Here's a nice test song:
See how 35 Hz is still higher in level than the 25 Hz portion? But all of it is higher than the midrange.
This song is an exception, most music I've come across does not have bass that loud. This song has awesome pressure build up, some of it more felt than heard, at lower bass.
Now show us what levels those 18" OB woofers do @ 25 Hz at the listening spot...
If there is - I've never heard it or found it. See here:
Spectrum of Musical Genres
What there is below 35Hz is noise, room tone and LFE. Noise you probably don't want, room tone is fun, but it also exists above 35Hz and LFE should probably be its own channel.
Flat to 20Hz is fine, but why put all that money and effort into a place where it brings so little reward?
mmm, not many, and I think they had to stop using it where it does exist (to put the fear of God into one!) due to structural damage and other messy side effects....
Here is an analogy:
Most of the time you drive at 100kph on the highway. Or 60mph...
You have a car with a maximum top speed potential of 200kph.
That's fast, but that's ''nothing''.
You see my point? 200kph top speed car is nothing extraordinary nowadays. Most of the sportscars are doing 250kph+ and there is no supercar with sub 300kph capacities. But on the highway, public roads, we will ALL drive at 90-120kph or so (unless you're in Germany 🙂 )
Bottomline, i think the real challenge in a ''small footprint speakers'' is about the low-end and the SPL.
Have you ever listened to pipe organ recordings? How about "urban contemporary"? There's plenty of signal there at those frequencies.
Your statement makes it sound as if that doesn't matter. The ears can hear it, and there are MANY recordings with information in that band, especially SACDs and other higher fidelity recordings...as it exists in real life.
I think that the OP is correct in trying to reproduce that LF band. It makes a whole lot more sense than paying a lot of money and creating so many issues with matching polars and 1/4 wavelength spacing (including time alignment) with the 1-3 semitones above 16 kHz trying to integrate a "super-tweeter". You're getting between 1 and 1.5 octaves below 40 Hz that the human senses detect...and actually expect to be there during reproduction.
It doesn't take a 5.1 system to have the need for those frequency bands to be reproduced.
Chris
Yes 16hz is more common. Still, 16hz is pretty low for a ''natural'' music instrument 🙂
Look at the wiki chart above, there is many instruments that can play in the C0 and C−1 territory.
..and i'm not even talking about electronic music or any music or film that uses computer-processed sounds (most of it today?)
Exactly, Chris.
Most of the audiophiles (and DIYers) i know never really experienced what sub-bass really is. When you play with pure tones from 1hz to 60hz, on something that can take it, you understand much better what is all about. Doesnt need to be loud at all. In fact, that's the point: it's pretty quiet below 30hz! And the more you go down, the less you hear it and the more you feel it.
And, even though you cannot hear it, i would NOT stay in a room with a 10hz pure tone playing on repeat at high volume.
Flat to 20Hz in room is a reasonable target. One could cheat(?) with an IB venting through the wall, something I've experimented with. My U-frame subs get to 30Hz flat but not a small footprint
Just to be clear, i'm not saying listening a full 20hz-20khz is an absolute need. Not at all. I'm listening each day at my office a little portable MiniJambox, and the thing's bandwith is probably 200hz-8khz... At that's fine since i'm more into ''music mood'' than ''audiophile mood''.
But, topic's subject-wise, having something small that has limited bass output is hardly a challenge isnt it? Wouldn't all agree about that?
But, topic's subject-wise, having something small that has limited bass output is hardly a challenge isnt it? Wouldn't all agree about that?
Chris and Jon,
The argument Pano is making is a fair one. Across the spectrum of music, there is very little content below 40 Hz. If it is a priority for you, that's fine. It may not be for others. That's the beauty of DIY. We are not selling speakers here, just designing for our own pleasure, and each of us can choose whatever goals we like.
The minimum footprint challenge will always be partial to line arrays, that's a strength of the topology. As fluid and Wesayso have said, it is possible to do 20 Hz satisfactorily for them (though may be not for you, even though you never heard their speakers). This topology also provides other benefits that some of us think are important and should be prioritized over producing 20 Hz at 105 db or whatever. Maybe you should've mentioned in the first post that the challenge criteria is speakers that can produce 20 Hz with 110 db peaks (and I think all three of our line arrays would be able to do it).
Edit: I see we cross-posted. You seem to agree that the challenge is indeed to produce 20 Hz in a small footprint. Have you seen John's tapped horns?
inlowsound.com
The argument Pano is making is a fair one. Across the spectrum of music, there is very little content below 40 Hz. If it is a priority for you, that's fine. It may not be for others. That's the beauty of DIY. We are not selling speakers here, just designing for our own pleasure, and each of us can choose whatever goals we like.
