparing the subs, ideally should be in same position. Sometimes, 1m difference can affect sub response. Don't know how you can do this in crowded demo room.

Edited August 29, 2018 by Snoopy8
** added

[Ray H]

JL Audio Fathoms/Gothams come with the furniture gliders.. a convenient admission of their ridiculous weight. It is surprising given the size of the F113 alone how heavy it is.

 

@Sator Agree with your summations regards positioning by users and salesman. And agree with @Snoopy8 Once you nail down the product, a lot of trial and error can be useful, but to get the perfect result it would certainly pay to have it checked by a "pro" installer with software and experience with the sub at hand.

 

Any initial thoughts on which sub you may go with ?

[Sator]

4 hours ago, Snoopy8 said:

Use furniture Glides under the subs to find best position.

 

 

Oddly enough I own some of those already!

[Sator]

21 minutes ago, Ray H said:

Any initial thoughts on which sub you may go with?

 

 

If I stick with Lifestyle Store then I will probably go with either the JL Audio f112 (53kg) or f113 (60kg). Built-in 18 band EQ capability. The downside is that JL Audio carries a heavier distributor markup than REL or B&W (vs. US/UK prices)...aka Australia Tax. The salesperson said they usually have to offer discounts to be able to move stock.

 

The B&W DB1D is still very much in contention as it has balanced-array dual 12" Aerofoil-cone drivers while being a manageable 43kg in weight and 5 band EQ software, state of the art at least in terms of user-friendliness and flexibility.

[Ray H]

Wait for one of the Lifestyle sales if you go with the JL audio, they seem to run every few months, normally around 20% off, if they arent offerring that right now.

 

 

[Sator]

Well that was interesting.

 

Spent a couple of hours at Lifestyle Store. We only got as far as comparing the REL S/5 SHO with an older model JL Audio Fathom f113 V1 (the current version is the V2). We'd originally discussed throwing in the REL G1 Mark II for comparison, but I think the sales team felt it was too heavy and cumbersome for three of them to be bothered to move into our demo room (which in itself says a great deal) especially given that it exceeded the limits of my size tolerance anyway. The reason for comparing the REL S/5 SHO (about $4K) with the JL f113 ($7K) despite their price difference was because of size/ergonomic limitations since they are both around the same size/shape. The REL S/5 SHO is W 444.5 x H 455.5 x D 507 mm, the JL Audio W 419 x H 489 mm x D 489 mm. If you try to go upmarket in REL models, you get a massive size blow-out that instantly renders them uncompetitive.

 

Watching the subs being set up was interesting. The guy who did the set up had strong ideas about mostly doing it by ear and cringed at my measuring of frequency response plots. He was staunchly in favour of the REL and kept telling me about how only the REL High-Level Input method of connecting directly from the speaker outs of the pre-amp could possibly achieve flawless integration with the speakers. Only the REL High-Level Input method could almost eliminate the phase lag between the main speakers and the subwoofer, I was told, and a JL Audio would never be able to keep up, he alleged (BTW there are no independent measurement published anywhere to corroborate such extravagant claims). JL Audio was, he stated, only suitable for home theatre applications and had no place in a high-end audio system. He had to finish work as soon as the REL was set up and headed home, giving me that chance to jump in to measure the frequency response plots with the iPhone AudioTools RTA app while playing pink noise through the system. Throughout the audition, I ensured that the frequency response curves for both subwoofers were reasonably flat, and moreover, largely identical. They couldn't find the calibration mic for the JL Audio sub so it ended up being blended with the mains by measuring frequency response plots.

 

The result was no contest—it wasn't even close. The JL Audio f113 V1 wiped the floor, and when I spontaneously blurted out these conclusions, the salesman who stayed with me admitted he agreed with me completely (though this salesman owned JL Audio subwoofers himself). The f113 V1 integrated far better with the speakers (Dynaudio C2 driven by Devialet 220 amps without its high pass filter being activated), sounding fast and musical throughout to the point it seemed to disappear altogether. With the REL S/5 it was obvious that the sound was coming from the subwoofer which attracted attention to itself to the point of being in your face. I kept dropping down the volume and the low pass filter frequency level but the obnoxiously harsh bass bloat persisted. This is not a sound I could tolerate at all, let alone enjoy. The JL Audio f113 V1 was, by way of comparison, completely inaudible to the point I was wondering if we had forgotten to turn it on. Further tweaks of the steepness of low pass filter roll off only added to the sense of self-effacing refinement and seamless musical integrity with the main speakers. 

