Bossobass Dave

Yes, I've seen differences in a DVD vs the BluRay version and posted the graphs. Master & Commander comes to mind, but the BR came out years after the DVD. The GOE rental was a BR so the question here is whether or not the BR rental has a different mix than the purchased BR. They shouldn't be different other than possibly the level. Does anyone have the peak hold PVA graph of the rental BR to compare with your graph?

If you're talking about Deadpool, no way. It's as blue as R rating allows. Lots of gore and language, IMO.

No sarcasm, just curious because if the rental is that different from the purchase, it will be the first time it's happened in my experience. The rental, of course, has the lossless soundtrack and it certainly does not have the content shown in your PVA peak hold. If the rental can't be counted on to have the same content bandwidth, that's a problem because having to buy the disc to see what's on the soundtrack is unacceptable.

Sorry for my ignorance, but I don't know what that means. Can you explain the process?

I couldn't get on this site the last couple of days so, after screening Deadpool, I posted the caps in Adam's Raptor thread @ avs: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/1664809-bossobass-raptor-system-3-a-9.html I just did a comparo animation of the mac daddy scene, mic'd full range @ the LP vs digits off the Oppo BD105 SW out with LPF @ 100 Hz. I was running the subs 3dB or so hot. I dug the movie and will be adding it to our collection tomorrow. The sound is just about perfect. Just enough ULF to add that bit of weight but not so much that it adds too much decay to the kick of the transients. And, the transients are what make this one demo-worthy. There's a billion or so of the best low end transients in memory. Just my opinion and a heads up. ^^^

Yes, a rental. That and the possible use by Fat of an errant correction file are the only 2 possibilities, IMO.

Nope, it's new new one. Lots of nice low end scenes. Big waves, avalanche, etc. stuff.

I found the level to be low and the brick wall is an octave higher. Not sure what method Fat is using to graph the soundtrack, but my sig chain is dead flat and I'm positive I'm not missing content to 10 Hz... ...as in Point Break: My copy of GOE was a rental. Might be the diff? Dunno, but I'm sure of the content I graphed with the disc I had here. It would have been MUCH nicer with content to 10 Hz, for sure. It was lame as I viewed it.

GODS OF EGYPT lots of bass, but... PHIL-TURD At least an 8th order HPF @ 20 Hz throughout. Here's a snip of Chapter 15, which is indistinguishable from the bass in the entire movie (white means there is NOTHING there):

Not sure why you think any discussion of a comparison of your systems relates to what your choices have to do with anyone else. This personal crap is annoying. I just wanted to comment on the idea that the difference is massive in every way. It isn't. I guess it isn't open for discussion, which is fine by me. Good listening, Josh, et al.

Points noted, but there simply is no difference in group delay if FR is the same. The 2 (GD & FR) are directly related by a formula. Similarly, there is no power compression or (assuming you mean harmonic) distortion at reference level with XdB of headroom in either system. I concede inductance-related distortion >60 Hz, but simply lowering the crossover point and using mains properly designed to mate with a XXX system is a rather simple solution. Where it counts in a multiple-driver high displacement subwoofer system for Home Theater, <20 Hz, there is little chance the RF driver is even equal let alone a massive step up. You say diminished difference, I say zero difference, lots and lots of experience notwithstanding. And, I'm just not a subscriber to the whole "punchier slam" thing. What we hear is frequency response. When it's matched there is no GD to hear and when you have 8 x 18" subwoofer drivers with multi-KW power, there is no compression, THD or other audible differences. In fact, as I've posted a few times, many listeners over the years perceived high 2HD as presenting a kick drum as being "tighter", etc. Massive step up for those folks? I've got a bit of experience with all sorts of subwoofer drivers myself. You must just have better ears than I and my test listeners have. I'm only posting an alternative voice to the constant escalation of system size, cost and playback levels for the average enthusiast, who is quickly becoming lost in this madness of >140dB playback levels and the like. I'm not saying either is "better", just pointing out that there is far more similar in these 2 systems than there is difference, unless more data to the contrary can be shown.

Hi Nathan, Can you be more specific with what "driven hard" means in Ricci's room, how same FR can possibly sound different and any of the "many factors that will change the sound" that obviously aren't apparent to me? In other threads, for example, there is howling and jeering over snake oil salesmanship claims of the benefits of using certain cables, etc., but here the terms "better in every way" and "massive step up in every possible way" are cool? "Massive step up in every way"? With 80-100 liters of displacement and >20KW of power there is no way to drive either system to the point of reversion to non-EQ'd response in Josh's room unless you purposely do it for no known reason. He can theoretically raise the crossover if he wishes, although both traces show inaudible differences to 100 Hz. How hard would you have to push them to hear a massive difference? Back when Josh was contemplating buying the XXXs he asked my opinion. I designed a sealed, DO, push/pull box of some 20 cubes net. I mentioned that 10 cubes per driver would be the minimum I would put the XXX in. There's an 8-10dB increase in sensitivity and efficiency <20 Hz with the XXX in >2X the box Josh has them in. Seems a reasonable choice to me to build better enclosures than to spend 10 grand more for drivers and claim "better in every possible way". Josh said his goals were cost no object to see what he could do with the existing small boxes. I agree that he met those goals with happy results. But, to stretch that to "massive step up in every possible way" begs more specific data.

What am I missing? $20,000.00 vs $7,500.00 for same result. I was never a fan of the huge box requirement of the XXX driver or of stuffing it into such a radically small box but that neither here nor there in the comparo. I'm not seeing the big net gain everyone else seems to readily see... The FR at the seats is the same, neither system lacks headroom and power to drive the system is a non-issue.

If you're focused on low end efficiency, the XXXs need about 5 times that box from what I recall. There are 2 ways to flatten a naked response; 1) boost the roll off and 2) pull down the top end. If you choose the latter, you have to bump the master, increasing noise. The XXXs kick the snot outta the RFs. The caveat is that they require a huge box and a lower crossover point.

What size box is the XXX in?