Best subwoofer for Falcon LS3/5a?

[pankon]

Hi,

I love my Falcon LS3/5a for all the known reasons that LS3/5a have a loyal fan base. Having said that, I believe that my small speakers could use some extra bottom-end 'body', which is of course limited due to their limited volume.

I am wondering whether a subwoofer might be able to do the trick and offer the desired extension below 80Hz, but WITHOUT negatively affecting the speed and naturalness of the Falcons.

Oh, I have to clarify that I am also a neafield devotee, not due to room limitations, but because I feel that the nearfield listening position gives me more detail, more transparency and less room intervention.

Any comments about using a subwoofer? Any suggestions about subwoofers that could be a good match with the LS3/5a?

Enclosed a sketch of my listening room (blue area).

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

26516

[Firebottle]

You can't go wrong with REL subs.

[pankon]

Thanks, Alan,

I think that -apart from its inherent sonic qualities- the subwoofer should also have as many controls as possible, to facilitate the integration with the speakers in the given listening room. Would you agree?

[Sherwood]

I bought my Rogers LS3/5a's 40 years ago. Frankly, I have never heard them work well with sub-woofers, even those designed specifically for them. I have always found that a mega powerful amp does more to address their fundamental bass problems. Yes, a sub-woofer will provide a deeper sound but it will not provide a better one!

[graham67]

Have you thought about AB1 extender which was designed specifically for the ls 3/5a? Stirling Broadcast currently make a slightly revised version called the AB2.
20 years ago I had the opportunity to buy a Rogers AB1 and matching ls3/5a. But back then I didn't really have a clue about hifi and couldn't bring myself to buy something so Heath Robinson. If only I had listened to my ears and not my eyes!!
Anyway, the AB1 will give you more body and extension without overpowering the lovely balance of the 3/5a.

[pankon]

I bought my Rogers LS3/5a's 40 years ago. Frankly, I have never heard them work well with sub-woofers, even those designed specifically for them. I have always found that a mega powerful amp does more to address their fundamental bass problems. Yes, a sub-woofer will provide a deeper sound but it will not provide a better one!

Thanks for your feedback, Goeff.

It may sound rather heretic, but I seem to prefer my Falcon LS3/5a over my bigger and more expensive Harbeth SHL5 Plus 40th Anniversary. That says a lot in favor of the Falcons.

Of course just adding a subwoofer (irrespective of the subwoofer quality) without the proper, very careful integration, may fix some things and deteriorate others. So, IMHO, integration is key.

[pankon]

Have you thought about AB1 extender which was designed specifically for the ls 3/5a? Stirling Broadcast currently make a slightly revised version called the AB2.
20 years ago I had the opportunity to buy a Rogers AB1 and matching ls3/5a. But back then I didn't really have a clue about hifi and couldn't bring myself to buy something so Heath Robinson. If only I had listened to my ears and not my eyes!!
Anyway, the AB1 will give you more body and extension without overpowering the lovely balance of the 3/5a.


Yes, Graham, I am aware of the Stirling AB2 bass extender. It is intended to provide a turnkey solution for LS3/5a (and not only the Stirling ones). However, I am concerned with the fact that the AB2 have no controls and thus do not allow any adaptation to my nearfield listening preference within my specific room, which is not so regular in dimensions. Otherwise, the AB2 would have been a no-brainer.

[Discopants]

You can't go wrong with REL subs.

I would agree, you have a challenging room though as its rather square.

1 very good subwoofer in the rear right crossed over below 80hz may work.

But there are swarm subwoofer options where you go for four 8 inch subwoofers spread throughout the wall space and you get a much more even bass response, but you are not going to get much below about 22hz.


Whats your budget ?







Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Discopants]

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audiokinesis-swarm-subwoofer-system/

Have a read of this


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Discopants]

DIY 4 subwoofer system.

[URL][https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/a-diy-swarm-based-distributed-bass-array-for-sota-bass/URL]




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pankon]

I would agree, you have a challenging room though as its rather square.

1 very good subwoofer in the rear right crossed over below 80hz may work.

But there are swarm subwoofer options where you go for four 8 inch subwoofers spread throughout the wall space and you get a much more even bass response, but you are not going to get much below about 22hz.


Whats your budget ?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Martin. thanks for our feedback.

