Hi all
The slow bass bandits are at it againno wonder so many believe in it,its still being broadcast to the masses.
Quote FFWD hifi magazine,glossy glitzy shiny equipment
FFWD Feb/march 2005
'facts' attained from this so truthful article -
Small woofers MUST be faster,and cos they said so,its true
This company is thinking in a new way, which is better -compromise?whats that!Those darned laws of physics no audiophile need concern himself with them.
Whos giving FFWD reviewers free audio,and paying the bills this month!
The slow bass bandits are at it againno wonder so many believe in it,its still being broadcast to the masses.
Quote FFWD hifi magazine,glossy glitzy shiny equipment
FFWD Feb/march 2005
'facts' attained from this so truthful article -
Small woofers MUST be faster,and cos they said so,its true
This company is thinking in a new way, which is better
-compromise?whats that!Those darned laws of physics no audiophile need concern himself with them.Whos giving FFWD reviewers free audio,and paying the bills this month!
thats funny..... I would like to know how a smaller cone would move faster then a larger one. The motor plays a bigger role in how fast the cone moves then size(right?). I thought it was more logical that a speaker with less xmax at any size would be able to move faster?
Tweeker said:
LOL
I think peoples problems is the fact that large woofers produce bass in volumes not attained with 4" mini woofers,merely dissuades people from them!
If the displacement and response is similar the many little woofers probably sound the same at low signal levels anyway!
Well, max velocity is proportional to max amplitude, if I'm remembering my basic harmonic motion.Evilsizer said:
While yes a 20hz tone can't be talked about in terms of different speeds for different drivers, music is not made up of single tone sine waves. A sub is expected to play, for example, a variety of frequencies between 30 & 100hz all at the same time. The result is that while the big high excursion high Le woofer is moving say 1" point to point playing the lowest frequencies, it's just not going to do a good job reproducing the rest of the spectrum. You end up with a "mushier" sound in that 50-100hz region because dynamically it can't handle recreating all of the nuances contained in the signal. Given the choice I'd take lots of small drivers making bass over 1 large (and dare I say it) slow subwoofer.
In the example shown, just 4 drivers is unlikely to produce acceptable low end spls, but I do agree with the point they make.
In the example shown, just 4 drivers is unlikely to produce acceptable low end spls, but I do agree with the point they make.
Id rather ask the sub to only play the sub frequencies, and have the mains take care of that stuff. This means not using cute little tiny satelites for your mains though.
johninCR said:
So get 2 of these big subs so that you aren't needing 1" of excursion. The same problem would be had if you try to get much excursion out of the smaller drivers. Excursion can't be an argument for smaller drivers.
Tweeker said:
Size doesn't matter here... Laws of physics are different for passive devices.
If smaller is faster and better then why not make 1" dia. micro woofers. They should be ultra fast therefore the best. Just wire up a couple hundred of 'em and be quickly on you're way to audio bliss. Maybe there's even a market for such a contraption?
Tweeker said:
I wasn't defending the alignment, no way. Don't even get me started on the gimmicks of ported or pr alignments to generate bass. They're just additional ways to "mush" up your bass.
Regarding excursion- Yes I'm saying that is the root of the problem. That's why a properly designed horn can be so good, the cone moves very little, but slapping one of those slow high Le subwoofer drivers in a horn isn't going to help much because it is incapable of changing the direction of its cone movement fast enough to provide good dynamic detailed bass required to be true to the recording. They are only good down very low.
Re distortion- I hope it does show up as measured distortion otherwise the measuring system is flawed. What percentage it is I have no idea, but with typical subwoofer drivers it's enough to be quite audible if you have a good reference for comparison.
I'm not saying that all large drivers are "slow", just your typical high Le subwoofer drivers. On the other hand small drivers aren't going to have the same problem. Their problem is with output and extension.
If you want to get literal, let's see just how fast bass is!
Let's look at a typical 6.5" midbass driver, moving say 1mm to reproduce a 60 Hz signal. The speed at which it travels is
= .001m/sec x 60 x 3.6
= 0.2 km/h
Contrast that to a 12" subwoofer moving 25mm to reproduce a 20 Hz signal.
= .025 m/sec x 20 x 3.6
= 1.2 km/h
The big subwoofer is faster! But that's unfair, you say, the midbass driver has an xmax of 8mm p-p and would with that larger excursion be 8x faster! ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh so now you are saying that drivers get faster as you turn the volume up? :O
Of course, this is getting a little silly. Speed in the true sense is not what we are interested in.
I have noticed a definate difference in the sound from my 12" subwoofers vs the bass from my mains with 6.5" midbass drivers, although with more careful comparison making sure the levels and response are equal, it might not be really there.
Could it be that using terms like "slow" when referring to bass suggests that one does not know what technical terms are appropriate? When you talk about slow bass, it's very subjective. You might say that in your experience, subwoofers sound slow and that smaller drivers sound faster to you. That may be fair enough. However, to then say that smaller drivers are faster per se is another thing. Now you are getting into territory where technical terminology is more appropriate. Then you can get some real discussion. You might then talk about output, response, transient response, group delay, distortion, linearity, BL curves, power compression - real stuff we can debate. But this "slow" bass stuff doesn't really help discussion IMO.
