Would you mind describing your setup and the AudioKinesis gear used?
Tyray: I happen to own also Audiokinesis Azel's speakers, to be honest I was shopping around for speakers not subs and found Duke (and Jim Romeyn) at RMAF 2018 (or 17?) and from all the rooms I visited that was (to me) the best sounding room, I'm not saying AK's speakers are the best, many other manufacturers make good speakers as well, we all know at these shows the hotels rooms have their own problems and limitations so what Duke have done with his speakers is give you the opportunity to tune the speakers (and subs) to any room with no external analog or digital DSP, this could be done with RoomEQ as well (which has its own limitations like format changing etc), anyways apologies as I have a hard time following thread directly and I deviated here, my Swarm sub system was a byproduct as I was shopping only for speakers and had subs already PSA and SVS.On point. I have Azel's speakers which consists on a beryllium compression driver for highs and mids and a midbass woofer for lower mids and bass down to 55 Hz, this midbass driver reproduces bass with extreme tonality accuracy on the low registers it reaches, to me it is one of these speakers "forte", the 4 passive subs I have are crossed around 65 Hz, Duke's Azels are standmounts on top of what he describes as a SuperStand which contains one sub and one (what he calls) space generator but that is not relevant here, just that the sub is in the stand saving space of having a separate sub. His subs have very very low footprint but what they lack on area they have on tallness (hence my wife putting ornaments on top) the good thing is you can fit them anywhere. So four subs and two 1000 W amps (the one Duke referenced above). One amp powers the 2 left subs one amp for the right 2 subs. Crossed at 65 Hz, gain for each amp around 50% (more than that it provides still accurate bass but not needed and unbalances the system IMO), there is about 90 degrees phase difference between the left and right subs on my system. I'm enclosing some pictures at this link bit.ly/luismasystem I consider myself an audiophile but I don't have as many years as you most had to deepen your knowledge on audio systems etc. my knowledge of all this is superficial and if you want details I'm sure that Duke will chime in By the way @audiokinesis Duke thank you for providing the great explanation of your thoughts on sealed vs vented which always made me think about that paradigm, I understand 80% of it, based on what you are describing and since I have a "difficult" room based on REW measurements (I don't know where did put the response curve screenshot) could you say (Duke) that your vented subs overcome the irregular room response just as well as sealed or better because:1. I'm using 4 of them (vs 1 or 2) which requires less gain and allows for bass waves cancelling each other at almost most listening positions2. They are designed targeting the 20 - 80 Hz band better to integrate with your speakers (or any speaker which drivers reach down only to 80 Hz?) Tyray: I ranted through my post and wasn't able to explain directly your question, hope you could gather from my writing the essence of what you want to know about my system. I sold my PSA and SVS (great subs by the way) for the superior performance of 4 smaller subs and the convenience of saving space due to footprint and integration with speakers and cost savings over 4 equal subs from different manufacturers. PSA and SVS are great brands again and if you have the space and the money definitely you could do good as well with these If you look at my system my source is completely digital (at this moment) but EVERYTHING else is analog controlled, no DSP or anything and I looked at MiniDSP, DSpeaker, Trinnov, (there is one I forget the name $4000 - $6000 which was IMO the closest one for me to consider) and since all of these rehydrate digital (with its limitations) I decided that RoomEQ using analog devices is better for my system than going digital downstream, so I avoid that when possible. |
DEQX is the other method I considered to integrate everything but since I can do most of the correction analogue and since I am not personally interested in a complete flat room response I put the correction aside for the time being
|
Hello luisma31,
For someone who claims to not know a lot about audio, I think you're doing pretty well and have a nice system. I think you benefited by talking with Duke and James at RMAF, they're both very knowledgeable and won't steer you wrong. James Romeyn talked me into trying the 4-sub Swarm/Debra distributed bass array system and I'm always so glad that he took the time and effort to do that. It was a true bass revelation to me just as it seems to have been for you. As you know, it provides near state of the art bass performance and you made a great choice that will work well even if you move or change main speakers.
I find it interesting that we both operate our amps at about 50% volume and use fairly low crossover settings, well below 80 Hz. We've also both discovered that bass room treatments, DSP, EQ and room correction are not required for the 4-sub DBA concept to work well.
I recently treated my room with GIK room treatments but the improvements I noticed were mainly in the midrange, treble and imaging qualities but the bass does sound just a bit smoother and more detailed, too.
Enjoy,
Tim
|
Duke, Your above easy to follow, in concise in layman like terms of DBA are very welcome, needed and surprisingly understandable. Some months ago I took millercarbon’s advice and read: Optimal Bass Palyback In Small Rooms By Earl Geddes Why multiple subwoofers in sound reproduction? GedLee.com - GedLee LLC Papers by Earl Geddes And ever since then I came to understand to NOT ’judge bass by it’s level despite the fact that some bass levels are not at all natural or neutral’.
In Earl Geddes ’Why Multiple Subs?’ papers - when I read:
1) If there are corners, then one sub should probably go in a corner. Corners have the unique characteristic of see all of the modes. But using two corners is not an effective use of two subs because the symmetrical situation makes these two sources less statistically independent. A less symmetrical location for the second sub would be better. 2) One of the subs should be relatively close to the mains, but not too close. Ideal here might be to locate the first sub close to the mains, but back in a corner, if in fact the mains are pulled out slightly from the wall behind them, as they should be. 3) The rest of the subs locations become far less important if the first two points above are adhered to.
Subwoofer requirements:Because we are using 3 (or more) subwoofers, they do not need to be as powerful as a single subwoofer. Any decent active subwoofer (ported or closed design) with a 10" or bigger driver will do. It should have controls for.is - level (continuously variable)
- low pass frequency (continuously variable)
- phase (switchable or continuously variable)
- parametric equalizer (optional)
It was if the subwoofer lesser deities themselves opened up to me and I tried the technique with only 2 subs at first. One in the left corner of the room closest to the mains and I moved the sub that was in the far right corner and place it asymmetrical out of the right corner and against the far right wall and noticed an improvement right away. Of course there’s more but I won’t’ go on.
Duke, I’m just trying to let you know that because of your Swarm Subwoofer System I understand exactly what you have shown above NOW in a step by step manner to do the same thing in my own home and I say thank you. It is extremely hard to convince some of us hard core bass heads that a very high level of gain, volume, headroom and ’mega bass’ are not needed for ’good bass’. But now I know. There’s just one caveat, My subs do not have phase (switchable or continuously variable). My PSA subs have 2 pots for: Time Delay from 0ms to 16ms and Room Size from small to large Theses PSA pots were made to be adjusted by ear. How do and where should the adjustment be made with the 2 above pots with the multiple sub (4 or more) equation? |
@luisma31,
Outstanding room and rig indeed! I too have PSA and SVS subs that may be going up for sale. Duke, I have been to the Swarm website this weekend but did not see the Azel's? Could you give me a link to the Azel's and any other of your products I may have missed please. Thanks! |
smodtactical, I and others here did not intend to hijack your OP. Thank you for being so patient with us as this kind of bass stuff is very revelatory. |
Tyray wrote: "Duke, I have been to the Swarm website this weekend but did not see
the Azel's? Could you give me a link to the Azel's and any other of your
products I may have missed please. Thanks!" My website is being revised, but Jim Romeyn's site has all of my current designs. Jim is my partner in crime... for example the Space Generators that Luis mentioned were his invention: https://jamesromeyn.com/
Duke |
Hi Tim:
Thank you for the kind words, I'm trying to learn and as you stated Duke and Jim are a good source of unbiased data, they of course are in the business but they provide good advise even if sometimes goes against the actual product they are selling, this is something you don't find today commonly. If you learn how to filter BS here in Audiogon most of the time you can learn a few things too, there is a lot of people (like you which I follow your comments) that have knowledge and try to share such as well.