My budget is 1000€ (approx. 910 GBP with today's exchange rate). I am afraid that the Swarm subs are far above my budget. I would not like to spend the same or more than what the Falcons cost on the first place.

[Macca]

Look out for an REL Strata, Stentor or Stadium. Fully adjustable. Proper subs not pretend ones. All those models should be within your budget if you can find one. Stadium is the really big one.

[Discopants]

Wow i knew the pound had tanked but its not quite that bad yet...

I run a stentor 3 (one for sale in classifieds for £600) with proac tablette 10 signatures which are ls3/5 but my amp has a leading class room correction. This rel was designed for hifi

The more modern rel subs are designed for home theatre or home theatre and hifi. REL website actually recommends either one T7i subwoofer or a pair of T5is for a small room with Harberth LS3/5 models.

You should see if you can get a home demo though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Discopants]

Look out for an REL Strata, Stentor or Stadium. Fully adjustable. Proper subs not pretend ones. All those models should be within your budget if you can find one. Stadium is the really big one.

The series goes, strata, stadium, stentor then studio. The studio is 90kgs twin 10 inch drivers. However you dont get DSP on these models and your room is boxy which is a massive challenge for single subwoofer with no DSP.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pankon]

Look out for an REL Strata, Stentor or Stadium. Fully adjustable. Proper subs not pretend ones. All those models should be within your budget if you can find one. Stadium is the really big one.

I have been eying an SVS SB-3000 https://www.svsound.com/products/sb-3000 , mainly due to its mobile application (iOS), that can set the controls on the fly (via bluetooth) and a built-in DSP. It has EQ functionality that seems quite flexible...

[Macca]

The series goes, strata, stadium, stentor then studio. The studio is 90kgs twin 10 inch drivers. However you dont get DSP on these models and your room is boxy which is a massive challenge for single subwoofer with no DSP.

k

I don't know about a major challenge - as long as you're free to place it anywhere in the room. For the rest you are right of course. And I forgot all about the Studio but did anyone ever actually have one?

[Discopants]

I have been eying an SVS SB-3000 https://www.svsound.com/products/sb-3000 , mainly due to its mobile application (iOS), that can set the controls on the fly (via bluetooth) and a built-in DSP. It has EQ functionality that seems quite flexible...

Can you get it on demo ?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Macca]

45 day home trial according to the link.

[Discopants]

https://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4

By all accounts these are very good and would work well with an older REL


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Cycleallday]

Hi,

I love my Falcon LS3/5a for all the known reasons that LS3/5a have a loyal fan base. Having said that, I believe that my small speakers could use some extra bottom-end 'body', which is of course limited due to their limited volume.

I am wondering whether a subwoofer might be able to do the trick and offer the desired extension below 80Hz, but WITHOUT negatively affecting the speed and naturalness of the Falcons.

Oh, I have to clarify that I am also a neafield devotee, not due to room limitations, but because I feel that the nearfield listening position gives me more detail, more transparency and less room intervention.

Any comments about using a subwoofer? Any suggestions about subwoofers that could be a good match with the LS3/5a?

Enclosed a sketch of my listening room (blue area).

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

26516
Morning Panos,
I also have the Falcon LS3/5a speakers. Mine were part of an original batch sold as a complete kit just before Jerry at Falcon took them to the Berlin Hi end show and onsubsequently only sold them as built licensed versions at many times the kit price (approx £650). They still use fully matched components and Jerry told me they are unlikely to be identified as different from the licesnsed version if built as directed.

Mine are also used near field - often either side of my computer desk at about 1.6m apart and connected to a Linn amplifier. I am slowly digitising my large lp collection and use them to monitor the recording as well as general background music.

I have an MJ Accoustics Reference 150 sub which I often connect to them with good suuccess. This sub is of traditional analogue design rather than using class D amps with high output. It works very well in stereo hifi setups and this was its original design aim. I followed the makers guide in setting it up for working with HiFi and a guide published in HiFi News for determining sub location (also very important).

Rather than using the normal pre-out from the amp, I use a High Level input which connects the sub to the amp/speakers via the actual speaker connections/outputs. The sub must have the controls and input to support this type of operation. For the Falcons I set the sub to cut in at around 65Hz. I then adjust the sub volume to a point I just hear a bass boost and then back off a touch. I site the sub in a corner which suits me and is in line with the HiFi News guide I read. The primary aim is to integrate the lower missing frequencies from the sub with the higher frequencies the speaker can provide. This is all very subjective according to what you like and takes some time to achieve. I hate big bass boom/boost as normally heard from subs in AV setups. My sub volume is usually set in the lower quarter of its range.

