Klipsch Sub 12 vs R-112SW

[algernonIp]

Hello everyone, 

 

I am considering an upgrade for my Energy esw-8.

Now I am considering buying the R-112SW, however I have not been able to find many reviews on it.

I have heard the Sub 12 in action which I liked a lot in terms of power, and they seem to be pretty similar to me (Keep in mind that I am not an expert in this field, so if I'm missing something please forgive me). Looking at the specs sheets (Sub 12) (R-112SW) it seems that

the main differences between the two are:

 

• 650 watts vs 600 watts dynamic power in favor of the sub 12
• 24Hz-120Hz vs 24Hz-125Hz frequency response in favor of the R-112SW
• Bash vs All digital amplifier for the sub 12 and the R-112SW respectively
• Output:
  • Max continuous output sub 12: 117 dB @30 Hz 1/8 space 1 meter
  • Max acoustic output R-112SW: 118 dB
• (Down-fire vs Front-fire for the sub 12 and the R-112SW respectively)
• (Copper Cerametalic woofer for the R-112SW)

 

My sub-questions are:

1. How important is the dynamic power for the overall performance?
2. Same for the frequency response (especially considering that the difference in frequency is in the higher end)
3. What is the difference between Bash and All Digital and which performs better?
4. Is the output information given on both spec sheets comparable? and if yes, which one has a higher significance (and thus gives the edge to the respective subwoofer)?
5. Does the material of the woofer make a difference in sound/performance

 

and then my main question is of course:

In terms of performance, which of the two is better?

 

 

The Receiver I am using is the Denon AVR-1912 (will probably upgrade in the future, but I don't know within what time-frame)

I am aware of the fact that the Sub 12 has been discontinued, but in the case that the Sub 12 is significantly better buying second hand would be an option or saving up for the R-115SW and upgrading the Receiver proportionally(The latter not being preferred in terms of financial resource management but if the upgrade isn't worth it and the sub 12 not available it's better to save up and wait as to me this is a long-term investment). 

 

Thanks in advance!

 

(Tldr; see main question )

[derrickdj1]

These are pretty much identical sub when both are function at 100%.  The big difference is new vs old in terms on amp failure.  The key question is where do you want to be with your bass system.  This is a hard question and not easily answered without some trial and error.

[algernonIp]

21 minutes ago, derrickdj1 said:

These are pretty much identical sub when both are function at 100%.  The big difference is new vs old in terms on amp failure.  The key question is where do you want to be with your bass system.  This is a hard question and not easily answered without some trial and error.

Hello derrickdj1, 

Thank you for your reply! 
What exactly did you mean by "where do you want to be with your bass system" ?
Do you mean in terms of position relative to the room and the room size etc?

Edited April 8, 2017 by algernonIp

[nitrofan]

The sub12 doesn't get much love ion here but I have 2 and like them a lot. I know there are much better subs out there but for the price I find them hard to beat. Much better than similar offerings from Polk or even velodyne In  this price range

[algernonIp]

 

1 minute ago, nitrofan said:

The sub12 doesn't get much love ion here but I have 2 and like them a lot. I know there are much better subs out there but for the price I find them hard to beat. Much better than similar offerings from Polk or even velodyne In  this price range

Yeah I agree, I am quite impressed by it. Anything on that level or higher will definitely be a significant upgrade for me, that's why I was wondering how it stacked up against the R-112SW because finding the Sub 12 is going to be harder, but if it ends up being better than the R-112SW it might be worth looking for it anyway. Based on the reply of derrickdj1 however this seems to be not the case  (rather they are pretty much equal) 

  

[derrickdj1]

I am not being negative on the sub 12.  What I am saying is that if this sub is for HT and music, there are other things to consider.  How much tactile response, chest slam and pressure response are you looking for.  For music a 12 in. sub is fine for most systems.  If the room is large or the seating further than 10 ft., a 12 in. sub may not be sufficient.  I have ran the gamut from a 6 in. sub to 18 inches and they are different.  I had a couple of 12 in. sub and felt good about what I had.

