Question for those with external subs

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,654
4,449
963
Greater Boston
Hi Al,

My comment above about your sub being audible to me is in the present tense. Yes, I have commented about the good integration in the past, but lately, I have been more aware of its presence. Perhaps we just have a slightly different view on what sub level sounds most integrated. That is fine.

Over time, my listening skills have changed. I don't know if they have improved or worsened, but I do know that I now listen for different things then I did just a year or two ago. I learn more, my tastes change, I notice different things, so what I now think may well be different from what I used to think. I agree with you that I have remarked on the good integration in the past. You have also made many changes to your system over the past year including new speakers, DAC, Pass B1 buffer/volume control, cables. You have also adjusted your carpet, rotated your tube traps, moved around large absorption panels, all in an effort to shape the sound more to your liking. All of these changes have meant that the sound of your system has not been constant or static over the past year and as I now think about it, my impressions of the degree of your sub integration have changed as well. I'm not trying to revise history, just placing my comments into some kind of context.

Thanks for the clarification, Peter. Tastes are individual. Four other audiophiles who have come over more recently had no objections to my sub settings. Only the last time, when I auditioned the Octave R320 amp, one of them had objections. Perhaps at that time I was too enamored with the phenomenal capabilities of the amp, which was also new to me, for my judgment about fitting bass levels not to be clouded.

It does seem to be a very individual hobby where one's personal preferences are what should matter most.

Indeed. Obviously, individual perceptions vary about what is the 'right' amount of bass. While I like a 'good bass' once in a while ;) I have heard a system where even I felt the need to ask the owner more than once to turn down the sub because I found the bass way overdone on a few particular recordings.

That is also the problem with rigidly fixed sub settings: while they may be fine with a lot of material, sometimes they are not -- not at all. Or if you want to set the sub so low that even outliers don't disturb, then your average recording may not be as well represented as it would be if you were to choose your fixed setting higher and tone it down for the 'fat' outliers.
 
Last edited:

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
I disagree, David, that the desire to change sub volumes per recording is related to improper integration. I have heard the same problems with too divergent bass volumes between individual recordings on great full-range speakers without subwoofers, and I appreciate the ability to simply correct for that with a subwoofer.
If you want to use the sub as asome kind of tone control is your business Al but that’s not something I subscribe too. You can’t just change one parameter on the sub without affecting the entire frequency range. If the sub is truly integrated you won’t hear it all and acranking the volume even by a very small amount will muddy up the sound.

david
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,654
4,449
963
Greater Boston
If the sub is truly integrated you won’t hear it all

Agreed, in the sense that you don't hear the sub as a separate entity -- but you will hear the added bass foundation in the music.

and cranking the volume even by a very small amount will muddy up the sound.

If even a very small increase in volume from standard setting muddies up the sound then the sub is not truly integrated ;). At a minimum, then you have a problem with more bass-heavy recordings at the chosen standard setting.

David, I guess that we will have to agree to disagree. Nothing wrong with that.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,020
1,486
520
Eastern WA
If they are inconsistent with music you have 1 of 2 problems, or 2 or 2. In no particular order:

*They are simply in the wrong spot.
and/or
*Phase adjustment is wrong.


They should not be detectable at all as a separate entity. If they are it's phase issue.

If the bass is simply too loud or quiet then it is related to placement.

Those are general rules, obviously you can have horrific placement that'll prevent phase adjustment from mattering, but I'm not sure what would do it.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,654
4,449
963
Greater Boston
IIf the bass is simply too loud or quiet then it is related to placement.

You simply cannot claim that at a given setting the bass level will be optimal for all recordings. The bass level between different recordings just varies too much (in classical perhaps the least, but certainly in jazz and rock).

If anyone asserts that an optimally set-up system magically will take care of everything at a given fixed sub level regardless of recording, then that is, pardon me, hogwash. I have heard on certain recordings too many of the same problems in different systems, including featuring very expensive speakers, to buy into that. It's a myth.

Let's not forget that Cello suggested when it released the Palette tone control unit that some recordings should be corrrected in certain frequency ranges by up to 15 dB (!). So were they wrong, or is the above mentioned audiophile myth right? Not that I would want to fiddle with six different tone controls all the time (I understand when Francisco got fed up with that and sold his Mark Levinson Audio Palette), but that in particular in the bass region recordings wildly vary by output level is a fact.