 

For example, on the f113 V1, playing orchestra music, the double basses, bassoons, horns, tubas, and tympani all sound perfectly integrated into the whole structure of the orchestral tutti without ever protruding out unnaturally. The same went with solo organ music by Bach (Francis Jacob playing the Bach "St Anne" Prelude in E flat as this recording has the most amazingly well-captured bass notes that really growl at you). Even the most viscerally low notes sounded integrated into the musical whole. The same integration was simply not to be found between the Dynaudio C2 and the REL. Nor did lowering the volume or low pass filter level do anything to substantively ameliorate this.

 

It should also be mentioned that this description of the disappearance act pulled by the JL Audio subs is corroborated by what numerous other reviewers have stated of the JL Audio f113. The current f113 V2 is supposedly even better and comes with an even more powerful amplifier and updated crossover design.

 

I also tried moving the f113 V1 myself a bit more. I had to wriggle it across the room rather than lifting it, but it was doable. It seemed somewhat less unmanageable and daunting. Given that they are reasonably compact, I could imagine a pair of them in my living room. 

 

I was offered a price that brought the f113 to a level more than competitive with the $6900 full retail price of the B&W DB1D. I am so taken by the sound of the JL Audio f113, I am strongly tempted to pick it instead of the B&W. 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2018 by Sator
spelling/grammar

[Ray H]

Not a completely surprising result tbh ! Dual f113’s are a very good place to end up. Quite interesting that the initial rep favoured the Rel so highly. You do get the impression they may have been told to push certain brands.

 

The only possible mitigation in favour of the Rel may be that it was quite new and not run in as it is highly probable an f113 v1 has quite a few hours on it. Nonetheless a fairer price comparison would no doubt have been the Rel G1 mkii, but if the size is an issue.... i just looked it up myself 57cm wide and 68 cm deep, it is big.

[Sator]

There was a divergence of views on the floor, and this seemed a personal thing rather than a directive from above. Given the reputation REL has for supposedly seamless integration with the main speakers, the outcome was surprising. Often those in the AV world wrongly state that larger more power subwoofers are not better but simply intended for larger rooms, but this is clearly not the case. We were in one of the smallest demo rooms. More power amplifiers control the bass driver better even at low listening levels. The reason to overspec your amps is to gain control and this in principle should control THD better. While the B&W DB1D with its dual opposed array drivers has a total driver surface area that is greater than the single 13" f113 driver, the JL Audio has the more powerful amplifier overall (3000W peak transient output vs 2000W peak transient output for the B&W DB1D). The amplifier specs predict that the more powerful JL Audio amp will have greater control over its smaller total driver surface area.

 

Another thing is that we cling to simple stereotypes about UK/EU/JP gear being more old-world and polite while stereotyping American kit as being big-boned and brash. But as with people we meet in the real world, these stereotypes often fail. Tonight I met the loud brash Brit and the quiet refined American. The REL was more like Johnny Rotten, and the JL Audio, Michael Tilson Thomas.

Edited August 30, 2018 by Sator

[Sator]

Oh, I think I might have an idea what's going on. One of the store salespeople said something about speaking to the REL rep and another one sounded like he was quoting directly from one. They also said something about the service you get from the JL Audio distributor being a bit slow and having to negotiate prices down to keep them competitive. That means the REL distributor is quick to get you stock, their prices are competitive...and their sales reps come in to evangelise you all the time.

Edited August 30, 2018 by Sator

[Sator]

Another interesting set of figures.

 

JL Audio f113 V2

Claimed maximum transient peak Class D amplifier output: 3000W

Approximate total driver surface area (A=πr2): 143 square inch 

 

B&W DB1D

Claimed maximum transient Class D amplifier output: 2000W

Approximate total driver surface area (A=πr2): 226 square inch

 

The B&W amp has to control a driver surface area that is 1.5 x (50%) larger than the JL Audio amp, despite having 1/3rd less power. This modelling predicts that the JL Audio amp will achieve superior control over its bass driver than the B&W. Plus add in the fact that the JL Audio f113 has an extra 17kg of inertia over the B&W, looking at it from the perspective of fundamental physics, it predicts that the JL Audio will sound better.

[Sub Sonic]

In the end you will be listening to the subwoofer(s) with your ears, not your wallet. Makes the decision easy

[Sator]

^ All very true.

