Why the fascination with subwoofers?


I have noticed many posts with questions about adding subwoofers to an audio system. Why the fascination with subwoofers? I guess I understand why any audiophile would want to hear more tight bass in their audio system, but why add a subwoofer to an existing audio system when they don’t always perform well, are costly, and are difficult to integrate with the many varied speakers offered. Additionally, why wouldn’t any audiophile first choose a speaker with a well designed bass driver designed, engineered and BUILT INTO that same cabinet? If anyone’s speakers were not giving enough tight bass, why wouldn’t that person sell those speakers and buy a pair that does have tight bass?
128x1282psyop

Hi @lewinskih01, you asked, "What is your point of view about time alignment of a SWARM or other DBA systems?"

Imo time alignment is at best a secondary consideration in a distributed multi-sub system, from a perceptual standpoint.

The ear has very poor time-domain resolution at low frequencies, and you are aware of Geddes’ thinking on the subject (which is based on AES papers). On the other hand the ear is very good at hearing loudness differences at low frequencies once the low frequencies become loud enough to be audible. This is why equal-loudness curves bunch up south of 100 Hz. A 5 dB difference at 40 Hz can be perceptually as big a difference as a 10 dB change at 1 kHz! The implication is that getting the in-room frequency response right matters more.

Also, since speakers + room = a minimum phase system at low frequencies, when we fix the frequency domain we have also fixed the time domain, and vice-versa.

That being said, imo you bring up something which intuitively makes sense: Preserving the initial pulse of bass energy, that which "whaps" you. It would seem that precise alignment of the arrival of the energy from multiple subs would best support that initial impulse, but how precise is "precise"? Within 1/4 wavelength? According to a paper I read, the ear cannot even detect the presence of bass energy from less than one wavelength, so the "precision" required might not be as great as our intuition would lead us to believe.

This is just anecdotal, but every time I have reversed the polarity of one of the four subs in a Swarm system, there as been a subjective improvement, despite the fact that the initial pulse has been obviously degraded.

This past October at RMAF an industry veteran manufacturer with decades of experience came into our room and played his reference recording of Fanfare for the Common Man. He said, "that’s what a tympani sounds like." He went on to say that our system (in a normal hotel room) did the best he had yet heard on that recording. We were using two amps and had manipulated the phase of the two left-side subs relative to the two right-side subs.

Now it is theoretically possible to use four time-aligned and equalized channels of amplification and achieve precise time alignment and excellent in-room response smoothness simultaneously, and this would probably be even better. But at the price point I’m working, focusing on room-interaction related issues seems to give good return on investment.

Once we relax cost constraints, it might make more sense to build a planar array into the front wall and a corresponding array into the rear wall, reverse the polarity of the rear wall array, and time-delay it such that it cancels the signal from the front wall when it arrives.

Duke

Dear @audiokinesis : "" I didn’t design the Swarm to go below 20 Hz """

of course you did not and certainly not at your market price. I’m not with an attitude to make a critic or something against your product what I’m doing is to post some facts for the people really know where are " seated ".

As you I have more than 25 years with the " fascination " subs ideas because is a true fascination when you are " there ". I’m a simple music lover and audiophile.

The people that own your product could think they are " there " but in reality they are not yet.

The true and complete room/system bass management premise is that the audio system can handled bass frequencies below 20hz at real/live event SPL with lower THD we can achieve in our room/system ( other day we can talk about the importance of that THD. ) and to accomplish that we need self powered true subwoofers and we not necessarily need 4 subs we can do it with two true subs. The Harman white papers proves that.
Of course that if we are not satisfied with those two true subs in our room/system then we can go for the 4 solution.

My target is to have the best solution ( rigth now with two true subs. ) at one and only one seat position where the mids and higs are spot on.

There are alot of very valuable music information below 20hz in hundred/thousands of recordings and we can enjoy it in all its splendor if we have the system for reproduce it.

The differences between a quasi-bass management against a true bass management is not little or tiny but higher that what any one of us can imagine. We have to experienced to understand it.

Now all those gentlemans that already has the four not true subs only have to change it for true subs where maybe they will not needs 4 but only 2 but this depends of the room/system, which true subs were choosed and eacvh one of us targets.

I understand the " fascination " that have your customers that are living with and they already think they discovery the bass " panacea " when it’s not that way. They are close to that panacea but needs to " work " to achieve it.

So, my posts were not a true critic or something against to, not at all. Only facts.

Btw, I take a look in your site and I don’t find out which are the 3 +,- db points in those 10" units. Could you share it?. Appreciated.