Let me repeat what I said above, relating to a particular experience:

That is also the problem with rigidly fixed sub settings: while they may be fine with a lot of material, sometimes they are not -- not at all. Or if you want to set the sub so low that even outliers don't disturb, then your average recording may not be as well represented as it would be if you were to choose your fixed setting higher and tone it down for the 'fat' outliers.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
(...) Let's not forget that Cello suggested when it released the Palette tone control unit that some recordings should be corrrected in certain frequency ranges by up to 15 dB (!). So were they wrong, or is the above mentioned audiophile myth right? Not that I would want to fiddle with six different tone controls all the time (I understand when Francisco got fed up with that and sold his Mark Levison Palette), but that in particular in the bass recordings wildly vary by output level is a fact. (...)

Unfortunately any correction needed to fiddle with a few tone controls - the Audio Palette was a complex equalizer, each control had optimized steps and Q. Just see

Frequency Adjustment Controls:
25 kHz control: +/- 24 dB in 1.00 dB increments
5 kHz control: +/- 12 dB in 0.50 dB increments
2 kHz control: +/- 6 dB in 0.25 dB increments
500 Hz control: +/- 6 dB in 0.25 dB increments
120 Hz control: +/- 14.5 dB in 0.50 dB increments
15 Hz control: +/- 29 dB in 1.00 dB increments

Changing one control obliged us to change also several others - it was really a time consuming process. In the end I decided that optimizing the whole system instead of sticking with a Cello system was a better choice!

IMHO a complete Cello system was very dynamic and analytical, extremely revealing but not completely neutral. The Audio Palette could be really a blessing in such systems.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,485
10,629
3,515
USA
If they are inconsistent with music you have 1 of 2 problems, or 2 or 2. In no particular order:

*They are simply in the wrong spot.
and/or
*Phase adjustment is wrong.


They should not be detectable at all as a separate entity. If they are it's phase issue.

If the bass is simply too loud or quiet then it is related to placement.

Those are general rules, obviously you can have horrific placement that'll prevent phase adjustment from mattering, but I'm not sure what would do it.

Folsom, do you think these two problems are different or more pronounced when trying to integrate a sub with a two-way stand mount rather than an already full range floor standing speaker system? I keep thinking back to when Magico specifically told me that one of their three way speakers would be a better choice than trying to match their sub to my Mini II speakers. They told me that only after I had a full range speaker and felt I wanted more extension should I consider adding a subwoofer.
 

audioguy

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
2,794
73
1,635
Near Atlanta, GA but not too near!
You simply cannot claim that at a given setting the bass level will be optimal for all recordings. The bass level between different recordings just varies too much (in classical perhaps the least, but certainly in jazz and rock).

It depends on your objectives. If your objective is to accurately reproduce what is in the recording (the "purists" among us), then adjusting the bass is not necessary at all. But if, like me, you are way more interested in enjoying the music, then adjust the bass to your liking. Some of the recorded 70's rock music has anemic bass where in a live concert, it was anything but. Music from Chicago, Boston, etc are perfect examples where adding additional bass turns a not-so-great listening experience into one where I get very involved.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,654
4,449
963
Greater Boston
Folsom, do you think these two problems are different or more pronounced when trying to integrate a sub with a two-way stand mount rather than an already full range floor standing speaker system? I keep thinking back to when Magico specifically told me that one of their three way speakers would be a better choice than trying to match their sub to my Mini II speakers. They told me that only after I had a full range speaker and felt I wanted more extension should I consider adding a subwoofer.

Magico's opinion of course is no surprise given that their subwoofers are really large. I woulldn't want to try to incorporate an S Sub or a Q Sub with a 2-way speaker either. Too much discontinuity between drivers from the start. A smaller sub (9 or 10 inch diameter maybe, mine is 9 inch) can be expected to be better integrated with a 2-way speaker. Better to live without the last few Hz extension than with obvious discontinuity.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,654
4,449
963
Greater Boston
It depends on your objectives. If your objective is to accurately reproduce what is in the recording (the "purists" among us), then adjusting the bass is not necessary at all. But if, like me, you are way more interested in enjoying the music, then adjust the bass to your liking. Some of the recorded 70's rock music has anemic bass where in a live concert, it was anything but. Music from Chicago, Boston, etc are perfect examples where adding additional bass turns a not-so-great listening experience into one where I get very involved.