 

A rare independent set of test measurements on the older JL Audio f113 V1:

 

https://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/subwoofer-tests-archived/8152-jl-audio-fathom-f113.html

 

Conclusions:

 

Okay, so what do I think of the f113? I think it's an amazing subwoofer. It has the best performance/ litre ratio I have ever seen when it comes to commercial subwoofers. It has very good user settings and a lot of very useful and most importantly working features like the E.L.F and the wonderful crossover, although I wish that the A.R.O had more bands it's better than nothing, and, of course, one can always add an SMS-1 or BFD to go with it. The build quality and the cabinet are the very best I've ever seen. It is truly a high-end subwoofer. Of course it has its limitations due to laws of physics but still, the performance is better than with most much larger and more expensive subwoofers. Other than maybe the price, it really doesn't have many weak spots. Bravo, JL Audio! 

 

Then the distortion issue. The whole question "was JL's distortion that audible?" is a bit strange because distortion is a multi-dimensional variable. It's not like "is 5 larger than 2", which only has one answer—yes. Distortion depends on both output level and frequency so there's no single easy answer to that question. Then there's also a so-called masking effect. If you look at the distortion measurements I took, you can see that the f113 is not the cleanest subwoofer out there when you push it close to its limits. But the ones that are cleaner, either have larger, or multiple woofers, in a much larger enclosure. Of course, also porting a subwoofer lowers the deep bass distortion. At more common listening levels, the distortion that the f113 produces is very minimal.

 

When looking at the very important "Harmonic Distortion % By Component" graph, you'll see that the distortion consists mainly out of second and third harmonics. The higher harmonics raise their ugly heads only at the low end, and even that happens only at high output levels. So when the distortion is like that, it's very hard to hear it because the fundamental masks anything that is very close to it. And second and third harmonic can be considered being 'close'. I've compared the f113 and the LMS-5400 sealed 100L in my own listening room, and although the f113 has quite low distortion, it can not match the ultra low distortion of the LMS woofer. It's not audible when using low to moderate levels but when really pushing them, one can hear that the LMS subwoofer stays cleaner, especially at the low end. Same goes for the SVS PB13-Ultra: it stays cleaner than the f113 at high output levels and when simultaneously inputting a low-frequency content. No wonder there though, the f113 is a very small sealed subwoofer while the other is a much larger ported sub. But does this make the f113 a bad subwoofer? No way! It's one of the best subwoofers I've heard, and by far the highest performing small subwoofer I've ever heard.

 

The upgraded specs of the current V2 of the f113 are likely to have ameliorated some of the shortcomings identified e.g. it now has 18 band EQ capability. The V2 also weighs about 1kg more than the V1, while retaining largely the same dimensions within a few millimetres. An improved crossover on the current V2, along with a more powerful amplifier, is highly likely to help control the harmonic distortion even better. The conclusion is that the f113 triumphs in terms of "performance/litre ratio". If you compared its performance with an elephantine 100L subwoofer, however much it may outperform the f113, this may be entirely moot if it isn't ergonomically acceptable or practical.

 

The failure of the REL range is a failure of performance/litre ratio and this performance variable gives us very valid reason to have compared the REL S/5 SHO with the REL f113 V1 despite them being in different price categories. It is all to clear that REL rates poorly in terms of "performance/litre ratio". If we compared the REL 212 model ($6000 AUD) with the JL Audio 212 model ($11600 AUD), it is fairly certain we would get the same result. 

[almikel]

apologies, I haven't read every post in this thread

getting good sound from a sub or subs is all about the integration - the subs you've been considering are all good - it will be the integration that is more important than the hardware that makes the difference.

19 hours ago, Sator said:

The B&W amp has to control a driver surface area that is 1.5 x (50%) larger than the JL Audio amp, despite having 1/3rd less power. 

but does this spec mean anything in your scenario? controlling the driver is about damping factor/low output impedance of the amp - and I suspect every sub you're looking at has "sufficient" not to be a determining factor.

Maximum SPL doesn't seem to be a requirement either (from what I've scanned from the thread)...

 

IMHO

• well integrated multiple subs will achieve a smoother "in room" bass response than a single sub - but the integration is harder - tools like Multi Sub Optimiser (MSO) can help, but you need DSP capability to EQ and delay each sub independently
• depending on speaker/sub positions, but almost always, to time align subs with mains, you need a solution capable of delaying your mains more than your subs - the inherent delay in sub crossovers (of any type - passive/active, doesn't matter) usually means your subs lag your mains in time unless you position your subs much closer to the listening position than your mains
• Delay/phase controls on a sub delay the sub further - it can work, but it's like the sub missed the bus and caught the next one. Not time alignment, but it can work Ok.
• below 250Hz or so, the room response dominates, so it's a combination of speaker/sub position, treatment and EQ that makes the difference - if your sub/s can hit the spl required with low distortion - then it comes down to form factor - can you fit the subs in the room...
• after that it's all about integration of the sub/s to the rest of the system and room

cheers

Mike

 

 

[Sator]

^ All of these issues are already discussed. Yes, multiple subs are good (but due to costs most buy one to start then sequentially add more in, hence the reason for the talk about only buying one). Yes, you need the help of measurements to coordinate multiple subs. Yes, measurements are already being taken, as already discussed above.