Only for your records: I bougth my ADS L2030 ( that was not and stritly massive market product because was not designed for consummer market. ) many many years ago and when I was absolutely ig norant about bass management and its importance and with out knew nothing about the Harman papers. I bougth it in Laredo,Tx. because the vendor convince me about and because in those old times we can seen ADS advertasing in all audio magazynes as High Fidelity, Stereo Review or Audio.

Well these sealed/acoustic suspension ADS design between other drivers has two 14" woofers and line source for the mids/higs and its bass specs at 3 +,- db are: 22hz and 18hz at 5+,- db an 16hz +,- 4 db bi-amp fashion using its dedicated active C2000 crossover that I owned and I think still own.

Well, ADS was choosed ( with out knowing for my self any information about this.) by Telarc for monitoring all the Telarc recordings and the first recordings Telarc used ADS speakers designed exclusively for them and powered by Threshold. Latter on Telarc ask to ADS for a better full rage professional monitor and was then when ADS designed the L2030 that was runned in bi-amp fashion with the C2000 and Threshold electronics. The man behind the desin of ADS L2030 speakers was Mr.Kelly whom rigth after this his  last ADS speaker design ( he was the engenner in chief in ADS. )  founded the very well regarded Aerial Acoustic that between other things has true subs in its catalog line.

Well, even all  those at some time of my audio life all was not enough for me and I started with subs till today where my self heavy up-graded L2030 works as satellite speakers in my room/system.

I post this history because no matters how low the speakers goes if are passive design always will be a huge benefits integrating to those speakers with two true self powered subs.

The subs market development and growing is just starting because from a few years now audiophiles are starting to learn that true subs are not for HT but for a stereo system in our places. So the best on regards is forth coming and this is a very good news for we audiophiles and people like you that are manufacturers and good designers.

Good to know you and meet you here.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOPT DISTORTIONS,
R.

@rauliruegas wrote: "we not necessarily need 4 subs we can do it with two true subs. The Harman white papers proves that.... My target is to have the best solution ( rigth now with two true subs. ) at one and only one seat position where the mids and higs are spot on."

You can get good bass in one sweet spot with two equalized subs.  If you want good bass over a significantly larger area, four subs intelligently distributed can make a worthwhile improvement. 

(Note that Todd Welti et al did not investigate asymmetrical sub placements, and they also made the assumption that rooms are acoustically symmetrical at low frequencies.  This totally made sense for the paper they were writing.  But in practice rooms are never symmetrical low frequencies because unless the room has no doors or windows or AC vents or other "soft spots" in the room surfaces.   Even a heavy recording studio door is a significant "soft spot", changing the room's effective length in that dimension at low frequencies.) 

Rauliruegas also said, "Btw, I take a look in your site and I don’t find out which are the 3 +,- db points in those 10" units. Could you share it?. Appreciated."

The response of the individual Swarm units is the approximate inverse of "typical" room gain.  "Typical room" gain has been given by several authors as being about 3 dB per octave below 100 Hz or so, so my response curve is -3 dB per octave from about 100 Hz down to about 20 Hz, and then below 20 Hz the rolloff accelerates rapidly.

In other words I look at subs + room as a system, and my target is all about what the system does, not what the part I make does all by itself.  The Swarm system is highly adjustable to work well with a wide variety of rooms.   Ports can be plugged, polarities reversed and/or phase manipulated, and the amp includes a single band of parametric EQ along with a +3 dB "bass boost" switch.  In practice, the output of the four distributed subs combines in semi-random phase at the upper end of the bass region, gradually transitioning to approach in-phase at the bottom end of the bass region as the wavelengths become long relative to the room dimensions.  In most cases it is beneficial to offset this additional gain as we go down in frequency by reversing the polarity of one of the subs, or if we are using two amps, by manipulating the phase of one amp relative to the other. 

If I were to tell you that my subs are "-3 dB at such-and-such Hz", none of the above information would be conveyed by that spec.   Unfortunately people compare subs based on who has the lowest -3 dB spec, and therefore manufacturers compete on the same basis, and what REALLY MATTERS (which is, what happens when you put the sub into a room) is not given much if any consideration.   

Duke

Dear @audiokinesis : """ You can get good bass in one sweet spot with two equalized subs..."""

and that’s the target of almost any audiophile at his room/system. Makes no sense to me to have several bass seat positions when the mids/hig frequency range has only one seat position and no one audiophile listen only bass range.

I know is your business but not the one for a home audio system audiophiles.

In my case at my place in my room and with my system I don’t need but 2 subs but as you posted: " you can get good bass in one sweet spot with two equalized subs "", that in my case are not equalized at all.

