Do sound recordists compensate for bass roll off on our speakers? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

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 11th February 2011, 05:25 PM   #1
Boscoe is offline Boscoe  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: England
Default Do sound recordists compensate for bass roll off on our speakers?

Basically that really. If I had an imaginary speaker that could be totally flat from 10HZ-20KHz at 100db/1w/1m would the bass seem rediculasly over powering or would it be the correct level it just doesn't sound right as it's not what I'm used to?
__________________
I thought about it once, but then thought again.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 06:03 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
ianpengelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
They shouldn't but most modern recordings are over compressed, often resulting in there sounding like there is a lot of bass. If it is a decent studio then the speakers they use tend to be full range (not to be mistaken with a full range single driver, but one covering the audible spectrum 20Hz - 20kHz, so the EQ should be correct.

Also consider that the roll off of our speakers varies massively depending on what you use as your speakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 06:55 PM   #3
Boscoe is offline Boscoe  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: England
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianpengelly View Post
They shouldn't but most modern recordings are over compressed, often resulting in there sounding like there is a lot of bass. If it is a decent studio then the speakers they use tend to be full range (not to be mistaken with a full range single driver, but one covering the audible spectrum 20Hz - 20kHz, so the EQ should be correct.

Also consider that the roll off of our speakers varies massively depending on what you use as your speakers.
Yes I guess it's quite hard to equalize songs appropriately for everyone.
__________________
I thought about it once, but then thought again.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 08:29 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
dantheman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mountain View, CA
I participate on a number of recording boards. Believe me, there are a lot of messes on that end of the spectrum (no pun) yet. Not globally, but many more than I'd hope for. For the amateur it's definitely the majority (maybe so for the pro!). Despite everyone's best intentions, unless there are standards it's marginal how much any one end can do right. Much of the necessary research has been done, now people just need to read it and put it to use.

I'd say the DIY audio guys are generally well ahead of the guys making the recordings. Sad really. It should be the other way around.

Dan
__________________
My Blog
My Music Recordings
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 09:24 PM   #5
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Blog Entries: 2
Take a look at TweakHeadz Lab Electronic Musician's Hangout. There are numerous articles about recording techniques. The mastering engineer will be aiming to produce a result that is suited to a wide range of playback devices and will probably evaluate what he has produced on a variety of favourite representative systems. Obviously there is some compromise involved here, and an element of fashion. Many people complain that modern recordings are lacking in dynamic range (generally quiet passages) due to the amount of compression employed in order to make the result sound 'loud'.

That said, the general standard of playback equipment is constantly improving, many people listen through earphones which in general have quite impressive bass performance, so one would not expect that an overloud bass eq. would be a feature of most recordings unless perhaps in a particular genre of music.

w
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2011, 10:17 PM   #6
Elbert is offline Elbert  Norway
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
An interresting discussion...

From my sessions behind the console, the most difficult thing during mixdown was definitively bass.

Many controll-rooms and monitoring systems are just not capable of providing full and accurate monitoring down to the lowest frequencies. This will especially be the case for lower and mid-end facilities, the proliferation of which has been made possible by the digital revolution and availability of inexpensive yet high-performing equipment.

Unfortunately, big monitoring systems (not to mention a proper controll room!), are still expensive like in the days when multitrack recording required heavy capital investment, and not just a few 1000$ for a hardisk recorder etc..

Sure, some good sounding and affordable monitors are available out there, but they can never do what those big Altecs, JBLs, UREIs, and Westlakes etc. did back in the late 70's and early 80's (and still do today many places)

Today, I just completed and hooked up a subwoofer capable of reproducing frequencies down to 20 Hz at realistic levels.

On some recordings, the absence of low frequency information suggests that this has been avoided in the mix as "unnecessary" or unreproducable on equipment available to the wider audience. In many cases, this may actually be the wiser decision..



On other recordings, very excessive and poorly balanced low frequency information was revealed, a typical sign that this was simply not heard during mixdown, and/or that mixdown was balanced to give bass that the monitoring speakers / room could otherwise not present.

When mixing down on "ordinary" monitors, it is very easy to overdoo the bass in mixdown to get more "punch" and omph, and when later reproduced on a system that really does go all the way down, the mess is revealed, especially if you throw in some room modes as well.

I allways found that checking bass-levels on a good closed head-set provided a good reality check if the monitoring could not be fully relied uppon for the deeper frequencies. Yet, this allso has its limits as you miss the ever present low frequency room modes.

My last finding of the day was listening to "out of the blue" by ELO.

With my new subwoofer, the bass was well extended and provided that extra dimension to the listening experience without becomming obtrusive or dominating.

This album was recorded and mixed down in a classical "big" studio, and I believe it shows.

So, after just one evenings worth of listening, I've concluded that the extended frequency capacity of my system is really a double edged sword; It brings out so much more from good recordings, but many others with poor bass-mixdown can be allmost unlistenable!

