The Bass is the place!!
- Thread starter DaveyF
- Start date
What, now I'm even more confused....what's our fearless leader Steve W doing in that video??
Trying to find a shark with a laser to align his speakers of course:What, now I'm even more confused....what's our fearless leader Steve W doing in that video??
Regarding speaker's laser alignment:
When I first started my hi-fi stereo journey...in the sixties...and up to the mid nineties...I wasn't using a laser to align them.
And from roughly the last twenty years, it became simple routine...but with few times without.
I am not an expert in that domain, just a regular audio reader and explorer. I don't know the exact level psychologically and scientifically in the perfect triangulation between the point of origin and the two speakers, plus the precise amount of toe-in (in millimeters) and the distance between the two speakers and the listener for each different room and furniture.
It's only by experimenting and hearing and personal satisfaction that I arrived where I am today. I have no clue as to the very best music reproduction in regards to the perfect parameters mentioned just above. It depends of too many factors and room's dimensions, plus personal sound preference.
I should admit this though; I feel good to know that behind my head there is a red laser dot that my two speakers were/are crisscrossing.
It's more a feeling than a science study or measurement analysis. ...For me. Perhaps it's a good thing, then I'm doing the right thing (doesn't bother me to try various toe-ins with laser adjustments either - it's fun like spinning albums with the fun rituals that come with it). I guess I take my music listening seriously...up to my own extent.
I wouldn't argue with speaker's laser alignment, but I for sure would be delighted to learn further about the millimeter's precision...benefits...if any of considerable music listening enhancement. So, I welcome the expert's opinions on the subject of 'The Bass is the Place' if not too disengaging of that topic.
Because, it's more the higher frequencies and the stereo holographic imaging that benefit from laser alignment...and for that yes, I can clearly hear the benefits...from extensive testing. And I know exactly which music recording I used the most for that:
So yes, if you are serious about pinpoint imaging, speaker's laser alignment is a good tool to use in our audio hobby, a very good tool for serious music hobbyists and audiophile philanthropists. ...I personally recommend.
<<>> Subwoofer's (two) laser alignment? I don't think so. ...Tweeters. :b
That laser alignment stuff; it is as much essential as it is to have your two speakers perfectly aligned with your two ears for best micro detail retrieval and best imaging (sound stage's holography) and balanced music ambiance. ...In my sincere/genuine/serious/satisfying and personal physical experienced opinion.
@Gary (Protein doc), that's my take. :b
When I first started my hi-fi stereo journey...in the sixties...and up to the mid nineties...I wasn't using a laser to align them.
And from roughly the last twenty years, it became simple routine...but with few times without.
I am not an expert in that domain, just a regular audio reader and explorer. I don't know the exact level psychologically and scientifically in the perfect triangulation between the point of origin and the two speakers, plus the precise amount of toe-in (in millimeters) and the distance between the two speakers and the listener for each different room and furniture.
It's only by experimenting and hearing and personal satisfaction that I arrived where I am today. I have no clue as to the very best music reproduction in regards to the perfect parameters mentioned just above. It depends of too many factors and room's dimensions, plus personal sound preference.
I should admit this though; I feel good to know that behind my head there is a red laser dot that my two speakers were/are crisscrossing.
It's more a feeling than a science study or measurement analysis. ...For me. Perhaps it's a good thing, then I'm doing the right thing (doesn't bother me to try various toe-ins with laser adjustments either - it's fun like spinning albums with the fun rituals that come with it). I guess I take my music listening seriously...up to my own extent.
I wouldn't argue with speaker's laser alignment, but I for sure would be delighted to learn further about the millimeter's precision...benefits...if any of considerable music listening enhancement. So, I welcome the expert's opinions on the subject of 'The Bass is the Place' if not too disengaging of that topic.
Because, it's more the higher frequencies and the stereo holographic imaging that benefit from laser alignment...and for that yes, I can clearly hear the benefits...from extensive testing. And I know exactly which music recording I used the most for that:
So yes, if you are serious about pinpoint imaging, speaker's laser alignment is a good tool to use in our audio hobby, a very good tool for serious music hobbyists and audiophile philanthropists. ...I personally recommend.