The AB cabinet originally developed to match to the LS3/5a was also supplied in kit form for a short period by Falcon using the official drivers. However this never moved accross to retail production after the kits sold out so I assume Jerry did not feel it was a good match or neccesary to enhance the LS3/5a speaker.

Feel free to ask any questions either via the post or pm as i think the reply is now a little too long.

Mel

[pankon]

Hi Mel,

Thanks very much for your insightful feedback. It seems that the LS3/5a can indeed be enhanced with the help of a sub, provided sufficient care has been given to integration.

I am also not looking for huge amounts of bass, just ‘as much’ to fill the missing bottom end.

I have asked a friend to come over with his equipment and measure the room. I hope we’ll be able to figure out what’s needed first. And we will keep a record of the before and after, so that we can compare.

Thanks again.

[Mandryka]

I bought my Rogers LS3/5a's 40 years ago. Frankly, I have never heard them work well with sub-woofers, even those designed specifically for them. I have always found that a mega powerful amp does more to address their fundamental bass problems. Yes, a sub-woofer will provide a deeper sound but it will not provide a better one!

I was interested in your comment, can you say a bit more - which amps, how powerful?

I don’t have Falcon LS3/5A but I have a distant relation, Rogers JR 149s. They sound great for chamber music with a Quad 306. To some extent the midrange and image is so good that you just forget their weaknesses. But I can’t use them for music which where lower frequencies matter more.

I use a pair of subs very successfully with electrostatics, but I would prefer to try other ways partly because of the difficulty of integration (it took a year of experimentation before I was happy with the ESL subs settings!) and partly because . . . well why not?

[Sherwood]

I was interested in your comment, can you say a bit more - which amps, how powerful?

I don’t have Falcon LS3/5A but I have something similar, Rogers JR 149s. They sound great for chamber music with a Quad 306. To some extent the midrange and image is so good that you just forget their weaknesses. But I can’t use them for music which where lower frequencies matter more.

I use subs very successfully with electrostatics, but I would prefer to try other ways partly because of the difficulty of integration (it took a year of experimentation before I was happy with the ESL subs settings!) and partly because . . . well why not?


When I bought the Rogers LS3/5a's I first used them with Rogers own A75 MkII amp. This was highly recommended at the time and it did sound pretty good. However, it's limitations became apparent when I paired them with a Rogers Cadet II valve amp. On paper, the Cadet valve integrated was hugely underpowered and should have sounded poor in comparison with the solid state A75. It didn't! In fact, it wiped the floor with the A75. I was told that the high voltage swings with the valve design suited the inefficient LS3/5a's. I found the sound to further improve when I paired them with an Art Audio Quintet power amp. This preserved the improved dynamics of the Cadet but added more weight to the bass and midrange. I then tried a huge home built Mosfet power amp and the bass become so much better controlled. Previously, there was always a danger of the driver "chuffing" when driven hard, bu the extra control of the Mosfet greatly increased bass solidity and control.

Although your JR149's use the same drivers, they are a not sealed box design so I cannot say that they would respond similarly. However, I am sure they would respond well to a high current solid state design. A couple of years ago I got the Rogers LS3/5a's out of storage and tried them with an Odyssey class A/B power amp and a NuPrime class D power amp. They sounded great with both designs.

[Frazeur1]

Since when were the JR149's not a sealed box design? New one on me...

[spendorman]

Since when were the JR149's not a sealed box design? New one on me...

I thought the same, have two pairs of JR149, they are very well sealed.

[spendorman]

Just my thoughts, I have vintage Chartwell LS3/5a's, and find them very slightly underdamped, giving a slight bass boost, that is perhaps welcomed in most cases.


It may be sacrilege, but I have added a little extra damping inside the the cabinets, this tightens up the bass, possibly making adding a good sub-woofer a bit easier.

[pankon]

Based on the feedback by the forum members, it seems there is no clear consensus about whether a subwoofer could (under circumstances) be a reasonable improvement for the LS3/5a (or not).

I believe that room integration is key, so I believe that the candidate subwoofer should have as many EQ controls as possible.

Thanks

[Discopants]

So what are you getting...?

