A Superior / Musical Bass: Does it exist? If so, is it free? How do we recognize it? How do we achieve it?

[Atmasphere]

BTW, I’m suspecting some of us are talking apples and oranges regarding this so-called superior / musical bass because to the best of my knowledge it's entirely free. Provided of course one already possesses reasonable or better hardware for the frequency range in question and the desire to make it happen. Not to mention having a somewhat reasonable room that includes minimal furnishing e.g. carpet/rug with pad and a few select in-room furnishings.

To the best of my knowledge and given those basic conditions or requirements, a superior / musical bass:

- Cannot be achieved by adding room acoustic treatements.

- Cannot be achieved by building a custom room.

- Cannot be achieved with playback system upgrades or products. (if full-range speakers no subwoofer is required)

- Cannot be achieved with some-to-many consultants / professional services.

- Cannot be achieved with any playback system tweaks or tuning config changes - that is aside from speakers and/or subwoofers.

IOW, if the above is true, not only is a superior / musical bass free it cannot be purchased.

I also suspect any tweak or accessory that no matter how well they might improve the overall presentation incuding the bass regions they cannot and will not transform the bass from the average or typical bass over to the other side of the fence where we find a superior / musical bass. Though if such tweaks or accessories genuinely improved bass reproduction on one side of the fence, chances are very good it will work likewise on the other side of the fence.

I suppose one could pay dearly to acquire a superior / musical bass but assuming the above cannots are true, I'm unsure what one might purchase aside from perhaps consulting fees who in turn may or may not achieve a musical bass as they may not even know such a thing exists. I suppose one could purchase varioius products or even entire replacement systems, and/or build new rooms and perhaps if all the planets were in perfect alignment one just might achieve a superior / musical bass. Otherwise, I'd venture the chances are excellent they'd still be in much the same boat as before the purchases but now with a new bag of issues.

My two cents anyway. And you get what you pay for, right?

On second thought. Let's say one could acquire a superior / music bass by any and/or all options in the incomplete list in my OP. Of course we know that's not happening otherwise every exhibiting room at every audio show would be demonstrating a variation of a superior bass and we'd all know how it sounds and most of us would already be there ourselves. But still, even if it were possible (I'm still guessing it's not) to achieve a superior bass by any combination of the many options in the OP, why go that route when one could go the free route with no additives? Less is always more, right?

Its easy to get good musical bass with extension to 20Hz.

The most common problem people have with bass is they get standing waves in the room. This causes peaks and valleys in different areas of the room, depending on the bass note frequency. A common complaint (which I've experienced a lot) is no bass at the listening chair.

This is easy to fix and you don't need bass traps or DSP room correction. Both of those things work but at about 5% efficacy. What you need is something called a Distributed Bass Array (DBA). This is best represented by the Swarm subwoofer made by Audiokinesis, but any set of subs can be made to do the job. The idea is to place the subs assyemetrically in the room so that the standing waves are broken up, resulting in much much smaller and many more peaks and valleys- essentially evenly distributed bass around the room.

The trick is to prevent the subs (and this is true of any sub really) from attracting attention to themselves, and this is done by preventing them from having any output above about 80Hz. At this frequency, bass notes are about 14 feet long, so in most rooms the bass note is able to pass by the ear and bounce off the rear wall within about one iteration or less of the fundamental waveform, thus resulting in the bass being omnidirectional. So you can use a mono signal for the subs.

If you meet this criteria, its then a simple matter to adjust the level to match the main speakers.

My speakers are the Classic Audio Loudspeakers model T-3.3s, with custom cabinets to allow them to be flat to 20Hz. So I already have bass in the front of the room. So to solve my standing wave issue (which of course only occurs at the listening chair) I only needed to add a pair of the Swarm subs. One sits to the left of me and the other is behind me and slightly to the right. I have their drivers facing the wall to insure they are inside the room boundary effect, on which the Swarm subs rely to be flat at 20Hz (by using this technique the subs could be designed to be smaller).

I did this experimentally so just used junk speaker wire between the sub amp (which sits by the preamp in the equipment rack) and subs. Nevertheless, it works a treat- well that I've no incentive to change out the cables other than cosmetics.

You can use a DBA in many room types and get excellent bass. Square rooms are particularly problematic and DBAs sort them out quite well.

The only reason we don't see this at shows is because most people showing don't install a DBA (other than Duke of Audiokinesis of course)

 

[kernelbob]

A basic rule is that any waveform can be described as multiple sine waves that are superimposed synchronously. As a simple example, consider a bass frequency square wave signal is being reproduced by a three way speaker with tweeter, midrange, and woofer drivers. The woofer needs to be able to generate a sine wave that includes the bulk of the wave form, but is not fast enough to generate the sharp and extremely sharp leading and trailing edges of the square wave. Fortunately, the speaker's crossover(s) isolate those sharp and extremely sharp portions of the square wave to the midrange and tweeter drivers respectively. This splitting up of the input signal and reassembly applies of course to the complex waveforms of music.

In a perfect loudspeaker, these three isolated signals (bass, midrange, treble) combine in the output of the speaker as close an approximation as possible to the input' signal square wave. What could go wrong? Pretty much anything and everything.

Let's say that our ideal speaker isn't so ideal, especially in the room it finds itself. If, for example, the woofer's output is lower than it should be relative to the midrange/tweeter. Then, even if the output signal is perfectly time aligned, the associated midrange & tweeter fragments of the square wave will be louder than the bass fragment. This means that the ear/brain will not be able to integrate the midrange and/or treble waveforms. The excess portions will instead be heard as additional midrange and/or treble sound.

The above is just one way that midrange & treble bass signal fragments can be orphaned. Another way is if the initially time aligned woofer, midrange, treble components of a "bass" signal are time skewed by the systems' components. This skewing can be caused by just about any component in the path traveled through your system. The result is that the midrange & treble components of the "bass" wave are still reproduced, but the wttenuated woofer output means that some of the associated midrange & treble output is heard as just that... a midrange and/or treble sound.

The ear/brain is very sensitive to time. It's really amazing how at a live concert (let's keep it to unamplified music concerts for simplicity) You can close your eyes and hear the most delicate triangle be clearly located and followed even during loud symphonic passages. Any time smearing of an audio signal will cause blurring of both instruments location (soundstage width & depth). The other major impact is compromizing instrumental timbre.

So, amplitude issues in bass reproduction can show up as spurious midrange & treble information. Time smearing reduces image focus and instrumental timbre. This has lead me to choose components wherever possibe with no local or global feedback (except in amps driving dynamic woofers where very fast feedback loops are used to maintain woofer control).

 

[stehno]

I’m quite certain some of us are talking apples and oranges here about a superior / musical bass which has nothing directly to do with how low the bass frequencies go. Rather it has everything to do with the volumes of bass information that become audible as well as the sound quality of every last bass note. Very low deep bass response is always impressive to most anybody who hears it so long as it isn’t too sloppy or too ill-defined. But again, a superior / musical bass has nothing directly to do with how low the bass response may go. But once a transformation occurs and the bass moves to the superior / musical bass side of the fence, whatever deep bass you had before will be deeper, more well-defined, and just more musical.

I mentioned in an earlier post something about the bass range of interest being that low frequency range that are most likely to be transformed when a speaker is acoustically coupled to its associated room. As far as I know those are my words because it seems that’s exactly what happens when a one is able to find a superior placement position for their speakers / subwoofers within a given room. It’s just moving the speakers around maybe in ½ inch increments until suddenly a light switches on and the bass is transformed. It’s as simple and free as that. Yet, in my experience locating a speakers' optimal location is the most frustrating and painstaking thing to achieve.

But really this is not new news or shouldn't be. Many of us are already aware that some subwoofer mfg'ers and bass experts tell us how to maximize a subwoofer's performance by playing bass notes, walking crawling around the room listening for suckouts, what have you, and when you've found a spot that sounds best, that's where to place the subwoofer.

That's it really. But it can also be done with full-range speakers too as I’ve achieved this 3 times in 3 different rooms which apparently is 3 times more than many. However, IMO, it's far easier to achieve with just full-range speakers and no subwoofer. In fact, if a pair of full-range speakers should go almost as low as a subwoofer say 20Hz, even if a given full-range speaker only goes down to 23-24Hz, I'd opt for the full-range speakers only because adding a subwoofer can easily overly complicate matters. In fact, my first 2 rooms there were no tuning opportunities except for possibly moving the speakers in tiny increments to get a little close to the pitcher's mound or optimal location. With a subwoofer, there remains a number of switches and dials as well as placement and it can really be taxing. My 3rd and current room with a 15-inch subwoofer still isn't quite on par musicality-wise as with the first 2 rooms without a subwoofer. But it's close. Those full-range speakers had single 10.5-inch woofers and went down to about 23-24Hz. It's been well over a year now since I dialed things in with my speakers and sub and I'm still fine tuning things.

Don’t know how else to explain it except that it seems when the speakers / subwoofers are placed / tuned optimally, the room’s acoustics and perhaps even the dwelling’s structure actually work with and/or reinforces perhaps every bass notes’ sound waves. And perhaps when a speaker is not acoustically coupled to a room, the dwelling structure / room’s acoustics are working against every bass notes’ sound waves. And yes,

A superior / musical bass is not just a doof, doof as Tao claims. Actually it’s more of a doof, doof where little / no doof, doof existed previously (inaudible). Or if there was a doof, doof it now becomes a doof doof. But a pronounced bass alone does not distinguish a superior or musical bass from an inferior or average bass as there is so much more. But whatever bass is more pronounced, it’s also more well-defined.

I’ve suggested in another thread that bass seems to have its own acoustic noise floor and that appears true. Not to be confused with a playback system’s electrical-induced noise floor as the two seem almost like two entirely different vineyards. Almost? Perhaps many have encountered scenarios where if you move a speaker here, bass notes become inaudible while the audible bass becomes less defined. Or if you move a speaker there, bass notes you did not know existed become audible. That implies to me an acoustic noise floor exists.

But as more bass notes become audible, new as well as pre-existing audible bass notes also become tighter, deeper, more well-defined, and more natural i.e. more musical. Moreover, there enters a significant boost of presence of new previously inaudible ambient info as well. Besides warming up the entire presentation iIt also instantaneously balances out every presentatioin that previously sounded lean. Higher frequency music notes that once bordered on overly bright or fatiguing or breakup suddenly drop and are just more musical, as is the overall presentation – top to bottom.

