Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Is 50Hz the magic XO number wrt subs in a music system?

  1. #1
    Industry Expert Nyal Mellor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA, USA
    Posts
    357

    Is 50Hz the magic XO number wrt subs in a music system?

    I came across an AES paper recently (Martens, Braasch, Woszczyk 'Identification and Discrimination of Listener Envelopment Percepts Associated with Multiple Low-Frequency Signals in Multi-Channel Sound Reproduction' that shows the result of a study from which the conclusions were that keeping bass signals separate above 50Hz contributes to perceived envelopment and spaciousness of the sound.

    The extension of this conclusion being that for ultimate quality the main LR speakers should NOT be crossed over to subs located physically separate (e.g. in the corner or behind the listener) from the LRs above about 50Hz. Also that the LR signals should NOT be combined monophonically and directed to sub(s) since the signals above 50Hz contain information that contributes to overall sound quality.

    What are people's thoughts on this? How does this fit with the typical paradigm of combining musical information monophonically below about 80-100Hz? How does this work with the Geddes multi-sub approach for music?
    Acoustic Frontiers - Design, Build and Calibration of High Performance Listening Rooms and Home Theaters.

  2. #2
    Site Founder And Administrator Steve Williams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Coto De Caza, California on the 5th fairway
    Posts
    13,171
    I completely agree

    I have always felt that if a sub is crossed over too high you get some midbass information inthe sub which IMO always seems to localizethe sub in the room. Crossed over correctly the sub should not be distinguished as to its position in the room

    Presently I am crossing over at 41 Hz
    Steve Williams
    aka oneobgyn
    There's ALWAYS another Steve Williams BUT there's only "oneobgyn"
    Industry Affiliation........Lamm Dealer

  3. #3
    Addicted to Best! cjfrbw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pleasanton, CA
    Posts
    1,266
    I think the rule of thumb is that you don't want localizable sound above 200 Hz entering the sub in a volume that can be heard compared to the main signal.

    Using this rule of thumb, a 12db/octave filter would dictate a pass frequency of between 40-60hz which would roll off in excess of 20db for 200 Hz,
    You could use steeper filters, which some believe make the blending worse, or shallower filters which would require a lower cut off point.

    Just playing it by ear, I find that a 80 Hz crossover with 12db/octave filter seems to work fine in my room, I can't hear the location of the subs unless they rattle some physical object. So some of it just has to do with what works in your room with your speakers through physical experimentation and measurements if you have that capability.

    Also, some individuals with very small mains may choose higher crossover points just to remove the amplifier demand from the smaller speakers caused by the bass.

  4. #4
    WBF Founding Member RUR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    650
    Nyal, a fair bit of discussion on bass crossover in this thread. Copy of the AES paper may be found here.

  5. #5
    Site Founder And Administrator Steve Williams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Coto De Caza, California on the 5th fairway
    Posts
    13,171
    I use a crossover of 41 Hz with a 12 Db filter. I was using a 24 Db filter but prefer the 12 Db now
    Steve Williams
    aka oneobgyn
    There's ALWAYS another Steve Williams BUT there's only "oneobgyn"
    Industry Affiliation........Lamm Dealer

  6. #6
    Addicted to Best! flez007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mexico City
    Posts
    2,311
    I found it as the second best option for my specific setup, the first one was 86Hz with a soft rollout curve, but differences were VERY subtle. This could be because of my particular room and speaker characteristics. I used the equalisation programme of my Velodyne sub which really works better than going just by ear.

  7. #7
    WBF Technical Expert
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Monument, CO
    Posts
    2,504
    I participated in a listening test long ago that had maybe a dozen people run trials to see when we could "localize" the subwoofer. IIRC, there were three subs set up, and which one (or 2, or 3) were on was determined randomly. We all took turns over a couple of days doing multiple (blind) trials. The results showed generally that everybody could tell where the sub was at around 100 Hz, nobody could below 50 Hz, and between was a continuum, with some not finding it below 100 Hz and some reaching to near 50 Hz. I was around 80 Hz, I think.

    Another thing that came out of it was that the sub was easier to localize at very high volume, which we speculated was due to the percussive wave from some material (we used the Sheffield Drum record, pink noise, test tones, and several musical selections including rock/pop, orchestral, and organ -- and no, I don't recall all the selections!) I think we ran most of the tests at "moderate" volume, about 75 dB SPL.

    It took longer than we expected to set up because we had to almost clear the room -- when something rattled anywhere people tended to focus on that and it throug off the localization results. We had to tie down and take down shelfs, tighten a few things, etc.

    Fun times - Don

    p.s. I am crossing over around 40 Hz from my Maggies to a pair of subs, treating them as "full-range" L/R speakers. I have preferred this in the past, before the time of LFE, and just returned to my default path. The xovr was determined from measurements and listening; mostly measurements as there's not a lot to hear down there.
    Don Herman
    "After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley

  8. #8
    Industry Expert Nyal Mellor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA, USA
    Posts
    357
    It also probably depends greatly on what type of music you mostly listen to. The authors of the AES paper used computer generated 'noise' rather than music...

    Thanks for posting your findings Don, an interesting experiment! Was that something you did as part of a job or just as part of this crazy hobby?
    Acoustic Frontiers - Design, Build and Calibration of High Performance Listening Rooms and Home Theaters.

  9. #9
    WBF Technical Expert
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Monument, CO
    Posts
    2,504
    I worked at a high-end store in Columbia, MO that was started by some of the guys who started DiscWasher (remember them?) and had ties to some places in KC and St. Louis. At that time (late 70's/early 80's) we had quite a few high-power types stop through one or the other (typically Columbia or KC) as it was sort of the only high-end place in the "middle" midwest. For example, one of the Shure VP's made a special Greek/Roman style listening "room" sort of attached to his house outside KC, with a stacked HQD* system and all sorts of cool gear. The work got me into a lot of very interesting projects and rubbing elbows with a lot of folk I had no real business meeting, but it was a lot of fun! My job was mostly repair tech and installations, with a tiny bit of sales when things got busy. So, the short answer is a little of both. - Don

    * HQD = Hartley/Quad/Decca = 24" Hartley subwoofer, a pair of Quad ESL-63's and Decca ribbon tweeters (4, I think) per side of a stereo system. At that time the Wilson of the audio world. This was long before the home theater revolution.
    Don Herman
    "After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley

  10. #10
    WBF Founding Member FrantzM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,053
    OT.
    The HQD used the original Quad ESL, often referred to as the ESL-57 although Quad never called it that.The second Quad ESL was officially named the ESL-63 though, in the early 80's... Heard the HQD (by Mark Levinson, the Man) and a wonderful speaker for its time .. I think that DAW used ESL for the midrange in some (all?) of the WAMM iteration.

    Interesting question.. later if time permits
    Frantz
    __________________________________

    "For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
    —Carl Sagan
    "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction."
    — Albert Einstein.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Which subs are you using for your HT system.
    By audioguy in forum Subwoofers
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 05-23-2012, 03:54 PM
  2. Do You Believe In Magic
    By Steve Williams in forum Off Topic Forum-Anything Goes
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-24-2012, 12:07 AM
  3. Bryston BDP-1 for Theta Digital & Aerial Music and Home Theater System!
    By Steve Bruzonsky in forum Computer Based Music Servers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-24-2011, 08:55 AM
  4. The magic of stereo
    By microstrip in forum General Audio Discussions
    Replies: 167
    Last Post: 02-23-2011, 06:31 PM
  5. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-08-2011, 10:33 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •