SVS PC13 Ultra
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Sorry but even though their supposed to be very similar in performance one of these enclosures is in the traditional rectangular shape whilst the other is in a cylindrical design with ports firing upwards. I can't help but think if the pc 13 ultra was tested in open air (excuse my terminology but i can't think of the correct word to explain the name of this process) like the rest of the subs, the results may prove different. So far the pb 13 ultra has been tested with each port bunged and then totally sealed. I can't believe the pc 13 ultra hasn't been tested by a website of this calibre yet!
Sorry but even though their supposed to be very similar in performance one of these enclosures is in the traditional rectangular shape whilst the other is in a cylindrical design with ports firing upwards. I can't help but think if the pc 13 ultra was tested in open air (excuse my terminology but i can't think of the correct word to explain the name of this process) like the rest of the subs, the results may prove different. So far the pb 13 ultra has been tested with each port bunged and then totally sealed. I can't believe the pc 13 ultra hasn't been tested by a website of this calibre yet!
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Without sounding rude, must i be brainwashed to believe that these two subs so different in design are going to sound identical in performance.............furthermore is that the reason why the pc13 ultra hasn't been tested yet?
Without sounding rude, must i be brainwashed to believe that these two subs so different in design are going to sound identical in performance.............furthermore is that the reason why the pc13 ultra hasn't been tested yet?
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
For everyones information, i already own a pc13 ultra sub which is why i was asking why there hasn't been an official test done for this sub like there has been for so many other subs on this website.
Surely i can't be the only person asking this question? why not put it to an official poll for a response?
For everyones information, i already own a pc13 ultra sub which is why i was asking why there hasn't been an official test done for this sub like there has been for so many other subs on this website.
Surely i can't be the only person asking this question? why not put it to an official poll for a response?
Joined
·
1,541 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Wow, bigbucks, you sure know how to make an impression...you've got not one, but two knowledgeable people responding to your post, I guess I need to be more creative with my threads to get greater response:rofl:
If you've got a pc13, svs will gladly support what the mods are saying-that there will be very little, if any noticeable difference in sound quality/output. Boxes are just more traditional and cylinders are, well, cylinders; and they aren't everyone's cup of tea as some may say. When the pc shares components with the pb, I'm sure SVS would rather submit another one of their products for review rather than an identical performing sub. Lots of products and limited reviews means competition for advertisement.:newspaper:
I like the idea of a poll-see how many HTS'ers own either a box or cylinder from SVS-all models. Better yet, a combined poll with all sub owners that have box or cylinder. But I think you can guess the results...
Wow, bigbucks, you sure know how to make an impression...you've got not one, but two knowledgeable people responding to your post, I guess I need to be more creative with my threads to get greater response:rofl:
If you've got a pc13, svs will gladly support what the mods are saying-that there will be very little, if any noticeable difference in sound quality/output. Boxes are just more traditional and cylinders are, well, cylinders; and they aren't everyone's cup of tea as some may say. When the pc shares components with the pb, I'm sure SVS would rather submit another one of their products for review rather than an identical performing sub. Lots of products and limited reviews means competition for advertisement.:newspaper:
I like the idea of a poll-see how many HTS'ers own either a box or cylinder from SVS-all models. Better yet, a combined poll with all sub owners that have box or cylinder. But I think you can guess the results...
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Thankyou for your feedback as you do seem to try and make some sort of sense out of this debate, however what a manufacturer specifies and what actually happens is two different things. From the way i've seen all the other subs tested on this forum i'm sorry but theres no way these two subs are going to sound the same. Fair enough they may share the same parts but thats the only similarities the two share..........another example: the pb 13 ultra has forward firing ports, now if you tune the sub to 15hz optimum and then send a 15-20 hz testtone at 100db through the sub but you stick a piece of paper in front of the two remaining ports how long would the paper stay in place for? which leads me to how much air movement you could feel from the sub if the sub is placed next to the tv in front of the viewer. Lets face it you wouldn't have this problem with the pc13 ultra. however if we do our research properly we would find out that due to the cylinder being a slightly smaller cubic litre enclosure compared to the pb13 ultra, the pc 13 ultra suffers slightly from port chuffing problems in comparison.