Simply by locating an optimal position for the speakers / subwoofers to acoustically couple to the room’s acoustics. My words.

Yes, it’s free indeed. At least in my 3 cases. Anyway, I've already shared more than I know. But as mentioned earlier, it seems so rare that I've yet to hear it elsewhere, though I've read some who seem to have achieved it.

BTW, I realize I was a bit dogmatic about one unable to purchase a superior bass. I'm still holding to that but I could be wrong. For all I know maybe there's hundreds of way to acquire a superior bass with all the potential options out there. But again, if that were true, surely by now there'd be a sure fire way to achieve it, other than the free optimal placement way, that a superior / musical bass would be most everywhere by now. I've not gotten out much in the past few years but I still haven't heard of this happening. If it were, a superior / musical bass can be so exhilerating that I imagine it would be the talk of the town so-to-speak.

At the very least, I hope you get a little pleasure out of these two bass-oriented recordings and by all means turn up the volume a bit to get the jest of what they may / may not offer.

 

[thedudeabides]

Just listen to a well recorded acoustic bass. Same basic parameter as listening to a well recorded piano to determine a system's performance. Pretty simple and basic without over analysis.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

get the direct to disc (Jeton 100 3315) pressing of this cut, and use Ray Brown's double bass to separate the wheat from the chaff of musical bass reproduction. it takes no prisoners. you will need it tight and agile, with linear upper, mid and deep bass to capture all the overtones. extreme bass technical capabilities get fully utilized yet the music is subtle, sublime, and intimate......as Monk and that Beethoven guy intended.

pull it off and it's an emotionally compelling musical treat with great beauty and tone. the double bass projects plenty of musical force and presence. predictable suspension of disbelief. goosebump city; breathtaking, and when my visitors hear this they are stunned and we sit there for a moment afterward pondering the implications as we catch our collective breath..

careful of the feedback effect on your vinyl playback......if your system can move lots of air some moments may not be linear. don't blame the pressing. the digital is quite good, but a mere taste of where the dtd can get to. there is a second vinyl pressing, which is mastered from a tape copy of the dtd.....good but not special. so buy the right pressing.

 

[Duke LeJeune]

A superior / musical bass is not just a doof, doof as Tao claims. Actually it’s more of a doof, doof where little / no doof, doof existed previously (inaudible). Or if there was a doof, doof it now becomes a doof doof. But a pronounced bass alone does not distinguish a superior or musical bass from an inferior or average bass as there is so much more.

The most refined bass systems can be distinguished by the most discerning ears: "dufe, dufe".

Seriously, imo in the bass region, the elephant in the room is the room. Compared with the minor differences between high quality bass systems (whether mains or subs or both), what the room does to the low frequencies is yuge.

Whether you address room interaction via painstaking setup or powerful EQ or acoustic treatment (ideally professional) or a funky multisub system (my dog in the fight) or some combination thereof, imo THAT is what pays the biggest dividends.

 

[tima]

use Ray Brown's double bass to separate the wheat from the chaff of musical bass reproduction.

You betcha. Ellignton and Brown. String bass and piano - the most lifelike sound I've heard from any vinyl record.


Pablo 3210 721 / Analogue Productions APJ 015

Hear how really low piano bass notes interact with the instrument's sounding board as Ellington plays the Second Movement of "Fragmented Suite for Piano and Bass." Detail cashed out as physical presence. Fret buzz, string rattle, tone bending, hand touches, notes bouncing off the piano’s lid and from within the bass’s resonance chamber -- it is all there with a sense of utterly natural musical expression, as darn close to live as I’ve experienced from recorded music.

 

[assessor43]

first you need a good room.

 

[stehno]

The most refined bass systems can be distinguished by the most discerning ears: "dufe, dufe".

Seriously, imo in the bass region, the elephant in the room is the room.

If you are correct here, would I not be equally correct if I said a full-range speaker was the elephant in the room?

Even so, might it be even more accurate to say the elephant in the room is a full-range speaker AND room combination?

Compared with the minor differences between high quality bass systems (whether mains or subs or both), what the room does to the low frequencies is yuge.

Same as above. If you are correct saying what the room does for the low frequencies is huge, would I not be equally correct if I said, what full-range speakers do for low frequencies is huge?

Even so, might it be even more accurate to say, what the full-range speaker AND the room combination does to the low frequencies is huge?

Without speakers the room is nothing, right? If so, I'm unsure why one might exclude speakers in such statements unless it's just bad habit? In fact, since rooms in and of themselves require sound coming from a speaker to influence sound, wouldn't it make more sense to exclude the room from such claims first before excluding the speaker?

Hopefully I'm not splitting hairs here because I actually consider these distinctions quite important. Especially since for decades we've had some claim the room is the most important component and others claim acoustic treatments are an absolute requirement. Almost as if speakers have little/nothing to do with what we hear in a given room.

Whether you address room interaction via painstaking setup or powerful EQ or acoustic treatment (ideally professional) or a funky multisub system (my dog in the fight) or some combination thereof, imo THAT is what pays the biggest dividends.

