Comparing subwoofers

Subwoofer shake out!

B&W front with cover in place

Tested:

1) B&W ASW 2000 12 inch Subwoofer, 175 Watt, 22-140Hz, 75lb, downward firing port.

B&W front with cover off

2) SVS PB2000 12 inch Subwoofer, Sledge STA-5000D amp, 500 watts. 1100 peak, 17-260Hz, 66lb, front firing port.

SVS front with metal grill attached

3) MartinLogan Dynamo 300 8 inch Subwoofer, 75 watt amp, 150 peak, 45–150 Hz, 22lb, downward firing port.

Martin Logan front

The SVS has a very different sound than the B&W, though both are 12" ported subwoofers, due to the down firing port vs the front firing port. They are so different that I can not as yet pick a winner.  Picture right is the underside of the B&W with the down firing port.

I'm very use to the B&W sound, for example the opening scene of Star Wars, the Star Destroyer passing would shake everything in the house!  But not really any shaking from the SVS.  I miss the earthquake effect of the B&W on that scene.  However on music like "Gimme All Your Lovin" (from the 5.1 DVD-audio of ZZ Top's Eliminator) the B&W was harsh and muddy, where the SVS has a tight, accurate punch on this song.  Certainly the SVS can produce the power to knock you over on songs like "Love me Like a Reptile" (from the 5.1 DVD-audio of Motorhead's Ace Of Spades).  The best sounds so far came from "Smoke on the Water" (from 5.1 DVD-audio of Deep Purple's Machine Head.)  Roger Glover's bass notes sounded perfect with SVS, as if we were in the studio.   To the left is the front of the SVS.

Both woofer and port fire downward on the Martin Logan

But again I missed the house shaking sustained deep rumble of Tony Bank's opening low bass keyboard on "Behind the Lines" (from the 5.1 SACD of Genesis's Duke).  It seemed hardly there on the SVS. 

Right is the back panel of the B&W.

In size and weight the B&W and SVS are very close.

The long noise on the SVS grill makes it a bit awkward to place in a room.

Above the Martin Logan on top of the SVS.

Of course the Martin Logan is a much smaller sub and I use it in a smaller room.  It's what one would call a disappearing sub, it doesn't knock you back like the B&W and the SVS do, rather it fills out the range of sound perfectly.  Generally you don't know it's on, but turning it off makes the whole bottom end of the music go away.  Turn the Martin Logan on again and the music sounds rich and full.  All together, the Martin Logan is the most pleasant sounding  sub I've ever heard.  The SVS is rude in comparison.  The B&W, even more so, on many occations I had to cover my windows with blankets and pillows because they were shaking so badly I thought they would break.

Above are the back panels of the SVS (left) and Martin Logan.

Of course I'm still on break in with the brand new SVS, I think in time I'll grow to love it.  More than the B&W?  Well I'll listen to the SVS for a few months and then switch back to the B&W and see which is really "the best".

I should also mention the SVS PB2000 has a gentler sister, the SB2000.  Same amp, same woofer, in a Sealed Box (thus the SB), so no port, and is said to be more movie friendly and less likely to punch you like the PB2000 does.