bass guitar frequency range - Page 8 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Live Sound > Instruments and Amps

Instruments and Amps Everything that makes music, Especially including instrument amps.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26th February 2009, 05:06 AM   #71
diyAudio Member
 
Brett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Default Re: highest freq.

Quote:
Originally posted by JohnEEADBL
I'd like to clear up one point regarding harmonics. If you have a 5-string bass playing a low-B at fundamental frequency of 30 Hz you are generating even and odd harmonics at even and odd multiples of that fundamental; e.g. 2nd harmonic (in terms of "pure" theory, the fundamental is the 1st harmonic!) at 60 Hz, 3rd harmonic at 90, 4th harmonic at 120, etc. When you play a B an octave up, with the fundamental frequency at 60 Hz, then the 2nd harmonic is at (roughly--strings don't necessarily vibrate at true integer-multiple harmonics) 120 Hz, the 3rd at 180, the 4th at 240, etc.
None of that was ever unclear.

Quote:
Originally posted by JohnEEADBL
You cannot "roll off" or "turn down", "reduce", "dampen", etc., the fundamental of various notes without some sophisticated real-time- or other-digital processing, not a low B, not the highest A, nor any other note! If you roll off your low frequency response, whether through use of an electronic-filter
This is clearly what I meant in earlier posts.

Quote:
Originally posted by JohnEEADBL
If your cabinet's deep bass response gives you a "muddy response", then your cabinet's deep-bass response is NOT FLAT!!
In a club or other enclosed venue, then the room will play a major part in the acoustics and there is nothing you can do but move the rig a bit, or EQ to make the best of it. Muddiness may also not simply be an FR issue.

But all of that is moot; most BG cabs on the market are not engineered flat anyway, they have a sound that they think is best or will differentiate them in the marketplace.
Quote:
Originally posted by JohnEEADBL
. . . these people (known as "The Grateful Dead") have "been there and done that." --> The Wall of Sound .
And since then outfits like Danley Sound, Meyer, Clair Bros Funktion One amongst others have taken it to a higher level than the WOS ever achieved.

Finally, since I'm clearing up misconceptions,[/B][/QUOTE]No, you're ranting. You are not the only experienced bassist or engineer/tech to post here.


Quote:
Originally posted by albertofrog
heres my take on this..

Highest fundamental on a 4 string is G string at 24th fret.

This is G5= 783.99Hz = MIDI#79

Anything above the 7th Harmonic is so small in amplitude that an audience wont hear it. (remember were talking about bass guitar here, played in bars and other noisy places, not necessarily listented to by audiophiles...)

So: 783.99 X 7 = 5487Hz.

I need to built a low pass filter to remove some hiss from my wireless transmitter, so i'm going to aim for 5.5 as a 3db freq

any thoughts?
Worth trying especially if you can borrow an xover and try it on the bench this way. If it works, use it, if not you can try other settings and see if they make an improvement.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2009, 06:46 AM   #72
diyAudio Member
 
Cloth Ears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
I've been looking at a few of the older 'vintage' bass combos/boxes to see if I can get something to match my old Maton Lute bass (like the Easybeats used to have - short neck so I don't need to go too low).
A lot of the 60's and early 70's cabinets made locally used to use one or more of the full-range Plessey (or Rola) 12" drivers (Fs ~40Hz and theoretical FR from 35-15kHz). Of course, mounting them in sealed boxes (or open back boxes) generally meant an f3 of ~70Hz or higher, but a fairly smooth rolloff below that.
Ally that to the fat sound of the Playmaster or Goldentone tube amps that were used for a lot of these units and you get a pretty good sound, even if the extension isn't that great.
The only hassle...trying to find any of them cheap. No way - I can't even find the drivers for cheap.
__________________
Jont.
"It is impossible to build a fool proof system; because fools are so ingenious."
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th March 2009, 08:26 PM   #73
diyAudio Member
 
FastEddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: North Californie
I'm building a custom guitar amp this month (hybrid tube per-amp with MOSFET output power stage).

ALL pro-level guitar amps, bass or whatever, pass 20 to 20k audio without "early or late" rolloff on either end = flat response +/- 1 or 2 db. Some bass only pre-amps and amps may extend this range down to 5 Hertz ... or not. Within the pre-amp section there may or may not be knobs for tone adjustment and "eq" for cut or boost. Lots of older tube amps and many highend tube amps have utilities for external "fx" plugin and pass through ... or not.