I suppose there are several reasons why some-to-many might adhere to the EQ, acoustic treatment, and/or custom room strategy. But wouldn't any such strategy be essentially the equivalent of acoustically coupling the room to the full-range speakers? And if so, wouldn't that pretty much be the opposite approach of the strategy of acoustically coupling the full-range speaker to the room? And if both were executed extremely well, wouldn't either strategy essentially be achieving the same goal i.e. a superior bass?

If per chance either strategy worked equally well, wouldn't it be simpler / more efficient to focus on coupling a full-range speaker to the room? IOW, if one was to follow the coupling the full-range speakers to the room strategy, wouldn't the need for EQ, acoustic treatments, and/or custom rooms (think extras or excess) cease?

I'm curious. Are you one of those subwoofer mfg'ers who advocate finding an optimal subwoofer position in the room is paramount for best bass performance?

Regardless, might you suppose that if a bass expert (perhaps you) was an advocate for optimal subwoofer placement for superior bass performance, is there any reason that same bass expert should not equally advocate for optimal full-range speaker (no sub) placement for the exact same reason i.e. superior bass performance?

 

[Duke LeJeune]

If you are correct here, would I not be equally correct if I said the speaker was the elephant in the room?

Even so, might it be even more accurate to say the elephant in the room is the speaker AND room combination?

Same as above. If you are correct saying what the room does for the low frequencies is huge, would I not be equally correct if I said, what speakers do for low frequencies is huge?

Even so, might it be even more accurate to say, what the speaker AND the room combination does to the low frequencies is huge?

A good subwoofer can have extremely smooth anechoic response in the bass region, then we put it in a room and measure, and get a peak-and-dip pattern of maybe plus or minus 6 dB(!). Move the subwoofer to a different location, and now we get a DIFFERENT room-interaction-induced peak-and-dip pattern. Now move the microphone instead of the subwoofer and we get yet another, different peak-and-dip pattern. If we replace that subwoofer with a different good subwoofer which has a different anechoic frequency response, its in-room frequency response will undergo the SAME AMOUNT of changes at the SAME frequencies as the first sub. So imo, the room's effects are making the biggest difference.

I assume you know all of this and prefer different wording, and that's okay with me. Your wording may well be better than mine.

I suppose there are several reasons why some-to-many might adhere to the EQ, acoustic treatment, custom room strategy. But wouldn't any such strategy be essentially the equivalent of acoustically coupling the room to the speakers? And if so, wouldn't that pretty much be the opposite of the strategy of acoustically coupling the speaker to the room? And if executed extremely well, wouldn't either strategy essentially be achieving the same goal i.e. a superior bass?

If per chance either strategy worked equally, wouldn't it be simpler to focus on couple the speakers to the room? IOW, if one was to follow the coupling the speakers to the room strategy, wouldn't the need for EQ, acoustic treatments, custom rooms (think extras) cease?

I don't understand what the difference is between "coupling the room to the speakers" and "coupling the speakers to the room." What is the distinction, and is it critical?

I'm curious. Are you one of those subwoofer mfg'ers who advocate finding an optimal subwoofer position in the room is paramount for best bass performance?

No. Imo subwoofer placement is one piece of the puzzle. I don't dispute that there probably are optimal subwoofer location(s), but I embrace a strategy which is not reliant on finding those optimal locations down to a fraction of an inch.

Regardless, might you suppose that if a bass expert (perhaps you) was an advocate for optimal subwoofer placement for superior bass performance, is there any reason that same bass expert should not equally advocate for optimal full-range speaker (no sub) placement for the exact same reason i.e. superior bass performance?

I make speakers as well as subwoofers, and my placement suggestions for each have different priorities.

I suggest placing subs for in-room response smoothness and practicality. I suggest placing fullrange speakers for sound quality, spatial quality, and practicality, and then adjust the bass (via multiple pluggable ports) for best results in that location.

Click here for a look at my approach to subwoofering. Feel free to be critical of what I do, as that too is part of our hobby and passion.

 

[stehno]

A good subwoofer can have extremely smooth anechoic response in the bass region, then we put it in a room and measure, and get a peak-and-dip pattern of maybe plus or minus 6 dB(!). Move the subwoofer to a different location, and now we get a DIFFERENT room-interaction-induced peak-and-dip pattern. Now move the microphone instead of the subwoofer and we get yet another, different peak-and-dip pattern. If we replace that subwoofer with a different good subwoofer which has a different anechoic frequency response, its in-room frequency response will undergo the SAME AMOUNT of changes at the SAME frequencies as the first sub. So imo, the room's effects are making the biggest difference.

Thanks for the response, Duke. However, it doesn't seem you answered my question. Nevertheless, since a subwoofer is a speaker, cannot a well-designed full-range speaker also achieve an extremely smooth response in the bass region by various means?

Also, just like your example with moving the subwoofer, if you were to move the full-range speaker to a different location, would you not likewise get a DIFFERENT room-interaction?

Do you see my point? It seems like many, you choose to focus on the room, whereas my focus is on the speaker's placement. Worst case, it seems either focus should work equally well and we're just arriving at the same target from opposite ends, right?

