One driver will not do it all gentlemen. Dedicated low end sub like a TC sounds Lms ultra 5400 for the low end... JBL 2242H for the mid bass.
Enclosures to match your space, powered by a fp14000 and you have all the headroom you need. The tc sounds sub used to be the
sub to have for sq and spl. The Jbl is one of the best mid bass subs you can buy. Together you have sub Nirvana with the ability to
get what your want using your eq. Room treatments as required as everyone's room is different. Overhead isn't an issue with
gear of this caliber. Diy your cabs, model them for where you want to be. Pay a carpenter to make your thick Baltic birch cabs
with all the specs laid out if you don't have the skill set. This gets what you want in the shape and color you want to blend in or hide in plain sight. The fast and tight bass you require, the low bass that you need and just the best music / home theater that is the envy of most people in this forum.
Apply what you know about modeling and electronic measurement with this hardware and you will get exactly what you need.
Tc sounds subs are getting really rare as they went out of business but there are a few replacements that are still very nice.
Here are some sub measurements to help you make a decision. for the TC Sounds substitution.
https://data-bass.com/#/drivers?_k=biesvx
You also have options for cabs. I personally went with a triangle design 6 feet high with a lms 5400 to make use of unused space with 2 passive 18's to get the output i wanted with tunability. Maybe 2 smaller subs in a push pull configuration gets you where you want to be with out a lot of space taken up.
Enclosures to match your space, powered by a fp14000 and you have all the headroom you need. The tc sounds sub used to be the
sub to have for sq and spl. The Jbl is one of the best mid bass subs you can buy. Together you have sub Nirvana with the ability to
get what your want using your eq. Room treatments as required as everyone's room is different. Overhead isn't an issue with
gear of this caliber. Diy your cabs, model them for where you want to be. Pay a carpenter to make your thick Baltic birch cabs
with all the specs laid out if you don't have the skill set. This gets what you want in the shape and color you want to blend in or hide in plain sight. The fast and tight bass you require, the low bass that you need and just the best music / home theater that is the envy of most people in this forum.
Apply what you know about modeling and electronic measurement with this hardware and you will get exactly what you need.
Tc sounds subs are getting really rare as they went out of business but there are a few replacements that are still very nice.
Here are some sub measurements to help you make a decision. for the TC Sounds substitution.
https://data-bass.com/#/drivers?_k=biesvx
You also have options for cabs. I personally went with a triangle design 6 feet high with a lms 5400 to make use of unused space with 2 passive 18's to get the output i wanted with tunability. Maybe 2 smaller subs in a push pull configuration gets you where you want to be with out a lot of space taken up.
Last edited:
I perfectly understand most spreadsheets but so stupid as accept the output as GOSPEL. Manufactures specifications are more often than not 'best case scenario'. Only a complete moron would attempt to convince me to disregard the evidence of my lying ears. Judging by most of the comments most members have very little understanding of the input data, typically dB per octave. Whilst people quote frequency responses, the range simply indicates that a driver is not disposed to respond those frequencies as efficiently. Ergo, if my sub cut-off frequency is 50Hz it also playing 100hz - just not as loudly.
For the record: this is the second time we've crossed swords on 'personal' issues. You have no idea of my technical comprehension. How many of the x86 series returned incorrect results in computations passed to the x87 co-processors?
You may be a moderator but please keep your unsubstantiated, little-bitch personal comments to yourself. You have no idea what I do and don't know.
Hello Surtsey.
Brett is not a Moderator, so even that part was wrong in your reply.
You would have gotten a smidge more respect if you were able to actually formulate a proper response instead of calling names, which almost makes it seem like you're throwing a tantrum TBH.
I do not wish to make you angry, but you do seem a bit presumptuous in your statements:
You are correct in one point:
Which is sort of the point of all our calculations and theory, it makes good sense to look for any unwanted resonances or limitations before you buy all the hardware, make sawdust, and proceed to fall flat on your face because you did an error during the planning phase.
