Are you going to be ordering some EP400's to do another comparison chart of the EP400 EP500 and EP600 in different numbers?

I am curious to see what 4 EP400's would sound like in comparison to 3 EP500s. Also, 2 EP400's vs 1 EP600?

hmmmmmmm

Whadayathink?

Where is the original chart that jakeman created?

I think it was Craigsub that created the list, but Jakeman posted it, I could be wrong.

Yep. Craig posted it on avsforum around the time of the last subwoofer shootout, I think...

And he appears to have moved on to the super huge driver/enclosure subs.

I do believe that it was Jakeman that had 3 EP600's 2 EP500's in his theatre.

He did his own comparison chart as to what combinations are the best.

Craigsub did a sub shootout, which is different than an all Axiom sub comparison.

From Jakeman:

" There was a time not long ago when I had 3 EP600s and 2 EP 500s in my HT so I experimented with many combinations of these subs to come up with that list. The objective was not to find maximum output as I could easily have cracked the house foundations but to find the combination/placement that gave me uniform bass response anywhere in the HT regardless of seating position. Having satisfied my curiosity, I did finally bow to WAF and sold some of those subs. Here is a shot of four of them in the side/front HT using a pair each of 600s and 500s.

1. 4 EP600s
2. 3 EP600s, 1 EP500s
3. 2 EP600s, 2 EP500s
4. 1 EP600, 3 EP500s
5. 4 EP500s
6. 3 EP600s
7. 3 EP500s
8. 2 EP600s
9. 2 EP500s
10. 1 EP600
11. 1 EP500



I wonder where the 4 EP400's would fit into that list...

That's just insane.

he also mentioned the following:

"yes there is more output than anyone could ever want but that was not the objective. My inspiration for all those subs came from reading the Harman article on optimizing LF sounds in an HT and I decided to check it out for myself. Not that I don't trust technical articles but often it doesn't transalte into real world situations.

Output for the sake of max SPLs is a mugs game since good bass has to blend with the rest of the speakers. I configured those 4/5 subs in total to give 75db level matched so the subs were as loud as any one speaker. Where the benefit comes from multiple subs is more even FR anywhere in the room and also far lower THD and IMD so you get the cleanest sound possible in the most seats.

In my room, I found the most significant sonic benefit comes from having dual subs on opposing side walls and I recommend that for anyone's HT. After that, well it gets better with more subs but with diminishing returns.

Now if I can only fill in that crack on the outside of my basement foundation wall."

Since having 2 subs on opposite walls made the most difference, I am not sure having 4 EP400's would be worth it...

Holy Smoke! Maybe someone should have told him it is possible to just turn the volume up on the EP-600 instead of buying new ones!

like he mentioned, he wanted a uniform bass response in his whole room, and really, the only way to accomplish that is with a subwoofer on each wall.

Why not? you would then have dual EP400s on opposite walls achieving what he found to be the most beneficial.

I'm curious how the EP400 fits in anywhere. Does anyone on the boards have one? (I mean, other than Amie, Ian, Alan, etc...)

NADishman has one. I'm not sure about any others. I'd love to get my hands on one and do a side-by-side comparison with the 600. It's common knowledge that the sub used to be ported and now it's sealed. It's this in particular that has me intrigued.

4 400s would make for an incredible audio system. a 500 plays twice as loudly as a 400 ie. 106db vs. 109db anechoic but has the same extension and what looks like a 12db rolloff per octave rather than brickwall digital filters at 100hz in the 500/600. In some applications, especially with monitors that sloping rolloff can be helpful when blending one sub with speakers. On the other hand multiple subs with long rolloffs can pose a challenge for the mid-high bass output of the mains. The brickwall filters with their steep rolloffs are very useful in keeping sub sound and harmonics out of the higher frequencies which is the job of the speakers. That rolloff characteristic would more than anything distinguish the sonic qualities of the 400 compared to the other EP subs. The 400 has slightly less extension and much less output than the bigger subs but with four I would rule out output as a limiting factor in any room. Heck just a pair of them would make a big impact in any but the largest rooms.