However, as you pointed out here, if you swap in a different subwoofer, everything changes. As should be expected. That implies to me that when one focuses on the EQ, acoustic treatments, and/or a custom room, it's back to the drawing board for any one of those things.

Whereas, my position is when one focuses on the full-range speaker (or sub), one need only focus again on finding yet another optimal placement position. Again, perhaps 6 of one, half-dozen of another, but by focusing on the full-range speaker alone, I've at least saved myself potentially much resources by avoiding acoustic treatments and/or custom room specifics altogether.

I assume you know all of this and prefer different wording, and that's okay with me. Your wording may well be better than mine.

You call it room-interaction-peak-dip and I call it acoustically coupling a full-range speaker to a room. It seems both imply the same or similar thing. But it's back to which one chooses to focus on, the speaker / sub or the effects the speaker / sub induce on the room.

I don't understand what the difference is between "coupling the room to the speakers" and "coupling the speakers to the room." What is the distinction, and is it critical?

If one chooses to focus on the room via acoustic treatments and/or custom room, are they not altering the room to accommodate the speaker / sub? If so, that's what I mean by "coupling the room to the speaker".

On the other hand, if one focuses only on a speaker and/or sub's position within the room for best response, that's what I'd call, "coupling the speaker / sub to the room."

No. Imo subwoofer placement is one piece of the puzzle. I don't dispute that there probably are optimal subwoofer location(s), but I embrace a strategy which is not reliant on finding those optimal locations down to a fraction of an inch.

Understood that is your position. But if we instead focused our attention on finding an optimal location down to a fraction of an inch, might that not simplify things? Granted, it ain't easy, but it would seem easier than whatever strategies have been used to address the room?

And that's kinda been my point with opening this thread. My hunch is, if more people focused on optimal speaker / sub placement it might actually get easier over time and maybe even eventually discover a sure fire formula that works for most / all.

But so far, it seems others are having too much fun focusing on the room and its anomalies. Hence, the speaker remains an afterthought, if that.

I make speakers as well as subwoofers, and my placement suggestions for each have different priorities.

I suggest placing subs for in-room response smoothness and practicality. I suggest placing fullrange speakers for sound quality, spatial quality, and practicality, and then adjust the bass (via multiple pluggable ports) for best results in that location.

I suggest focusing on finding a speaker and/or sub's optimal location for best bass response and all other sound quality characteristics seem to fall in line as well. One of the beneifts if/when this occurs is the need for acoustic treatments and custom rooms ceases. If that is true, less is more, right?

Click here for a look at my approach to subwoofering. Feel free to be critical of what I do, as that too is part of our hobby and passion.

Yes, I read thru it relatively quickly. But it does seem rather important to me that you said there, the secret is the placement. And that's why I opened this thread. Now you may have ulterior philosophies than me with your "secret" than I but nevertheless, that is the real secret isn't it?

I've never owned more than one subwoofer at a time so I've no clue what 2, 4, or even 20 subwoofers carefully places in a room is capable of accomplishing. But based on the efforts required for my to carefully position speakers and tune a single sub, my initial thinking about multiple subs is it may be inviting a potential nightmare from both an additional hardware and additional resource perspective. For me. I also cling very much to the less is more strategy whenever performance is at issue. So when I read something claiming more is required, my radar goes up.

Ultimately, I've no clue what your idea of a superior / musical bass is. Like any other topic and designer, your idea of a superior bass could be fabulous and off-the-charts or it could be left wanting. I share in-room recordings that IMO, give a faint idea what I'm trying to describe but they apparently are of no value to anyone. Which leads me to think either everybody has a superior / musical bass and I'm preaching to the choir or the bass in my videos is sloppy and ill-defined and others are just too kind and respectful to correct me.

But considering that through much due diligence, I've achieved what i call a superior / musical bass in 3 different rooms with large dry spells in between while attempting to get there and that I've yet to encounter this level of bass performance elsewhere e.g. at shows, dealers, friends homes, etc. leads me to believe that many of us are talking apples and oranges regarding this matter.

Do you happen to have a video link to a customer's room you could share that demonstrates a before/after or just after music presentation?

 

[izeek]

But did you enjoy listening to it?

 

[Duke LeJeune]

Thanks for the response, Duke. However, it doesn't seem you answered my question. Nevertheless, since a subwoofer is a speaker, cannot a well-designed full-range speaker also achieve an extremely smooth response in the bass region by various means?

Also, just like your example with moving the subwoofer, if you were to move the full-range speaker to a different location, would you not likewise get a DIFFERENT room-interaction?

Do you see my point? It seems like many, you choose to focus on the room, whereas my focus is on the speaker's placement.

I work to make speakers which interact well with a normal untreated room because I see that as my job, as the designer. You work to place speakers for optimal room interaction, because that's your job as the end user. I don't see a conflict. (Dialing in the settings on the subwoofer amp would also be the job of the end user, for which I offer suggestions and guidelines.)

However, as you pointed out here, if you swap in a different subwoofer, everything changes. As should be expected. That implies to me that when one focuses on the EQ, acoustic treatments, and/or a custom room, it's back to the drawing board for any one of those things.

Personally I don't focus on EQ or acoustic treatments or custom rooms, but I wouldn't characterize the implications of changing subwoofers to be "back to the drawing board" for those who do.