Thankyou for your feedback as you do seem to try and make some sort of sense out of this debate, however what a manufacturer specifies and what actually happens is two different things. From the way i've seen all the other subs tested on this forum i'm sorry but theres no way these two subs are going to sound the same. Fair enough they may share the same parts but thats the only similarities the two share..........another example: the pb 13 ultra has forward firing ports, now if you tune the sub to 15hz optimum and then send a 15-20 hz testtone at 100db through the sub but you stick a piece of paper in front of the two remaining ports how long would the paper stay in place for? which leads me to how much air movement you could feel from the sub if the sub is placed next to the tv in front of the viewer. Lets face it you wouldn't have this problem with the pc13 ultra. however if we do our research properly we would find out that due to the cylinder being a slightly smaller cubic litre enclosure compared to the pb13 ultra, the pc 13 ultra suffers slightly from port chuffing problems in comparison.
Joined
·
1,541 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
I'm not familiar with the direct, unimpeded air movement relating to spl effectiveness, ie whether a driver, or port, must face the listener at the low freqs as they are always touted as omnidirectional, with long wavelengths, but see the importance of whether they are reinforced by walls, listening area. Many noteable subs are downfiring, but effective, even when compared to sidefiring, and you never feel direct air movement.
Your volume consideration would indeed be a factor. You can't use outside dimensions to calculate interior volume, though, not even close. Don't be deceived by the tube's thickness, it is likely only several mm or 1/4" thick vs the lost volume of wood in a box sub, and a small difference in diameter makes a huge impact to volume.
I'm interested in how, if any, differences occur in sound quality due to room placement differences using different subs of similar build parts. This seems like a very interesting topic to me.:nerd:
I'm not familiar with the direct, unimpeded air movement relating to spl effectiveness, ie whether a driver, or port, must face the listener at the low freqs as they are always touted as omnidirectional, with long wavelengths, but see the importance of whether they are reinforced by walls, listening area. Many noteable subs are downfiring, but effective, even when compared to sidefiring, and you never feel direct air movement.
Your volume consideration would indeed be a factor. You can't use outside dimensions to calculate interior volume, though, not even close. Don't be deceived by the tube's thickness, it is likely only several mm or 1/4" thick vs the lost volume of wood in a box sub, and a small difference in diameter makes a huge impact to volume.
I'm interested in how, if any, differences occur in sound quality due to room placement differences using different subs of similar build parts. This seems like a very interesting topic to me.:nerd:
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Why would SVS not be objective when comparing their own two subs. I can see if you asked them to compare one of their subs to a competitor, but when everything any of these ID companies says is so analyzed and picked over with fine toothed comb, I just don't see them being less than honest on this particular subject.
Why would SVS not be objective when comparing their own two subs. I can see if you asked them to compare one of their subs to a competitor, but when everything any of these ID companies says is so analyzed and picked over with fine toothed comb, I just don't see them being less than honest on this particular subject.
Joined
·
15,060 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Our very own member who is on staff Ikka tests many of the subs and you could send him a PM and see what he says.
You do have the right to question this however I can say that SVS is NOT your ordinary company and customer service and product quality is there number one priority. You wont find many companies that operate this way and if you doubt the performance specifications that they posted why dont you send them an email and I am sure Ed Mullen or Ron Stimpson can clarify any questions or concerns you have.
Agreed, Ed Mullen has already stated in many posts that both subs preform almost identical and given the quality of either I would have to believe what he says.
Our very own member who is on staff Ikka tests many of the subs and you could send him a PM and see what he says.