If you would show a bit of self-restraint and willingness to learn and understand then I'm sure most here are still willing to help you with that, but...
Pardon me for being blunt: I hope you understand that trying to reason with a furious child throwing a tantrum is not what people usually enjoy spending time on, not saying this to trigger you, please just remember that most people have less than endless patience.
Many of the people that have responded to your thread have done so try and give you a better understanding of what a "Musical sub" may be, if you seek information it's not the best course of action to tell off every single person that actually has some crucial bit of information.
Relax, and read through your text a few times before hitting "post reply", put yourself in the readers view:
Consider if you yourself would be willing to assimilate what is written.
Brett is not a Moderator, so even that part was wrong in your reply.
You would have gotten a smidge more respect if you were able to actually formulate a proper response instead of calling names, which almost makes it seem like you're throwing a tantrum TBH.
I do not wish to make you angry, but you do seem a bit presumptuous in your statements:
and then just after that you say:
That may be, however, it's VERY clear to most people here that you do not have any remote idea whatsoever what THEIR level of "Technical Comprehension" may be.
You are correct in one point:
Which is sort of the point of all our calculations and theory, it makes good sense to look for any unwanted resonances or limitations before you buy all the hardware, make sawdust, and proceed to fall flat on your face because you did an error during the planning phase.
If you would show a bit of self-restraint and willingness to learn and understand then I'm sure most here are still willing to help you with that, but...
Pardon me for being blunt: I hope you understand that trying to reason with a furious child throwing a tantrum is not what people usually enjoy spending time on, not saying this to trigger you, please just remember that most people have less than endless patience.
Many of the people that have responded to your thread have done so try and give you a better understanding of what a "Musical sub" may be, if you seek information it's not the best course of action to tell off every single person that actually has some crucial bit of information.
Relax, and read through your text a few times before hitting "post reply", put yourself in the readers view:
Consider if you yourself would be willing to assimilate what is written.
PMSL! Here's the thing . . . One day I will really need help on an important project. For now, I post insignificant and non-critical scenarios. The idea is to separate to the truly knowledgeable and experienced from the spreadsheet warriors. I posted a very specific question based on the example I provided. 90% of the posts are irrelevant to the OP.
Here's the irony: there's nothing musical below 40Hz. The spreadsheet warriors will tell you about pipe organs but that's the b*llsh*t they read on the Internet - technically correct but but none of their favourite tunes feature a pipe organ. MOBO is the only genre that truly utilises sub-bass. Drum and bass tracks will feature bass notes as low as 30Hz but a DJ changing from D&B to reggae or R&B will often cut power to the deck, waiting for the track to slow to half speed before mixing in the next track. At this point the 30Hz bass note becomes 15Hz. This leads us to consider the effects of scratching . . . in taking a note from 50Hz to -50Hz it must pass through 1, 2, 5, and 10Hz.
As to my original question: I'm now convinced the size (volume) of the HelmHoltz resonator is related to latency and fidelity. Allegro bass is unsuited to large resonators.
Here's the irony: there's nothing musical below 40Hz. The spreadsheet warriors will tell you about pipe organs but that's the b*llsh*t they read on the Internet - technically correct but but none of their favourite tunes feature a pipe organ. MOBO is the only genre that truly utilises sub-bass. Drum and bass tracks will feature bass notes as low as 30Hz but a DJ changing from D&B to reggae or R&B will often cut power to the deck, waiting for the track to slow to half speed before mixing in the next track. At this point the 30Hz bass note becomes 15Hz. This leads us to consider the effects of scratching . . . in taking a note from 50Hz to -50Hz it must pass through 1, 2, 5, and 10Hz.
As to my original question: I'm now convinced the size (volume) of the HelmHoltz resonator is related to latency and fidelity. Allegro bass is unsuited to large resonators.