Yeah we have kind of the same settings, if our rooms were bigger (I guess yours is medium size room like mine) maybe we will go higher on the gain settings to fill it but the "bass perception" I get is just perfect. I say perfection because I tried and can't barely hear anything below 40 Hz.
I thought on using the GIK but I have other priorities to improve my system which I think will be more relevant than a subtle change on room treatment.
In addition to this Duke's speakers take advantage of late reflections to improve the mid/high perception so room treatment, flat response filters etc. will kind of flatten / remove this and I just don't want that.
This is OT of course but among all the music I like is classical and instrumental violins, piano, cello etc. and even opera.
When I travel I love to go (especially in Europe) to live venues which are very inexpensive, one of my favorite venues are church concerts, usually these are $10 - $20 per seat typically (even in Paris, Prague etc which some concerts are even free) and you can do even two events the same day, you perceive the music coming directly from the instruments and also these churches high tall vaulted ceilings and walls provide all sort of reflections. If one could go into the venue with a microphone and a FR software and computer I'm pretty sure the FR curve will be all over the place, not flat at all, does that prevent us from enjoying live music? not at all and that brings me to the topic of perfect flat response, is it really that critical? I don't want to spoil this thread with anything else but the close to perfect FR of the bass using the Swarm by wave overlapping it is just brilliant, too bad physics won't allow for the same with all the other frequencies.
|
To smodtactical,
Imo the sheer size of your large listening space bodes well for bass reproduction. Arguably what the Swarm does in a smaller room is, approximate the in-room response that we’d get with fewer subs in a much larger room. I do think your square footprint makes asymmetrical sub placement worth a shot, and you may well get very good results with only two big subs. As an alternative to asymmetrical, particularly if your two subs have phase controls, I suggest center of the left and right walls, and then dial in 90 degrees of phase difference between the two subs.
Despite the fact that I use four relatively "small" subs, I do not subscribe to the school of thought that says small woofers are "faster". What we perceive as "speed" in the bass region is directly related to the in-room frequency response curve. To the extent that small woofers tend to have less low bass they may be perceived as "faster", but that’s not a direct result of the cone diameter in and of itself.
I do not have first-hand experience with very many of my competitor’s subs, but ime the Rhythmiks are very good. A pair of big Rhythmiks in your big room would be hard to beat.
Duke
|
Outstanding room and rig indeed
Thank you, it is actually a lazy rig, I have several problems, one is the wife doesn't want dual racks so I can put my turntable in, another one is the wife won't allow a fixed coach / chair on the sweet spot, so I have to listen from the side or move every time a chair to the sweet spot to listen. The other one is her decorations are on the way kind of blocking direct hearing. So is either these conditions or we divorce. Eventually I will get a separate room just for my stuff, we'll see |
@smodtactical, I have been using two JL F212 in my 2 channel system fro the last 7 years. Last year I decided to add two more subs to attain a 4 subwoofer array. So instead of getting two more JL subs, I bought two BIG subwoofers from Funk Audio 21.0LX. I tried to integrate the four subwoofers to my 2 channel music but finally the BEST integration if just the two BIG subs. Now the JL F212 is used for HT. The bass quality from the 21.0LX is so well control and fast. the tonal texture is awesome. I am super happy that I go for the BIG subs, may be the 24 inch subs in the next upgrade.
|
Hi tyray, There’s just one caveat, My subs do not have phase (switchable or continuously variable). My PSA subs have 2 pots for:
Time Delay from 0ms to 16ms and
Room Size from small to large In your case the time delay pot is your phase control. I do not know what the room size pot controls. I will try to find out and get back to you. What other controls does your PSA have? |
@tyray
The room size pot appears to be a low frequency attenuation filter with 0 attenuation when set to large room and maximum attenuation when set to small room. I do not know if the pot adjusts the slope of the attenuation, the frequency where the attenuation starts or both. |
+1 millercabon
+1 big_greg
+1 erik_squires
Yes big sub woofers are viable for 2 channel music.
I am also of the belief that quantity of subs is more important than which brand of sub. I believe any decent brand will work well.
Currently in my system I am using 2) SVS SB4000, 1) Rythmik F12SE and 1) REL S5/SHO
All three subs cycle low enough and they are all equally loud enough. The differences between them is in how they sound. The REL has a passive radiator and delivers what I call very fat or thick sounding bass. The attack and decay of the notes or beats last a little longer giving the music a little warmer feel. The Rythmik and the SVS are both sealed and are much punchier and have more impact and I would guess that a ported sub would fall somewhere between the sealed and the passive radiator. Which is the correct style for you would depend on what you like to listen to. If you like percussive, highly dynamic music I would lean toward the sealed style sub. If you prefer more of a lush or softer style of music I would lean more toward the passive radiator style. In the interest of full disclosure my room is substantially smaller than yours at 14 x 10 x 9 so these findings may vary from yours.
You have a very large room (at least to me) and somethings that I haven't seen mentioned yet depending on how many and where in the room the subs are placed you may have some very long cable runs and from my experience single ended cable runs of more that 10' - 15' are a no-no so you might want to check into gear that has balanced input and output capabilities or if you are using passive subs you might want bump up the gauge of your speaker wire.
Integration in your case maybe more challenging than for most of us. Again depending on the location of your speakers in relation to your listing position there may not be enough delay in your basic phase control pot built into the subs amps. Tyray mentioned his PSA sub had a 0ms to 16ms range. I do not know what that equates to in relation to 0 to 360 degrees of phase delay, but if that is equal to 360 degrees of phase delay and your listening position is more than 16' away from some of your speakers than you may not have enough compensation to cover that distance and you will have the signal from from your drivers arriving at your listening position at different times which would make a royal mess. That is also assuming that there is no other delay caused by the cabling and that the delay the signal experiences going through all of the amps is equal. I believe that one foot of distance is approximately equal to 1ms of time.
Normaly I would say that a multi-sub system would be much much easier to integrate than the a one or two sub system, but in your case it may not. Duke being a much, much, much smarter person than I and if he sees this will hopefully chime back in set me straight if I am wrong.
Good luck and happy listening
|
@noble100 @big_greg Just like you, I'm most surprised by the extremely high crossover frequency of 120 Hz, which is generally considered upper bass, is well above the 80 Hz threshold at which bass tones become localizable. Most individuals should be easily able to discern that 120 Hz tones are originating from the 2 subs which normally negatively effects good imaging.
I cannot explain why the very high 120 Hz crossover setting in your 2 sub audition didn't significantly and negatively effect the sound stage imaging in the room. Can you?
If the two subs are inline or very close in proximity to the main speakers, I would think that imaging would be maintained. I've tried a high crossover setting with my subs. It didn't sound bad, but it bothered me that the sound was localized. I could "hear" the two behind me.
There are speaker management devices on the market that allow you set different crossover points for your subs so you could set a high crossover frequency for two subs placed near your main speakers and a lower frequency for the subs located far from your mains. DBX makes a very economical one and XTA makes a very expensive one and there will be others in-between. |
@audiorusty I think you're right about the placement of the subs. I can adjust the crossover on each of my subs, so might play around more with the crossover point on the two front subs. |
@audiorusty Yes big sub woofers are viable for 2 channel music.
