Well, some water is indeed not quite drinkable, tasting occasionally like kerosene! 
Uhmmm, that’s not water, that’s moonshine!
Chris, You might have mentioned it already but what are the approximate dimensions and weight of the Sub? Wondering if I need a crane to get it to the second foor.
Dimensions (HxWxD)
14.75"W × 16.75"H × 17.5"D (18.125" with grille)
Net Weight
77 lbs (35 kg)
Thanks! I’ll need to start lifting weights
Hi Chris! Currently I am running a pair of REL N31’s to prop up my Vivid G1 Spirits. Am I going to want to switch for the soon to be released Chris B design? I like the thought, I love your work!
For your customer base that’s used to the metric system, can PSA please also include sizes in mm/cm/m in any upcoming editions of their documentation/manuals/etc?
That would be very helpful and much appreciated. Thanks!
@Chris_Brunhaver: will this subwoofer be the ultimate PSA Subwoofer, or will there be a range like with the FR speakers?
If the Aspen release is any indicator, then the flagship comes first. I’ll be interested to see if this gets verified.
With this stated by Chris and seeing the dimensions and weight of the PS subwoofer I would guess that the Rel subwoofer that’s the competition would be in the Rel S series family say The S510 and S812 or the newer Rel S series subwoofers. I assume the Rel reference subwoofers No. 31 and No. 32 would better both the new Rel S series sub and the upcoming PS audio sub but that’s just my opinion and I’m very biased. lol
I’m a big fan of @Chris_Brunhaver also!
Very little data exists out on the internet for actual performance numbers between the various REL offerings. I try not to get involved in “this versus that” much because I think there’s room for everyone and people will have their preferences and tribes etc.
We are close friends with REL and have always recommended their products to customers and John Hunter is the best “setup guy” in the biz, and has bailed us out a a few trade shows when we were struggling with dialing in the system. He’s the man.
I think their high end stuff is a home run cosmetically but, I wouldn’t be building subs unless I thought I could do better. Theirs is definitely is a “look at me”, statement piece. Kind of like the Sonus Faber of subs. Our sub is a simple, clean cosmetic (though very well build bracing and baffle structure etc.) and I’d have to say that REL subs “win” in the cosmetics if that’s your focus.
That being said, the only objective measurements I’ve been is for their HT or small models, not their high end offerings.
Here are a few pictures of their 12” woofers. They are all using a double stack magnet structure (varying in size up to 220 mm slugs) and have a 3” coil and 200 mm spiders. All these designs are limited to ~20 mm of suspension travel. Box volume and woofer size has a significant impact on system performance and our sub is indeed smaller and so likely sacrifices a couple dB of sensitivity (leads to impact and punch in the upper bass) but I would say that we’re putting a substantially better woofer and amp in our sub than anything in their 12” subwoofer lineup.
Nothing I’m seeing could support RELs marketing claims of things like “greater excursion of up to 100mm” and “driver suspension permits a full 4” (100mm) of travel fore and aft.”
A 15” has a lot more cone area than a 12" woofer (not double but close to that), so I think that’s a different argument. We were definitely targeting a rather compact size (and using multiples for large systems). Maybe, if we see some success, we could do a 15” or 18” model if there is interest (though stacking a pair of 12’s already gets you there in a lot of ways).
Thanks again for your insights, Chris!
We were originally considering a second larger model than this (with a 15” or 18”) but subs should be used in multiple locations and rather quickly it gets hard to place a number of large boxes in a room in the acoustically optimal locations.
There is also an audiophile bias against larger woofers, though there is nothing keeping a larger driver equally as musical (and with lower distortion/higher output).
That being said, a pair of these subs stacked will outdo many sealed 18’s and this modularity may be a better approach. I’m curious to see what our customers want from us in the future.
Thank Chris! I’m in the 15” club! That probably doesn’t sound right or believable! Lol
One more question with regards to the four and six pack installation: is the cabinet designed for stacking and resonance decoupling?
I’m not Chris but I do remember @Paul mentioning that the new PS subs will be stackable.
Absolutely designed for stacking, there’s even a stacking kit including the connecting cable. Can’t wait!
Good Day,
is there particular reason for stacking except the beauty of it?
if stacking for better base, why not bigger?
With respect, some digital, in ambiant music, they have left/right bass, so, please explain stacking?
best regards
Stacking allows for a smoother bass response, if set up properly.