I will censor my first reaction Mr. high and mighty. I happen to be an organist and listen to a lot of pipe organ. The virtual pipe organ that I was using until recently when my console started having mechanical issues and I also had to repurpose the VPO computer had many dispositions with various 32 foot ranks including reeds, diapasons, and flute stops all with very different attacks and harmonic content. I know very well what they should sound like and how difficult it is to reproduce, and yes it is music.
I was listening to this reaction video on YouTube just last night and happened to run it through a spectrum analyzer. This vocalist actually hit B0 (just under 30Hz) at one point.
Even the piano goes to A0. So there is in fact music below 40Hz.
So you can stuff your arrogant BS.
Put a scope on the first album by Enigma, MCMXC ...the bass content on the very first track, "The voice of Enigma" , a powerful & frankly wall shaking sound courtesy of frequencies well well below 40 hertz...when the female voice "announces" her presence, it becomes an elegant crystal voice swimming in a sea of bass content. "Good evening..."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick...
A lot of loose talk here about eyeballing a "scope" and seeing "well below" 40 Hz notes, singers with near sub-sonic voices, and so on.
I think folks should withhold their anecdotes and visceral reactions unless they can post an RTA showing frequencies and loudnesses of the imputed sounds. Even people with just a tiny knowledge of psychoacoustics know the limited value of such impressions when it comes to low notes.
B.
I think folks should withhold their anecdotes and visceral reactions unless they can post an RTA showing frequencies and loudnesses of the imputed sounds. Even people with just a tiny knowledge of psychoacoustics know the limited value of such impressions when it comes to low notes.
B.
If you are referring to me I used a software spectrum analyzer (Calf) with peak hold The tonic was clearly 41 Hz with occasional notes just left of the 30Hz line (B0). I posted the link feel free to measure it yourself with whatever tools you like.
Well, nevertheless, no need to **** yourself...
Please consider a more humble approach, as I sincerely doubt people will be willing take the time to answer you properly if you keep having such high thoughts about yourself.
Good looking out Surtsey! I learned something new today...MOBO.
In 2006, DJ and music journalist Bigger wrote that the presentation had been "veering away from its concept of rewarding music of black origin" as early as its third edition, noting its increasing dominance by American acts at the expense of domestic acts. He argued that the show had become "little more than a pat on the back and a jolly boys' outing for major labels and American acts."[39]
In 2011, Lanre Bakare wrote in The Guardian that the show was being affected by the music industry's dilution of the distinctive black music scene, promoting it to mainstream audiences as popular music (including "manufactured", U.S.-style hip-hop and R&B). In the column, it was noted that Labrinth had criticized the nominations of Conor Maynard and Ed Sheeran for awards, while Charlie Dark of Attica Blues argued that the MOBOs needed to promote innovation in black music, and "shouldn't be an annual event where everyone pats themselves on the back for very small advances that they've made, when they are powerful enough to bring real change. If they don't adapt, artists who aren't interested in commercial pop and being put in musical boxes will just do their own thing."[38]
In 2020, English rock duo Nova Twins wrote an open letter on Twitter addressed to the MOBOs concerning the fact that there was no Rock/Alternative category, despite the fact that many POC have contributed to the evolution of rock music, and still are to this day, and hoping "that a Rock/Alternative category will be added to the MOBO (Music Of Black Origin) Awards in 2021, recognising the POC contributors to the genre.".[40] The MOBOS later replied on Twitter that "the MOBO Awards Judging Panel have actually discussed this and [...] will continue to review potential category expansions for future Award ceremonies."[41]
Criticism[edit]
The MOBOs have faced criticism for having become increasingly oriented towards "commercial" urban music, and having given nominations and awards to musicians who are not black.[37][38] In 2003, a boycott effort emerged after the American pop musicians Justin Timberlake and Christina Aguilera won the awards for Best R&B Act and Best Video respectively. The Independent described the wins as being the result of the "white appropriation of black music".[37] A MOBO spokesperson defended their presence, stating that the awards were designed to honor achievements in music of black origin, regardless of the ethnicity of their performers, and cited the increasing worldwide growth of urban music at the time.[37]In 2006, DJ and music journalist Bigger wrote that the presentation had been "veering away from its concept of rewarding music of black origin" as early as its third edition, noting its increasing dominance by American acts at the expense of domestic acts. He argued that the show had become "little more than a pat on the back and a jolly boys' outing for major labels and American acts."[39]
