rower30
Active member
BF212 Sub Woofers
I recently added two BF212 Sub Woofers to my CLX's and the difference was more than I really expected. I was using two well known 10” powered subs before and the changes were well worth the effort to move these 145 pound monsters. The picture of the BF212 next to the single CLX makes the woofer look big? Don't worry, it will be JUST as big in your room! I'm sure glad the visible finish is excellent as you do see them. There was one finish error inside onside one woofer grill location that appears to be an improperly finished gloss black area, and it was a dull whitish smear about the size of a fifty cent piece. Odd.
I have a weird room (don't we almost all) that is “L” shapes so one sub is in the corner and the other is in the open end of the L. If I set-up the subs as directed, with a master / slave arrangement it seems that the EQ is a compromise to the vastly different room loadings. I loaded the CLX cross-over slope and then did an initial PBK. May as well listen to the break-in somewhat close to flat.
Placement was just behind each CLX with the woofers pointed at an angle to the rear wall. I did a sweep and the curve was the expected rise starting at about 40 Hz and gradually UP, up and up to 20 Hz (my room is a LONG 39 feet!). That long dimension aggravates the lowest frequency resonance. Can the PBK fix it?
This is a dedicated 2.1 only system, so I PBK'ed the two subs as SEPARATE Left and Right channels to “flat” This way, EACH sub is as flat as it can be in the unique spot it resides. Then, I adjusted the level as needed with a 30 and 50 Hz tone to get the same output in the main seating location(s).
The PBK is almost a let-down as it is SO EASY to do. There is no reason to wait till the subs break-in for 50 hours to get them close to room corrected. Just do it again every once and awhile. I used the V2.07 software and has zero issues using it. They really do mean it when they say it take but 5 minutes to EQ a sub (actually less than ten minutes for both). Somehow you hope to screw around with it more as effort equals results. In this case, near no effort equals results. My traces were less than 2 dB off the calculated curve till 25 Hz where the room resonance pushed either sub up about 4-5 dB. I removed this some with the 25 Hz knob, backing it off a few dB until I decided I LIKED the extra deep oomph. OK, not accurate but fun!
Two BF212 seems like overkill? Maybe. But, the effect is for a more even blend of bass and resolution than “loudness”. The cone excursion is much smaller with four 12” drivers each with it's own 800 watt amplifier, which keeps IM and Doppler distortion low and resolution and quickness high. That's the idea, anyway.
Does it work? Compared to my older subs, which are admirably good by the way, the BF212 do indeed add a level of bass refinement I haven't heard. They reach much deeper and it gets better the deeper the music goes than my replacements. But, to tell WHAT was changing I had to listen to two complete .wav file RIP CD's of various artists several times. And, I had to keep from tuning each song! After several, several songs I could start to tell the sound of the “sub” over the sound of the “music”. It turns out, most music has TERRIBLE bass. The subs come through crystal clear and with amazing resolution on my better material and well, let the bad stuff still sound bad. My replacement subs were “warmer” and tended to diminish the big differences in the bass. I suppose this can be heard as good or bad. I wonder if the recording studios can even hear the bass properly when it is done, or just “guess”? It sure sounds like they guess to me as vastly different bass resolution and level jumps are heard from song to song.
The aluminum cone drivers are faster, and register stronger tighter reverberations WAY deep. OK, they aren't 7 Hz Paradigm SUB1 levels of deepness but they are VERY musically matched to the CLX with a faster, more resolving sound down to a reported 18 Hz. My test tones are easily heard at 15 Hz setting on up. Set-up is still key to the bass quality, though. These subs will squish your head clean-off with too aggressive level or 25 Hz settings.
On records, which to my ear have much more consistent bass, the sound is really nice. Tight and crisp. Yes, you can turn up the level to stupid levels if you want without stressing them at all. YOU on the other hand will be! Bruce Cockburn's, Dancing in the Dragon's jaws was a delight with these subs. And, to my ear they do blend well with the CLX. Achieving a, “are they really on?” level of blending isn't too hard. Even with dynamic driver speakers, though, a LOT of bass is so artificially done it is “bass” and then the rest of the music so I can't blame ESL speakers for that situation.
As hard as good bass is to record or play, the PBK with the BF212 subs does seem to really do the job, though. No, this isn't an easy study as so much is influencing what you hear; subs, placement, room, recording ETC. The quality of these subs with PBK seem to mitigate as much as can be expected the hardware side of the equation. And, it is SO EASY to do.
As good as the BF212's are now, maybe 15 hours on them, I don't expect them to surprise me in a negative fashion....likely the opposite as they gain quickness and resolution.
I'd love to hear other impressions of these subs general sound quality. So far they are on the dryer side of warm, and right where I like it. Some may favor the “warm” tone of bass. I'm more the crisper listener as my choice of main speaker would attest. More resolution and less warmth is a sound I like more than the opposite. For folk music (most of what I play; Bruce Cockburn, Peter Paul and Mary, Neil Diamond, Linda Ronstadt, ETC) the BF212 and CLX are excellent choices. Don't get me wrong, the set-up plays my Super tramp fine, too.
You will forget that they are on once set-up right...just don't expect to not see them in the room!