Now I remember what you posted that +,- 3dbs at 100 and 20hz that I read at your site. Thank's.

R.
bdp24,
    
     Excellent description of bass , thank you.  I often find it difficult to describe in words what I consider good bass response but I think your information about "critically damped" at a specific system Q factor of 0.7, wich is a good balance of bass quantity vs bass quality, is very descriptive and useful.  Sort of like Goldilocks' porridge, just right.
     I understand that a sub's woofer driver has its own resonant Q, which is modified by the sub enclosure’s resonant Q. These resonances combine and interact to reach the system Q.   A Q of less than 1 is considered overdamped, while a Q of more than 1 is underdamped.  Most sub designers aim for a Q of about 0.7 to reach a compromise between extended bass response (down only 3dB at resonance) and good transient response (very slight overhang). Some designers maintain that a Q of 0.5 is ideal, and that a higher Q produces bass of poorer quality.
     I'm not sure of the exact Q factor of each of the Audio Kinesis Debra's 4 subs I use in my system, or if the Q factor of each sub differs from that of all 4 operating in concert.  I expect the dba system Q factor would be somewhere in or very near the 0.5-0.7 range since I consider the bass performance to be very well balanced between bass quantity and quality.
     I think it’s possible to put together an extremely involving music system based on smaller speakers that don’t reproduce bass below about 50Hz. But I know I enjoy music and ht tremendously more with 6x2ft planar-magnetic panels and a 4-sub dba system that seamlessly integrates the high quality midrange/treble/imaging of the panels with the high quality bass of the dba that accurately extends the bass response down to 20 Hz.  I've discovered that experiencing even just most of the bottom octave (16-32 Hz) on music and ht is immensely enjoyable mainly because I perceive both as more realistic.  I'm not a Bass-Head but I admit I enjoy the bass weight and power that viscerally involves your whole body in the music or ht. But I also believe in setting the crossover frequency as low as possible so the subs only engage when required for accuracy and not for an artificial general system bass boost.
      I've also discovered that bass quality is vastly more important than bass quantity. A leaner presentation without much extension is preferable to me than lots of bass if that bass is thick, colored, and sluggish. If the bass isn’t well reproduced, I think most would agree we’d rather not hear it at all. The poor bass performance becomes a constant annoyance and a reminder that we’re listening to a reproduction. 
      I've learned that realistic reproduction of the majority of the bottom octave (16Hz–32Hz) doesn't require large woofers in large enclosures, 4 subs with 10" woofers in relatively small enclosures are equally capable. 
      It's also true that a system’s bass presentation affects such seemingly unrelated aspects of the sound as midrange clarity and sound staging. Thickness in the mid bass reduces the midrange’s transparency. A cleaner mid bass not only makes the midrange sound more open, it also lets you hear more clearly into the extremely low frequencies. Moreover, extending a system’s bottom end has the odd effect of increasing soundstage depth and our overall sense of the recorded acoustic, even on music with minimal low-frequency energy.       

     I believe there are two main reasons to consider a subwoofer. The first is if you like the sound of your main speakers and just want more bass extension, power, and impact. The second is if you want a full-range sound but don’t want the intrusion of large, floor-standing speakers in your living room, although subs with floor-standing speakers can also definitely improve overall system bass response.

     Both cases sound simple in theory, but in practice, getting subs to blend with your main speakers is quite a challenge. Although you’ll undoubtedly get more bass, you might not achieve a sound that is seamless and coherent from bottom to top. That is, you might be aware that there’s big cones chugging away, seemingly disconnected from the rest of the music.  But the 4 10" cones, chugging away at a more moderate pace and even with all in mono mode, of a dba's subs seem exceptionally well integrated with the rest of the music in my system.  

     However, I'd suggest choosing subs designed for musical accuracy, not home-theater fireworks. Some subs exist to produce the highest possible sound-pressure-level at the lowest possible frequency for playing back explosions in film soundtracks. Others are crafted by musically sensitive designers with high-end sensibilities. Be sure which kind you prefer and are selecting.

      Proper placement of the subs is very important in providing optimum bass smoothness and detail. One of the huge advantages of sub/satellite systems is their ability to position the satellites for best imaging without worrying about the bass response, and then to locate the subs for best integration and bass response with the room and satellites. This includes treating full-range floor standers as satellites, too.   

     It's critical to spend some time adjusting the subs’s or dba's amp controls so that it blends seamlessly with your main speakers. On the one hand, getting two different products (the main speakers and subs), designed by two different designers, to work together in harmony is asking a lot. On the other hand, you have much more control over subs or a dba system than you do over the bass output in a full-range system. 