I am also of the belief that quantity of subs is more important than which brand of sub. I believe any decent brand will work well. That's good to know. It's also good to know you can use any brand of sub used together as part of the multiple. Funny, I got a in very good condition 'vintage' SVS PB12 Plus/2 with the rare 12.3 subwoofers but I'm waiting on Tom V to put out his new 12" subs. I don't think it would be a good idea to use the SVS PB12 Plus/2 as the sub to raise up and elevate since it weighs 165 lbs. Gain Delay Crossover Room Size |
Dual 15” passive subs with at least 800 RMS WPC MOSFET mono blocs
|
big_greg,
I have my V801's crossovers set at 100hz and as I said before they disappear when playing. It could also just be the synergy with my almost vintage
Miller & Kreisel
MPS 2510 passive studio monitors with 2 midrange woofers and 3 tweeters each speaker. I'm gonna set the sub that's farthest away at 80hz and listen for awhile. |
I don’t know about big Subwoofers, but my two little JL Audio Dominion D108 Subs certainly pack a punch and filled a big room quite nicely with my Goldenear Triton 5’s. They’re powerful little Subs.
|
Legacy Audio XTREME XD Subs in use. See my review at Dagogo.com
I have at times used from 4 to 12 15" woofers employed in systems. It's fascinating to hear the gradations of power, dynamics, smoothness, ease, tonality, etc. that occurs in different configurations of large drivers reaching down well below 20Hz.
|
Hello douglas_schroeder,
I have never employed 4 to 12 15" woofers in my room or systems in different configurations of large drivers reaching down well below 20 Hz. I've only employed a maximum of 4 10" woofers/subs in a single optimized configuration, that reach down to 20 Hz, but not likely much deeper, and were included in the Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub distributed bass array (DBA) system I've been utilizing in my room and systems for the past 5 years.
Since employing the AK Debra 4-sub DBA system, however, I have become very familiar in experiencing and enjoying very high quality bass performance that you very aptly describe as having the qualities of "gradations of power, dynamics, smoothness, ease, tonality, etc." I would only suggest adding speed, accuracy, detail and naturalness to your list.
But your apparent endorsement of employing subs with larger woofers and in quantities beyond 4 subs to reproduce bass well below 20 Hz and even further improve bass performance, both surprises and somewhat confuses me.
It's my understanding that reproduced bass tones below 20 Hz are not audible, mainly just vibrate things around the room including parts of our bodies, there are very few musical instruments that produce bass below 20 Hz with pipe organs being the only ones I'm aware of and there being virtually no commercially available music recordings containing bass frequencies below 20 Hz.
I prefer bass that sounds and feels natural like when music is played, heard and felt live in person at smaller venues, not like over-amplified arena rock bass. What am I misunderstanding about music bass below 20Hz?
Thanks,
Tim
|
You don't know what you are missing until you experience it.
Frequencies below 20Hz add realism when watching movies. In real life if a train rolls by, or there is a gun shot or explosion, there are frequencies you feel. The sensation added by low level deep frequencies can contribute to emotion during movies. The ability to reproduce those frequencies is a good thing.
There are frequencies below 20Hz used in some of today's music.
Smodtactical, the best advice you have received is to listen. When things settle down from the virus, find as many listening opportunities as you can. Continue to do research here and other sites.
The construction of your room matters (concrete or suspended floor etc.) Your preference for bass matters. Some people love sealed subs, others do not.
I have two JTR S2 subwoofers in a 14x29x8 room. I use a mini-dsp to adjust the subs. There are times I have caught myself thinking, wow, I paid all that money for these subs and I can't even hear them. Then the music or sound track calls for it and I get a big smile across my face. These subs are special.
You are planning a large room, bass requires displacement of air. Larger drivers move more air.
I am in SC. You are welcome to come listen when things are safer. Oh, by the way, my in room response is +/- 3 db from 100 to 6 Hz. I have also added a BOSS platform as detailed in The Hideaway Theater thread on another forum. Large sub-woofers can be great!
Enjoy the journey, and have fun!
John |
John I like your approach. I infact may go dual RS2s as well. But I might go ported just to maximize the low end extension especially for movies with the captivator 4000.
Or sealed S7201 or ported TV42Ipal.
But I think im settled on going for big subs.
Another approach would be 4x 18 spread around my space for a smoother response.
|
Smodtactical,
The subs I bought were being sold used, locally. A friend who had listened to my system before suggested I needed large sub-woofers. That same friend told me these were available. I listened the first day without purchasing, after that I could not get them out of my mind.
The S2 is my first sealed sub-woofer and I must admit, they took some getting used too. I never realized it but I like/am used to distortion. These subs are so different than what I have ever heard before. They are tuneful, effortless, and can send you running for the remote. I know it is a cliche but I am hearing things in familiar movies and music I did not realize were there.
The JTR 4000 promises to be a pretty amazing sub-woofer. The JTR 2400 would probably be easier to place and is also special.
My advice is don't spend any money yet. Research as much as you can (Google is your friend here), give appropriate weight to opinions that have actually heard the speakers in question, and listen for yourself.
|
Hello jwmorris/John,
I just wanted to respond to a few of your statements on your last post:
"Oh, by the way, my in room response is +/- 3 db from 100 to 6 Hz." and "There are frequencies below 20Hz used in some of today’s music".
Your profile has no system details and I’m wondering if you could list the main speakers and subs you use in your system? It seems like you use your system for both stereo music and HT playback, just as I do.
Your stated in-room bass response of +/- 3 db from 100 to 6 Hz is impressive. My Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub distributed bass array system only has a bass response of +/- 3 db from 100 to 20 Hz.
However, I’m fairly certain that 4K Ultra HD Bluray discs and streaming videos don’t contain any audio content below 20 Hz. I’m virtually 100% certain that no commercially available stereo music content, whether issued on LP, CD, SACD or Hi-Res digital file, contains any audio music content below 20 Hz because not one of the numerous individuals, that I’ve asked to identify a single specific example of a stereo music recording with bass below 20 Hz, has been able to do so. I’ve even searched for a single example myself without any luck. Can you name a single example? Anybody reading this thread know of a single example?
My main point, which I believe you likely agree with, is that it makes little sense to have an audio system capable of bass down to 6 Hz if there’s no HT or music content that contains bass that deep. Are you sure you’re not listening and feeling bass that’s going down to 20 Hz and just thinking it’s going down to 6 Hz?
In my room, even bass down to only 20 Hz sounds and feels very deep with powerful impact and realism on both HT and music. I don’t perceive I’m missing a thing.
Tim
|
Tim -- ...I’m fairly certain that 4K Ultra HD Bluray discs and streaming videos don’t contain any audio content below 20 Hz. I’m virtually 100% certain that no commercially available stereo music content, whether issued on LP, CD, SACD or Hi-Res digital file, contains any audio music content below 20 Hz because not one of the numerous individuals, that I’ve asked to identify a single specific example of a stereo music recording with bass below 20 Hz, has been able to do so. I’ve even searched for a single example myself without any luck. Can you name a single example? Anybody reading this thread know of a single example?
