Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Hey Boros, try listening again. 20:08 - 20:13 is all noise from the sub. You can compare it to my video of the LV12r. https://youtu.be/c4mc4CxPiak
I was all set on waiting to get a second sub, because I thought the LV12r might be inferior, but i would have been disappointed if I waited another year to save up and spent $1500 extra, and still got tripped up on that scene (honestly my only issue with my LV12r). I'll be getting another LV12r black matte when they get back in stock. While I'm not saying the LV12r is in the same class as the PB13-Ultra or F15hp, for my room size and down to 20hz it's quite amazing.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
If you enable the rumble filter you should have no problems with that scene. It has very high 10hz - 30hz energy and it is well known that ported subwoofers unload under their tuning frequency. If you want to experience it you would need the larger ported subs tuned to 10-15hz or lower or a good sealed sub. Unfortunately the rest of the movie lacked the bass of that scene. Here is a snapshot of the LFE channel.
Attachment 1352
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Totally agree that the rumble filter fixes all of that. I've seen my F12's extend incredibly far, it looked like a couple of inches to me, but they didn't bottom out with the rumble filter on. Sounded insanely good. Can't get enough of my dual F12's.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
I'm not sure if the LV12r has a rumble filter or not. I know that there isn't an option to turn it on or off if there is one.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
LV12R was designed before Edge of Tomorrow as release. The design objective is to get as much extension as possible and yet does not cause the driver to overexcursion (under constant strength signal) With all of movies I tested out, like "How to Train your Dragon" and others, LV12R is fine.
But EOT is something else. Sure we can come up with an aggressive roll-off contouring that can allow let customers sail through that opening scene. But what is the catch? After that 10 seconds, customers need to go back to the back panel to flip the extension to a different position for the rest of the 1 hour and 1/2 movies, or it will have less bass extension. Also the bad sound is primarily due to the wind noise. If I can be a movie critic for just a minute, I think the opening scene with 5db or 10db too hot down to 10hz serves no purpose. It could have stopped at 15hz and still make the point and yet let everyone enjoy the rest of movies with just one extension setting. If customers think this is ok to flip switch during a movie, we can design the filter into the next release of LV12R. The extension filter setting will then be LOW-music (same as HIGH now) and LOW-HT (same as LOW now) and then this EOT special switch.
Rumble filter on sealed subs is a different story. Sealed sub does not have this problem that ported subs have that below the port tuning frequency, the enclosure back pressure is decoupled from the driver and therefore the driver and port makes 180 degress out of phase outputs. Therefore the rumble filter in sealed subs protects the cone from over excursion with overloaded subsonic signal and yet still allows us hear some part of subsonic effect.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RythmikAudio
LV12R was designed before Edge of Tomorrow as release. The design objective is to get as much extension as possible and yet does not cause the driver to overexcursion (under constant strength signal) With all of movies I tested out, like "How to Train your Dragon" and others, LV12R is fine.
But EOT is something else. Sure we can come up with an aggressive roll-off contouring that can allow let customers sail through that opening scene. But what is the catch? After that 10 seconds, customers need to go back to the back panel to flip the extension to a different position for the rest of the 1 hour and 1/2 movies, or it will have less bass extension. Also the bad sound is primarily due to the wind noise. If I can be a movie critic for just a minute, I think the opening scene with 5db or 10db too hot down to 10hz serves no purpose. It could have stopped at 15hz and still make the point and yet let everyone enjoy the rest of movies with just one extension setting. If customers think this is ok to flip switch during a movie, we can design the filter into the next release of LV12R. The extension filter setting will then be LOW-music (same as HIGH now) and LOW-HT (same as LOW now) and then this EOT special switch.
Rumble filter on sealed subs is a different story. Sealed sub does not have this problem that ported subs have that below the port tuning frequency, the enclosure back pressure is decoupled from the driver and therefore the driver and port makes 180 degress out of phase outputs. Therefore the rumble filter in sealed subs protects the cone from over excursion with overloaded subsonic signal and yet still allows us hear some part of subsonic effect.
Personally, I would leave the LV12r just like it is. The PB13 Ultra did the same thing during EoT. I personally want the deepest extension possible without the filter. This sub consistently measures less than 1% distortion and decay times are amazing. Keep up the amazing engineering! We can chalk this one up to a bad mix with EoT.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RythmikAudio
Rumble filter on sealed subs is a different story. Sealed sub does not have this problem that ported subs have that below the port tuning frequency, the enclosure back pressure is decoupled from the driver and therefore the driver and port makes 180 degress out of phase outputs. Therefore the rumble filter in sealed subs protects the cone from over excursion with overloaded subsonic signal and yet still allows us hear some part of subsonic effect.
Just makes me love my F12's even more. The more I listen to my F12's, the less I understand the appeal of ported subs besides less cost for more output above the tuning frequency.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Hello everyone, I'm new here and seeking any input on the LVX12. I know most own either the LV12R or the FVX15 or FV15HP. Would anyone happen to know how it's numbers compare to that of the LV12R, FVX15, and something like the SVS PB2000. I'm comtemplating picking one up while on sale.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CajunBuddha
Hello everyone, I'm new here and seeking any input on the LVX12. I know most own either the LV12R or the FVX15 or FV15HP. Would anyone happen to know how it's numbers compare to that of the LV12R, FVX15, and something like the SVS PB2000. I'm comtemplating picking one up while on sale.
I think that the SVS PB2000 and Rythmik LVX12 will have very similar outputs capabilities. Here is my thinking. SVS has said the the cylinder and box version of their subwoofers give you almost indistinguishable performance. They were designed that way in fact. The SVS PC2000 was recently measured on Audioholics (http://www.audioholics.com/subwoofer...r/measurements ). As you can see from the long term outputs, the SVS sub can output about 105 dB before compression sets in. Unfortunately I don't have measurements for the Rythmik LVX12. But, the FV15HP was measured on Data-bass ( http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=51&mset=49 ). As you can see in either port configuration the Rythmik subwoofer can output about 110 dB before compression begins setting in. According to Rythmik's webpage ( http://www.rythmikaudio.com/products1.html ) the LVX12 is about 5.5 dB down from the FV15HP. The LVX12 has the same port tuning modes as the FV15HP, so pick a port configuration and imagine shifting those all down by about 5 dB and you should have a pretty good idea of what the LVX12 can do. This isn't going to be exact because the drivers are different sizes as are the boxes, etc. But, it should be pretty close. This means that the Rythmik LVX12 can output about 105 dB before compression sets in. Either the SVS PC2000 or Rythmik LVX12 can probably burst more than 105 dB if only asked to do so for a split second, but this is about as much as they can do continuously from 2 meters away without compression really beginning to set in.
So the two seem to be very similar in output capabilities. This means, to me, that the case for getting the Rythmik is a lot stronger. The Rythmik LVX12 offers port tuning capabilities and servo technology. Whereas the SVS PB2000 doesn't have either. On post 33 of this other thread ( http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/sho...5586#post55586 ), I mention where Dave F. (Ascend's owner and speaker designer) and Brian (Rythimk's owner and speaker designer) talk about the advantages of Rythmik's servo technology over just using DSP, like SVS and most other subwoofer companies implement.
Good luck. Hopefully this will help you decide which sub is best for you.
Re: LV12R vs. LVX12 vs. L22 for HT in Small Sealed Room
Quote:
Originally Posted by
N Boros
I think that the SVS PB2000 and Rythmik LVX12 will have very similar outputs capabilities. Here is my thinking. SVS has said the the cylinder and box version of their subwoofers give you almost indistinguishable performance. They were designed that way in fact. The SVS PC2000 was recently measured on Audioholics (
http://www.audioholics.com/subwoofer...r/measurements ). As you can see from the long term outputs, the SVS sub can output about 105 dB before compression sets in. Unfortunately I don't have measurements for the Rythmik LVX12. But, the FV15HP was measured on Data-bass (
http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=51&mset=49 ). As you can see in either port configuration the Rythmik subwoofer can output about 110 dB before compression begins setting in. According to Rythmik's webpage (
http://www.rythmikaudio.com/products1.html ) the LVX12 is about 5.5 dB down from the FV15HP. The LVX12 has the same port tuning modes as the FV15HP, so pick a port configuration and imagine shifting those all down by about 5 dB and you should have a pretty good idea of what the LVX12 can do. This isn't going to be exact because the drivers are different sizes as are the boxes, etc. But, it should be pretty close. This means that the Rythmik LVX12 can output about 105 dB before compression sets in. Either the SVS PC2000 or Rythmik LVX12 can probably burst more than 105 dB if only asked to do so for a split second, but this is about as much as they can do continuously from 2 meters away without compression really beginning to set in.
So the two seem to be very similar in output capabilities. This means, to me, that the case for getting the Rythmik is a lot stronger. The Rythmik LVX12 offers port tuning capabilities and servo technology. Whereas the SVS PB2000 doesn't have either. On post 33 of this other thread (
http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/sho...5586#post55586 ), I mention where Dave F. (Ascend's owner and speaker designer) and Brian (Rythimk's owner and speaker designer) talk about the advantages of Rythmik's servo technology over just using DSP, like SVS and most other subwoofer companies implement.
Good luck. Hopefully this will help you decide which sub is best for you.
Thank you N Boros, I appreciate the detailed response. I mainly wanted to use the SVS PB2000 as a benchmark comparison since Rythmik does not have much info out on their subs being tested. I will most certainly buy a Rythmik, I want SQ above all else. I'm just trying to decide on the LVX12 or the FVX15. With this info I'll probably pick the LVX12 while it's on sale and a second if need be. Thanks again!!!