I know without a shadow of doubt that I’d miss the bottom octave and a half on my LS3/5as if I took the sub out.

I can and do turn it off for late night listening though when the missus goes to bed.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pankon]

So what are you getting...?

I know without a shadow of doubt that I’d miss the bottom octave and a half on my LS3/5as if I took the sub out.

I can and do turn it off for late night listening though when the missus goes to bed.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hi Martin,
theoretically, if the subwoofer is fast enough and its controls are sophisticated enough to allow a proper integration with the room and the LS3/5a, I do not see any reason to spoil (but only improve) the great sound of my Falcons (and my Harbeth SHL5 Plus, too; with different settings of course).
Would you agree?

[Discopants]

Yes , but there is another critical variable and that is the room. DSP will help but its constrained by the room.

You have to be prepared to spend a lot of time tuning it to your system and the room.

Are you going with that Swedish one ?




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pankon]

Yes , but there is another critical variable and that is the room. DSP will help but its constrained by the room.

You have to be prepared to spend a lot of time tuning it to your system and the room.

Are you going with that Swedish one ?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, I have not decided yet how to proceed. What I am going to do is first measure the room with the help of a friend, who has the knowledge and the necessary equipment, in order to have an insight about the issues that need to be addressed. Then we will see how to deal with those issues and to see whether the candidate subwoofer can address my room's peculiarities with the help of its controls.

Focusing on music and not home theater, it's the quality of bass I am looking for and not quantity.

[graham67]

have you thought about the Graham Audio Sub 3 designed for the Ls 3/5a.

Its passive so should be considered as an extension to your existing speaker rather than a sub. IMO, a well matched passive is a great option as the tricky matter of integration is solved for you and tonally it will match.

https://www.grahamaudio.co.uk/images/sub3_front.jpg
https://www.grahamaudio.co.uk/products/sub3/

[pankon]

have you thought about the Graham Audio Sub 3 designed for the Ls 3/5a.

Its passive so should be considered as an extension to your existing speaker rather than a sub. IMO, a well matched passive is a great option as the tricky matter of integration is solved for you and tonally it will match.

https://www.grahamaudio.co.uk/images/sub3_front.jpg
https://www.grahamaudio.co.uk/products/sub3/

Hi Graham,

after quite some thought, I've decided to stay away from subwoofers that do not allow precise tuning in my listening room, which is rather complex in shape (see sketch).

26571

That, together with the fact that I listen nearfield, makes the SUB3 or the AB1/AB2 options too much of a gamble for me for optimal results. This does not mean that those subs would not work work for others (with different requirements).

Thanks for the advice anyway.

[struth]

Subs can be difficult to integrate into Hifi systems, and are usually better in surround systems or an amp that at least has a sub out connection

[Bluedroog]

Check our BK Electronics subs. Not the best know name but well respected in the industry. Made in the UK, direct sales model and used to produce models for REL to stock their badge on, their equivalent models are typically better value. I used to own the XXL400 and it was very good.

https://www.bkelec.com/

[fatmarley]

Check our BK Electronics subs. Not the best know name but well respected in the industry. Made in the UK, direct sales model and used to produce models for REL to stock their badge on, their equivalent models are typically better value. I used to own the XXL400 and it was very good.

https://www.bkelec.com/

They are very popular on other hifi forums. Supposed to be even better when you plug in one of those anti-mode boxes.

[pankon]

I cannot claim that I have experience on subwoofers. What I find appealing is the ability to control the settings of the sub from my couch via a mobile app. The SVS SB-3000 can do that. Any other similar candidates?

[Cycleallday]

Yes the new version of the MJ Acustics can but really you do not need a sub with the Falcons. You asked if one can be used and I said my MJ worked well but also I do not use them together very often as the Falcon sound is what I enjoy. I have other speakers should I want a different sound.

I suggest you enjoy what you have and if it is not the sound you want look for a single box rather than try to mix speakers from different manufacturers. The fact there is no real consensus on a bass enhancement system for the ls3 should give the hint that one is really not needed or wanted by most users.

Mel

[Discopants]

I like my Proac tablette 10 signature and rel stentor 3 combo, but I can integrate it easily.

I listen to a fair bit of music where those bottom 12 notes would disappear , even on none bassy tracks I think the Rel adds to the harmonics of the higher frequencies and is additive.