I recently added two BF212 Sub Woofers to my CLX's and the difference was more than I really expected. I was using two well known 10” powered subs before and the changes were well worth the effort to move these 145 pound monsters. The picture of the BF212 next to the single CLX makes the woofer look big? Don't worry, it will be JUST as big in your room! I'm sure glad the visible finish is excellent as you do see them. There was one finish error inside onside one woofer grill location that appears to be an improperly finished gloss black area, and it was a dull whitish smear about the size of a fifty cent piece. Odd.
I have a weird room (don't we almost all) that is “L” shapes so one sub is in the corner and the other is in the open end of the L. If I set-up the subs as directed, with a master / slave arrangement it seems that the EQ is a compromise to the vastly different room loadings. I loaded the CLX cross-over slope and then did an initial PBK. May as well listen to the break-in somewhat close to flat.
Placement was just behind each CLX with the woofers pointed at an angle to the rear wall. I did a sweep and the curve was the expected rise starting at about 40 Hz and gradually UP, up and up to 20 Hz (my room is a LONG 39 feet!). That long dimension aggravates the lowest frequency resonance. Can the PBK fix it?
This is a dedicated 2.1 only system, so I PBK'ed the two subs as SEPARATE Left and Right channels to “flat” This way, EACH sub is as flat as it can be in the unique spot it resides. Then, I adjusted the level as needed with a 30 and 50 Hz tone to get the same output in the main seating location(s).
The PBK is almost a let-down as it is SO EASY to do. There is no reason to wait till the subs break-in for 50 hours to get them close to room corrected. Just do it again every once and awhile. I used the V2.07 software and has zero issues using it. They really do mean it when they say it take but 5 minutes to EQ a sub (actually less than ten minutes for both). Somehow you hope to screw around with it more as effort equals results. In this case, near no effort equals results. My traces were less than 2 dB off the calculated curve till 25 Hz where the room resonance pushed either sub up about 4-5 dB. I removed this some with the 25 Hz knob, backing it off a few dB until I decided I LIKED the extra deep oomph. OK, not accurate but fun!
Two BF212 seems like overkill? Maybe. But, the effect is for a more even blend of bass and resolution than “loudness”. The cone excursion is much smaller with four 12” drivers each with it's own 800 watt amplifier, which keeps IM and Doppler distortion low and resolution and quickness high. That's the idea, anyway.
Does it work? Compared to my older subs, which are admirably good by the way, the BF212 do indeed add a level of bass refinement I haven't heard. They reach much deeper and it gets better the deeper the music goes than my replacements. But, to tell WHAT was changing I had to listen to two complete .wav file RIP CD's of various artists several times. And, I had to keep from tuning each song! After several, several songs I could start to tell the sound of the “sub” over the sound of the “music”. It turns out, most music has TERRIBLE bass. The subs come through crystal clear and with amazing resolution on my better material and well, let the bad stuff still sound bad. My replacement subs were “warmer” and tended to diminish the big differences in the bass. I suppose this can be heard as good or bad. I wonder if the recording studios can even hear the bass properly when it is done, or just “guess”? It sure sounds like they guess to me as vastly different bass resolution and level jumps are heard from song to song.
The aluminum cone drivers are faster, and register stronger tighter reverberations WAY deep. OK, they aren't 7 Hz Paradigm SUB1 levels of deepness but they are VERY musically matched to the CLX with a faster, more resolving sound down to a reported 18 Hz. My test tones are easily heard at 15 Hz setting on up. Set-up is still key to the bass quality, though. These subs will squish your head clean-off with too aggressive level or 25 Hz settings.
On records, which to my ear have much more consistent bass, the sound is really nice. Tight and crisp. Yes, you can turn up the level to stupid levels if you want without stressing them at all. YOU on the other hand will be! Bruce Cockburn's, Dancing in the Dragon's jaws was a delight with these subs. And, to my ear they do blend well with the CLX. Achieving a, “are they really on?” level of blending isn't too hard. Even with dynamic driver speakers, though, a LOT of bass is so artificially done it is “bass” and then the rest of the music so I can't blame ESL speakers for that situation.
As hard as good bass is to record or play, the PBK with the BF212 subs does seem to really do the job, though. No, this isn't an easy study as so much is influencing what you hear; subs, placement, room, recording ETC. The quality of these subs with PBK seem to mitigate as much as can be expected the hardware side of the equation. And, it is SO EASY to do.
As good as the BF212's are now, maybe 15 hours on them, I don't expect them to surprise me in a negative fashion....likely the opposite as they gain quickness and resolution.
I'd love to hear other impressions of these subs general sound quality. So far they are on the dryer side of warm, and right where I like it. Some may favor the “warm” tone of bass. I'm more the crisper listener as my choice of main speaker would attest. More resolution and less warmth is a sound I like more than the opposite. For folk music (most of what I play; Bruce Cockburn, Peter Paul and Mary, Neil Diamond, Linda Ronstadt, ETC) the BF212 and CLX are excellent choices. Don't get me wrong, the set-up plays my Super tramp fine, too.
You will forget that they are on once set-up right...just don't expect to not see them in the room!