Most changes or adjustments to the basic freq response should be done either within the guitar pickup electronics or in the speaker box acoustics = In My Opinion and that of others.

"Hey, Charley. Can I borrow your amp for this next song? Mine doesn't hit the tweeters ..." ... = no adjustable mid or high boost or cut.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2010, 03:10 PM   #74
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Appleton, WI
I stumbled into this thread. I know I'm a year and a half late to the party.

The speaker is only part of the equation. With passive, high impedance pickups, the fundamental of the lowest note, can be poorly produced. The higher the impedance, the more this is the case. With a 5 string, it's even more the case, as with the lowest notes (below E) the fundamental is rarely produced.

It's not much of a problem, as our ears/brains, hear the 2nd and 4th harmonics and fill in the missing bass.

So is a bass rig that can produce the fundamental of the low E or even the low B necessary? Maybe not.

When Ampeg first produced the SVT, the ad copy bragged that a selling point of the SVT was that it did NOT produce the fundamental of the low E. This improved the sound, as the sound stage was not cluttered with those low fundamentals, making the bass more easily heard and enjoyed.

With active pickups, the actual windings are usually lower impedance, relying on the internal preamp to provide the desired volume level. These pickups CAN produce the fundamental. A bass with piezo bridges, the same. The limits here are the low end of the preamps used.

I have used active pickup basses for 20+ years. I do notice the difference, and often the main difference is the stress on the speakers I use. The sub frequencies can be felt more than heard, and sometimes the speaker excursion shows high output, but the actual volume heard is not that great.

I play 5 string, have piezo pickups on my main bass, and active, low impedance pickups in my other basses. I often use a sub generator, but even then, use a highpass filter on my amp to take out the sub freq's that are inaudible...mostly for the sake of the speakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th January 2012, 11:02 PM   #75
wahab is offline wahab  Algeria
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: algeria/france
Surprisingly , no dedicated bass amp combo ever sounded as well
as an amplifier head connected to a 3 way PA cabinet , namely ,
a Zeck PA 15/3 Mini Proline , mounted with an Electrovoice 400W speaker,
a medium from Audax , the tweeter being variable , with a ribbon version.

Click the image to open in full size.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2012, 03:27 AM   #76
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Default Turn all the knobs to zero

I'm almost always smiling through reading from the first post on. I would think the frequency range of tones, overtones, and all their harmonics is wider, probably for any instrument, than we would initially credit them. I'm thinking of a fingernail scratching over a wound string and I think that's very rich sound. I think it's nearly impossible to talk about 'the tone of' any amplified musical instrument because so much of the tone is in the amplification chain rather than what the instrument 'sounds' (without amplification) like. I never liked trying to judge the quality of a stereo system by listening to amplified musical instruments. Even the 'input' chain of amplification to get it recorded to some media is troublesome enough and colors the sound. That's bad enough, leave the 'output' side out of the equation! So, if you asked me, I'd say you want to 'hear' flat from 20 to 20k Hz. You get to go pick whatever you want to emphasize about it with your amplifiers. Nobody's taste is right or wrong, it's nothing but their own. Me? I'll take the big old stand up bass with no amp in a reasonably small, warm, quiet room, played by someone who can pluck, strum and bow, with 'handmade' dynamics, and just sit back and continue to smile! (Hmm...I wonder if, in essence, "DIY" doesn't mean without an amplifier.)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2012, 03:32 PM   #77
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by binaryplumber View Post
I would think the frequency range of tones, overtones, and all their harmonics is wider, probably for any instrument, than we would initially credit them.
It really is. We create very low frequency signals when we pluck the strings, and very high frequency signals if we scratch them (I'm a bassist, and I do this a lot, not to mention the effects of my overdrive stomp box). But I see the topic as a "which frequencies are relevant", rather than "all frequencies there are". Or even "relevant enough to double the size, weight, cost and power consumption of your system".
Quote:
Originally Posted by binaryplumber View Post
I think it's nearly impossible to talk about 'the tone of' any amplified musical instrument because so much of the tone is in the amplification chain rather than what the instrument 'sounds' (without amplification) like.
Tone is a different thing. It carries a lot from the instrument, a lot from the electronics and speaker, and also from the player. But the thread is about the whole range of frequencies which should be reproduced, so this would include all "tones".
Quote:
Originally Posted by binaryplumber View Post
(Hmm...I wonder if, in essence, "DIY" doesn't mean without an amplifier.)
Interesting thought, but you can DIY amplifers and tones...
Best regards,
Emerson
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st January 2012, 05:28 AM   #78
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
My laughter was caused by how far the topic went astray. From what is the 'frequency range' to page after page of 'what amps, instruments, speakers, cabinets'!