However if you cant integrate perfectly then you may well end up dissatisfied still, thats why l think you should look for subwoofers you can home demo , ideally for a week.

The SVS sub you mention gets good reviews but I notice a couple of folks saying they don’t think the 3000 is as musical as the 2000. With a small room and near field listening you might be better off with the smaller sub.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pankon]

I like my Proac tablette 10 signature and rel stentor 3 combo, but I can integrate it easily.

I listen to a fair bit of music where those bottom 12 notes would disappear , even on none bassy tracks I think the Rel adds to the harmonics of the higher frequencies and is additive.

However if you cant integrate perfectly then you may well end up dissatisfied still, thats why l think you should look for subwoofers you can home demo , ideally for a week.

The SVS sub you mention gets good reviews but I notice a couple of folks saying they don’t think the 3000 is as musical as the 2000. With a small room and near field listening you might be better off with the smaller sub.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hi Martin,

I used to have an SB-2000 with my KEF LS50. They definitely improved the overall sound, but I was not sure about my ability to achieve optimal integration by listening. The SB-3000 can be parametrized on-the-fly from the listening position with the help of a mobile app, whereas the SB-2000 does not have that capability. And the SB-3000 also has more sophisticated settings.
So, it's not the size of the sub that I am interested in, but the best possible integration.

The Dynaudio 18S has a similar mobile app like that of the SB-3000.

[pankon]

Several months again after the original post about finding a subwoofer for my Falcon LS3/5a, I have to admit that I have not taken a decision. I am reopening my quest. The new piece of information is that SVS have recently introduced a new model, the SB2000 Pro (closed box with 12" driver and DSP, adjustable via a mobile app). The price is in the range of 1,000€.

However, the REL T7/i still remains strong contender in my mind. It has the high-level connection to the speaker binding posts of the amp (which the SVS does not). How important/advantageous is the high-level connection over low-level input? But there is also another caveat. I have Croft monoblocks and that means -according to REL- I can connect the sub only to one monoblock via the high-level input. So, half job, unless I also get a second REL for the other channel as well. And no DSP capability either.
I have also noted the possible locations, where the sub could be positioned within my room (red boxes).

So, what do you guys think? SVS SB-2000 Pro or REL T/7i for my little Falcons?

Thanks for your opinion!

27275

[Stryder5]

I can answer half of your question, but it raises a question.

High level inputs are much better for SQ than low level in my opinion.......but what is your source of the low level out put?

Gary





Several months again after the original post about finding a subwoofer for my Falcon LS3/5a, I have to admit that I have not taken a decision. I am reopening my quest. The new piece of information is that SVS have recently introduced a new model, the SB2000 Pro (closed box with 12" driver and DSP, adjustable via a mobile app). The price is in the range of 1,000€.

However, the REL T7/i still remains strong contender in my mind. It has the high-level connection to the speaker binding posts of the amp (which the SVS does not). How important/advantageous is the high-level connection over low-level input? But there is also another caveat. I have Croft monoblocks and that means -according to REL- I can connect the sub only to one monoblock via the high-level input. So, half job, unless I also get a second REL for the other channel as well. And no DSP capability either.
I have also noted the possible locations, where the sub could be positioned within my room (red boxes).

So, what do you guys think? SVS SB-2000 Pro or REL T/7i for my little Falcons?

Thanks for your opinion!

27275

[pankon]

I can answer half of your question, but it raises a question.

High level inputs are much better for SQ than low level in my opinion.......but what is your source of the low level out put?

Gary

Hi Gary,

thanks for your response. Well, if I have understood your question correctly, my sources are a phono stage (ASR Mini Basis Exclusive) and a DAC (LAB12 DAC1 SE). They feed a Hattor BIG passive preamp (with high quality Khozmo attenuators), which in turn feeds a Hattor valve active stage (with ECC82 valves). The valve active stage connects to the Croft monoblocks. If I have to use line-level connection for the sub, I will connect an RCA pair from the line level out from the Hattor valve active stage to the sub's input. I hope to have answered what you've asked.

Cheers,
Panos

[Stryder5]

Hi,

I think I understand your issue, the REL has only one low level input as usually if using an AV amp the R and L channels are down mixed to provide an output to the sub.

So we have a problem that you say REL have identified using mono-bloc’s ( I thought this was only an issue using ‘D’ class amps, could be wrong though) can you clarify this with REL I thought that a positive speaker output from each amp and negative from the case of one of the amps would work DONT TAKE MY WORD ON THAT PLEASE VERIFY. This would be high level.