This is tangential to your former examples of arguments in the vein of "there’s no stereo information in the bass, neither recorded nor perceived; symmetrical placement of subs is moot (at a not specified cross-over frequency)" etc., and it goes to show what you’d like to feel better about while trying to convince others into believing as well. Sorry to be blunt about this. Let’s make this clear once and for all: there IS content below 20 Hz en masse certainly as found on Blu-ray’s and UHD’s (look over at highdefdigest.com and their Blu-ray/UHD reviews, where there are occasional bass charts to prove there’re numerous examples of titles with infrasonic information into the single digits), and while I’ve seen no similar documentation on whether CD’s contain information below 20Hz I know of several individuals who have a music collection to strongly benefit from sub systems capable of much below 20Hz reproduction (compared to "just" having honest capabilities down to 20Hz), which is at least indicative of source material actually containing information in these "nether regions." Head over to the AVSForum and see with your own eyes the sub set-ups these people have in their homes, and ask them whether <20Hz reproduction matters. Visit databass.com and ask the same. The answer, I promise you, while be quite unanimous. People may not all agree on the priority of attaining infrasonics (and the compromises potentially involved here), but most won’t deny that frequencies down to ~10Hz (below that to truly matter requires rather massive radiation area and power to make a difference) are perceivable/felt, and can have a big impact on the experience. The proof is IN THE EATING of the pudding, but there’s documentation to back it up as well - should you feel inclined. My main point, which I believe you likely agree with, is that it makes little sense to have an audio system capable of bass down to 6 Hz if there’s no HT or music content that contains bass that deep. Are you sure you’re not listening and feeling bass that’s going down to 20 Hz and just thinking it’s going down to 6 Hz?
In my room, even bass down to only 20 Hz sounds and feels very deep with powerful impact and realism on both HT and music. I don’t perceive I’m missing a thing. With my own sub set-up I’ve consciously chosen to forego <20Hz because I favor bass reproduced from horns, tapped horns at that (this requires of you to actually buy into that bass isn’t just bass, be that via distributed arrays or not), and while infrasonics can be had with bass horns they simply end up being ginormous (so, a practical consideration), or with tapped horns in particular it means giving up extension in the upper frequency range, eating away sensitivity (though it’ll stay higher than any typical direct radiation sub) while continuing to have the physical size grow into behemoths when seeking an ever lower tune. When in my tapped horn subs the drivers move just a couple of millimeters with content down to 20Hz, I don’t feel I’m missing anything either - indeed it’s a visceral, awesome experience that shakes the air. I absolutely agree with you on the sufficiency felt here, although it’s not only about mere extension but also, and importantly about how these frequencies are reproduced. However, I’ve heard what <20Hz can do when reproduced forcefully, and it adds a dimension difficult to describe other than it has emotional impact (as @jwmorris expressed above) and can also lead to a sense of unease and even intimidation. It makes a difference in particular with Blu-ray’s/UHD’s, and while I’m a movie buff and know of what I’m missing with my choice of sub system, I feel I gain sonically where it matters mostly to my ears, which is from ~20Hz on up. |
@phusis is absolutely correct. There is content below 20Hz and each individual must decide tor themselves if that content is worth pursuing. @noble100 It is true some movies are released with bass filtered content. There is a group of enthusiast that have created a way to measure each movie, and display the average and maximum level of content at each frequency. They then found a way to use a mini-dsp to restore the filtered content. https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2995212-bass-eq-filtered-movies.html
I found a Spotify list of music with content below 20Hz using Google, I have not played this list. The search took about 5 minutes:
https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1Of0wCy23zikiR2kdzNeCo
The 1960 VW Karmann Ghia came with a 36 HP engine. The top speed was 72 MPH. The top speed of a BMW 528 xi is 155 MPH. Both cars cars can drive 70 MPH, but the driving experience will be very different. The BMW will reach speeds that are seen in daily use with extreme ease and comfort. The same applies to speakers. You may be able to get a speaker to play at 30 HZ but if it is struggling to do so, distortion goes up and the sound is affected. That is the reason we have sub-woofers, they take over where our main speakers are challenged. A large sub-woofer, with a numerically lower frequency limit can take playing ability one step beyond a sub-woofer limited to 20 Hz. A sub-woofer that can play clear, distortion free, sound at reasonable levels below 20 Hz is completely at ease at with content above 20 Hz, that difference can be heard. I use Vandersteen speakers in my multi-channel system. I use Innersound Eros in my office system. I will try and get some system information up this week. I also plan on trying to show my system measurements as well but if I show you mine, you have to show me yours (system measurements that is...). |
phusis: "This is tangential to your former examples of arguments in the vein of "there’s no stereo information in the bass, neither recorded nor perceived; symmetrical placement of subs is moot (at a not specified cross-over frequency)" etc., and it goes to show what you’d like to feel better about while trying to convince others into believing as well. Sorry to be blunt about this." jwmorris:"I found a Spotify list of music with content below 20Hz using Google, I have not played this list. The search took about 5 minutes:
https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1Of0wCy23zikiR2kdzNeCo" Hello phusis and jwmorris, I think it's best if we consider these as separate issues: 1. Recorded 4K Ultra Hd Bluray bass content. I had stated: "I’m fairly certain that 4K Ultra HD Bluray discs and streaming videos don’t contain any audio content below 20 Hz. " I believe my statement is generally correct but I'm willing to concede the fact that there is recorded sub 20 Hz bass existing on numerous 4K Bluray discs if individuals are willing to invest the time, effort and equipment required to retrieve and play it back. I'm not interested in doing so but I understand there are other HT enthusiasts that enjoy plumbing the bass depths of their HT systems. 2. Recorded stereo music content. Acoustic scientists have proven that humans cannot localize, which means to determine where a sound is coming from, bass frequency tones below about 80 Hz but are increasingly adept at localizing tones as the frequency of the tone increases from about 80 Hz up to the human audible high frequency limit of about 20,000 Hz. Recording engineers, of course, were aware of these facts and are the reason virtually all of them have been summing all the bass below about 100 Hz to mono on their master recording mixes for all music content formats for the past 60-70 years. This means there's no recorded stereo bass information on music content on Phusis, your link on your last post to a Spotify site, that you stated lists music recordings containing bass below 20 Hz, did not work and connect me to this list. Can you please correct this and repost the link? You do realize that you conflated several separate but related bass issues when you stated ""This is tangential to your former examples of arguments in the vein of "there’s no stereo information in the bass, neither recorded nor perceived; symmetrical placement of subs is moot (at a not specified cross-over frequency)" etc., and it goes to show what you’d like to feel better about while trying to convince others into believing as well. Sorry to be blunt about this.", right? You conflated the separate issues of whether there are any music recordings in any format that contain bass below 20 Hz with whether this deep bass is recorded in stereo and whether individuals would be capable of perceiving the deep bass as stereo even if the bass below 20 Hz actually was recorded in stereo. My point is that all the following conditions have to be met for you to be correct about the viability of achieving true stereo deep bass in your system: 1. At least a single commercially available music recording with bass content below 20 Hz has to exist. 2. This deep bass must be recorded in stereo. 3. A left and right channel sub needs to be setup, and 4. You need to be able to localize bass frequency tones below 80 Hz. Pending the validity of your Spotify list, I don't currently believe any of these conditions have been yet met. Fortunately however, none of this matters if you do the following: 1. Play any music recording with bass content down to 20 Hz. 2. This bass must be summed to mono as the overwhelming majority of commercially available recordings already are. 3. All your subs are run in mono mode and positioned in the room for optimum bass response at your listening seat. 4. You will not be able to localize any of the deep bass coming from any of your subs but you'll still perceive the deep bass as stereo, with the deep bass seeming to originate from the proper instrument in the sound stage image illusion. This is possible because the fundamental deep bass tones down to 20 Hz and under 80 Hz, which we cannot localize, are being reproduced by the subs in mono. But the deep bass harmonics or overtones of the deep bass fundamental tones which reach above the 80 Hz threshold, which we can localize, are being reproduced by your main speakers in stereo. You'll be able to perceive the deep bass as stereo bass because our amazing brains are able to associate the bass harmonics or overtones coming from your main stereo speakers with the much deeper bass fundamental tones coming from your subs. It all works like a charm and works with any recording whether the bass extends below 20 Hz and recorded in stereo or not. For example, the double bass will be perceived as being positioned at the front left of the sound stage image and the drums will be perceived as being positioned at the rear center of the sound stage image with solid and stable image illusions. |
Everything Tim posted is right, especially this one bit here: You will not be able to localize any of the deep bass coming from any of your subs but you'll still perceive the deep bass as stereo, with the deep bass seeming to originate from the proper instrument in the sound stage image illusion. This seems almost contradictory. But it is true. Emphatically. My system https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 is set up with 2 Dayton amps and I have tested all possible setup combinations- including stereo and mono. There is no difference running stereo vs mono. In fact just about everything else makes a difference EXCEPT stereo/mono.
Yet this is emphatically NOT to say the bass does not SEEM to be in stereo.
There is a whole recording angle involved here I'm not even going into. Just read the comments I have made and the comment Mike posted after his visit. The bass comes from everywhere and nowhere, and is perfectly integrated with the sound stage. Recording after recording the bass with my DBA has all the character and imaging as everything else from the midrange on up- whether or not the subs are run stereo or mono. Trust me on this- not only do the subs disappear, but when you get it right all the speakers and the whole freaking room disappears. |
Hello millercarbon, You know we both completely agree, based on personal experience, about how exceptionally effective the 4-sub DBAs are in virtually any room and with any pair of main speakers. The topic on this thread had switched a bit and was recently about whether anyone knew of any commercially available music recordings that contained bass below 20 Hz. Phusis then posted some comments that raised the issue again about whether or not deep bass under 80 Hz was recorded in true stereo and whether individuals can localize bass below 80 Hz even if the music was actually recorded in true stereo bass. I think we both know how extremely rare it is for anyone being able to identify a single music recording that's commercially available with any bass content below 20 Hz and that, even if one is proven to exist, I think the odds that the bass was also recorded in true stereo below 80 Hz and not summed to mono, is lroughly zero. My current concern is that we're veering away from the main subject the OP, smodtactical, is concerned with. His main concern seems to be how he can achieve very good bass response in his future very large 30'x30' room for music that will also perform very well for HT use. Can he achieve this using large subs or will it require smaller, sealed subs to perform very well, especially on music. Smodtactical, please correct me if I didn't summarize your main concerns correctly. My suggestion is that you'll likely find it easier to get very good bass performance in your future large room than it would be in a smaller room. This belief is mainly based on the fact that bass soundwaves are omnidirectional, are physically much longer and behave much differently in any given room than midrange and treble soundwaves behave. Midrange/treble soundwaves are highly directional, physically much shorter and, therefore, behave much differently in any given room than bass soundwaves do. In smaller sized rooms,I've found it's best to get the bass sounding right in the room first and then optimally position the main speakers in the room, in relation to the designated listening seat, for midrange/treble and imaging performance. 'm not certain this approach works as well in larger rooms but I don't see why it wouldn't. In theory, I believe it should be easier. Smodtactical, I think you have several options to get the bass right in your future room. But I realize I'll need to more specifically need to understand your goals and budget to best tailor the options I'm thinking about to your requirements. Generally, I'd like to know if your priority is quality or cost and how important convenience is to you in terms of setup and use. My options all consist of a minimum of 2 subs. I know that 2 subs will perform about twice as well as a single and 4 subs about twice as well as 2. Here are some of the general options I'm currently considering for your room: 1. Start with a pair of Captivator RS2 or similar large subs and position them each optimally in your room using the crawl method. If you only use a pair of subs, the optimum positioning of each sub is very important and unlikely to consist of just positioning one by each of your main speakers. You'll need to be open to placing each sub sequentially in your room where the bass sounds the best to you at your listening seat and not where they conveniently fit in your room. This could require rearranging furniture and other room décor. A variation on any of these options is to add a 3rd and even 4th sub to to create what's called a distributed bass array (DBA) system. The advantages of a DBA system are that the bass will have increased bass power and bass dynamics capacity when the content calls for it since the bass is cumulative, each sub will be operating well below its limits for lower distortion, the bass will be perceived as smoother, faster, more detailed, even better integrated with the main speakers and this high quality bass will be perceived throughout the entire room, not just at the designated listening seat. 2. Start with a pair of smaller REL 812S subs optimally positioned using the crawl method. If this is deficient in any way, you could add a 3rd and even 4th 812S sub until it meets your requirements. I believe using smaller and less expensive subs as additional subs might work almost as well as additional 812S subs. I also believe the 812S subs have the very convenient advantage of offering wireless connections. 3. Start with a pair of Syzygy SLF870 subs as a less costly option. These are newer subs that have received very good reviews and are also offer wireless connections. I believe the guy who started this company formerly worked for REL. Here's a link to their site: http://syzygyacoustics.com/4. Buy a complete 4-sub DBA system for about $3K total, such as the Audio Kinesis Swarm or Debra bass system. This is what I use in my smaller 23'x16' room and it works spectacularly well. I know these are designed to provide high quality bass performance similar to being in a bigger room, but I think this system would work at least as well in a larger room such as yours. However, I'd suggest contacting Duke or James Romeyn at AK to make sure they agree. Here's a review of the Swarm in The Absolute Sound that I found gives a very accurate description of the bass performance level to expect: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audiokinesis-swarm-subwoofer-system/Best of wishes, Tim |
Tim -- I had stated: "I’m fairly certain that 4K Ultra HD Bluray discs and streaming videos don’t contain any audio content below 20 Hz. " I believe my statement is generally correct ..
No, you are generally wrong in this specific instance. Why do you maintain to be "generally correct" when you admit the following (and is faced with facts/empirical evidence to prove otherwise): .. but I’m willing to concede the fact that there is recorded sub 20 Hz bass existing on numerous 4K Bluray discs if individuals are willing to invest the time, effort and equipment required to retrieve and play it back. I’m not interested in doing so but I understand there are other HT enthusiasts that enjoy plumbing the bass depths of their HT systems.
The "time, effort and equipment required to retrieve and play it back" is one to be invested in any endeavor regarding sub(s) implementation, in fact the only difference here is acquiring subs that dig below 20Hz (and having sufficient power). Have your DBA set-up if you so prefer (in your case that’s a rhetorical question), find the proper (bigger) subs to delve into infrasonics, and voila. To boot: as poster @jwmorris referred to there’s the added bonus with bigger subs of having more headroom. Phusis, your link on your last post to a Spotify site, that you stated lists music recordings containing bass below 20 Hz, did not work and connect me to this list. Can you please correct this and repost the link?