I agree with your reply. Mostly. I won't quibble. I apologize for any misuse of verbiage, but you seem to have gotten my point. My point could be restated as "there is no 'reference' from which you can compare an amplified instrument". Strictly, I don't think that's true but we'll touch on that after I spew some more.

Example: The components: A violinist, a violin and bow, in a room, a 'perfect' microphone, and a listener in the room, ears at the microphone point, some distance away from the violinist. The listener hears the sound, stores a large amount of information. A 'perfect' recording device records it from the 'perfect microphone'. That information the listener gathers is based on all of the components above. The reference is based on the combination of all of those component. This is about a simple an acoustic 'reference' as I could think of. No amplifiers in the production of the sound experience.

Listener then goes to a superb, 'perfect', stereo system, in a perfect room, from the 'perfect' spot, and listens to the recording made as a reference. Compares that information with what he already had gotten. I contend that most of us would hear differences. There are no 'perfect' devices as listed in the example. But, the 'reference' as an information experience, not recording, has been established. The 'reference' sound and the recorded sound in this example are about as simple as I can think of.



Yet the violin 'reference' is really only what only 'that' one violin sounded like in 'that' room, played by only 'that' violinist, to 'that' listener (along with 'that' microphone in the room). It really can't be used as a reference for any other set of components. I really ought not judge anything else by it.

'Very well,I contradict myself. I contain multitudes'. (Walt Whitman)

So, to that end, I could turn it around and say that a bassist, with a bass, amplified, in a room with a listener and a device constitute the 'reference'. That seems true enough, but much less simple than the unamplified scenario. Much harder to make comparisons from.

This intellectual cr_p I'm spouting is just that though. I love going to hear a hard driving bass line under a bunch of tastefully played electrified instruments and singer pounding on me. I know I love it. That's an experience for which there need not be a reference. I should get a life, get a stereo.


'It took me twenty years to learn all the notes on the piano, and another twenty to learn which ones I could leave out'. (Duke Ellington)
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2012, 12:40 AM   #79
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Talking Hmmm . . . ranting? Mwah?

Well, maybe . . . [chuckle]

I [re-]stumbled across this thread looking for [again--I take poor notes when I'm ranting] the frequency range of bass-guitars as I'm contemplating building a box for a bass player [I gave it up many years ago, when I came home, drunk, and Pete-Townshend--ed my last bass; I was frustrated at the fact that my brain and my fingers are just never going to get together, as my brain runs several times faster than my fingers, especially now that I haven't had a drink for half my life--now 56].

But, I digress . . .

. . .
If you really think the brains' ability to "supply" the missing fundamental, missing 1st harmonic (which is really 2 X fundamental-frequency, hereinafter "f"), and missing 2nd harmonic (3 x f!) of a low bass-guitar note with as much "gusto", as much "presence", as much "emphasis", giving you as much perceived aesthetic enjoyment of a full-freqency-range-performance, get an old table radio (not a Bose WaveRadio or whatever they call it; they play "psychological/acoustical" "tricks" with it), your laptop computer (sans external speakers), etc. and listen to Geddy Lee play bass (I just did that the other night on Palladia, using a good, but old pair of RadioShack (award-winning, partially for flat-frequency response from approx' 20Hz to 20KHz). You can turn that old table radio, laptop, etc. up as loud as you want, you're not going to hear the deep bass--even though your brain's saying you are--like you hear it with a good amp/PA combination, with the PA adding the bottom-end the bass-amp doesn't have! It just AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!


Again, sans the parenthetical comments: . . .
If you really think the brains' ability to "supply" the missing fundamental, missing 1st harmonic, and missing 2nd harmonic of a low bass-guitar note with as much [deleted] enjoyment of a full-freqency-range-performance, get an old table radio [deleted] and listen to Geddy Lee play bass . . . You can turn that old table radio . . . up as loud as you want, you're not going to hear the deep bass--even though your brain's saying you are--like you hear it with a good amp/PA combination, with the PA adding the bottom-end the bass-amp doesn't have! It just AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

Now, that's (repeating one's self, shouting--USING ALL CAPS INAPPROPRIATELY, etc.) ranting.

Often times people read stuff online and think that the incomplete information they've been given by people who seem to know what they are talking about is complete. Completing (or attempting to) that information, clearing up misconceptions and falsehoods, etc. is not ranting. It's completing (or attempting to) that information, clearing up misconceptions and falsehoods, etc. I.e. the first harmonic of any fundamental is twice the frequency of the fundamental frequency. As incorrectly used above, 2H is actually three times the fundamental frequency as it is the second harmonic.

Now, about mush on stage: if you don't know what you're doing (aside from having a speaker with non-flat frequency response), you can make anything mush up (including professionally produced, #1 hits) anywhere by simply playing something back too loud through a system that is not capable of playing [whatever--Geddy Lee's bass, Philip Auberg's organ, etc. Who's Auberg, you say? Google it! ].


Or, simply stated: improperly reproduced sound, low-frequency or hi-, tends to mush up.


Try listening--if you can--to a 5-string bass just through a good, properly setup PA sometime! Try listening to it by itself, no rhythm or lead guitars, no keys, no vox (You'll notice I left out drums--Marshall Tucker/Bears Stadium/1974-->10 minute drum solo and additional 15+minutes of drum/bass duet)! If you can't marvel at the deep bass beauty, either the player is playing wrong, the bass guitar is messed up (not tuned properly, controls set badly, etc.), the DI/pedal is messed up, or the amp-speaker/PA is messed up. Or, your head is: ???? [chuckle] J/K


Much of the "top-end" of the bass-guitar is intentionally cut to keep it from "swamping" the lead vox and all guitars, higher keys' parts, etc.


Much of the "mud" that occurs on stage is because you've got open drum mics (kick, snare, toms primarily, but all overheads/cymbals also), open vox mics, and they're all picking up the bass (which is very non-directional, which flows everywhere in a hemispherical pattern from the ground/stage up). Thus, you're getting phase-addition and phase-cancellation problems up the wazoo (properly called "massive 'comb-filtering'") which creates the 'mud'.


I watched someone (can't remember the year, whether it was Boston's sound man, Pure Prairie Leagues'--nope, wasn't them: the front man was screaming "turn up the [deleted] fiddler" at one point when the fiddle player was soloing at almost unheard levels) engineer a big-name rock show, in the last 3 years. While he could have done it differently (he was the "guest-engineer" on a PA hired for that one event), he had four-faders, one under each of the four fingers on his right-hand (why he didn't group and mute/unmute? old-school?), and every time they stopped singing on stage, whoooooosh!, those faders got cut to -infinity. Then, just a fraction of a second before they'd start singing, whoooooosh!, up the faders would go. Whoooooosh! up and whoooooooosh! down. Every vocal! EVERY VOCAL.


(Sanitized) I watched someone engineer a big-name rock show, in the last 3 years. [Deleted] [H]e had four-faders, [deleted] and every time they stopped singing on stage, those faders [immediately] got cut to -infinity. Then, just a fraction of a second before they'd start singing [the faders--in unison, when all 4 vocalists were going to sing, or 1, 2, or 3 faders for 1, 2, or 3 vocalists--would go up!]


Guess what? NO mud. Very deep bass when appropriate (as long as one wasn't sitting in a 'power-valley'--go ask Dave Rat; it's his term; but, that's another story). Very clear vocals (well, except for the crackling in the PA, but, that's another story). Very good guitar and keyboard solos. Very good instrumental harmonies. All because someone knew what they were doing, did it properly, etc.


My guess is they learned, like I did (learn what I've learned; I ain't learned it all), by not trusting incomplete or incorrect information. If that's ranting, then, it's a required rant!


Thanks.

Sincerely,



John



PS Have a nice day.



PPS Fundamental: f, 1st Harmonic: 2 * f, 2nd Harmonic: 3 * f, 3rd Harmonic: 4 * f, etc


!!!NOT!!!---><---!!!NOT!!!







PPPS Who knows? Maybe in another year or two, having [probably] re-forgotten that bass-guitar frequency range, I may re-read this thread and re-read what I re-re-wrote! chuckle



pppps guffaw
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st June 2012, 08:14 AM   #80
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
Per definition the 1st harmonic is the ame as the fundamental.

The second harmonic may or may not (depending on spectrum - but for bass it usually is) be the same as the 1st overtone.

Regards

Charles
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
guitar speaker frequency range voivodata Multi-Way 19 30th September 2011 11:15 AM
Optimum frequency response curves in the bass range The golden mean Subwoofers 8 30th June 2008 05:22 PM
Frequency range of the human voice & full range center channel speakers jwmbro Multi-Way 31 20th January 2008 03:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:30 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2