 

As for "sufficient" amplifier power based on room size. I am planning to upgrade to a Devialet 440 i.e. have two 220 amps in monobloc configuration. I imagine someone in the AV world would say it isn't necessary because the 220 is "sufficient" to drive my main speakers to fill the room with sound. That isn't why you have more powerful amps to drive speakers, and this holds true irrespective of what drivers (tweeters, mids, woofers etc) are under discussion. The reason is, when you use a more powerful amp to better control the driver, it reduces THD, which is particularly an issue with the larger driver units found in subwoofers (see f113 measurements of Harmonic Distortion % By Component).

[jamiebosco]

On ‎30‎/‎08‎/‎2018 at 9:48 PM, Sator said:

Well that was interesting.

 

 

Watching the subs being set up was interesting. The guy who did the set up had strong ideas about mostly doing it by ear and cringed at my measuring of frequency response plots. He was staunchly in favour of the REL and kept telling me about how only the REL High-Level Input method of connecting directly from the speaker outs of the pre-amp could possibly achieve flawless integration with the speakers. Only the REL High-Level Input method could almost eliminate the phase lag between the main speakers and the subwoofer, I was told, and a JL Audio would never be able to keep up, he alleged (BTW there are no independent measurement published anywhere to corroborate such extravagant claims). JL Audio was, he stated, only suitable for home theatre applications and had no place in a high-end audio system. 

 

I was offered a price that brought the f113 to a level more than competitive with the $6900 full retail price of the B&W DB1D. I am so taken by the sound of the JL Audio f113, I am strongly tempted to pick it instead of the B&W. 

 

 

It's definitely an odd thing for the guy to say....usually the only real criticism of the JL's is in regard to price/dB (VFM)....and perhaps their decision to use a  HPF @ 20hz on a sealed sub. 

Their hardware (driver/cabinet construction/amplifier/DSP are all regarded as absolutely top shelf.

I think the fact that JL are primarily a car audio company may rub some "high end" audio people the wrong way 

 

 

 

*edit* just thought I'd add that personally I'd take (or at least audition) 2 x of the (also excellent and well reviewed) JL Audio E112's over a single F113

https://data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=104&mset=116

https://www.audioholics.com/subwoofer-reviews/e-sub-e110-e112

 

just my 2c

 

good luck, really no bad choices at the level your looking at

jamie

Edited September 1, 2018 by jamiebosco

[andyr]

1 hour ago, Sator said:

As for "sufficient" amplifier power based on room size. I am planning to upgrade to a Devialet 440 i.e. have two 220 amps in monobloc configuration. I imagine someone in the AV world would say it isn't necessary because the 220 is "sufficient" to drive my main speakers to fill the room with sound. That isn't why you have more powerful amps to drive speakers, and this holds true irrespective of what drivers (tweeters, mids, woofers etc) are under discussion. The reason is, when you use a more powerful amp to better control the driver, it reduces THD

 

Absolutely correct!

 

1 hour ago, Sator said:

which is particularly an issue with the larger driver units found in subwoofers (see f113 measurements of Harmonic Distortion % By Component).

 

I suggest it would be better to have subs driven by more powerful plate amps .... than use a 'hifi' amp.  Because of the increased power you need as you go lower in frequency, whilst 220w may well be fine for your mains (particularly if you are rolling them off to match with the subs, like I do) ... you should give your subs more power.

 

My subs (15" Dayton 'Ultimax' drivers, custom-supplied by Paul Spencer) each have an 800w (into 4 ohms) Hypex plate amp.

 

Andy

 

[frankn]

You need as many watts as the subwoofer design requires. Too little and the distortion will increase as the amplifier is operating outside of its linear performance.  You know this. It’s all about the overall implementation. 

Peak power isn’t a good metric to quote. It can be very misleading as manufacturers  use different measurements for peak or maximium power. 

Subwoofers using servo’s to control the driver performance are becoming common, done well this improves the performance over just using the amplifier.  

 

[davewantsmoore]

 

On 26/08/2018 at 1:33 PM, Sator said:

But the difference in the audition room acoustics and overall system setup vs. that at home make meaningful comparison extremely difficult.

It makes it impossible.