Let’s forward this to @jwmorris as the proper recipient. You do realize that you conflated several separate but related bass issues when you stated ""This is tangential to your former examples of arguments in the vein of "there’s no stereo information in the bass, neither recorded nor perceived; symmetrical placement of subs is moot (at a not specified cross-over frequency)" etc., and it goes to show what you’d like to feel better about while trying to convince others into believing as well. Sorry to be blunt about this.", right?
What I pointed out with named examples was to expose and emphasize the nature of your argument, irrespective of the particularities brought up. You often seek to wrap up matters in a nice bundle of absolutes, or would certainly like to get to where (a fresh example) "anything below 20Hz is hogwash because we can’t ’hear it,’ and moreover there’s not really any source material to support it," because that’s what you’ve gotten into your head. It’s convenient even, and while we’re at it let’s try and have everyone else agree on it. You conflated the separate issues of whether there are any music recordings in any format that contain bass below 20 Hz with whether this deep bass is recorded in stereo and whether individuals would be capable of perceiving the deep bass as stereo even if the bass below 20 Hz actually was recorded in stereo. My point is that all the following conditions have to be met for you to be correct about the viability of achieving true stereo deep bass in your system: ..
Again, as examples not intended to necessarily strike on a relation between them, going on from here is redundant. We have been confronted with yours and poster @millercarbon’s views in particular on the prowess of the DBA sub set-up ad nauseam (and you’ve learned of my views a couple times as well), and we get it. Duke’s (and Earl Geddes’) findings on this are by all accounts scientifically sound and very well thought out, but the whole concept, through your promoting it not least, revolves from a mindset of rigidity and reductionism that fails to give leeway to views, and not least experience of opposing nature. For this conversation then, let’s focus on the latest subject for you to preferably shave into the size you deem fitting: <20Hz reproduction (and that it, to you, doesn’t amount to anything, in truth because your lack of experience here and theory-laden approach keeps you from knowing about it), which also naturally caters to and reverts our attention to the OP’s inquiry, whether big subs are viable for 2-channel music (and HT). @millercarbon -- Everything Tim posted is right ...
Obviously it isn’t. |
Oh, he’s right all right. You simply disagree. That doesn’t make him wrong. In this case it makes you wrong. Probably your shoddy reasoning led you astray. Just look at what you wrote: Duke’s (and Earl Geddes’) findings on this are by all accounts scientifically sound and very well thought out, but the whole concept, through your promoting it not least, revolves from a mindset of rigidity and reductionism that fails to give leeway to views, and not least experience of opposing nature.
Well, yeah, it takes feelings and "views" out of the equation. That is kind of the whole point of science and logic. You could look it up. Only, why bother? The beauty of science and logic is anyone can learn to use them. They work very different from what you do, twisting words around trying to score rhetorical points. But unlike your word games they do in fact actually work. |
@millercarbon --
Oh, he’s right all right. You simply disagree. That doesn’t make him wrong. In this case it makes you wrong.
Let's hone in and focus on what's addressed here with a few excerpts of noble100's:
... your apparent endorsement of employing subs with larger woofers and in quantities beyond 4 subs to reproduce bass well below 20 Hz and even further improve bass performance, both surprises and somewhat confuses me.
It's my understanding that reproduced bass tones below 20 Hz are not audible, mainly just vibrate things around the room including parts of our bodies, there are very few musical instruments that produce bass below 20 Hz with pipe organs being the only ones I'm aware of and there being virtually no commercially available music recordings containing bass frequencies below 20 Hz.
I prefer bass that sounds and feels natural like when music is played, heard and felt live in person at smaller venues, not like over-amplified arena rock bass. What am I misunderstanding about music bass below 20Hz?
..and in a later post: ... My main point, which I believe you likely agree with, is that it makes little sense to have an audio system capable of bass down to 6 Hz if there’s no HT or music content that contains bass that deep. Are you sure you’re not listening and feeling bass that’s going down to 20 Hz and just thinking it’s going down to 6 Hz?
In my room, even bass down to only 20 Hz sounds and feels very deep with powerful impact and realism on both HT and music. I don’t perceive I’m missing a thing. And that's just it: "I don’t perceive I’m missing a thing.," because he wouldn't know otherwise having no had the actual experience of the impact <20Hz can have. And that's OK if it weren't for the fact that theory trumps experience here, not in the sense of being in the right about it, but by letting theory have its say to presume he's right, when he's not in this case; experience, it seems, is irrelevant, and yet it would tell him, and you, that a rigid 20Hz barrier (or what's "audible") isn't the final word in bass extension. Not to mention the importance of headroom which is a "neat" takeaway with bigger subs, but getting through with that is futile when most would believe what they have is "enough."
Probably your shoddy reasoning led you astray. Just look at what you wrote:
Duke’s (and Earl Geddes’) findings on this are by all accounts scientifically sound and very well thought out, but the whole concept, through your promoting it not least, revolves from a mindset of rigidity and reductionism that fails to give leeway to views, and not least experience of opposing nature.
Well, yeah, it takes feelings and "views" out of the equation. That is kind of the whole point of science and logic. You could look it up.
You conveniently left out 'experience,' which forms a view. It tells me a thing about you in particular; it's not that you can't listen (or so I presume), but rather that your reliance on theory (or "science and logic," as you so put it) won't get you to where experience could challenge your assumptions on audio.
Only, why bother? The beauty of science and logic is anyone can learn to use them. They work very different from what you do, twisting words around trying to score rhetorical points. But unlike your word games they do in fact actually work.
My "word games" are simply trying to express the importance of letting experience (i.e.: listening) have its say, as per above. It's not that I'm oblivious to science and logic, I'm just weary of having it dictate what I'm hearing. |
As enthusiast enamored with our equipment, in our
room, in our opinion we have to be careful not to be closed minded. I do not
believe most enthusiast start with a great system. Great systems usually evolve
over time. Most enthusiast come to a forum seeking advice and/or to learn from
other people’s knowledge and experience.
We read, research, hear, or hear about a new way of doing
things and we explore the new information. If we are open minded our joy of the
hobby and our systems are improved. If we are determined to be closed minded,
we do not grow. If we are determined to be closed minded we miss out on
possible system improvements.
If we insist our way is “The” only way we hinder/limit
our own growth. If we openly criticize equipment and experiences with no credible
experiences we could possibly hinder the growth of others. In those cases we
should always remember to include “In My Opinion/Experience” etc.
I read more than I post. I try not
to criticize anyone’s personal preference of speakers etc. I have heard
multi-subwoofer setups. I actually considered purchasing a SWARM setup. I have
experimented with a third subwoofer in my room. I have also experienced
sub-woofer systems capable of Ultra Low Frequencies (ULF). I am very happy with
my system but I am also very aware it can be improved.
None
of our systems are perfect. None of us know everything. None of us should
attempt to invalidate the experience of someone else based on our own
experience. The goal should always be to learn more/understand more. The goal
should always be to improve and increase our enjoyment of music and the music
playback systems. Some have forgotten this, others never knew it.
|
https://www.certifiedautosound.com/basshead-songs-put-your-subwoofer-system-to-the-test/?hilite=%27bass%27%2C%27below%27%2C%2720hz%27
We sorted through about 75 tracks using Adobe Audition. Audition allows us to look at the spectral content
of a track quickly to find out how low it extends. We’ve included spectral
content charts for each track that shows frequency along the vertical scale,
time across the horizontal scale and amplitude shown as color intensity from
black through purple and orange.... (continued) The monologue
introduction to “Boom Boom Pow” by will.i.am builds to a crescendo from the
45-second mark, peaking with infrasonic information from :50 to 1:03. Content
during this time extends solidly down to 7 Hz. There is another drop at 2:18,
and the section from 3:13 to 3:42 contains a lot of infrasonic content. If your
system is up to the challenge, this track has it all: a solid conventional bass line and enough content below 20Hz to make any true basshead happy!