+1

I also just want to enjoy the music. I don't think audiophilia should devolve into an exercise in masochism by striving to "accurately reproduce what is in the recording" at all cost.

(And the purist argument is problematic to begin with, as I outlined in #10.)
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,020
1,486
520
Eastern WA
Folsom, do you think these two problems are different or more pronounced when trying to integrate a sub with a two-way stand mount rather than an already full range floor standing speaker system? I keep thinking back to when Magico specifically told me that one of their three way speakers would be a better choice than trying to match their sub to my Mini II speakers. They told me that only after I had a full range speaker and felt I wanted more extension should I consider adding a subwoofer.

I think it's easier to integrate with bookshelfs on stands, in a way. The reason is that when the subwoofer plays in higher registers you can actually hear it, and tune it. But it is more work to get it going correctly. Where as when you have pretty full range towers you can have poor settings (maybe placement too) on a subwoofer and it'll be fairly undetectable until you play that 1 track that tells you.

It would be a pain with very large subwoofers that are hard to move around, as the needs are more specific. Smaller cubes or custom taller than wide and deep boxes are a lot easier to deal with.

With your speakers you need to blend into 40hz so phase will be sensitive. You could even run a crossover for your Mini's and use subwoofers to fill in even more, if you desired higher output volumes for more dynamics overall. The Magico subwoofer solutions don't seem ideal for your situation. They're simply too cumbersome to move about and adjust it seems.



Al, you are talking more about preference. If you are close to a "flat line" that you can get in a room (granted it hardly looks like one on a graph) then that's right. That doesn't mean your preference wouldn't be for more or less on different recordings, but it would be a stable accurate-ish (as all rooms go w/ speakers) setting for all music.

Would I like more bass on Nirvana Unplugged on vinyl? Yes but that's because it's mastered like crap compared to the CD, not because subs need adjustment.
 

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,376
2,497
1,398
I think it's easier to integrate with bookshelfs on stands, in a way. The reason is that when the subwoofer plays in higher registers you can actually hear it, and tune it. But it is more work to get it going correctly. Where as when you have pretty full range towers you can have poor settings (maybe placement too) on a subwoofer and it'll be fairly undetectable until you play that 1 track that tells you.

It would be a pain with very large subwoofers that are hard to move around, as the needs are more specific. Smaller cubes or custom taller than wide and deep boxes are a lot easier to deal with.

With your speakers you need to blend into 40hz so phase will be sensitive. You could even run a crossover for your Mini's and use subwoofers to fill in even more, if you desired higher output volumes for more dynamics overall. The Magico subwoofer solutions don't seem ideal for your situation. They're simply too cumbersome to move about and adjust it seems.



Al, you are talking more about preference. If you are close to a "flat line" that you can get in a room (granted it hardly looks like one on a graph) then that's right. That doesn't mean your preference wouldn't be for more or less on different recordings, but it would be a stable accurate-ish (as all rooms go w/ speakers) setting for all music.

Would I like more bass on Nirvana Unplugged on vinyl? Yes but that's because it's mastered like crap compared to the CD, not because subs need adjustment.

When I used to integrate with monitors...i still left the sub cut off relatively low because i preferred not to hear the sub...it did not give me an even full range that was equally powerful throughout, but it also allowed (to me) for the monitors to run as cleanly as possible without bleeding.

Did i have a hole in the frequency response...almost without doubt. but it generally worked better that way for me...I did not cut off at 40hz, but it was definitely not 55hz either...as i recall it was high 40s-50hz with steep cutoff above that.
 

Fitzcaraldo215

New Member
Nov 3, 2014
394
2
0
I set my sub level (and all main/satellite levels) once automatically during Dirac Live 7.1 calibration via mike. That's it. I am happy as can be, and no fiddling. Only my master volume level gets adjusted slightly per album, affecting all channels equally. The sub disappears unless it it called upon by the program material, where it adds wonderfully to frequency extension and dynamics.

Crossovers are also set in bass management. That required some measurement and listening comparisons, but not too much. I strongly prefer symmetrical hi and low pass crossovers, avoiding any overlap by frequency with the sub at 60-80hz.
 

cjf

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2012
452
101
948
I was reading the article from this link below that I found in another thread and based on what is stated in the article the author ( A JL Audio employee I believe) claims that there are only two ways to properly integrate a sub with the mains in order to fix the critical Group Delay/Timing issue involved between the sub/subs and the main towers.

http://www.soundoctor.com/whitepapers/subs.htm

1. Move Sub 9-10ft closer to the seated position which in turn deals with the inherent 10ms delay found in all subs
2. Add a "box" Inline between the Preamp and the main tower amps that allows one to introduce the same delay as above to the main speakers instead

Are there any folks here who disagree with the above articles claims?

There are several potential issues I see with adding a box after the Preamp dead smack in the middle of the all important analog signal chain and that is the obvious addition of more circuits and also the addition of another AD/DA conversion process taking place. The types of devices on the market capable of handling this from what I have seen thus far are not exactly "audiophile" approved type units. By this I mean, most are only capable of doing AD/DA at 24/96 at best so any hope of wanting to stream anything over 24/96 or DSD are a mute point since they will be downsampled after they pass thru the "box" on the way to the Amp. In addition, the presence of this box would essentially undo whatever magic your Audiophile type DAC performed upstream of the box.

So with that said, it seems like moving the sub closer would be lesser of two evils. Of course moving the Sub closer may or may not be possible depending on the room and or if the spot you moved it to is considered the proper place within the room for it to be in the first place.

As a side note, I see many folks using Dirac Live, MiniDSP etc type devices but these will not be able to address the Group Delay problem of just one set of speakers. Since they live way upstream, whatever delay you may do at this point will of course affect both the main speaker AND the Sub which is not the proper fix here according to the article above.

What is everyones thoughts on this thorn and are you aware of or are you doing anything different to address it in your system?

Thanks
 

Fitzcaraldo215

New Member
Nov 3, 2014
394
2
0
I was reading the article from this link below that I found in another thread and based on what is stated in the article the author ( A JL Audio employee I believe) claims that there are only two ways to properly integrate a sub with the mains in order to fix the critical Group Delay/Timing issue involved between the sub/subs and the main towers.

http://www.soundoctor.com/whitepapers/subs.htm

1. Move Sub 9-10ft closer to the seated position which in turn deals with the inherent 10ms delay found in all subs
2. Add a "box" Inline between the Preamp and the main tower amps that allows one to introduce the same delay as above to the main speakers instead

Are there any folks here who disagree with the above articles claims?

There are several potential issues I see with adding a box after the Preamp dead smack in the middle of the all important analog signal chain and that is the obvious addition of more circuits and also the addition of another AD/DA conversion process taking place. The types of devices on the market capable of handling this from what I have seen thus far are not exactly "audiophile" approved type units. By this I mean, most are only capable of doing AD/DA at 24/96 at best so any hope of wanting to stream anything over 24/96 or DSD are a mute point since they will be downsampled after they pass thru the "box" on the way to the Amp. In addition, the presence of this box would essentially undo whatever magic your Audiophile type DAC performed upstream of the box.

So with that said, it seems like moving the sub closer would be lesser of two evils. Of course moving the Sub closer may or may not be possible depending on the room and or if the spot you moved it to is considered the proper place within the room for it to be in the first place.

As a side note, I see many folks using Dirac Live, MiniDSP etc type devices but these will not be able to address the Group Delay problem of just one set of speakers. Since they live way upstream, whatever delay you may do at this point will of course affect both the main speaker AND the Sub which is not the proper fix here according to the article above.

What is everyones thoughts on this thorn and are you aware of or are you doing anything different to address it in your system?

Thanks

Multichannel systems, including even some very cheap AVRs, have fairly decent tools to easily integrate a subwoofer. Traditional stereos do not.

I am very familiar with the problem described. I use a JL sub myself. It is largely an issue because of the DSP input network on JL and other subs, which introduces digital DSP delay in the sub signal path. But, if you have a Mch system, as I do, the issue disappears completely because each channel, including the sub, are calibrated by a microphone's actual acoustic level and time delay measurements. The sub need not be in front of or in back of the main channels. The calculated compensation pretty much nails it.
 