 

So much so that I tend to disagree with your comment that people "should audition subwoofers".    If you buy one which isn't "faulty"  (ie. buy a brand which reviews well), and is correctly sized for your application (ie. you don't end up pushing it into poor performance) then the performance is going to come down to the room/positioning and EQ at home.

 

As Paul said, whether you want the bottom octave, and how loud you want it (assumed no and not very) .... then the larger woofer is probably not needed....   but these assumptions do make quite a bit of difference.   If you want loud and/or low, then larger woofers might be needed.

[Sator]

14 hours ago, jamiebosco said:

It's definitely an odd thing for the guy to say....usually the only real criticism of the JL's is in regard to price/dB (VFM)....and perhaps their decision to use an HPF @ 20hz on a sealed sub. 

Their hardware (driver/cabinet construction/amplifier/DSP are all regarded as absolutely top shelf.

I think the fact that JL are primarily a car audio company may rub some "high end" audio people the wrong way 

2

 

The guy made some other extravagant claims too. He alleged that REL subs only have a phase lag of "2-3 milliseconds" and then pointed to the JL Audio claiming that it, and models from other firms, have a "10 ms phase lag" supposedly—reputed meaning that "you cannot possibly get it to integrate properly with the main speakers". I have looked far and wide, but nowhere can independent corroboration of these alleged measurements be found. REL would never dare to publish such statements on their website in rightful fear of litigation by rivals, but it would appear that does not stop the REL reps from dissing the dirt on rivals by word of mouth. It was also alleged that only REL's way of connecting from pre-amp to sub going through the speaker outs ("High-Level input" in REL-speak) could possibly give musically satisfactory integration between the subwoofer and main speakers. All the other companies who connect pre-amp to sub through the RCA/LFE or balanced/XLR line outs, it was claimed, were using a deeply flawed method of connecting subs that rendered them all utterly useless for serious audio systems and were only acceptable for home theatre! Only the High-Level Input used by REL, it was claimed, could eliminate the electronic differences between the sound produced by the main amp and sub amp—of course, you will have spotted the error there, since the only way to achieve that would be to have the main amps drive both the main speakers and the subs passively.

 

Next, on discussing the REL 212 SEs, he claimed that the addition of the two passive drivers made the model superior to a sealed sub like the JL f113 for audio purposes and that in no way did passive drivers make this model more suitable for home theatre. He scoffed and talked over me repeating "NO! NO! NO—WAY!" when I pointed out these functioned similarly to ports/vents. The only justification he could give for these claims was that he said so and that he must be right because he was shouting louder than me. He did take smug pleasure in correcting my error in thinking that the REL S/5 SHO was a sealed model since it has a rear and down-firing passive driver, but he shot himself in the foot in stating this because this is clearly one of the reasons this REL would predictably sound inferior in a two-channel audio setup compared to the sealed f113.

 

Next, the guy claimed that REL's superiority rests on the fact that unlike JL Audio, they only do subwoofers. Then he repeated the same old story about the founder of REL decades ago couldn't find subs fast enough to match electrostatics and had to make his own, blah blah (it's on their website too). But this is clearly a lame argument because it is entirely dependent on the quality and quantity of R&D time and money invested in this market segment. Dynaudio make drivers for car audio but it hardly makes their home audio speakers and drivers any less coveted.

 

Oh, I did mention didn't I, that when I went up to the Castle Hill HiFi place, I got the same spiel?—if not quite so in your face. If Lifestyle tried vigorously to talk me out of JL Audio, Castle Hill tried to talk me out of B&Ws ("only the High-Level Input allows seamless integration with the main speakers etc etc"). Both places sound like they'd been evangelised by the REL sales reps. I bet you REL hold "educational" junkets for sales staff, have generous kickbacks for achieving sales targets etc. It was clear that this guy designated as the "expert" on setting up subs had been brainwashed ("specially educated") by REL because he was saying that using equalisation, or even frequency response plots, was utterly pointless. REL would say that because they are behind after failing to invest R&D funds into developing equalisation software/hardware, and so need to come up with a lame excuse for why they are so clever that they are way behind in the competition, a party line they probably include in their "educational programmes" on how you have to set up subs by ear alone.  It was bizarre.

 

At first, I was impressed at how both the staff at two stores were spontaneously and independently pushing me towards the REL, but the overblown unsubstantiated claims made in their favour are only making me more and more suspicious that it is just aggressive marketing of a kind that bordered on charlatanism. BTW no blight on Lifestyle Store as the floor staff were equally split on their views on REL, with one salesman siding with me, another neutral.

Edited September 1, 2018 by Sator
spelling/grammar