Another all-time-classic
classical recording is Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture. This recording is known for
its jaw-dropping cannon blasts at the end. When played back on a vinyl record,
all but the very best turntable configurations will result in the needle
jumping out of the track as the cannons go off. The first five cannon blasts
appear at 12:36 into the track. The second and most impressive group begins at
14:41, with the blast at 14:55 containing low-frequency energy that extends
down to nearly DC levels. Call it one to two Hertz if you want – it makes no
difference.
|
|
Back to the original question...
In my room, using large sub-woofers, I can select two channel operation and be enveloped by music so much that I forget I am not listening in multi-channel mode.
Stay safe everyone |
Wow check this out from SVS... they seem to believe in the big subwoofers = potentially more distortion due to lack of control principle. "Acoustically, subwoofers with 15-, 18- and 20-inch drivers are more susceptible to boominess and distortion compared to subwoofers with 10-, 12- or 13-inch drivers because the pistonic movement of such a large surface area is harder to control. Poorly designed big subwoofer drivers with inadequate motors don’t produce accurate bass and struggle to start and stop on a dime. This results in low frequency output that can sound smeared, boomy or bloated and detract from the convincingness of an audio experience. It’s even possible for a subwoofer with a 10- or 12-inch driver to outperform a subwoofer with a larger driver if the motor magnets in the smaller subwoofer can generate greater force and exert better control over the driver. It’s also the reason why a subwoofer’s driver size can be overrated when determining the overall performance. Put simply, a big driver is harder to control, and offers no guarantee of greater SPLs or deeper bass than a small subwoofer." https://www.svsound.com/blogs/svs/strengths-and-pitfalls-of-big-subwoofer-drivers |
As they roll out their 16" subs... I'm a fan of SVS, but c'mon. |
How SVS fixed it...
"The turning point for the 16-Ultra Series subwoofers involved several key innovations. The first was an 8-inch edge wound voice coil, the largest ever deployed in a consumer subwoofer. The massive voice coil girth allows the woofer to exert complete control over the 16-inch Ultra driver and remain accurate and distortion-free with pinpoint speed in transients, even at reference playback levels. Four of the heaviest toroidal ferrite magnets ever used in a subwoofer generate unprecedented levels of magnetic force and machined motor elements produce astounding levels of low frequency output with minimal distortion. The cone material consists of a premium fiberglass resin composite that moves extreme amounts of air and sonic energy without ever flexing or losing control." |
@jwmorris --
As enthusiast enamored with our equipment, in our room, in our opinion we have to be careful not to be closed minded. I do not believe most enthusiast start with a great system. Great systems usually evolve over time. Most enthusiast come to a forum seeking advice and/or to learn from other people’s knowledge and experience.
We read, research, hear, or hear about a new way of doing things and we explore the new information. If we are open minded our joy of the hobby and our systems are improved. If we are determined to be closed minded, we do not grow. If we are determined to be closed minded we miss out on possible system improvements. If we insist our way is “The” only way we hinder/limit our own growth. If we openly criticize equipment and experiences with no credible experiences we could possibly hinder the growth of others. In those cases we should always remember to include “In My Opinion/Experience” etc.
I read more than I post. I try not to criticize anyone’s personal preference of speakers etc. I have heard multi-subwoofer setups. I actually considered purchasing a SWARM setup. I have experimented with a third subwoofer in my room. I have also experienced sub-woofer systems capable of Ultra Low Frequencies (ULF). I am very happy with my system but I am also very aware it can be improved. None of our systems are perfect. None of us know everything. None of us should attempt to invalidate the experience of someone else based on our own experience. The goal should always be to learn more/understand more. The goal should always be to improve and increase our enjoyment of music and the music playback systems. Some have forgotten this, others never knew it.
Very well put (indeed above quoted post of yours should be a "sticker" on these pages), and I'm not saying this as someone necessarily complying in my actions with what you point out. I just know of it to be a commendable approach, and one to strive for. |
How SVS fixed it...
I think it's a little disingenuous of SVS to imply that they're the only ones that know how to use a big driver. |
Hello phusis and jwmorris,
I think our disagreements and differences expressed on this thread can be boiled down to a difference in preferences and priorities. I could go into detail but I believe it basically comes down to both of your top priorities seeming to be the optimum bass extension of your sub systems for HT Bluray 4K Ultra HD audio performance and my top priority being the optimum bass quality of my sub system for 2-ch stereo music hi-res digital music file audio performance. I think both are enjoyable and worthy goals. But why can't we have both?
It's my understanding that current direct to hi-res digital recording technology is capable of recording deep bass content below 20 Hz on both digital music files and 4K Ultra HD Bluray discs. Given the factual limits of human hearing, of course, it would make little sense to record this deep bass as discrete stereo channels and the bass below 80 Hz would be summed to mono during the mixing stage for both music and HT audio recordings.
I think this would be a big step forward in the quality of the listening experiences involved with both music and HT audio. This would just require consumers possessing high quality subs capable of reproducing such deep bass frequencies, including my upgrading my 4 subs to ones of higher quality capable of reproducing bass frequencies accurately down to single digits.
Of course this would probably also destroy most regular consumer subs and sound bars that couldn't handle single digit bass frequencies, but that's a reasonable sacrifice, right?
Tim
|
@noble100 I agree the priorities of any system can be very different. The priorities of the person mixing the music or sound track also come into play. The bottom line is we each spend our time, and hard earned money where it matters to us most.
The question of destroying consumer subs and sound bars is the entire reason behind the BEQ thread linked earlier. Someone discovered that some film companies were reducing low bass content in blu-rays and DVD to prevent damaging consumer equipment.
That makes sense. But if you have invested the time and money to have a system capable of sub 20 Hz performance you can get that filtered information back using BEQ.
I did not plan on having a system capable of ultra low frequencies. The sub-woofers I bought were available less than 30 minutes away. I thought it was a great opportunity to own a pair of world class sub-woofers, so I made the purchase.
I do not believe I am lacking in quality or quantity. I have added some screen shots of my room measurements to my profile. I will try and add some pictures soon. The next thing on my wish list is some room treatments.
@phusis Thank you!
John
|
Hello John,
I've always built my systems based on the assumption that bass content on virtually all music and HT source material (LPs, CDs, SACDs, DVD and Bluray, digital files, etc.) only had bass extension down to 20 Hz since any recorded bass below 20 Hz was generally filtered out at the mixing stage.
I've been almost certain this assumption was correct and the complete story until you and phusis informed me that a group of AVS forum members had figured out a method, using a mini-DSP, that allows the retrieval of any bass content still existing on numerous specific Bluray and DVD discs that's below 20 Hz.
This was the first I was aware this was even possible on certain discs, so I wanted to thank both of you for bringing this to my attention. As I stated, I'm very satisfied with my current system's bass performance on both music and HT even though it's currently restricted to only 20 Hz in bass extension.
However, I am curious about experiencing how I would perceive even further bass extension in my room and system. I understand I would need to upgrade my current Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub distributed bass array system, or at least the existing four 4 ohm passive subs with 10" aluminum long-throw drivers it uses, along with adding a mini-DSP unit to realize high quality deep bass below 20 Hz. Even then, I understand this deeper bass would only accessible on certain HT Bluray and DVDs. I think whether I decide to proceed depends on your answer to the following question:
Does the mini-DSP also allow retrieval of deeper bass content on audio only discs such as CDs and SACDs?
Thanks,
|
@noble100 -- I think our disagreements and differences expressed on this thread can be boiled down to a difference in preferences and priorities. I could go into detail but I believe it basically comes down to both of your top priorities seeming to be the optimum bass extension of your sub systems for HT Bluray 4K Ultra HD audio performance and my top priority being the optimum bass quality of my sub system for 2-ch stereo music hi-res digital music file audio performance. I think both are enjoyable and worthy goals. But why can’t we have both?
Even though I fully acknowledge the impact <20Hz reproduction can have and that there’s plenty of source material to support it, not least watching movies via Blu-ray’s and UHD’s, as I’ve stated earlier I’ve chosen to consciously forego infrasonics in my own set-up. This is due to the nature imposed by design limits mostly, in addition to practical considerations in regards to sheer size; tapped horns, my preferred bass principle, are bandwidth limited to covering about 2 to 2 1/2 octaves cleanly (some would say 1 1/2 to 2 octaves, but it depends on the specific TH design and its weighted parameters within the given fold/expansion/compression ratio), and therefore a lower tune will at the same time "eat away" of the upper range that can be achieved. For those not in the need of a cross-over frequency above 50-60Hz here, 15Hz honest extension (or even lower in-room) can be had from tapped horns the likes of which count Josh Ricci’s monstrous Gjallarhorn V2, the Danley DTS-10 or lilmike’s LilWrecker. Apart from upper range limitations naturally imposed on these designs there’s also size to consider as they climb upwards of 30 cubic feet in volume, not to mention the added weight that follows. Moreover, a lower tune with tapped comes at the cost of sensitivity, though relative to direct radiating designs they are typically still more efficient even when tuned rather low. My MicroWrecker’s have a ~23Hz tune @97dB sensitivity that gives clean extension upwards to about or just below 100Hz, and with a 78Hz lowpass in my system to the mains (36dB/octave Linkwitz-Riley) no irregularities from the upper band of the MW’s interfere in the presentation. Highpassing the mains above some 70Hz has advantages in relieving them more effectively, but the exact cross-over frequency is one to be found with careful listening. A highpass at 20Hz (4th order Butterworth) protects the bass drivers of the MW’s downwards as they unload below the tune (in domestic use mostly to reduce theoretical distortion rather than over-excursion), and so 20Hz is pretty much the "hard deck." With the pair of MW’s this translates to +125dB’s SPL envelope and honest 20-25Hz reproduction. Some may regard such SPL capabilities in domestic environments as insane, but when faced with the effortless reproduction they deliver at any SPL one would care for, even having impact down to 60-70dB’s, it makes perfect sense. So, my preference and priorities revolve around attaining the bass that best integrates with my mains as well as acquiring prodigious amounts of headroom, and this requires going the (tapped) horn route with massive physical size to follow, as well as bandwidth limitations to consider. Infrasonics make a difference, for sure, but I’d rather attain optimum integration and overall bass presentation, to my liking, and sacrifice <20Hz with the given tapped horn design. Choices, and compromises.. (sorry for lengthy elaboration above). |
Hello phusis,
Thanks for your detailed response. I now have a much better understanding of your system preferences, priorities and goals. I looked at your system pic and description on your profile page and admire the unique and independent path you decided to take on your personal audio journey.
Your system certainly looks unique, interesting, beautiful and impressive, I'd love to hear it, or a similar one, in action sometime. You're obviously telling the truth about the size and weight of TH subs. I like the looks of your subs and main speakers but, if I was to switch to THs in my system and living room, my wife would likely be chasing me around our house with a large frying pan targeted at my head.
I have a limited understanding of the appeal of horn speakers, their efficiency, sound qualities, dynamics and ease even at very high SPLs. The first pair of speakers I purchased as an adult in about 1979, was a brand new pair of the original Klipsch Heresy speakers, in unfinished birch wood to save some money, for exactly $300/pair.
I really enjoyed those speakers during college with a TT, 40 watt ss Yamaha CR640 receiver and no sub. I still regret not knowing enough about audio at that time to at least try using a tube amp with them. Now I use 1,200 watt class D monoblock amps with a pair of inefficient planar-magnetic speakers and 4 subs. Oh well.
Thanks,
Tim
|
@noble100, I apologize for the delay in replying to this
thread. The Mini-Dsp helps optimize the information on ANY audio format.
It can be used in a variety of ways, one of which is optimizing up to four
sub-woofers. If using the Mini-Dsp for sub-woofers you can adjust the timing, volume,
delay and more for each sub-woofer individually. Separate adjustments for each sub-woofer would
also require a separate amplifier channel for each sub.
If you want to further optimize your system, In My Humble
Opinion, the first thing to do is measure your in room response, or after the
health scare is over, have someone else measure it for you. During the
measurement phase, use one speaker as a timing reference and correctly time all
of your speakers to work together. In my room, correct timing made a big
difference.
After measurements and timing adjustments, if you still want
to improve your system, I suggest doing some reading on the Mini-Dsp and consider
using it to optimize what you already have. I believe most enthusiast change
speakers without ever hearing them at their best. Once/If you reach the limit
of what your speakers can do, then consider replacements.
Another option available after the health scare is to find
someone near you with different speakers, that will demo their system for
you. Listening to someone else’s room and equipment is a great way to make new
friends and hear something different. If you like what you hear then you can decide if and how to implement the changes in your room. Stay Safe!
John |
Hello John,
No problem with the delay, I usually just check for new responses on threads once a day, no hurry. I’ve heard about the mini-DSP previously but the benefit of retrieving more recorded bass information from recordings is new to me. I’d be very interested in hearing a high quality system using multiple subsonic subs and a mini-DSP playing both music and HT source material. I think I’d need to experience the increased bass extension in person to determine whether updating my bass system would be worth time, effort and expense involved, which would include 4 new subsonic subs, the mini-DSP and learning how to properly use it. I’m currently torn because I’m fairly certain I would enjoy the added bass extension, likely perceiving it as being even more realistic and palpable than my current system which I perceive as having near sota bass response even though the bass extension is limited to 20 Hz.
There’s also the advantage of how convenient my current system is to operate and it’s overall simplicity. I just use an Oppo 205 Blu-ray player as a 5.1 Audio surround processor, with surround output channels run direct to separate amps and speakers for HT. And a separate preamp with ht passthru for music. The 4-sub bass system, with a separate sub amp/control unit that has settings for xover frequency, volume and phase, switches automatically between the summed bass on music and the LFE bass on HT based on the preamp input I select. This is very convenient because the settings on the sub amp/control unit don’t require changing for either music or HT, they remain constant with a xover of 40 Hz, volume at just under 50% and all subs in-phase. It’s basically set and forget. I’m concerned this won’t be true with the addition of a mini-DSP.
I completely agree with you about the benefits of getting my room measured. However, I was considering buying a good mic, downloading REW to my laptop and doing the measurements myself. I thought this would be a good method of learning the details of room measurements and gaining experience in understanding the relationship between objective measured room response and my subjective perceptions of the sound in my own room and system.
Thanks for all the very useful info.
Tim |