From the perspective of smoothing FR no question four 400s would be just as effective as four 500s or 600s. Without actually testing these subs I'm hesitate to update that table. However I would venture that a system with 4 400s could overall make a better sonic presentation than a pair of EP600s because of their ability to flatten room nodes. The giveup would be in 3hz of extension favouring the 600s. Output would not necessarily be compromised because of coupling among the subs. Two subs potentially can increase output up to 6db depending on distance between them while 4 subs have the potential to add up to a further 12db.

Could be an interesting followup project...

Jake,

I'd be grateful if you can point me to your table.

The advantage of higher frequency harmonics in the sub is the "snap" or "slam" that is heard as the stick or foot-pedal strikes the drumskin. I am snap/slam-challenged right now...even when I turn my receiver right up (I saw that coming, Rick ).

That's high frequency enough it should be handled by your mains.

Hi Mojo,

Its more a list which was reproduced earlier in this thread that came about after months of testing and listening to the various configurations. Its a tough call on whether the higher harmonics add or detract since it depends how well you have the sub(s) blended with the mains. The further a sub from the mains the more phase becomes a factor at the higher harmonics. The 500/600 brickwall filters removes the above 100hz harmonics which may or may not be an advantage depending on your room and speakers.

Right after FR and distortion, I find the transient response of the sub to be a big factor in hearing the snap/slam. Its often stated that sealed subs have an advantage in TR but that is a generality and their are many exceptions. In the listening tests I have had with other subs, the EP subs were far more "musical" than other ported subs though I see more manufacturers now focussed on this important aspect of sound quality. I'm curious to see how a sealed 400 would sound compared to a ported 500 with regards to snap. I might try to get ahold of one for some comparisons.

"I might try to get ahold of one for some comparisons."

Thats what I am talking about...but only 1??????!??

Maybe. I'm not ready to debate "snap/slam" at this time. Let's just say that this is the final dimension that I am personally missing in my environment. Frankly I am not very happy about it but I am patiently exploring various options.

once the EP400's start reaching the factory outlet, they will cost a mere $970 CAD, you could buy 2 of them for roughly the price of a new EP600...

Good one Hutz. Well I'm heading up to Dwight for some year end fishing this weekend so I'll see what the prospects are for getting my hands on one... or two.

I am mostly interested in which would be better, two EP400s or one EP600? I am VERY curious as the two EP400s obviously have an advantage for 2 placement areas, instead of just one.

Mojo, its hard to say but it may be a FR related room issue. Possibly ringing in the room. As you can see from the above pics my room is acoustically treated with four floor to ceiling bass traps and acoustical panel covering the better part of three wall. Some people say it sounds dampened like a studio but the overall effect is tighter, smoother response across all frequencies and better imaging.

Jake, I agree with everything you said. I don't want snap/slam at the expense of smooth, transparent musicality. Perhaps it's my room because, if you will recall from my room response graphs, I have comb-filtering taking place every 23 Hz or so from 90Hz all the way up to 300Hz.

I'm convinced the only way to smoothen this response is by heavily treating or listening in 7-channel stereo. I don't like either option frankly because treating is hit-and-miss unless I am willing to go to considerable expense for an acoustic analysis and extensive acoustic engineering and 7-channel stereo just doesn't sound "right".

This room response only affects my bass; I personally don't have any complaints about anything else. Maybe higher harmonics out of a sub will fix this problem. But if they're going to spoil smoothness and transparency, then I don't want them.

I'd be curious in finding out about the difference between the 400 and 500/600 too.

Well, there's a quick note about the EP400 (4 of them, in fact) over at Audioholics. They're promising a full review soon.

Yes interesting comment. He does corroborate that with multiple subs output, for all intents and purposes, is not an issue.

"...They switched back and forth between the coffin-sized EP600s and the new compact EP400s to showcase the benefit of multiple subwoofers and how 4 small subs can be equally effective as 4 large subs if they have enough output capability to fill the listening space. "

http://www.audioholics.com/news/trade-show-coverage/audioholics-show-report