Let's look at a typical 6.5" midbass driver, moving say 1mm to reproduce a 60 Hz signal. The speed at which it travels is
= .001m/sec x 60 x 3.6
= 0.2 km/h
Contrast that to a 12" subwoofer moving 25mm to reproduce a 20 Hz signal.
= .025 m/sec x 20 x 3.6
= 1.2 km/h
The big subwoofer is faster! But that's unfair, you say, the midbass driver has an xmax of 8mm p-p and would with that larger excursion be 8x faster! ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh so now you are saying that drivers get faster as you turn the volume up? :O
Of course, this is getting a little silly. Speed in the true sense is not what we are interested in.
I have noticed a definate difference in the sound from my 12" subwoofers vs the bass from my mains with 6.5" midbass drivers, although with more careful comparison making sure the levels and response are equal, it might not be really there.
Could it be that using terms like "slow" when referring to bass suggests that one does not know what technical terms are appropriate? When you talk about slow bass, it's very subjective. You might say that in your experience, subwoofers sound slow and that smaller drivers sound faster to you. That may be fair enough. However, to then say that smaller drivers are faster per se is another thing. Now you are getting into territory where technical terminology is more appropriate. Then you can get some real discussion. You might then talk about output, response, transient response, group delay, distortion, linearity, BL curves, power compression - real stuff we can debate. But this "slow" bass stuff doesn't really help discussion IMO.
Small woofers still require excursion in fact, more so. You're talking about smaller woofers and comparing it to horns.
Higher excursion doesn't mean you are always using it. At lower volumes this isn't an issue. The "slow" mushy sound is there at low power too in sub setups that I have noticed.
Higher excursion doesn't mean you are always using it. At lower volumes this isn't an issue. The "slow" mushy sound is there at low power too in sub setups that I have noticed.
johninCR said:
Those nuances are by their nature, higher frequency, and with a properly designed system shouldn't be going anywhere near the sub driver.
johninCR said:
Klipsch claimed to have shown that ported systems have much less modulation distortion than closed box systems with the same size radiators, and that bass horns were better yet. The reason is [IRONY] that "fast" bass produces modulation distortion! [/IRONY] By "fast" bass, I mean low frequency notes that cause the cone to move at high velocity, and thus produce frequency modulation (due to the Doppler effect) in higher frequencies produced by the same driver. The cure is either to use a larger driver, or to harness the backwave somehow, in order to reduce excursion, and thus reduce diaphragm speed. If you have to move farther in a given amount of time (say 1/50 sec at 25Hz), you have to move faster. And that's a bad thing for a loudspeaker.
BTW, I am listening to a PR system as I type this, and it for sure ain't no way mushy.
You guys can talk about technical stuff until you are blue in the face. Measurements aren't done with music and unless you're quite strange, you don't listen to pink noise, white noise, or sine waves for musical enjoyment. According to your way of thinking an appropriately designed large driver could be a tweeter too. Brick wall xo's aren't typically used, so guess what, even if you cross low, your sub has output up into the ranges where it's not very effective. This leads to a loss of definition and nuances in the bass region typically referred to using the subjective term "slow".
When this discussion has come up before, someone in your camp says that the attack and detail of bass notes is made up of much higher frequency components. While yes that is true, it's not the whole story. The same frequency note of a bass guitar and a pipe organ do not sound the same even if you filter out all of the higher frequency component of that sound. The problem with a typical large subwoofer is that they do sound the same and that's where what is commonly called "fast bass" or "slow bass" comes into play.
Dave,
I don't doubt that your PR sub sounds good, but if you don't think it will sound mushy and "slow" next to a well designed horn, dipole, or sub that uses a multitude of small drivers, you've been misguided by getting too caught up in technical details and specs.
You guys have obviously never heard a sub that uses lots of small drivers, so you really have no real world basis for your arguements. I'm sure you wouldn't try to argue that any 2 drivers with exactly the same technical specifications would sound exactly the same. What makes you think that technical specifications are all that matters when it comes to bass? That's just not logical.
When this discussion has come up before, someone in your camp says that the attack and detail of bass notes is made up of much higher frequency components. While yes that is true, it's not the whole story. The same frequency note of a bass guitar and a pipe organ do not sound the same even if you filter out all of the higher frequency component of that sound. The problem with a typical large subwoofer is that they do sound the same and that's where what is commonly called "fast bass" or "slow bass" comes into play.
Dave,
I don't doubt that your PR sub sounds good, but if you don't think it will sound mushy and "slow" next to a well designed horn, dipole, or sub that uses a multitude of small drivers, you've been misguided by getting too caught up in technical details and specs.
You guys have obviously never heard a sub that uses lots of small drivers, so you really have no real world basis for your arguements. I'm sure you wouldn't try to argue that any 2 drivers with exactly the same technical specifications would sound exactly the same. What makes you think that technical specifications are all that matters when it comes to bass? That's just not logical.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.