In 2011, Lanre Bakare wrote in The Guardian that the show was being affected by the music industry's dilution of the distinctive black music scene, promoting it to mainstream audiences as popular music (including "manufactured", U.S.-style hip-hop and R&B). In the column, it was noted that Labrinth had criticized the nominations of Conor Maynard and Ed Sheeran for awards, while Charlie Dark of Attica Blues argued that the MOBOs needed to promote innovation in black music, and "shouldn't be an annual event where everyone pats themselves on the back for very small advances that they've made, when they are powerful enough to bring real change. If they don't adapt, artists who aren't interested in commercial pop and being put in musical boxes will just do their own thing."[38]
In 2020, English rock duo Nova Twins wrote an open letter on Twitter addressed to the MOBOs concerning the fact that there was no Rock/Alternative category, despite the fact that many POC have contributed to the evolution of rock music, and still are to this day, and hoping "that a Rock/Alternative category will be added to the MOBO (Music Of Black Origin) Awards in 2021, recognising the POC contributors to the genre.".[40] The MOBOS later replied on Twitter that "the MOBO Awards Judging Panel have actually discussed this and [...] will continue to review potential category expansions for future Award ceremonies."[41]
Recapping my thoughts on good bass...
My thoughts on what constitutes a good bass driver have changed over time.
I once bought into those inch thick car audio style rubber surrounds, before noticing that the same sized woofers with thinner surrounds and lower Xmax ratings consistently sounded better to my ears.
And speakers that used kapton/polyimide voice coil formers had a better tone and HF definition than those with aluminium. Then I pieced it together with what I had learned about eddy currents and conductive materials moving through magnetic fields + offset dependent BL. (More distortion).
Pro drivers seem to have come a long way, too (or is it how they are driven?) And now I'm looking at drivers that are built with accordion / cloth surrounds for longevity and linearity.
Check that Vas is not too small / box alignment not too ambitious. You could almost guarantee that an air spring will have a more linear spring constant than the spider + surround.
High Qms to reduce yet another potential source of distortion.
Low cone mass. The ratio of cone mass to total box mass will give an indication of parasitic vibrations, dipole losses, shipping costs and power consumption. Using less power to achieve the same spl usually means less distortion.
Active filters: gradual slopes like Bessel or linear phase, especially if going for higher filter orders to prevent ringing. Then again, a high filter order may not be so important if the higher frequencies are clean.
Use a quality amplifier that will be able to cope with the above. A musical instrument amp with a low damping factor will almost certainly sound much cleaner than something with a high damping factor. The "high damping factor" label is highly misleading because it is more like a half-hearted attempt at servo control, which is the opposite of 'damping' per se.
Make of that what you will.
My thoughts on what constitutes a good bass driver have changed over time.
I once bought into those inch thick car audio style rubber surrounds, before noticing that the same sized woofers with thinner surrounds and lower Xmax ratings consistently sounded better to my ears.
And speakers that used kapton/polyimide voice coil formers had a better tone and HF definition than those with aluminium. Then I pieced it together with what I had learned about eddy currents and conductive materials moving through magnetic fields + offset dependent BL. (More distortion).
Pro drivers seem to have come a long way, too (or is it how they are driven?) And now I'm looking at drivers that are built with accordion / cloth surrounds for longevity and linearity.
Check that Vas is not too small / box alignment not too ambitious. You could almost guarantee that an air spring will have a more linear spring constant than the spider + surround.
High Qms to reduce yet another potential source of distortion.
Low cone mass. The ratio of cone mass to total box mass will give an indication of parasitic vibrations, dipole losses, shipping costs and power consumption. Using less power to achieve the same spl usually means less distortion.
