Not necessarily more even but the spatial variance becomes smaller hence EQ is more likely to improve a whole area and not just a single point.
Someone posted this the other day in another thread, but I found it interesting to listen to, technical issues aside. Earl Geddes talks about using multiple subs.
Earl Geddes on Multiple Subwoofers in Rooms, smwtms Captured on Ustream:Earl Geddes on Multiple Subwoofers in Small Rooms, plus a CES Report, and New Faces...
Earl Geddes on Multiple Subwoofers in Rooms, smwtms Captured on Ustream:Earl Geddes on Multiple Subwoofers in Small Rooms, plus a CES Report, and New Faces...
I'm not sure if the people decrying subs are trying to argue that big, full range stereo speakers are better, or that you don't need to reproduce low frequencies at all? I built a sealed sub (with equalisation by minidsp) because my wife and I like my simple two way main speakers, but they were clearly not able to go much below 60 Hz. I find the sub adds a lot to the warmth and body of some music, and it can be quite surprising which tracks benefit. To avoid making statements that are just my opinion and that cannot be checked by people on their own systems, I'll name specific tracks that I think sould better with my sub than without.
'Sympathy for the Devil' (the 1968 recording) by the Rolling Stones is a great example, the first third of the song is just a bass guitar, a piano, a vocal and some maracas. Playing it with a sub just adds the weight to the bass and the lower piano notes that should be there. The 'Abbey Road' album by the Beatles is recorded with a very full bass, but especially 'Come Together', which has a very heavy 'wall of sound' atmosphere. Next up, and obvious choice, 'Freak Out' by Chic has a wonderful bassline, as does 'Soul Bossa Nova' by Quincy Jones (this is the theme music from the Austin Powers movie, so you probably do know it), and it should be no surprise that these two tracks deserve to be played on something that will reproduce the lower notes properly.
A surprising one is 'In The Ghetto' by Elvis which has a very solid lower octave, and also a lot of Sinatra classics are very well recorded and have a lovely acoustic bass sound, that goes right down to the big strings.
Those who are decrying subs as only for teenagers have clearly only heard subs made for teenagers.
'Sympathy for the Devil' (the 1968 recording) by the Rolling Stones is a great example, the first third of the song is just a bass guitar, a piano, a vocal and some maracas. Playing it with a sub just adds the weight to the bass and the lower piano notes that should be there. The 'Abbey Road' album by the Beatles is recorded with a very full bass, but especially 'Come Together', which has a very heavy 'wall of sound' atmosphere. Next up, and obvious choice, 'Freak Out' by Chic has a wonderful bassline, as does 'Soul Bossa Nova' by Quincy Jones (this is the theme music from the Austin Powers movie, so you probably do know it), and it should be no surprise that these two tracks deserve to be played on something that will reproduce the lower notes properly.
A surprising one is 'In The Ghetto' by Elvis which has a very solid lower octave, and also a lot of Sinatra classics are very well recorded and have a lovely acoustic bass sound, that goes right down to the big strings.
Those who are decrying subs as only for teenagers have clearly only heard subs made for teenagers.
The locations of those "built-in subs" are most likely far from optimal, resulting in a very uneven frequency response.
"Regular" speakers do 30Hz? Very unlikely.
I think this is the most important point.Sure they do, but at -10dB or lower
Last edited:
I'm going to get the wav files for some of the tracks I just mentioned ('Fly Me To the Moon' will be the Sinatra one) and Fourier transform them, and then we can see how much of the music is at frequencies in the range below where my regular speakers play. If you could nominate some tracks that you feel your regular speakers play perfectly, and if I have a copy, I'll run the transform on them too. Then, if you can let us know what the low frequency limit for your speakers is, we'll see if our subjective impressions match the measurements?
I'm at work now, but will do this when I get home tonight.
hi dumptruck, when I started the thread I tohught the my "bass problem"was with my speakers, but as I learned from you and other gurus I discovered the the room modes were the mais issue. thx
Any capable sub can be used in HiFi. The real question is how to optimally integrate subs. Here's a good read: Bass Integration Guide – Part 1
I dare anybody to play BT - Go(d)t on a speaker system without subwoofers and tell me they aren't missing anything. The second half of this song will make your walls breathe, and it's very much an intended part of the recording. If I played it without a high pass filter on my mains and turned the subs off, I'd be clanking coils off of backplates and destroying the clarity of everything else in the song, as well as wasting amplifier power trying to flop around the driver I'm using for midbass like a leaf in the wind, trying in futility to reproduce a note it has no hope of reproducing with any authority.
The truth is as music has evolved, along with reproduction equipment, artists have been producing more and more music that takes advantage of it. One could say the same about HD video, saying that it's not necessary because you personally only have SD DVDs in your collection, but you can't make a blanket statement that "nobody" needs it because you can't speak for what every person likes to listen to or what their favorite recordings might contain.
We could probably start a thread that could reach over 100 pages and talk about nothing but music and media that would give a proper ~20 cycle tuned subwoofer a workout.
I had a Sunfire Mark IV sub that I experimented with, for a few years. I recently sold it. It did little for my music, and yes I do sometimes listen to the wall shaking stuff. Already mentioned are two main reasons for having (or not) a sub: Does your music have much in the lowest octave? Most of mine does not. Do your speakers reach reasonably low? I am still in my "Bose 901 series I/II" period and my answer is definitely "yes..." but I push the bottom end up to 30 dB, compared with about 18 dB with the default Bose EQ. Perhaps as a rule of thumb, if you can lift one of your mains, then yes, you may need a sub
There is a link to a E Geddes presentation on Room modes and why multiple bass sources are required to have good low frequency response in a small room and why this is so it also touches on the process Earl uses with his subs.
GedLee LLC
2 speakers can give good bass response in 1 spot if you are 'lucky' but CANNOT give good coverage in a small room.
GedLee LLC
2 speakers can give good bass response in 1 spot if you are 'lucky' but CANNOT give good coverage in a small room.
My current speaker plays most music quite well but on some tracks they simply can't keep up. Well, it depends how loud you play too. Playing at 75dB average level no subwoofer is needed but if you play at concert levels you will most likely need a subwoofer.
It also depends on what you want. If you want to feel the bass in your body a pair of 6.5" drivers wont do it. Well, my dual 6.5" Morel drivers (per speaker) gives a good thump despite the limited cone area but the laws of physics still apply.
It also depends on what you want. If you want to feel the bass in your body a pair of 6.5" drivers wont do it. Well, my dual 6.5" Morel drivers (per speaker) gives a good thump despite the limited cone area but the laws of physics still apply.
maybe note this is especially aimed at surround setup for sound effects
not saying it doesn't work for music, but...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.