Scrappydue Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Hello all, this will be my first thread!! let me start off by saying hello! huge klipsch fan!! haven't been for too long. Our relationship grows stronger everyday i sit in front of my home theater. with all that being said let me get to the point. i currently own rf-82's, rc-52, rs-42 X 4, all powered by my onkyo tx-sr805. i also own three RSW-10d's. one of which is the only one hooked up right now due to space issues. i am in the military and am not yet in a permanent home to really let my home theater settle in. So since a member on this forum i have been reading alot of reviews on these SVS subwoofers. i have personally only been into velodyne before my first klipsch subwoofer. so i guess what i am wondering if it would be worth getting rid of the three rsw-10d's for one of the SVS 13 ultra's?? i plan on having a a dedicated theater space when i move back home at the end of the year. plan on having about a 22'X16' room. music will rarely be listened to in this room as i will be starting to piece together a 2.0 setup. would i be gaining alot of db's over the six (three active) woofers? i know i will get a little lower freq response will which make the biggest difference i'm sure. what about evenly sperad sound with three over just one beast?? Thanks for any info in advance!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Welcome to the forum. The SVS won't go a little lower, it'll go a LOT lower. As far as SPL goes, I'll look for the specs but I'd be surprised if the SVS wouldn't easily best the combined 10d's in output. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 I'm unaware of any objective measurements of the RSW-10d to give a great answer on this. However, per spec, a single RSW-10d has a maximum acoustic output of 114dB at 1 meter, in a 1/8th space (corner). If you were to stack the set of 3 (not necessarily the best way to set up multiple subs for other reasons, namely attempting to even out in room frequency response), you could achieve 123.5dB, again at 1 meter, in a 1/8th space, at 30Hz. Enter the SVS PB13U http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=55&mset=53 A singe PB13U has been measured to put out 113.5dB at 25Hz and 115.5dB at 31.5Hz at 2 meters, in half space (ground plane, or simply, outdoors with no nearby boundaries). Converting that to 1m, 1/8th space means adding 6dB for 2 meters to 1 meter, plus another 12dB for going from half space to eighth space (6dB per boundary). Going with the lower figure of 113.5dB @25Hz @ 2m, 1/2 space, you end up with 131.5dB @ 25Hz, 1 meter, 1/8th space. Based on this information, it would take approximately seven RSW-d10s to match the output of a single SVS PB13U at 30Hz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Just as a quick addendum: http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/subwoofers/pb12-nsd/pb12-nsd-measurements The PB12-NSD, with max output of 105dB @ 25Hz @ 2 meters, ground plane (equating to 123dB @ 25Hz, 1 meter, 1/8th space) would actually appear to match the lower end output of your trio of subwoofers rather well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Thanks for doing the math Stephen. I suspected as much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Steven, As incredibly musical as the RSW-10d is, it will not have the deep impact of a well designed 13 inch or 15 inch subwoofer. Three RSW-10d's will get LOUD, but not any deeper. As you know, the RSW-10d is punchy and fast and can really hold it's own for a sub of it's size. If this HT system in your future will be primarily for movies, sell the two black RSW's and buy yourself a big monster sub. Keep the other RSW-10d for that music system and run 2.1. IMO, it would be very hard to find a more musical sub that is already paid for. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted February 22, 2012 Author Share Posted February 22, 2012 wow stephen!! thanks for breaking that down for me. seemed confusing at first but i read it a second time and it makes sense much more. with all that being said that i would have a much louder sub that would play lower, the other thing i was wondering would the one sub being that much better compare with an even output across the room? i plan having two rows of four theater seats. back row of course up on about a 8 inch platform. would the output be as even? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted February 22, 2012 Author Share Posted February 22, 2012 Bill, I am not sure that i am going to want a sub for my 2.0 setup. i think i would like to find a nice full range set of speakers. i know every system could use a sub, however just talking the wife into buying the additional two rsw-10d's was a chore. and to tell her that i sold them and still had to pitch in more money for this new sub would take a miracle. i would rather get rid of all three and not tell her the difference i would have to pay :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 wow stephen!! thanks for breaking that down for me. Glad I can be of assistance! i was wondering would the one sub being that much better compare with an even output across the room? i plan having two rows of four theater seats. back row of course up on about a 8 inch platform. would the output be as even? It depends. If you take the time to optimally set up and calibrate a pair or trio of subwoofers, I would expect you can achieve a more even response across a wider area than with one subwoofer, regardless of how good it is. However, things like bass trapping and room correction software (ie Audyssey) can help to even out response pretty well, even for a single sub. Of course, if you plan on stacking your subs to maximize output,or if you plan on just placing them where they're aesthetically pleasing, ie flanking the TV, then you're not going to be gaining much or anything in the way of smoothing. Of course, if you are interested in multiple subs AND you want a hard and deep hitting setup, you could also consider something like the SVS Legato. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubanJimbo Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Sorry to step in here, guys. I just have a quick question similar to the original post. Would it be better to have TWO Klipsch RW-12D subs in a room (2,200 cub. ft) with one of the walls only being a half wall (open to another room) OR having ONE SVS PB12-NSD sub? Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Would it be better to have TWO Klipsch RW-12D subs in a room (2,200 cub. ft) with one of the walls only being a half wall (open to another room) OR having ONE SVS PB12-NSD sub? Depends. If you already own the RW-12Ds, I wouldn't exactly rush out to upgrade to a single PB12-NSD. If you plan to optimize the placement of the pair of subs, that can obviously make a worthwhile difference. If you just want to know which will net you the most dB based on the estimate that I gave previously using the max output spec of the RW-12Ds versus the PB12-NSD's measured output at 25Hz, then as noted above, the PB12-NSD can deliver 123dB @ 1 meter, 1/8th space, at 25Hz versus the RW-12D's spec of 116dB at 30Hz, 1 meter, 1/8th space. Adding 6dB for the second sub, you get 122dB, making it a wash. Of course, the PB12 does this with under 10% THD+N whereas we have no idea how the RW-12Ds are behaving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubanJimbo Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Thanks! I only have one RW-12D at this time (and am still within the 30-day window to return it). That's why I posed the question. Should I get another RW-12D and let them handle the bass equally? OR should I return the one RW-12D that I have and get the SVS sub? It would be slightly cheaper to get the SVS sub, but I'm willing to go the other route, if the two klipsch subs would work well also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted February 23, 2012 Author Share Posted February 23, 2012 Everything I have been hearing and reading i would say go with svs. They seem to make some great subs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Depends: Do you want the benefits of dual subs, and are you willing to put in the effort to achieve those benefits? Otherwise, the SVS seems to make a compelling argument: it's measured to deliver true 20Hz performance whereas the RW-12D is specified to go down to 24Hz (although whether it can do it ground plane at 2 meters with significant output and low distortion is another story). The SVS should be able to match (if not slightly exceed) the output of a pair of RW-12Ds from 30Hz on down, although we have no idea what's happening with the RW-12Ds above this point. Above all else though, the SVS is a known quantity. There's shouldn't be any question what you're buying thanks to the review at Audioholics and Josh Ricci measuring the thing up and down, side to side, and even diagonally. It's a great sub for the money. Conversely, no one even seems to acknowledge that the RW-12D exists except when it goes on sale at Newegg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubanJimbo Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Thanks for the explanation. I got mine from Amazon, but it was also heavily discounted from MSRP. If I get another RW-12D from Amazon, the total would be over $900 for both. Whereas, the single SVS sub is $769. I am willing to put in the effort to get the benefits of dual subs....i'm just trying to get a feel if that effort is warranted for two RW-12Ds or not. Sounds like you guys are really into the SVS sub. [] So, I guess that's a better option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I am willing to put in the effort to get the benefits of dual subs....i'm just trying to get a feel if that effort is warranted for two RW-12Ds or not. I'd lean towards no. If its really only you (the consumate audiophile) and your wife and kids (who couldn't care less about even bass response) then it doesn't matter all that much; you optimize the response for your seat with EQ and if needed, some bass trapping, and you're good to go. If you plan on hosting parties of audiophiles at your home, then multiple subs smoothing the response helps. Of course, if you're hosting groups of audiophiles at your home, you may want something a little nicer than a RW-12D anyway. Sounds like you guys are really into the SVS sub. Well I own the cylinder counterpart, the PC12-NSD, so I had better like it [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubanJimbo Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Thanks! I'm going to go ahead and get the SVS sub and try it for a few days. Most likely, I will love it and just return the RW-12D to Amazon with my sincerest apologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Sounds like a plan. Let us know what you think of it when all is said and done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.