Your solution using active stage will give you high level outputs into the SVS 2000 sub, which has L and R RCA’s and does it’s own mixing. Does your active have more than one set of RCA outputs, one for power amp and one for sub that are switched at the same.

Hope I understood.

Gary

[pankon]

Hi,

I think I understand your issue, the REL has only one low level input as usually if using an AV amp the R and L channels are down mixed to provide an output to the sub.

So we have a problem that you say REL have identified using mono-bloc’s ( I thought this was only an issue using ‘D’ class amps, could be wrong though) can you clarify this with REL I thought that a positive speaker output from each amp and negative from the case of one of the amps would work DONT TAKE MY WORD ON THAT PLEASE VERIFY. This would be high level.

Your solution using active stage will give you high level outputs into the SVS 2000 sub, which has L and R RCA’s and does it’s own mixing. Does your active have more than one set of RCA outputs, one for power amp and one for sub that are switched at the same.

Hope I understood.

Gary

Hi Gary,

as a matter of fact, the issue with REL is that a single REL sub can connect to either a stereo amp or one monoblock via the high-level input. If one has monoblock amplifiers (like me), it is possible to connect (via the high-level input) only one of the monoblocks to the REL sub, either the left or the right. The high-level output of the two monoblocks CANNOT (MUST NOT) be mixed into a single REL. That's an issue for me.

To connect a REL via the low-level input, one has to mix the two channels into the single-post low-level input of the sub. But that's easily feasible with a Y-connector.

My active tube preamplifier (Hattor) has 4 sets of output connections (2x2 RCA and 2x2 XLR). Currently only one set of RCA outputs is taken to drive my Croft monoblocks. I have 3 sets of outputs free (1 RCA and 2 XLR). I could easily use any of those three to drive a sub. In the case of the SVS, I would be able to use the free set of RCA as input to the low-level input.

I hope to have clarified the situation.

Thanks

Panos

[Stryder5]

Hi,

The svs is the most elegant solution for high level then in your case, and the reports are great.

Mine is in position top left in your diagram I had it in bottom left too try both see which you prefer.

Gary

[Thetiminator]

The secret with subs is having two (massive difference to speed and tone) and turn them down very low...that way they’ll just support the bass below your speakers but more noticeable than the bass is a dramatic change to the soundstage and atmosphere...

[pankon]

The secret with subs is having two (massive difference to speed and tone) and turn them down very low...that way they’ll just support the bass below your speakers but more noticeable than the bass is a dramatic change to the soundstage and atmosphere...

Hi Tim,

two subs are obviously the way to go. However, as we all know, room modes can appear that amplify or attenuate certain frequencies. Many people try to tackle such room modes by changing the placement of the sub(s), others use room treatment panels. Another option might be PEQ (Parametric EQ) to appropriate shape the sub's output in the frequency domain. Is that so or not?

[spendorman]

Some years ago I tried a subwoofer with Chartwell LS3/5a's I found that adding a little extra damping inside the LS3/5a's removed the slight hump in their bass.

Some may say that modifying the LS3/5a's is sacrilege, but it worked.

[pankon]

Alex, which subwoofer have you used with the chartwells? Were you happy with the overall result?

Cheers,
Panos

[spendorman]

Alex, which subwoofer have you used with the chartwells? We’re you happy with the overall result?

Cheers,
Panos

Two very different subwoofers, home built with EMI heavy duty 14" x9" unit and a JPW subwoofer.

Yes, pretty good.

[pankon]

Thanks for the feedback. Which trait do you think is the most important one for best integration?

[spendorman]

I thought the bump in the LS3/5a bass response was important to eliminate. This, of course could be room dependent.

[pankon]

I see. If the lower bass is filled, perhaps the bass bump becomes less obvious. (? )

[spendorman]

Strangely, I found the opposite.

[pankon]

Strangely, I found the opposite.
That's interesting. I would hesitate to open up my Falcons though.
The dilemma for me still remains: REL T/7i with high-level input or SVS SB-2000 Pro with PEQ?

[spendorman]

That's interesting. I would hesitate to open up my Falcons though.

I perhaps would to, I was even hesitant to open my Chartwells, even though I bought them second hand (in 1987 for £90).