If one chooses to focus on the room via acoustic treatments and/or custom room, are they not altering the room to accommodate the speaker / sub? If so, that's what I mean by "coupling the room to the speaker".

On the other hand, if one focuses only on a speaker and/or sub's position within the room for best response, that's what I'd call, "coupling the speaker / sub to the room."

Thanks for explaining. I just see it all as "speaker/room interaction".

My position is when one focuses on the full-range speaker (or sub), one need only focus again on finding yet another optimal placement position. Again, perhaps 6 of one, half-dozen of another, but by focusing on the full-range speaker alone, I've at least saved myself potentially much resources by avoiding acoustic treatments and/or custom room specifics altogether.

... if we focused our attention on finding an optimal location down to a fraction of an inch, might that not simplify things? Granted, it ain't easy, but it would seem easier than whatever strategies have been used to address the room?

And that's kinda been my point with opening this thread. My hunch is, if more people focused on optimal speaker / sub placement it might actually get easier over time and maybe even eventually discover a sure fire formula that works for most / all.

I suggest focusing on finding a speaker and/or sub's optimal location for best bass response and all other sound quality characteristics seem to fall in line as well. One of the beneifts if/when this occurs is the need for acoustic treatments and custom rooms ceases. If that is true, less is more, right?

considering that through much due diligence, I've achieved what i call a superior / musical bass in 3 different rooms with large dry spells in between while attempting to get there and that I've yet to encounter this level of bass performance elsewhere e.g. at shows, dealers, friends homes, etc. leads me to believe that many of us are talking apples and oranges regarding this matter.

Thank you for sharing your experiences and insights. It sounds to me like you've gotten exceptionally good results through placement alone. Would you be willing to describe your process?

I read thru it [review of the Swarm] relatively quickly. But it does seem rather important to me that you said there, the secret is the placement. And that's why I opened this thread. Now you may have ulterior philosophies than me with your "secret" than I but nevertheless, that is the real secret isn't it?

Just to be clear, I'm not the author of the review.

The placement strategy for the four subs is the "secret", rather than the specific placement of any one of them: Spread them around the room asymmetrically, such that each interacts with the room differently. Sometimes a symmetrical placement strategy works better for cancelling particular modes. Some customers do the subwoofer "crawl", repeating it each time another sub is added. The summed in-room response is what matters most, rather than the in-room response of any individual sub.

I've never owned more than one subwoofer at a time so I've no clue what 2, 4, or even 20 subwoofers carefully placed in a room is capable of accomplishing. But based on the efforts required for my to carefully position speakers and tune a single sub, my initial thinking about multiple subs is it may be inviting a potential nightmare from both an additional hardware and additional resource perspective.

I can understand your apprehension about the complexity of placing multiple subs when a single sub takes so long, but actually the MORE subs you have spread around the room, the LESS CRITICAL the placement of any one of them is. In practice, placement of the four subs seldom calls for more than one or two being repositioned after well thought-out initial placement.

I also cling very much to the less is more strategy whenever performance is at issue. So when I read something claiming more is required, my radar goes up.

Well there's nothing wrong with being skeptical, and not that I want to engage in a philosophical debate, but imo sometimes "more" actually does result in more performance.

Do you happen to have a video link to a customer's room you could share that demonstrates a before/after or just after music presentation?

No, unfortunately I don't, at least not for my subwoofer system. And the only YouTube customer videos I could find of my fullrange speakers are of a discontinued model:

The Night Train @ 140 Broadway - YouTube

 

[stehno]

I work to make speakers which interact well with a normal untreated room because I see that as my job, as the designer. You work to place speakers for optimal room interaction, because that's your job as the end user. I don't see a conflict. (Dialing in the settings on the subwoofer amp would also be the job of the end user, for which I offer suggestions and guidelines.)

Understood. BTW, I watched that video and nice bass.

Personally I don't focus on EQ or acoustic treatments or custom rooms, but I wouldn't characterize the implications of changing subwoofers to be "back to the drawing board" for those who do.

Sorry. Based on a previous response I got the impression you did.

Thanks for explaining. I just see it all as "speaker/room interaction".

I kinda' like the phrase, "Acoustically coupling the speaker to the room" or vice versa because it seems to describe exactly what we're trying to accomplish regardless of strategy or method.

Thank you for sharing your experiences and insights. It sounds to me like you've gotten exceptionally good results through placement alone. Would you be willing to describe your process?

Thanks, Duke. I imagine my process is no different than many attempting to do the same and you've probably already heard a few hundred variations from others.

After a quick prayer and a last meal, I'll start off with the often times suggested starting points for room sizes I've dealt with. Since my widest room experienced was 13.5ft, the tallest ceiling was 10.5, and the most depth was 21ft that usually implies starting off with the full-range speaker's woofer being anywhere from 5.5ft to 7.5ft out from the front wall and the woofer's centers being maybe 2.5 - 3ft away from side walls. From that starting point, I might move the speakers in 6-inch increments in any given direction always measuring to ensure both speaker cabinets are symetrical. It's important to me to always lay a little tape for reference as to where the speaker was last positoned in case I need to go back. As I start to hone in on an improved bass, I'll eventually get it down to 1-inch and then 1/2-inch increments until the light switches on. Once there I may even try one or two smaller moves just to see if the speaker acoustically couples even better with the room than before.

