Acoustic Research S115PS Subwoofers

Acoustic Research S115PS Subwoofers 

DESCRIPTION

Consists of a slot loaded down firing 15" subwoofer with a paper cone and a foam surround. Built in 200 watt power amp that allows either pre-amp hook-up or speaker level inputs.

USER REVIEWS

Showing 11-13 of 13  
[May 09, 2001]
Paul
Audio Enthusiast

Strength:

A lot of oomph for the money. Once set up correctly... it rattles your teeth. Fantastic addition to my home theater!

Weakness:

Rather cheap looking construction, very large,

On a dollar for dollar basis, you can't beat this unit. It doesn't have the punch of a Velodyne or similar mid to high end Sub. That said, you get 90% of the boom for 50% or less of the bucks. I couldn't be more pleased with my purchase. Abes of Maine, however, was VERY slow in delivery.

Similar Products Used:

None but I listened to a bunch

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
[Apr 06, 2001]
Ron Khurana
Casual Listener

Weakness:

Too boomy. Bass sound is not distinct

Sears agreed to match the internet price, so I got it for a good deal. I don't doubt the quality of the subwoofer or its wattage is exceptional. However, the bass was not as crisp as my old KLH speakers (hard to believe!). My ears actually hurt if I ever got too close to it.

Be careful of the crossover frequency if you purchased it to go into the higher ranges. I have Klipsch speakers which start at 150Hz. Even though the crossover was advertized as up to 150-200Hz, the subwoofer only offered up to 100Hz when I opened up the box! I noticed this range "hole" when playing some Led Zepplin music.

If you can spring for the extra $40-60, get the Cerwin Vega. Or if your room is 12x20 or smaller, try the ARS108.

Similar Products Used:

Cerwin Vega LT12, Velodyne CT80, CT100

OVERALL
RATING
3
VALUE
RATING
4
[May 24, 2001]
Nelson
Audio Enthusiast

Strength:

Original version has tight power bass.

Weakness:

There are two versions of this sub. Revised sub not as good as original version

I exchanged a Cerwin-Vega LW-15 sub for the Acoustic Research S115PS at Sears (see my review of the LW-15.) I actually bought two since they were on clearance like the LW-15. I did my homework before purchasing and found out that there are two versions of this sub just like the LW-15. It appears that some manufacturers feel that it is OK to produce multiple revisions of the same model without modifying the model number. I find the practice very annoying as the two S115PS versions have significant differences much like the two LW-15 versions. I hope others will comment on this practice in their reviews so that manufacturers will see that we, the consumer, do not like the practice, and that it ultimately costs the manufacturer due to returns generated by customers unhappy that the revised versions do not live up to the original product specs.

As indicated above, there are two versions of this sub. One has a pair of line inputs and a pair of outputs. The power amp is recessed so that the cooling fins are flush with the cabinet (this is the original model.) The other version has a single mono line level input, and the power amp is not recessed so the cooling fins extend out from the unit about two inches. The two versions can be differentiated while still in the box by looking at the serial number on the box. The S/N of an original model will start with 26. The S/N of a revised model will start with a letter.

The biggest difference between the two models is the top cut-off frequency. The original model has an upper cut-off of 100hz, whereas the revised model is adjustable up to 200hz. I read one review at this site where the reviewer noted that his cut-off was 100hz though the specs on the AR web site said 200hz. This is the reason. The only other thing I noticed was the speakers look slightly different though overall construction appeared to be similar (i.e. coated paper woofer, foam surround.)

Another difference in the versions, as noted above, is the lack of left/right line level inputs/outputs on the revised model. The lack of line outputs has traditionally not been a big deal to me, but I wanted to use both of the subs in the same system by daisy-chaining the subs together so it quickly became important. There is more than one way to “skin the cat” regarding connecting two subs to a system with one sub output by using a “Y” cable, but line outputs are a nice option to have, and definitely something you don’t take away if it was originally present. Left/Right inputs, as opposed to a mono input, are essential if using the preamp outputs on a receiver or preamp. It is not recommended to use a “Y” cable in a reverse configuration that combines the left/right signals together. This may damage some receivers or preamps.

It was apparent during testing that the revised model’s low-pass adjustment had a much greater range of variation than the original model. This is very important if using small satellites that may have a low-end response higher than 100hz. If using such satellites, it will be impossible to blend the satellites with the original version of the S115PS (as was my case.) Unfortunately, I found the bass produced by the original version of the S115PS much more distinct and powerful than the revision. The bass produced by the revised model appeared to be sound somewhat muddy to me. Additionally, I kept hearing a slight rattle eminating from the cabinet. This was very odd, and I could only make the noise go away by reducing the volume of sub. I have to assume something was not secure inside the cabinet, but I did not want to disassemble the sub to find the culprit. Both versions produced a slight amount of power amp hum when placing my ear to the cabinet while the subs were in standby mode, but both were slight and magnitudes less than the LW-15 that I returned.

In summary, I do not think I would recommend the new version of the S115PS to anyone. The sound and lack of flexible inputs/outputs left me feeling as if Acoustic Research cut corners with the revisions made to the sub. On the up-side, I like the better range of the low-pass filter of the new revision (but not enough to overcome the flaws.) I would recommend the original version if you will be using the sub with satellites (or larger speakers) that have a low-end response lower than 100hz, and if you can find one in stores. Unfortunately, it will soon be impossible to find an old version anywhere. So what am I going to do? The new revision is definitely going back. I may keep the original version, but I will need to return the JBL Trio135’s and find some satellites with better low-end response.

Similar Products Used:

Cerwin-Vega LW-15, B&W ASW3000

OVERALL
RATING
3
VALUE
RATING
4
Showing 11-13 of 13  

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.

audioreview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

Other Web Sites in the ConsumerReview Network:

mtbr.com | roadbikereview.com | carreview.com | photographyreview.com | audioreview.com