 

So, I am not saying you will have a bad experience but, stepping up did yield differences.  The problem that I faced was not exactly knowing what I was looking for.  I wanted good bass and HT but, without experiencing some stronger systems.  I had no reference to judge.  I can't answer this question for anyone which is why I mention some trial an error.  Most of us start small and say we only need so much.  This is not the same expectation we expect out of the rest of the speaker system.

 

Many would consider what I have as over kill but, to reach THX reference, more than one sub is needed in most cases.  The Klipsch speakers will hit reference level playback a lot easier than most of our wooferage.  Now, we are talking about a balance system.  Room size, basement, vs upstairs and other factors come into play.  I won't give you an answer because there are to many factors that come into play.

[algernonIp]

23 minutes ago, derrickdj1 said:

I am not being negative on the sub 12.  What I am saying is that if this sub is for HT and music, there are other things to consider.  How much tactile response, chest slam and pressure response are you looking for.  For music a 12 in. sub is fine for most systems.  If the room is large or the seating further than 10 ft., a 12 in. sub may not be sufficient.  I have ran the gamut from a 6 in. sub to 18 inches and they are different.  I had a couple of 12 in. sub and felt good about what I had.

 

So, I am not saying you will have a bad experience but, stepping up did yield differences.  The problem that I faced was not exactly knowing what I was looking for.  I wanted good bass and HT but, without experiencing some stronger systems.  I had no reference to judge.  I can't answer this question for anyone which is why I mention some trial an error.  Most of us start small and say we only need so much.  This is not the same expectation we expect out of the rest of the speaker system.

 

Many would consider what I have as over kill but, to reach THX reference, more than one sub is needed in most cases.  The Klipsch speakers will hit reference level playback a lot easier than most of our wooferage.  Now, we are talking about a balance system.  Room size, basement, vs upstairs and other factors come into play.  I won't give you an answer because there are to many factors that come into play.

Oh apologies, I think I did not formulate that right haha

I meant only that I agreed with nitrofan about that I like the Sub 12 sound quality. About the fact that other people seem to not like it on here I don't know much since I have only been here on this forum since a few hours  Thanks for elaborating your previous answer by the way. I think you definitely make a good point, and to be honest I am also a bit prone to getting addicted to upgrading. I will indeed have to experiment a bit, do you think it would be a good idea to borrow the Sub 12 and use that one as a reference to see how it sounds in my room since they are virtually the same in terms of performance (and then assume that the sound will be approximately the same with the R-112SW)? 

 

My room is not that big by the way. I don't know the exact sizes yet, but the distance certainly won't be more than 10 feet.
Thanks again, and sorry for the misunderstanding!

Edited April 8, 2017 by algernonIp

[derrickdj1]

You got to start from somewhere as a reference.  I wanted to here the dinosaurs stomp around and bombs go off in the air.  I got that from my 12 in. subs.  Then I wanted to fill the impact of the dinosaurs stomps and the bullets and bombs going thru the air.  The 12 in. subs did not deliver on that aspect.  THX recommendation called for the LFE channel to hit 115 db and up to 121 or 122 db in a 7.1 system.  I could hit that level but, where was I hitting 115 db.  The recommendation is between 31 and 63 Hz.  Most of us would rather hit it at 31 Hz compared to 63 Hz.

 

Most frequency ranges are 20 Hz to 20 k Hz.  I quick accepted I would love to hit 115 db at 20 k Hz and cover the audio range.  That is a huge goal and not easy to come by and hit cleanly without a lot of distortion and clipping.  But, this is kinda what I mean about defining where you want the bass system to land.  Everyone's goals are different and WAF and other things are a consideration.

[oldtimer]

He want's to feel the nuclear explosion before it actually happens in real time.  That way he will know how long he has to live.  Very few are so lucky.

[algernonIp]

24 minutes ago, derrickdj1 said:

You got to start from somewhere as a reference.  I wanted to here the dinosaurs stomp around and bombs go off in the air.  I got that from my 12 in. subs.  Then I wanted to fill the impact of the dinosaurs stomps and the bullets and bombs going thru the air.  The 12 in. subs did not deliver on that aspect.  THX recommendation called for the LFE channel to hit 115 db and up to 121 or 122 db in a 7.1 system.  I could hit that level but, where was I hitting 115 db.  The recommendation is between 31 and 63 Hz.  Most of us would rather hit it at 31 Hz compared to 63 Hz.