The minimum footprint challenge will always be partial to line arrays, that's a strength of the topology. As fluid and Wesayso have said, it is possible to do 20 Hz satisfactorily for them (though may be not for you, even though you never heard their speakers). This topology also provides other benefits that some of us think are important and should be prioritized over producing 20 Hz at 105 db or whatever. Maybe you should've mentioned in the first post that the challenge criteria is speakers that can produce 20 Hz with 110 db peaks (and I think all three of our line arrays would be able to do it).
Edit: I see we cross-posted. You seem to agree that the challenge is indeed to produce 20 Hz in a small footprint. Have you seen John's tapped horns?
inlowsound.com
Last edited:
Honestly, i think that most people (audiophiles, DIYers) would settle for a F3 @ 25hz.
A flat 20 is a reasonable target, maybe at 65-70db at listening position, with some EQ, but as soon as you want more output many speakers won't cut it.
You're in a purely pistonic territory and EQing below a driver's Fs is not that easy. Most 6''-10'' sub/woofer drivers Fs is between 25-45hz...
Sorry ra7, that is just not true.
below 30hz is not true, below 40hz that is just downright wrong.
Brickwall a speaker with a 40hz highpass and switch it on and off with any common music of any type and tell me there is no difference...
Linkwitz transform or this Sub-Woofer Controller which raises the resonant frequency then eqs below. Not something that I've tried or particularly want to, don't like the idea of the power and excursion requirements. I'd rather something like the sonotube TL I linked to earlier
Perhaps the notion that ~100 stereo music tracks randomly chosen tells the whole story is convincing.
But it doesn't in fact tell the whole story. With just a little effort, all the missing bass in those "mastered" recordings can be easily recovered...on even the most damaged stereo recordings--notably 44.1/16 bit stereo tracks on CDs.
When you hear those tracks restored and balanced, you'll have little doubt what the original recorded signal sounded like...and the huge difference in the listening experience that accompanies it.
But you first must have a music reproduction system that can accurately and cleanly reproduce those frequencies to hear the difference. It no longer takes an arm-and-a-leg financially to provide that capability--in fact it's very straightforward and economical to provide it.
But if you choose outright to never hear that portion of the music spectrum...you'll be missing a great deal.
Chris
But it doesn't in fact tell the whole story. With just a little effort, all the missing bass in those "mastered" recordings can be easily recovered...on even the most damaged stereo recordings--notably 44.1/16 bit stereo tracks on CDs.
When you hear those tracks restored and balanced, you'll have little doubt what the original recorded signal sounded like...and the huge difference in the listening experience that accompanies it.
But you first must have a music reproduction system that can accurately and cleanly reproduce those frequencies to hear the difference. It no longer takes an arm-and-a-leg financially to provide that capability--in fact it's very straightforward and economical to provide it.
But if you choose outright to never hear that portion of the music spectrum...you'll be missing a great deal.
Chris
It's still there, however. Because it's been uniformly attenuated during mastering in typical commercial stereo recordings (but typically not attenuated in surround recordings), it's very easy to undo. Using something like Audacity (free) it usually takes a few seconds/track.
Big difference...
Chris
I use multiple subs and have plenty of output down to 20 Hz. I'm not choosing to leave out 20-40 Hz, but I'm not under the illusion that this is the range that is crucial to faithful reproduction of the vast majority of music out there. This is simply not true. There is noise, and lot of unwanted junk in that range, and most times, you can get a lot of enjoyment even with a speaker that works down to 60 Hz. Just ask the full range crowd. Pano's analysis is spot on. Hundred randomly chosen tracks is good enough for me. I say thanks for proving what many of us felt intuitively was the truth.
BTW, if you have a vinyl front-end, that 20 Hz and sub-20 Hz output can cause some real problems.
BTW, if you have a vinyl front-end, that 20 Hz and sub-20 Hz output can cause some real problems.
Except there isn't, if you actually look at them. Surprising, but true. Well, at least I was surprised. And if you are a big time dub-step or giant pipe organ fan, then your requirements would need adjustment, no argument.
.
I hope you understand the difference between "doesn't matter" and "not the most important part of the spectrum." If the distinction isn't clear, then the whole statement will mean nothing to you.
"Show me the many" as Tom Cruise might say. 🙂 I have not found many recordings with substantial music content below about 35-40 Hz. I've shown my data, let's see yours.
I certainly agree that if you build a thin line array that needs help getting down to 80Hz, you're going to want subs. If you like distributed subs, then they can be put out of the way, keeping the footprint minimal and unobtrusive.
Now we get to the crux of your argument. You are re-engineering and remastering the music. That's fine if that's what you want, but most audiophiles don't. The general public might enjoy it, they always tend to "pump up the bass" - even tho that's usually around 100Hz. If you actually look at what is on the recordings, there isn't much content below 40Hz. If you enjoy drastically changing that balance, OK. But it's not what most people do or want to do.
All this really belongs in another thread, it's pretty OT to this one. I won't take it any further here.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.