My home-made clones, I purposely made the cabinets a bit larger and with more damping inside. These have superior bass, going down a little lower and with the upper bass peak missing.

[fatmarley]

Some years ago I tried a subwoofer with Chartwell LS3/5a's I found that adding a little extra damping inside the LS3/5a's removed the slight hump in their bass.

Some may say that modifying the LS3/5a's is sacrilege, but it worked.

That's correct. Adding stuffing lowers Qtc and will reduce the large midbass hump.

https://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/loudspeakers/68-technology/140-designing-loudspeakers-open-baffle-speakers-the-trials.html

[Made in 1968]

Jim Rogers did a sub for the 'JR149'. I think it was available in both Passive & Active versions.. Did an amp fro em as well

[Qwin]

Rogers latest bass solution for LS3/5a.

https://www.rogers-hifi.uk/rogers-ab3a-active-subwoofer-system

Pricey and not particularly deep, but they use the same bass drivers as the (Rogers) LS3/5a so will probably integrate well.

[pankon]

After quite some time, I am reactivating this thread, to ask whether anyone has heard the Rogers AB3a subwoofer. https://www.rogers-hifi.uk/rogers-ab3a-active-subwoofer-system
If yes, what were the impressions?
Thanks in advance.

[sailor]

With the budget you mentioned I suggest 2 X SVS SB1000. These 2 small subs will I think enhance your sound more than a single huge expensive brute. The 2 subs can be positioned where convenient and dialled in with their continuously variable phase. If a sub does not have this feature then I would not consider it at all.

The SVS SB 1000 is recommended because of the simple fact that without the output from a port, they are easier to integrate and the ability to adjust from your listening position is great. As you are probably aware they can do a lot more than adjust phase.

I use the volume presets on mine and toggle between 'music' and 'movies' which I have set 5dB higher. My room is approx, 35 square meters and this little sub plus a small REL fill the room with sound. There are times when I really crank the sound and there is no sign of stress. BTW if I could only keep one sub I'd keep the SVS.

Discopants linked to an article on the benefits of multi-subs. If you read that then you will understand that movable subs are intended to be positioned so that constructive and destructive combination of bass waves are somewhat reduced, smoothing out the lower frequencies.

The Rogers AB3a Active Subwoofer looks very nice especially with the LS3/5A perched on top, however, with the AB3A subs restricted to living underneath the speakers you are giving up the ability to optimise the room's performance. At their asking price you could get 3 of the SVS subs which in my opinion will outperform the Rogers' solution.

I don't have shares in SVS :lol:

[pankon]

With the budget you mentioned I suggest 2 X SVS SB1000.


Hi Charles,

I agree that the Rogers AB3a is a rather expensive sub. It is obviously by design a good match for the LS3/5a, with the only caveat that if there are any standing waves in the room, the AB3a cannot change their position to remedy that. So, only room treatment might work in that case.

My room is 14.5sqm and I am looking for a small but fast sub, that can keep up with the LS3/5a speed. I have the following two options in mind:

a) SVS 3000 Micro, which can theoretically be dialed in well with the help of the app
b) REL T/5x, which is supposed to be fast and very 'musical'

Opinions, please?

Thanks
Panos

[walpurgis]

Thanks, Alan,

I think that -apart from its inherent sonic qualities- the subwoofer should also have as many controls as possible, to facilitate the integration with the speakers in the given listening room. Would you agree?

I think you summed it up here on your second post.

[pankon]

I think you summed it up here on your second post.

What happens if no subwoofer can fulfill both requirements? You may have seen the two candidates in my short list. What should I choose? Musicality or ease-of-use with the app?

[walpurgis]

What happens if no subwoofer can fulfill both requirements? You may have seen the two candidates in my short list. What should I choose? Musicality or ease-of-use with the app?

I don't know the subwoofers you referred to, but the key requirement surely has to be integration? I'd opt for something that has great flexibility of control.

[Puffin]

I have played with subwoofers for years and the one that I use over all the others is an old Yamaha twin 8" tall style (could be placed on its side) which was given to me for nowt. It only has an in-phase or out of phase switch which is a god send. I have been driven mad with some I have that have too many things to fiddle with and I end up with something the same as the Yamaha (so my ears tell me)

[Macca]

With the budget you mentioned I suggest 2 X SVS SB1000. These 2 small subs will I think enhance your sound more than a single huge expensive brute. The 2 subs can be positioned where convenient and dialled in with their continuously variable phase. If a sub does not have this feature then I would not consider it at all.