Kal Rubinson

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2010
2,358
696
1,700
NYC
www.stereophile.com
I was reading the article from this link below that I found in another thread and based on what is stated in the article the author ( A JL Audio employee I believe) claims that there are only two ways to properly integrate a sub with the mains in order to fix the critical Group Delay/Timing issue involved between the sub/subs and the main towers.

http://www.soundoctor.com/whitepapers/subs.htm

1. Move Sub 9-10ft closer to the seated position which in turn deals with the inherent 10ms delay found in all subs
2. Add a "box" Inline between the Preamp and the main tower amps that allows one to introduce the same delay as above to the main speakers instead

Are there any folks here who disagree with the above articles claims?
I disagree with the use of the word "only" in the claim.

As a side note, I see many folks using Dirac Live, MiniDSP etc type devices but these will not be able to address the Group Delay problem of just one set of speakers. Since they live way upstream, whatever delay you may do at this point will of course affect both the main speaker AND the Sub which is not the proper fix here according to the article above.
The issue you have identified here is soluble for those using these devices effectively. That means placing the bass management (i.e., the active crossover) prior to the EQ process. Rather simple to do with a proper configuration.
 

Kal Rubinson

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2010
2,358
696
1,700
NYC
www.stereophile.com
Multichannel systems, including even some very cheap AVRs, have fairly decent tools to easily integrate a subwoofer. Traditional stereos do not.

I am very familiar with the problem described. I use a JL sub myself. It is largely an issue because of the DSP input network on JL and other subs, which introduces digital DSP delay in the sub signal path. But, if you have a Mch system, as I do, the issue disappears completely because each channel, including the sub, are calibrated by a microphone's actual acoustic level and time delay measurements. The sub need not be in front of or in back of the main channels. The calculated compensation pretty much nails it.

And, as you know, it works in two channels, too.
 

cjf

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2012
452
101
948
I disagree with the use of the word "only" in the claim.


The issue you have identified here is soluble for those using these devices effectively. That means placing the bass management (i.e., the active crossover) prior to the EQ process. Rather simple to do with a proper configuration.

Hello,

Would you mind expanding on what is involved with placing the bass mgmt prior to the EQ process and what a "proper configuration" may look like? If you mean those not using the included internal X-Over of their speakers or those using an Active Speaker system then I can certainly see that solving the problem fairly easily.

Short of those two items above and assuming one only wants to "fix" the main towers delay I'm at a loss how it would be accomplished without introducing another layer of AD/DA conversion after the Preamp via another "box" of some sort. I should also add that the ultimate goal would be to be able to maintain the "Audiophile DAC' & PreAmp" magic/sonic signature.

As a side note, I do use a Classe CP800 Pre which has built-in DSP that may be able to do this but by using that DSP it involves downsampling and also tosses out any benefits of the better DAC before it. I'm not fully thrilled by the sound of the internal DAC of the unit.

If I cant have my cake and eat it to while using a Sub then I guess I'll just have to stick with my two towers meager dual 8" driver output :)
 

Kal Rubinson

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2010
2,358
696
1,700
NYC
www.stereophile.com
Would you mind expanding on what is involved with placing the bass mgmt prior to the EQ process and what a "proper configuration" may look like? If you mean those not using the included internal X-Over of their speakers or those using an Active Speaker system then I can certainly see that solving the problem fairly easily.
I mean an EQ process that follows the division of the signal for the sub from the signal for the main speaker(s). This can, theoretically, be done with purely analog devices but those are hard/impossible to find. For example, there used to be analog delay devices (Bucket-Brigade and similar) but, imho, these were not really good sounding. As for EQ, there were the Rives Audio sub-PARC and PARC.

Short of those two items above and assuming one only wants to "fix" the main towers delay I'm at a loss how it would be accomplished without introducing another layer of AD/DA conversion after the Preamp via another "box" of some sort.
All involve A/D/A conversions if you have an analog source.

I should also add that the ultimate goal would be to be able to maintain the "Audiophile DAC' & PreAmp" magic/sonic signature.
Then put it before the "magic" but then you would need a three-channel DAC (possible) and a three-channel preamp (also possible but less so).

OTOH, you are right to be frustrated by this if you insist on handling this with analog signals while they are easily accomplished with digital signals. I do it all in my computer/server which feeds my DAC and then via a preamp or directly to the power amps. More than enough magic, especially in discrete multichannel.

BTW, I only took this up because I failed to see anything in the referenced comments about excluding digital processing. If there was, I apologize.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing