OneTwoMany

Most good receivers can do this anyway.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

It did not work out of the box, so I changed the battery and it still does not work. I then tried to sync it according to the directions, but no luck. I have a video ipod. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Bose lol

I have not tested the DTS-20 myself, but my intuition tells me otherwise. Its still single 12", horn loaded or not, there is only so much output you can get out of a 12, and pairing it with larger horn loaded 15" mains seems counterintuitive, at least to me.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I was at work until 2am last night finishing all the tests on our new 18 PA subwoofers. We have never really got into the professional audio market so Im excited. Its a very interesting sub because its a combination of a PA type of speaker with a home theater type of performance. In short, it will do 2-2.5" throw which is unheard of in a PA speaker yet maintain a 95dB sensitivity and a has BL product of about 27 teslas. We had two of them loaded into a huge 4th order bass reflex and we did a frequency sweep. The -3dB point was at 20hz. I was shocked! This thing easily could hit a 140dB+ in a pretty good sized room and it could handle thousands of watts. When I was testing in a room 30x20 it felt like a car audio system because it was pressuring the room and you could feel the air being pushed in and out of your lunges. We just finished the first 12 drivers yesterday and they will be used in the next Coldplay concertI'm getting tickets! The sub is not for hometheater but its the only thing I could recommend with khorns.. khorns are that freaking loud! Unforuntatly, it only comes in industrial grade texture finish not quite a spitting imagine of an veneered khorn, lol.

fast is a misused term and i completely hate it for that matter. They are talking about dampening and mostly depends on the box anyway. think about this, is a subwoofer was faster or slower, then it would not be playing the same frequency would it?

MTX...... rofl

I was just implying that in any general case, as you double your distance, you typical lose a great deal of spl unless youre dealing with an arrayed source of speakers. I guess the best analogy I can draw from this, is that a point source moves out more like a sphere: 4*PI*r^2 while a line score spreads out more like a cylinder 2PI*r*h If you actually do the math and calculate the intensity or energy of a sound wave propagating out in both cases, you'll find that the energy dissipates faster in the case of the point source because of the exponent. Thats all I was saying, hope I didnt seem like an idiot before, sorry

I have heard a sub that will keep up no problem. twin 18's in a box thats taller than an SVS tube Its one of our biggest subwoofers right now, strictly outdoors unless you want to break your house apart, its surprising deep too.

Wow, what a can of worms here, in response to the surround, its thin to provide higher efficiency. The TV12 has dual spiders which prevent it from ripping the surround. The TV12 may be bottoming out because the input source is probably very high on whoever was testing it. The TV12 is not the end all best 12 subwoofer in the world by any standard, it has its limits and clearly, they can be found. It gets plenty of respect so it can suffer some criticism, we enjoy that at TC (in small doses of course). <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Jay, I would agree.. CAS, Well thats good to hear that at least the drivers are not the weakest link. It may not be a surprise now, but I work for TC Sounds so I deal with SVS parts all the time. Yes, the Ultra driver is vastly more expensive and is exclusively made in the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />US. It's based on a very robust platform which is anything but cheap, I would take the single ultra over the dual dB's also, but since its me, I would just build my own woofers to my own likings I cant wait until we get our next generation of neodymium linear motors out on the market. Im also dying to tear apart that new RT-12 subwoofer from Klipsch. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Im also a big Klipsch fan, so I hope Im welcome here.

The ultra can take about 800 -1000 watts RMS no problem. I feel SVS under powers their subwoofers, the ISD's should have 500 watts and the ultra should have 1000 per driver. Its a lot more money I guess... The IDS's suck up that 320 watts very fast. The Amp really can't keep up under heavy loads.

The TV-12 driver uses an under hung VC with a very robust motor. Its a lot more expensive than the dB or ISD platforms, but it does perform better, and sound better.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

I do know how much horn loading a sub helps. I have seen horn loaded 18's do incredible SPL with only a dozen few watts. So yes, the box makes a huge difference and I guess if you look at that box, 18x18 by 84.... ya thats pretty damn big. I mean 18x18x18 is big, well thats like ~1/5th the size! as far as.. how good can this driver be? Its probably not even as good at the new RT-12d drivers. Drivers can only be so good and they can only move so much air before they sound bad. So like Jay said, the box has more to do with it. If the driver was so awe inspiring, You would see bragging associated with it on the website, but you don't, thats just my guess. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

I still have my doubts about what a single 12" woofer can do. subwoofers can only move so much air and whats so special about this woofer in the first place? There doest seem to be any info on it at all Its ultimately up to the horn to account for efficiency. I'd like to see measurements against some other popular subwoofers in the same room.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Call me different, call me naive, but Im pulling out the over-hype card for now.

You actually lose closer to 6db with point source speakers, line array's will be more like 3dB. subwoofers are point source.. at least only the ones we can afford.

Well not quite the same [] Though I'm not sure how many modifications can be made until it's considered a "different" motor... The target market they were aiming for wants a "pretty" package - I like to think of it by attaching a dollar value to the size of the enclosure (and that value will be different for everyone). It is "expensive" and much lower WAF for the target market to go bigger sub. Also, since they have very similar motors you can think of the KW-120's as having more motor per surface area of driver...so you should get better cone control (so less distortion too? I'm certainly not qualified to make the claim). Sure, you lose a bit of max output with less displacement, but how big of a concern is that? You would also get a lot more port noise with more displacement...requiring a complete overhaul on the design. We can totally sit here all day and go back and forth with all sorts of theory, but in the end it comes down to a listening test...and I know I much prefer the sound of the KW-120's to that of the RSW-15. I haven't done a perfect side by side AB comparison, but I feel the difference is large enough that it doesn't have to be. I really dont care to argue, but yes, you certainly need to increase the motor as you increase the cone (generally speaking). The cone control does not cause as much distortion as say what happens when nonlinearity occurs when large signals are sent to the driver. IMO (I have not tested the RSW's) I believe A 13" (15 speaker) cone on the motor we are talking about would do better than the 10" (12 speaker) because its more efficient and will not have to be driven as hard and risk those nonlinearities if you know what I mean. BTW, I refer to the 15 as the 13 and the 12 at the 10 because thats about the actual the cone of each woofer. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I think I would agree with you that the KW-120s are better, but the box designs are completely different and account for more of the sound differences than the drivers we are discussing.

trey, you got pm?

Little one you want to argue,great.I have plenty of time [] You see little one,SVS subs like Sunfire subs follow a pattern.A small SVS will sound almost the same to the largest,most powerful SVS save the headroom and capacity to fill a room and have the extra output down very deep. I do not need to own all the subs I recomend.I will listen to the top of the line,then a much less expensive one and based on specs make an educated guess that works 100% of the time. Nothing to add,do not be a silly wabbit.You are for a very long run and a hard reality check. He is more or less right. They do sound very similar and you don't need to hear all of them to get the kind of intuition he has about them. If you have heard the PB12+ then you can pretty much guess what the +/2 will sound like. Ironically the sunfire and svs woofers are made in the same building, but thats just a bit of off topic trivia. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

It's a contraction of two words you're not your Anyways, Im sorry, I do realize Im new here, but my buddy actually designed the RSW woofers. Do you work for Klipsch too? <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Fast? I hate that word. Did you use Klippel and test he velocity yourself? The kw-120 and rsw-15 use the same motor. In a simialr designed box, the RSW-15 would be the clear winner in all catatories. Bottom-line, I have no idea why Klipsch did not use the 15" woofer for the KW-120's the difference in price is probably less than 30 for the driver and a not too much more for a larger box. My only guess is it would have been overkill... indeed.