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Actually there are a set of objective tests similar to Ilkka's tests which show some fair differences between the PB13 and the PC13 in the areas below 20-25hz. These test show the PB13 to be stronger in the deep bass area when the two are compared in similar states of tune. The PB13 does have more internal volume which would favor the deep bass performance. How audible the differences are, I don't know.
http://www.avtalk.co.uk//forumdisplay.php?f=54
Actually there are a set of objective tests similar to Ilkka's tests which show some fair differences between the PB13 and the PC13 in the areas below 20-25hz. These test show the PB13 to be stronger in the deep bass area when the two are compared in similar states of tune. The PB13 does have more internal volume which would favor the deep bass performance. How audible the differences are, I don't know.
http://www.avtalk.co.uk//forumdisplay.php?f=54
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Ive had both in my room and the PB13 is alot cleaner and is not as boomy. I get no port noise unlike the PC13 and the deep bass is more pleasurable. The PB13 is definitely the clear winner and it looks better.
cheers
Graham
Ive had both in my room and the PB13 is alot cleaner and is not as boomy. I get no port noise unlike the PC13 and the deep bass is more pleasurable. The PB13 is definitely the clear winner and it looks better.
cheers
Graham
Joined
·
39 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
I havent heard anything like port noise - perhaps I don't play on same levels as you do - but according to: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/subw...1/215-a-secrets-subwoofer-review.html?start=1
the bench test - we have some low distortion readings here. So the clear winner - no - but winner perhaps - it digs deeper, but weighs in over 70 kg's or 155 lbs - same as a washing machine or +30 kg's over the PC13 - alot more. About the looks - it's all about taste !
cheers
Thomas
I have the PC13 and are more than happy with it - ok - haven't heard the box edition - but to call it boomy - not in my setup (also have the AS-EQ1). Also - I don't think the PC13 would have gotten so many nice reviews if it was boomy: http://www.lsound.no/index.php?side=info&group=240&subgroup=1156&id=427121
I havent heard anything like port noise - perhaps I don't play on same levels as you do - but according to: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/subw...1/215-a-secrets-subwoofer-review.html?start=1
the bench test - we have some low distortion readings here. So the clear winner - no - but winner perhaps - it digs deeper, but weighs in over 70 kg's or 155 lbs - same as a washing machine or +30 kg's over the PC13 - alot more. About the looks - it's all about taste !
cheers
Thomas
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
Thomas,
Even when the SVS chap came over to my house to demo the PB sub he couldn't believe the difference in my room.
The box is much cleaner than the cylinder and that horrid port noise of the cylinder! Yuk! Bad design in my eyes.
The box even at full load doesn't chuff at all.
The main problem I found was moving it around to find the best listening position. Talk about bad back. :doh:
cheers
Graham
Thomas,
Even when the SVS chap came over to my house to demo the PB sub he couldn't believe the difference in my room.
The box is much cleaner than the cylinder and that horrid port noise of the cylinder! Yuk! Bad design in my eyes.
The box even at full load doesn't chuff at all.
The main problem I found was moving it around to find the best listening position. Talk about bad back. :doh:
cheers
Graham
Re: Svs pc13 ultra
To be honest i'd like to know how the two subs compare when being driven, however i too have never experienced any sort of port chuffing or boomyness from the sub, it has took me some time to realise how to get the best from it but i don't think the pc13 ultra is that far behind the pb13ultra. Sometimes you have to question if someone knows how to set up a sub correctly and in which case they will never achieve the optimum from any sub they have.
To be honest i'd like to know how the two subs compare when being driven, however i too have never experienced any sort of port chuffing or boomyness from the sub, it has took me some time to realise how to get the best from it but i don't think the pc13 ultra is that far behind the pb13ultra. Sometimes you have to question if someone knows how to set up a sub correctly and in which case they will never achieve the optimum from any sub they have.
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Bigbucks,
Every room is different I suppose. Take for example the Pulse DVD it chuffed at -20db on the MV and bassotronics was another source of music that made the PC13 chuff.