Of course it helps to have good reference music that makes it easily noticeable when things are dialed in. I could probably list 25 or 50 pieces of music off the top of my head but one of the first that come to mind is Steely Dan's Two Against Nature album. It's pretty loaded with some good and even unique bass. I'm particulary fond of Two Against Nature, Cousin Dupree, and especially Negative Girl. I'm convinced if I get Negative Girl right, I'm probably done. I'm still not quite there yet with my subwoofer.

It may take me months or even years because I generally make only one or 2 speaker moves a week. In a pinch or if my only focus was on just this one thing I just might get things dialed-in in a single day or maybe single week. I've only tried and achieved this 3 times and I'd rather stick toothpicks in my eyes rather than go thru this ritual but IMO it's something that must be done. I've also exhibited at several audio shows but with so much else going on at a show, I never set out to achieve a superior bass there as at most I spent maybe an hour or 2 total on placement with borrowed full-range speakers. Perhaps just long enough time to achieve a good respectable bass.

It may be worth noting one other thing I do to augment the bass as well as the overall presentation that can make a significant difference before dialing in the speaker always seem to equally benefit after dialing in has been acheived. Namely, that is to place superior cones / points under the speaker to couple the speaker (and subwoofer) to the floor. This act in and of itself will not transform the bass from average to superior but it will greatly enhance whatever bass I already have. I have cones/points machined according to my design and materials but the key walk-away with cones/points is that if the cones/points are loose or freestanding and not tightly fastened to the speaker base, any improvements are usually negligible and not worth the bother - unless it's for aesthetics only. The mfg'er of my current VMPS speakers did not believe in coupling his speakers to the floor so mine are not. Though I've designed a new speaker bass that I hope to have machined one day soon so I can couple the speakers to the floor. However, the subwoofer is coupled to the floor using my custom points.

Anyway, the real secret just seems to be perseverance - which is what I hope to convey above.

Just to be clear, I'm not the author of the review.

Sure, but thanks for clarifying.

The placement strategy for the four subs is the "secret", rather than the specific placement of any one of them: Spread them around the room asymmetrically, such that each interacts with the room differently. Sometimes a symmetrical placement strategy works better for cancelling particular modes. Some customers do the subwoofer "crawl", repeating it each time another sub is added. The summed in-room response is what matters most, rather than the in-room response of any individual sub.

Understood. However, "placement" still seems to be the secret sauce regardless of ultimate purposes, goals, etc.

I can understand your apprehension about the complexity of placing multiple subs when a single sub takes so long, but actually the MORE subs you have spread around the room, the LESS CRITICAL the placement of any one of them is. In practice, placement of the four subs seldom calls for more than one or two being repositioned after well thought-out initial placement.

Yeah, I saw one of your threads speaking about this not too long ago. Aside from that, the only thing that comes to mind is reading a few threads suggesting bass can be improved more when a 2nd subwoofer is added to the mix at the exact opposite position on the opposite side of the room.

Well there's nothing wrong with being skeptical, and not that I want to engage in a philosophical debate, but imo sometimes "more" actually does result in more performance.

Agreed. But like the fella' says, you ain't never gonna' see no Top Fuel dragster pullin' a U-Haul trailer down the quarter mile strip.

No, unfortunately I don't, at least not for my subwoofer system. And the only YouTube videos I could find of my fullrange speakers are of a discontinued model:

The Night Train @ 140 Broadway - YouTube

Nice bass. Thanks for sharing.

This piece is always a fun bass illustration.

 

[stehno]

All said and done, I probably cannot think of a better illustration of what a superior / musical bass can do to a playback presentation than this in-room recording of a "poorly-engineered" recording.

I had just posted this in-room recording a few hours ago in the Rock & Drums thread. Give this a bit of volume and hopefully listen with headphones to the end - if you can. I've never even cared for Donovan until I played this the other day. Now I think he's pretty awesome. The first half warms you but the back half just might take you for a spin around the block.

This 1968 circa recording is what I would call a seemingly rather overly lean track. If I did not have what I consider a superior / musical bass I would never be able to tolerate this piece especially around the 102-103db level at which I recorded it in my istening room.

The presentation is still quite lean and just barely on this side of intolerable as so many seemingly inferior-engineered records may come across.

Yet, at the same time the bass and drums appear to be heavily competing with the overly lean presentation and IMO the result is a musical blast - if you can tolerate it. Give it a listen and imagine if you can just how intolerable this song might be if the bass and drums were any weaker.

I'm routinely amazed at how well-engineered some of these seemingly poorly-engineered recordings actually are. IMO, a superior / musical bass is one of main contributors toward that realization.

 

[wil]

All said and done, I probably cannot think of a better illustration of what a superior / musical bass can do to a playback presentation than this in-room recording of a "poorly-engineered" recording.

I had just posted this in-room recording a few hours ago in the Rock & Drums thread. Give this a bit of volume and hopefully listen with headphones to the end - if you can. I've never even cared for Donovan until I played this the other day. Now I think he's pretty awesome. The first half warms you but the back half just might take you for a spin around the block.