Good bass in mixdown requires firm, sometimes generous, use of compression, economy with low frequency energy (carefull EQ), and allowing the harmonics of bass-rich instruments some breathing-room. Simple in theory, very difficult in practice.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2011, 12:40 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
dantheman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mountain View, CA
Now a days you can get great bass eq for really cheap when it comes to a recording studio's budget. There's no real excuse now other than the unusual beliefs the seem prolific in recording forums. I'd imagine that there are many engineers that don't post on these forums and know the rational behind what they are doing. I don't have any evidence for that statement, but it's my own unusual belief. Don't ruin it for me. Ha ha. Maybe it's just the ones I'm on? Is there a good one with many knowledgeable posters? In a way, there is no reason (unless in anticipation) for the consumer to perfect their acoustics and equipment if recording/mastering studio doesn't even understand that they need to. It seems so backwards to me that the purchaser has more understanding of the product than the producer of the product. I can tell you the VW engineers (not to start a car war) know more about my car than I do--and I love cars.

Dan
__________________
My Blog
My Music Recordings
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2011, 02:10 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Bksabath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
I don'T want to contradict Elbert
Altougt I did things differentley and it may look opposite at what he did I am not saiing that he is wrong
Just 2 different enviroments (Times and Places)

Quote DO sound recordist compensate for bass...



I never did At times when mastering 2 3 instruments special care was used but
At normal when recording the ritmic sections this was alwayse in the worst places like the traks at the edges of the tape or pre mastered the drums on second hand tapes.
I am talking about 1980 ties
At that time the fist MIDI and digital stuff started to apears.

We mostly did rock pop commerciall stuff I don't know of others at the time that did or if it did make any sense to
the enphasy was in keeping voices and such clear the only frequency where attention was placed where the hi as bubus in those could mean a broken late when making the records.

As long as the studio was properly designed and the sound caracteristic refined and known (I can remember a few session spending 12 16 hours just to get the sound right on the monitors once done that part of the system was under lock and key) al we payed attention was on the hi part
Bass frequency was never an issue even with (in today money) 80K worht of Urey monitors and amps as long as it was there we where happy we had to satisfy the mass market and at the time the getto blaster was the bench mark.

I moved on to other things in the 90 when digital started and can't really comment but to me digital recording dinamic is flat IMO and I found the sound unplesant.
The correct recording and at times the manypulation of the hier spectrum may make more sense if you look at it in a different way.

There is a big difference between recording and reproducing music harmonics in recording are quite velcome the define the caracter of the instrument
For example you tune the guitars to 315 Hz that is the same all over but a gibson sound different from a fender and this is just tanks to the different harmonics generated by the different wood strings and nut and bolts holding the instrument togheter.

The corect recording of those can define not only the caracter of the instrument but it's placement in the sound stage (orizontal verticall and depth).

As harmonics are multiples of the fundamental care is needed on the hi frequency bands
(IMO digital can't cope with it as analog did ) so again emphasy was on the hi frequency if you get those right decent bas was nomal and much easier to get.

we know it was there so we did not bother
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2011, 04:39 AM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
dantheman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mountain View, CA
Did they not have parametric EQ in the 80s?

Dan
__________________
My Blog
My Music Recordings
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2011, 10:34 AM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Birmingham, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman View Post
Now a days you can get great bass eq for really cheap when it comes to a recording studio's budget. There's no real excuse now other than the unusual beliefs the seem prolific in recording forums. I'd imagine that there are many engineers that don't post on these forums and know the rational behind what they are doing. I don't have any evidence for that statement, but it's my own unusual belief. Don't ruin it for me. Ha ha. Maybe it's just the ones I'm on? Is there a good one with many knowledgeable posters? In a way, there is no reason (unless in anticipation) for the consumer to perfect their acoustics and equipment if recording/mastering studio doesn't even understand that they need to. It seems so backwards to me that the purchaser has more understanding of the product than the producer of the product. I can tell you the VW engineers (not to start a car war) know more about my car than I do--and I love cars.

Dan
A bass eq is pretty useless if you only have nearfields to monitor on as you can't eq what you can't hear.

As for recording forums have you tried gearslutz.com?
Recently I was involved in a discussion about vintage monitors there which included the Abbey Road man Ken Scott and the original Motown engineer Bob Ohlsson.
  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
Level-dependend Sound Quality by certainly Bass Drivers - very bad sound at low level tiefbassuebertr Subwoofers 11 3rd March 2012 10:54 AM
Bass drivers which cleanly roll-off without a low pass filter. theophile Multi-Way 4 10th February 2011 10:50 AM
Need help on what direction I should go. Rock N Roll Speakers ta_nhra02 Multi-Way 22 11th August 2010 09:52 PM
Level-dependend Sound Quality by certainly Bass Drivers - very bad sound at low level tiefbassuebertr Multi-Way 1 2nd April 2010 04:12 AM
Input cap (2.2uF) / 50k pot (bass roll-off) question: GrahamnDodder Chip Amps 6 23rd September 2003 09:32 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:26 PM.


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