       Take advantage of the subs’s or dba amp's volume, phase, crossover frequency, and other adjustments to perfectly dial it into your system. Generally, the lower the crossover frequency between the subs and main speakers the better; the main loudspeaker’s bass is often of higher quality than the sub’s, and a low crossover frequency moves any crossover discontinuity lower in frequency, where it will be less audible. In addition, a low crossover frequency ensures that you won’t be able to locate the sound source of the low bass. 

      Subs reproducing frequencies above 100Hz can be “localized”—i.e., the location of the source of the bass can be detected—which is musically distracting. Too low a crossover frequency will, however, burden small loudspeakers with excessive bass and reduce the system’s power handling and maximum listening level.

     Another variable in sub crossovers is the slope. Most use second-order (12dB/octave) or higher filters. Ideally, the crossover frequency and slope would be tailored to the particular loudspeakers used with the subs. But because the sub manufacturers don’t know which loudspeakers will be used with the subs, these parameters are compromised for good performance with a variety of loudspeakers.

     A sub’s or dba amp's phase control allows you to time-align the subwoofer’s wavefront with that of the main speakers. Here’s a simple trick for perfectly setting this adjustment. (This technique assumes that the phase control is a continuously variable knob, not just a simple “0/180°” switch.) Drive the system with a pure tone at exactly the crossover frequency between the subs and main speakers. (Many test CDs include a full range of test tones.) 

     Driving the system with a pure tone at the crossover frequency causes the main loudspeakers and the subs to reproduce the same signal. Now invert the polarity of the main loudspeakers relative to the subs by reversing the red and black leads going to both loudspeakers. Sit in the listening chair and have an assistant slowly vary the phase control until you hear the least bass. Return the loudspeaker leads to their former (correct) polarity. The phase control is now set optimally. 

     Here’s why: When the main loudspeakers’ and subs’s wavefronts are 180° out of phase with each other, the greatest cancellation (the least sound heard) will occur. That’s because as the subs’s cone moves outward, the main speakers’ cones are moving in, canceling each other. When the loudspeaker leads are returned to the correct position (removing the 180° phase shift), the subs and loudspeaker outputs are maximally in-phase. Any time lag between the main speakers and subs has been eliminated. This technique works because it’s much easier to hear the point of maximum cancellation than the point of maximum reinforcement.

    Most subs use either a sealed enclosure or a ported enclosure. Which type you choose will affect the character of the bass the sub produces. In a sealed enclosure, also called acoustic-suspension loading in some designs, the air inside the cabinet acts as a spring behind the woofer, compressing when the woofer moves in. In a ported enclosure, also called bass-reflex loading, the woofer’s rear wave is channeled outside the cabinet by a port or duct.  Bass-reflex loaded system maintains flat bass response down to a lower frequency, but then the bass output drops off more quickly than it does in a sealed system.


The common way of specifying a speaker’s low-frequency extension is to cite the frequency at which its response is attenuated by 3dB (“-3dB at 28Hz” for example). This method unfairly favors reflex loading because it doesn’t take into account the very steep roll-off below the -3dB cut-off frequency. The ideal method of specifying a loudspeaker’s bass extension is to cite the frequency in which its response is rolled off by 3dB as well as the frequency at which its response is rolled off by 10dB. A loudspeaker’s -10dB point is a more reliable indicator of a loudspeaker’s subjective bass fullness and extension because it takes into account not only the low-frequency cut-off point, but also the steepness of the roll-off.

     There’s one more technical difference between sealed and ported enclosures to know about- transient performance. A woofer in a sealed enclosure, when subject to a transient signal such as a kick drum, will tend to stop moving immediately after the transient. Conversely, a woofer in a vented enclosure could tend to keep moving after the drive signal has stopped. The speaker with the sealed enclosure generally has more accurate dynamic performance.

     The AK Debra dba system has removable port plugs that allow the choice of configuring them as either sealed/acoustic suspension or ported/bass-reflex subs.  I've tried them in both configurations in my room/system and determined that I perceived both as equally dynamic on transients but preferred the ported configuration since the bass extension seemed superior.  

     I have the crossover frequency on the sub amp set at 45 Hz, the volume set slightly under halfway and the phase control set in-phase at "0".  

     My main Magnepan 2.7QRs are operated as full-range and I utilize no bass room treatments and no room correction, other than configuring my mains as 'Large' and my center and surrounds as 'Small' for ht. 

Sorry, I tend to err on the side of TMI on my posts,

Tim