This 1968 circa recording is what I would call a seemingly rather overly lean track. If I did not have what I consider a superior / musical bass I would never be able to tolerate this piece especially around the 102-103db level at which I recorded it in my istening room.

The presentation is still quite lean and just barely on this side of intolerable as so many seemingly inferior-engineered records may come across.

Yet, at the same time the bass and drums appear to be heavily competing with the overly lean presentation and IMO the result is a musical blast - if you can tolerate it. Give it a listen and imagine if you can just how intolerable this song might be if the bass and drums were any weaker.

I'm routinely amazed at how well-engineered some of these seemingly poorly-engineered recordings actually are. IMO, a superior / musical bass is one of main contributors toward that realization.

Stehno, your speaker location set up routine is pretty typical. The final degree of success one gets is probably a result of extreme patience and dogged dedication which you seem to have plenty of! I've probably managed to get 90% there and honestly don't have any desire to diddle with it more. The music sounds great as is.

(Sorry to harp on this, but am I right to assume when you say you recorded at "102-103db" that you're referring to the peaks, not the average? You refer a lot to the loudness levels you listen to and record at -- I believe it would be more meaningful for anyone reading your posts to refer to the average level and the dynamic range.)

 

[andromedaaudio]

My take on it :

A passive full range bass reflex speaker is needed with well designed adjustable couplers / feet , housing material phenolic resin ( no energy storage ) much better then mdf /wood , aluminum is also quit good but HPL is superb , like my own designs .
Adequate room size versus speaker size / membrane surface .
Trapezium shaped / noise isolated room with solid boundaries .
Solid ground surface : concrete with wooden overlay or concrete with a thin carpet or a solid wooden flooring with strong wooden beams underneath .
Push pull tube power amps with for example with KT 120 or 6550 tubes , transistor amps lack in " ultimate " bass definition imo .
Thats one of the reasons i dont like active subs with digital or transistor amps in them .
This speaker might look like civilized in size , but its a bass monster subs won t come to mind while listening , it can produce sonic hurricanes .
Woofer membrane material is also extremely important , nothing beats ETON kevlar / honeycomb woofers in linearity / impact in a well constructed housing , certainly not paper woofers.


Ps. Its certainly not free as good bass is expensive done right , there is no way around it .
There is also no way back: meaning returning to a small speaker set up once you re familiar with it


xpe hele speaker voor by andromeda61, on Flickr

 

[stehno]

Stehno, your speaker location set up routine is pretty typical.

Indeed. But I keep going until eventually I'm at the pitcher's mount and a transformation occurs.

The final degree of success one gets is probably a result of extreme patience and dogged dedication which you seem to have plenty of! I've probably managed to get 90% there and honestly don't have any desire to diddle with it more. The music sounds great as is.

Without a literal transformation occurring, getting 90% there is like being almost pregnant or telling your boss you almost made it to work today.

(Sorry to harp on this, but am I right to assume when you say you recorded at "102-103db" that you're referring to the peaks, not the average? You refer a lot to the loudness levels you listen to and record at -- I believe it would be more meaningful for anyone reading your posts to refer to the average level and the dynamic range.)

If you were truly sorry, you wouldn't keep harping even after I respectfully asked you to stop, would you? Arent't you the one who wears earplugs when attending live performances?

 

[stehno]

My take on it :

A passive full range bass reflex speaker is needed with well designed adjustable couplers / feet , housing material phenolic resin ( no energy storage ) much better then mdf /wood , aluminum is also quit good but HPL is superb , like my own designs .
Adequate room size versus speaker size / membrane surface .
Trapezium shaped / noise isolated room with solid boundaries .
Solid ground surface : concrete with wooden overlay or concrete with a thin carpet or a solid wooden flooring with strong wooden beams underneath .
Push pull tube power amps with for example with KT 120 or 6550 tubes , transistor amps lack in " ultimate " bass definition imo .
Thats one of the reasons i dont like active subs with digital or transistor amps in them .
This speaker might look like civilized in size , but its a bass monster subs won t come to mind while listening , it can produce sonic hurricanes .
Woofer membrane material is also extremely important , nothing beats ETON kevlar / honeycomb woofers in linearity / impact in a well constructed housing , certainly not paper woofers.


Ps. Its certainly not free as good bass is expensive done right , there is no way around it .
There is also no way back: meaning returning to a small speaker set up once you re familiar with it


by andromeda61, on Flickr

A good respectable bass can be costly as you describe here. A superior / musical bass can be free, per my description above.

 

[wil]

Indeed.

Without a literal transformation occurring, getting 90% there is like being almost pregnant or telling your boss you almost made it to work today.


If you were truly sorry, you wouldn't keep harping even after I respectfully asked you to stop, would you? Arent't you the one who wears earplugs when attending live performances?

OK, since you either don't comprehend what I'm saying, or there is some other mysterious reason for your misleading spl levels obsession, I'm going to drop out of reading you're posts.

I don't wear "earplugs" to concerts -- I wear ear protection which allows full frequency-- the kind musicians wear to save their hearing. Some concert goers ear's are already shot -- maybe they need 120 db to hear anything at all.