The SVS SB 1000 is recommended because of the simple fact that without the output from a port, they are easier to integrate and the ability to adjust from your listening position is great. As you are probably aware they can do a lot more than adjust phase.

I use the volume presets on mine and toggle between 'music' and 'movies' which I have set 5dB higher. My room is approx, 35 square meters and this little sub plus a small REL fill the room with sound. There are times when I really crank the sound and there is no sign of stress. BTW if I could only keep one sub I'd keep the SVS.

Discopants linked to an article on the benefits of multi-subs. If you read that then you will understand that movable subs are intended to be positioned so that constructive and destructive combination of bass waves are somewhat reduced, smoothing out the lower frequencies.

The Rogers AB3a Active Subwoofer looks very nice especially with the LS3/5A perched on top, however, with the AB3A subs restricted to living underneath the speakers you are giving up the ability to optimise the room's performance. At their asking price you could get 3 of the SVS subs which in my opinion will outperform the Rogers' solution.

I don't have shares in SVS :lol:

Might be a first but I totally agree with all of this ^

Good advice.

[sailor]

Hi Panos, I have not heard the SVS Micro but going by the performance of the SVS SB1000 I would call it a safe bet. As I mentioned I own both SVS and REL subs but the SVS has many parameters to adjust to seamlessly blend in. In addition to variable phase there is also low pass filter, polarity, parametric EQ, room gain compensation, presets and system settings. They are also less pricey.

Regarding your concern over 'speed' of the sub. A driver will obey the signal, it can not do anything else. Where people find a sub to be 'slow' is a function of the room's acoustics. I'm sure you have seen plots of speakers in various rooms. Those big peaks you see are the problem! They could be 15dB above the rest so when the sound decays to inaudibility the peak is still very much in evidence adding its noise to the party and this ponderous mess is understandably perceived as s-l-o-w.

Room acoustics are important. If you can manage two subs and spend the time positioning and adjusting I think you will hear your speakers like never before. Perhaps consider buying a microphone and familiarising yourself with the free download REW. It will help you position your main speakers and subs and is fun and rewarding when you see the peaks being tamed and the nulls filled in. Adding some absorption will also show up on the plot and it's interesting to watch and hear the effect.

[Lawrence001]

Regarding your concern over 'speed' of the sub. A driver will obey the signal, it can not do anything else.

Not sure I agree with this

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

[Pigmy Pony]

Yes, in a similar way me and Usain Bolt can both obey the starting pistol, but the results will differ somewhat. Bass loading and cone materials will surely affect the 'speed' to some degree.

[Macca]

I agree with Sailor. Again. A 'Slow' sounding subwoofer just isn't tuned right or placed right. It's not a quality inherent to the device.

[sailor]

Hey now, Mr. Bolt is past his prime, be gentle with him. :)

[pankon]

Gentlemen,

just to report that I've pulled the trigger and bought a REL T/5x. Being unable to demo both the SVS 3000 Micro and the REL T/5x in my room, I've taken a leap of faith, based on the positive feedback from a lot of people about how easily they have been able to integrate a REL sub with their speakers.

I will take some time and revert with impressions.

Cheers,
Panos

[sanchezxxx]

Try 2x of these: https://www.svsound.com/products/3000-micro-subwoofer

I think lots of the sub comments around not running them with electrostatics or LS3's are pre DSP.

[hifi_dave]

Too late.

[pankon]

While waiting for my Falcon LS3/5a Gold Badge to return after a service at the Falcon factory, I've tried to integrate the REL T/5x sub with my temporary main speakers, the OGY, which are single-driver (3.9"), full range, crossover-less and transmission line. They are narrower, but deeper than the Falcons, as can be seen in the enclosed photos.

I've taken the route to integrate the sub by using a calibrated microphone (UMIK-1) and REW software, rather than relying on my ears. Enclosed are the results. The purple line is the one with the REL sub included, and as is evident it differentiates from the red line (main speakers only) in frequencies below 90Hz.

Without any doubt the sub is a big plus in the overall sound quality of the system.

Furthermore, as soon as I receive my serviced Falcon LS3/5a from the Falcon factory, I will integrate the sub with Falcons and post the respective measurements.

31171
31172
31173
31174
31175