No sub = no bass... true?

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Surround sound for music has far too many variables to be a serious contender for high quality reproduction for the masses. Because of this the recordings do not get made in any serious numbers. Hell even decent stereo presents enough of a problem in many households.
Even so you can have an excellent system for surround sound that performs superbly for music too. Of course the main front stereo speakers need to be high quality, high fidelity models.

As a person who mixes 5.1 and 7.1 music and movie soundtracks, what variables are you referring to?

Done well it will cost more than a two channel system. If you are not too cost/budget restrained there is no need for the system to be a Jack of all trades.

This is not necessarily true anymore. I have a 7.1 system that costs far less than two channels of my Bryston/Dunlavy combo. Do I think it is a trade off for music? No, even two channel music sounds wonderful through that system. The funny thing is the conductor of the city orchestra I live in has a choice of listening to recordings I have done with the orchestra on a $400k studio system down to a $10k system, and he loves the $10K system. Now it is pretty obvious a $10k system will not sound as good as my $400k studio system, but he states you are about 85-90% there on the less expensive system.

Even if it is two seperate systems they can be used together. These days some Stereo purist amp's/Preamp's, CD/Preamp's even have Home Theatre Bypass to allow the front channels to be handled by the stereo system.

Agreed. I know several people who have system's like this.

Few people go for seven channel, indeed few films support it.

There are a little over 100 movie and music soundtracks that are in 7.1. Two years ago there were none. Almost all of our catalog titles at the studio I work for are released with back to the stems 7.1 remixed soundtracks. Warner is starting to do the same thing with their catalog titles soundtracks via Mi Casa Studios. Just like with any new format, things start off small and get larger over time. Once upon a time there were very few 5.1 soundtracks, and now almost all new music is archived that way, and all movie soundtracks are released that way.
 
Well there is the entire music DVD catalogue issued over the last 10 years.

Amazon alone lists 30,100 results under "Music Videos & Concerts" -- doesn't prove anything but it is a substantial catalogue.

Thank you! I think most of the folks who talk about multichannel recording lacking in titles are usually not looking for multichannel titles. I have over 500 in my collection, and thanks to downloads and Bluray, it is growing even larger.

Seek and ye shall find. Don't seek, you find nothing.
 
I think the threadstarter is confused by the sound of
'budget' 5.1 setups that have 1 sub of usually mediocre quality.
Usually when i listen to such systems, they either aggrevate me
or make me grin, knowing that my stereo-setup sounds much better,
especially with music.

I never tried a setup with multiple (at least 3) subs myself,
but reading the theory behind it i'm convinced that when
set up properly, such a setup would outperform
a conventional 2-channel setup without subwoofers.
A 5.1 setup is too expensive for me, since i would then have to
invest in 5 channels instead of 2.
 
I'm very much an amateur DIYer, so I'll keep certain parts of this post quite short :). Also, I have been involved in surround sound since 1992, selling it but mostly as a hobby:

* the best bass I've heard has been produced by well-configured sat+sub systems, just one sub though.

* I've heard very good bass produced by quite a few large speakers, where the woofer was at least 10" in diameter or where dual 8" woofers were utilized. Cost of these began at only around $600 per pair (for smaller rooms). Inherently simple too: a receiver or integrated amp + a pair of speakers + source. Voila, you're done.

FYI: the music that I used to listen to the above systems was my own. I do not know those albums' lower frequency limits but highly doubt they reached below 30Hz.*

* IMO sub systems can be quite time consuming to set up correctly (e.g. anyone ever done the "sub crawl"?), not to mention the best spot for the sub could very well end up being exactly where your S.O. doesn't want it to be - so much for one of the sat+sub's most touted advantages!

* generally speaking, sat+sub systems begin to sound unacceptable to me when they use sats equipped with a woofer (for each speaker) smaller than one 6.5". So much for an "invisible" speaker system. ;) And those systems using sats equipped with woofers smaller than 5.25"? No thanks. I think they sound thin, weak and just not very realistic (see this interactive instrument frequency chart for clarification on this).

* I think sat+sub systems are great for people with limited budgets and who like bass-heavy music and who have a large room to fill with sound. That's because they don't need to buy a powerful receiver or power amp which is what a pair of large conventional speakers need to sound their best in that large room with that bass-heavy music.

* my ultimate sat+sub system for my 16ft x 20ft living room? Sats with one 8" woofer to allow a seamless and stress-free transfer to the sub (ever watched a 5.25" woofer crossed over at 80Hz while playing a Stereolab album at just slightly loud levels, say, about 30 watts average? Looks like the cone is going to launch itself right out of its frame!), paired with a 12" acoustic-suspension subwoofer.

And in addition to non-optimal sub location and individual channel level problems, here is one of the main reasons why I think so many people have had bad experiences with sat+sub systems: the system they heard didn't use an active speaker management system i.e. active low AND high pass filters and distance compensation to make sure all that sound reaches the listener at the same time to prevent phase issues....but especially the low and high filters!