Mine hasn't been EQ'd with an external device but only with Onkyo's Audyssey but the PB13 sounds cool.
They both are still not the most musical sub though which is why I am still searching...
cheers
Graham
Every room is different I suppose. Take for example the Pulse DVD it chuffed at -20db on the MV and bassotronics was another source of music that made the PC13 chuff.
Mine hasn't been EQ'd with an external device but only with Onkyo's Audyssey but the PB13 sounds cool.
They both are still not the most musical sub though which is why I am still searching...
cheers
Graham
Joined
·
7,141 Posts
I have extensively tested the PB13 and the PC13 against each other and found the 2 quite different.
To start off with, here is the proof I actually did the testing and I was using REW to setup and analyse everything:
After a considerable few hours I came to only 1 conclusion, the box was better. I posted my findings on another forum and it seemed to cause some debate as well as a bit of backlash :bigsmile:
Anyways, I found that on paper (well REW) the in room response of the 2 subs in any given position was
pretty much exactly the same, so there was no debate for me on the performance side of things. I did however find that the cylinder seemed 3-4 db louder given the same settings and after system setup and calibration was carried out. This gave the cylinder more apparent power from an audible POV, but it just didnt seem as controlled. It was more boomy, and it did cause doors etc in the room to rattle a bit more.
When I tested the box it had the same power and authority, but was ever so slightly quieter. I could feel it the same but it wasnt booming the same. The bass had more texture than the cylinder and sounded more accurate. For music this made the box the clear superior, and for movies, scenes like the hospital demolition in The Dark Knight were much better. The collapse of the building was just a loud constant rumble with the cylinder, where as with the box you could hear a definite difference as the building started to crumble, to full collapse and then the quieter rumbles of the last remnants settling.
Other tests included the chuffing thresh hold of the 2 subs, and the box seemed to suffer very little unless the attempt to get it to chuff was deliberate, where as the cylinder did it on a regular basis. Also I found the grill on the cylinder, at highish spl levels, significantly contributed to the soundtrack with grill noise, and this was very distracting for me. The grill was never an issue on the box.
All in all, the cylinder seems a power house of a brute in a Mike Tyson kinda way, while the box is just as accomplished, but with more technical ability in a Lennox Lewis kinda way.
Just my ten pence. :sweat:
To start off with, here is the proof I actually did the testing and I was using REW to setup and analyse everything:
After a considerable few hours I came to only 1 conclusion, the box was better. I posted my findings on another forum and it seemed to cause some debate as well as a bit of backlash :bigsmile:
Anyways, I found that on paper (well REW) the in room response of the 2 subs in any given position was
pretty much exactly the same, so there was no debate for me on the performance side of things. I did however find that the cylinder seemed 3-4 db louder given the same settings and after system setup and calibration was carried out. This gave the cylinder more apparent power from an audible POV, but it just didnt seem as controlled. It was more boomy, and it did cause doors etc in the room to rattle a bit more.
When I tested the box it had the same power and authority, but was ever so slightly quieter. I could feel it the same but it wasnt booming the same. The bass had more texture than the cylinder and sounded more accurate. For music this made the box the clear superior, and for movies, scenes like the hospital demolition in The Dark Knight were much better. The collapse of the building was just a loud constant rumble with the cylinder, where as with the box you could hear a definite difference as the building started to crumble, to full collapse and then the quieter rumbles of the last remnants settling.
Other tests included the chuffing thresh hold of the 2 subs, and the box seemed to suffer very little unless the attempt to get it to chuff was deliberate, where as the cylinder did it on a regular basis. Also I found the grill on the cylinder, at highish spl levels, significantly contributed to the soundtrack with grill noise, and this was very distracting for me. The grill was never an issue on the box.
All in all, the cylinder seems a power house of a brute in a Mike Tyson kinda way, while the box is just as accomplished, but with more technical ability in a Lennox Lewis kinda way.
Just my ten pence. :sweat:
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