 

Most frequency ranges are 20 Hz to 20 k Hz.  I quick accepted I would love to hit 115 db at 20 k Hz and cover the audio range.  That is a huge goal and not easy to come by and hit cleanly without a lot of distortion and clipping.  But, this is kinda what I mean about defining where you want the bass system to land.  Everyone's goals are different and WAF and other things are a consideration.

 

Ah yeah that makes sense. I mostly use my system for PC gaming and music, but I don't have a specific requirement yet as what I would like to have result wise, but I will try to specify that for myself  
 

 

15 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

He want's to feel the nuclear explosion before it actually happens in real time.  That way he will know how long he has to live.  Very few are so lucky.

Haha what?  

[nitrofan]

I agree with Derrick 100 percent. Bigger is almost always better. I was just saying comparing 12 inch subs only, the sub 12 is a fine performer. If I had the chance to upgrade to 2 15s or 2 18s I'd  do it In  a heartbeat

[oldtimer]

Exactly.

[algernonIp]

2 minutes ago, nitrofan said:

I agree with Derrick 100 percent. Bigger is almost always better. I was just saying comparing 12 inch subs only, the sub 12 is a fine performer. If I had the chance to upgrade to 2 15s or 2 18s I'd  do it In  a heartbeat

 

2 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

Exactly.

 

Yeah true, I wish I had that kind of funds, but right now the level of a single 12 inch sub is all I can afford, maybe a 15, but I think a 12 is where it's at for me right now.

[derrickdj1]

12 minutes ago, algernonIp said:

Yeah true, I wish I had that kind of fund

yeah, I wish I had those type of funds.  That's why so many of us have DIY subs.  Your average 12 in. sub is 2 1/2 to 3 cu. ft.  for the same money I have some 11 to 17 cu. ft. subs, lol.  I am not a handiman or DIY'er but, have adapted quickly for the gains.

[CECAA850]

The Sub 12 was a great bang for the buck sub and got mucho love when it came out.   It only started getting bad press when their amps started capping out in large numbers.  When it's running it's a decent piece of gear.  Basically a good performing sub with questionable reliability.

[algernonIp]

50 minutes ago, derrickdj1 said:

yeah, I wish I had those type of funds.  That's why so many of us have DIY subs.  Your average 12 in. sub is 2 1/2 to 3 cu. ft.  for the same money I have some 11 to 17 cu. ft. subs, lol.  I am not a handiman or DIY'er but, have adapted quickly for the gains.

 

In the back of my mind I have considered that option as well, but I figured I would need a bit of a more technical background in order to do so, and considering I'm only a beginner compared to most people here probably I kind of figured that would be out of my reach for now. How long did it take you to learn the required techniques to safely build your own subs?

[algernonIp]

7 minutes ago, CECAA850 said:

The Sub 12 was a great bang for the buck sub and got mucho love when it came out.   It only started getting bad press when their amps started capping out in large numbers.  When it's running it's a decent piece of gear.  Basically a good performing sub with questionable reliability.

Ah I see, thank you for the background information, that explains a lot! 

[derrickdj1]

 There are kit that you can put together with only glue and be mostly done in under 1 hour.  Parts Express is one place to look for the UM 15 or 18 kit for around $360.  All the help you ever need is right here on the forum.

[algernonIp]

18 minutes ago, derrickdj1 said:

 There are kit that you can put together with only glue and be mostly done in under 1 hour.  Parts Express is one place to look for the UM 15 or 18 kit for around $360.  All the help you ever need is right here on the forum.

NIce! Thanks for the tip!

I am actually waiting for my new room to become available as that's where the new subwoofer will be placed and that won't be til mid-august 
so right now I'm still only orienting, but if it only requires gluing parts together I suppose it should be doable for me. Of course I will still need to prepare well and work very carefully, but knowing this definitely makes it worth considering.

[derrickdj1]

There is no preparing, the part are A- G or H so you don't even have to know all your ABC's.  They also have an instructional video that is step by step on the assembly.  Before I put my first one toghether, the only other thing I ever built was a napkin holder in the 7th grade.