Personally I cannot imagine successfully blending sats with a sub by just using the sats' natural roll-off plus the sub's internal crossover or much worse, a sub's non-adjustable "speaker level" crossover with its usually shallow roll-off and (correct me if this is wrong) the fact this crossover is in series with the sat's crossover.

Unfortunately very few "hi-end" preamps and integrateds include full speaker management systems. OTOH every multichannel receiver and preamp does include it (part of Dolby Lab's and DTS' licensing agreements I think) but since so many audiophiles are um.....allergic :D.....to these types of components, they never get to hear what they are capable of.


* for example: Massive Attack's Mezzazine, Beck's Guero, Black Flag's In My Head, and the most frightening :), Stravinsky's The Firebird (Telarc CD-80270)
 
Quality is a top priority, lack of bass is bad reproduction to me
Probably , some people at Yamaha had the same thoughts
I've been listening at a friend's apartment , a little nice micro system .
At first sight I said ' Whoa, you are stylish...orange ,little ,Cd,radio ,usb ...ok ,let me hear it !!?'
So ,after five minutes I had the feeling of listening to some loudness compensated digital amp . Later confirmed when I went home and checked the Yamaha catalogue . For making the little 4" seem to have 'life' , they put this stupid circuit that lift the bass level , and you can't control it .
Sorry , I want to get off : would you stop the car :confused:
So , yesterday I played my favourite vinyls and Ray Parker is my friend .
Also the Big Whale , ooooh yes !!
 
is nobody curious?

If you are interested in building your own I will share plans for a project I had planed before I became unable to build.

Steve: I just now stumbled across your post and generous offer. As far as I can see not one interested or curious person. Go figure. Well I am curious to hear what you propose for your project. What have you got in mind? Best regards Moray James.
 
Surround sound: I love it.

For movies: because action/adventure stories benefit i.e. they're simply more fun to watch! But more thoughtful movies can also benefit because a gentle ambience or subtle discrete background effects (birds chirping, a church's reverberation etc) can be used to create certain moods or simply add realism to what's happening on-screen.

For music: music is a form of art to me, so whatever enhances the emotional impact of the music - in this case literally being surrounded by it - is fine with me. No stereo mix has affected me as much as its surround counterpart, though the type of mix figures heavily into this e.g. "ambient" mixes are largely a waste of time for me: I might as well just fire up my CD player and push the "hall" or "club" DSP button on my receiver. :rolleyes: But Peter Gabriel's Play dvd or Donald Fagen's The Nightfly dvd-audio, created from the original multitracks? Awesome.

Surround systems, to me anyway, are not that difficult to set up. Though in my experience the larger the room, the better the result, because the surround sound "bubble" becomes more seamless and more coherent.....OTOH smaller rooms cause the listener to hear the speakers themselves rather than that bubble.

Based on what I know the best music surround systems are set up slightly differently than ones optimized for movie playback, especially the location of the speakers themselves. There is a diagram for this on page 2 - 5 of this semi-technical white paper, written by some of the best in the multichannel music business:

"Recommendations for Surround Sound Productions"
 
Steve: I just now stumbled across your post and generous offer. As far as I can see not one interested or curious person. Go figure. Well I am curious to hear what you propose for your project. What have you got in mind? Best regards Moray James.

Moray: I tried to PM you, but your box is full. I will work up the files and send them to you and the one other person that showed interest.
 
Enough people PMed me to make this worth posting here.

Everything should be in the two pdf files except the notch filter for the cavity resonance at 15K. The program will calculate that, but it will not include it in the graphs or the schematic. The notch filter is:

C = 2uF
R = 12 ohms
L = o.o5mH

All three components are in parallel with each other and in series with the mid/tweeter.

Everything is available from PartsExpress. The response graph includes 3 dB per octave of room gaine starting at 50 Hz.
 

Attachments

  • BassBox Pro.pdf
    56 KB · Views: 90
  • X·over Pro.pdf
    56.5 KB · Views: 65
Last edited:
I had no problem finding smaller floor standing speakers with excellent bottom. Since the mid 2000's, I've been using Dynaudio Audience 72's (driven by my TV as a pre-amp) amped with a B & K Ref 2200 power amp. Visitors are always amazed since these speakers resemble so many "Designed and made for big box retail" models but the sound is tremendous.

Specs:

http://dynaudio.com/eng/archive/data/Audience72.pdf

Don't believe the 28Hz? Too bad. (The box has a prominent sticker indicating "Danes don't lie" and I agree.)

These are very reasonably priced and could approach overwhelming in your room. The Audience 82 is even more so.

It is a mistake to believe you need larger woofers for low frequencies. Small woofers can move tremendous air and are very accurate since they shut up very quickly due to their smaller cone mass.

I've recently built two small/moderate tower pairs featuring ScanSpeak drivers (the 18w-8531G to be specific) which is a PAPER cone 180mm driver (also prominent in the mentioned Ekta Grande.) Their bass is incredible. Everyone who hears them thinks I'm cheating by including the RS 9 Kappa's they are next to in my living room.

P
 
^ I've also heard relatively small loudspeakers that had great bass, bass which was comparable to larger models from other brands (the Vienna Acoustics "Haydn" for example). But there is one little caveat to that situation:

The smaller speakers are usually more expensive, and many times MUCH more expensive, than those larger models. E.g. those Dynaudio 72s cost $1600/pair according to a 2008 AVGuide review.

A woofer that can produce X amount of bass vs. a larger woofer while still maintaining midrange integrity requires some pretty slick technology imo, along with very precise manufacturing standards, both of which can add up to significant price increases.

And: to allow the smaller speaker to provide all the bass they are capable of, compared to the larger (and probably more efficient) model they will require a beefier amplifier, which can also strain the wallet of many music fans.

So for many people, a larger but less expensive speaker can still provide great sound - it just won't be as "sexy" as the svelte upscale model w/comparable bass. Heck one of those clunky fatter ;) speakers may have an improved midrange spectrum if it uses a 3-way configuration, but that's a discussion for another thread!
 
Last edited:
^ I've also heard relatively small loudspeakers that had great bass, bass which was comparable to larger models from other brands (the Vienna Acoustics "Haydn" for example). But there is one little caveat to that situation:

The smaller speakers are usually more expensive, and many times MUCH more expensive, than those larger models. E.g. those Dynaudio 72s cost $1600/pair according to a 2008 AVGuide review.

A woofer that can produce X amount of bass vs. a larger woofer while still maintaining midrange integrity requires some pretty slick technology imo, along with very precise manufacturing standards, both of which can add up to significant price increases.

And: to allow the smaller speaker to provide all the bass they are capable of, compared to the larger (and probably more efficient) model they will require a beefier amplifier, which can also strain the wallet of many music fans.

So for many people, a larger but less expensive speaker can still provide great sound - it just won't be as "sexy" as the svelte upscale model w/comparable bass. Heck one of those clunky fatter ;) speakers may have an improved midrange spectrum if it uses a 3-way configuration, but that's a discussion for another thread!

Many Vienna Accoustics speakers use ScanSpeak drivers or drivers made by ScanSpeak, as does Wilson Audio.

I paid 1000 USD for my Audience 72's, including 2nd day shipping from Michigan to GA. Given the sound this was a good deal.

The first pair of build I did involved only about 700 USD. The build pics are here:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1931365576772.108597.1621248869&type=1&l=448c6a3d89
(If you choose to trust facebook.)

This pair (and the later) do very well with my ancient Sony integrated amp (as shown.) It's rated at about 100WPC into 8ohms. Again, they are very graceful on the bottom and have good bass in my living room (which has a 16 foot high ceiling and "open upstairs" to the rear of the listening area.) In the smaller14x16 area where they now play, they are very good.

If you want cheap speakers, that's all well and good. I still agree that a good home built design is worth more than 2 times their cost in store bought speakers. I just tend to use MDF that is not really medium (1" that is about 127 lbs/sheet) and quality drivers.

P

I would also point out that that build is a two way that crosses over at 1600Hz. Kudos to Suman, the designer. Additionally he was available by email and a great deal of help with the build. (unlike the ZAPF build.)
 
Last edited:
What's the budget?

Building a 4 way stereo pair based on the following drivers (per speaker) would do the trick:

1x http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=294-895
2x RCF L8S800 8" Midbass Speaker 294-828
1x JBL 2446H 2" Titanium Horn Driver 8 Ohm 4-Bolt 294-415
1x HiVi RT2-Pro Planar Isodynamic Tweeter 297-404

crossover points of ~100hz, ~800hz, and ~6000hz.

I would suggest bi-amping and using an active crossover for the crossover from the woofers to the low-mids (100hz). I also would suggest building the speakers as a sub/sat configuration, so that the mids/horn/tweeter on up are mounted on a narrower baffle. Just place the "sats" on top of the stereo pair of "subs." The passive crossover will need some padding on that JBL horn.

"Sub boxes" should be 8-12ft^3 each tuned to 20-30hz depending on taste. EQing the bottom end will be required in most listening enviroments. Use an amp with a ton of dampening factor combined with these heavily dampened woofers for more low frequency accuracy and lower bass distortion than is conceivable by the human mind :)
 

Attachments

  • Borat-VeryNice.jpg
    Borat-VeryNice.jpg
    17 KB · Views: 214
It seems to be a big trip to get to it without a sub. I went to listen some and I was surprised on how a relatively inexpensive setup can deliver. I'm exploring in complementing my speaker setup instead of throwing it and reinventing the '80s method of doing things.

What characteristics should I look for to get a good tightly-controlled music-friendly sub? There seems to be a consensus around a sealed enclosure, but what more? Phase inversion possibility, adjustable crossover, but what more?

As a basic question; what is the difference between an "audiophile" or a "for-stereo-purpose" subwoofer and a home-theater sub?

Regards,
Martin.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.