Active filters: gradual slopes like Bessel or linear phase, especially if going for higher filter orders to prevent ringing. Then again, a high filter order may not be so important if the higher frequencies are clean.
Use a quality amplifier that will be able to cope with the above. A musical instrument amp with a low damping factor will almost certainly sound much cleaner than something with a high damping factor. The "high damping factor" label is highly misleading because it is more like a half-hearted attempt at servo control, which is the opposite of 'damping' per se.
Make of that what you will.
I need not withhold my "anecdotes", I KNOW if an audio frequency is below 40 hertz, "visceral" or not. I know your intent is to be as scientific as possible & frankly I appreciate it immensely..."prove it!" OK, I'll upload a "virtual oscilloscope" & see if I can upload an image of said musical passage...I did do the same thing to a tune, Lucky Man" from Emerson Lake & Palmer in about 1983 ...towards the end of the song I measured a 26 hertz waveform from that song.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick...
If the lowest note on an 88 key piano is 27.5hz, then why limit your so called subwoofer enclosure (bass bin) to 40hz?
For those of you who say 90% of music is above 40hz, 2020 Visions: How Hip-Hop Claimed Universal Dominance .
For those of you who say 90% of music is above 40hz, 2020 Visions: How Hip-Hop Claimed Universal Dominance .
A common error: when you hit the last key on the piano, you hear a sound folks identify as a certain note [sorry, I don't know the musical note]. Some part of that sound is 27.5 Hz (or whatever near-there the tuner felt provided the right sound along mixed with all the other partials you hear when that piano key is hit). Organ notes too. For the low notes, often the "official" Hz is present in diminishing amounts.
B.
REW (which is honourware) has RTA - a math trick (FFA) that produces a freq profile of the music as it plays or cumulatively, the peaks of the piece. All you need to do is find a link in your audio output chain and feed that (perhaps using a Y) back into your computer. "Back into" can be the mic input or into a DAC (digital to audio converter... but actually you have to use an ADC) which feeds it into a USB. Simple as that.
You can ask REW to pass some pure tones or sweeps into the system and you will be astonished how good the measurement system is in frequency and distortion aspects. If not, you might want to buy Apple gear.
BTW, the mic in my MacBook is nearly as good as my calibrated condenser mic when in the same location and except for lower bass. And if you are working iteratively, FR perfection doesn't matter much anyway.
B.
B.
Somewhat correct but the organ is different. 32 foot flue pipes (i.e. not reeds) have very strong fundamentals. The screen shot below is the output of a low E from the 32 foot Untersatz on the Eisenbarth pipe organ disposition. The audio is actual sample recordings of the pipes. I used the E because my spectrum analyzer only shows down to 20 Hz. the last 4 semitones would have the fundamental off the display.
Sorry I cut off the units on the Y axis. Each bold line is 12dB.
Attachments
Wonderful to see data and your helpful comments. Thanks.
I would only add that an organ pipe - as your plot shows - is not like a pipe in high-school science class. Even a single organ pipe has complex overtones curated by the builder in all kinds of trick ways, top to bottom and sides. And as a musical instrument, keys and I suppose even pedals, have other pipes added all the time.
Just to circle back to speaker acoustics, in a church or in a room at home, big variations in how the organ sounds at different seats. As much as I love watching the console (when possible), the sound half-way back suits me better. Toronto is blessed with some excellent organs, baroque and modern.
And just to circle back to psycho-acoutics, the picture of frequencies in the low bass is far from what you hear due to Fletcher-Munson that everybody on this forum certainly knows all about. Unless the lowest notes are far, far louder in the plot than the middle notes, you hear mostly the middle notes (and your brain invents the virtual fundamental).
Last edited:
Ben,
As written, that is not exactly true- each note contains harmonics at multiples of the fundamental frequency that can be heard whether or not the fundamental is reproduced, exceptions being synthesized notes created with no, or very reduced harmonics.
Art