<<>> Subwoofer's (two) laser alignment? I don't think so. ...Tweeters. :b
That laser alignment stuff; it is as much essential as it is to have your two speakers perfectly aligned with your two ears for best micro detail retrieval and best imaging (sound stage's holography) and balanced music ambiance. ...In my sincere/genuine/serious/satisfying and personal physical experienced opinion.
@Gary (Protein doc), that's my take. :b
Last edited:
I dont use a laser . but I did set up my speakers using a tape measure to within a 1cm tolerance in respect of distance to me , distance to the sidewalls exact centre of room and so on.
Makes a huge difference when set up with precision.
Makes a huge difference when set up with precision.
My point was that I can measure the room but it serves no purpose when I can't do anything to fix the problems arising from the structure itself without major alteration so why bother? Its the same when I do a client install, I can't change the physical dimensions of their room for better bass. The thing with measurements is that you already need to have an understanding of residential room acoustics and decent set up experience and skill for it to have any real value. Using the example that you mentioned, most of the popular software takes the measurements at the listening position and if I got that wrong in my initial setup then my measurements will also be flawed and probably worthless.
What is often overlooked here is the necessity of expertise and experience, even at a basic level. If one can't figure out a single listener's position by simply walking around the room then what are we talking about taking complex measurements here? Even if hypothetically one manages to get some decent measurements people often under estimate the expertise involved in optimizing the decay and rise time in a room using physical acoustical treatment without introducing new problems? It's probably beyond all of us here in this forum, you need a real expert and they will take their own measurements. Also given the number of poorly designed rooms, studios, halls, etc. not all experts are born equal, you need the right one. I'm not against taking measurements just see little value in causal ones, but YMMV...
david
Measurements are merely a starting point.. kinda like a doctor .. he has to diagnose the illness to cure it.
A final measurement will tell you how well you theoretically fixed things , but wont give a huge indication as to quality of sound to YOU or the finer details.
In terms of 20+ years of fiddling with bass , bass correcction , room correction etc , these days I can more or less tell by just listening the areas that need to be fixed in the bass
Anyway , it's pointless losing time to analysis paralysis .. either your results sound good to you or not.
I have a pal that has measured 200+ times trying to set up his subs , finally he got totally flat bass to 20hz at listening position , he showed me all his plots ..I turned around and said to him "Now you are gonna ask me why the bass sounds bad despite it measuring so well ?" "Yes" was the reply .. Me "well its because you relied on measurements to tell you what you like.. and flat bass is not likeable in most rooms"
A final measurement will tell you how well you theoretically fixed things , but wont give a huge indication as to quality of sound to YOU or the finer details.
In terms of 20+ years of fiddling with bass , bass correcction , room correction etc , these days I can more or less tell by just listening the areas that need to be fixed in the bass
Anyway , it's pointless losing time to analysis paralysis .. either your results sound good to you or not.
I have a pal that has measured 200+ times trying to set up his subs , finally he got totally flat bass to 20hz at listening position , he showed me all his plots ..I turned around and said to him "Now you are gonna ask me why the bass sounds bad despite it measuring so well ?" "Yes" was the reply .. Me "well its because you relied on measurements to tell you what you like.. and flat bass is not likeable in most rooms"
That's why we all need to rely on our own ears as the final arbiter, IMHO. While measurements might be another tool in our chest, they should NOT be the only tool and certainly not the tool that we rely on in exclusion to all others, again IMHO.
The bass is the place...where the most problems seem to arise in our systems. As I stated in my OP, the quality of bass is ( or at least seems to be for most of us) the most difficult to obtain. When i talk of bass, I'm not really so much discussing the amount of bass that a system can elicit; no--- to me it is the quality/resolution and the adherence to what is on the recording that I am concerned about. Flabby/booming bass is easy to replicate and to produce....massive drivers in too small a space will do that every time. Precision reproduction is the goal...and one that is very rarely obtained IME ( unfortunately). Complete accuracy to the original event is probably impossible. ( Too many chains in the link between the original event and the final end user).
BTW, we have not even began to talk about the problems associated with our upstream gear in regards to their ability to portray bass....and I'm not just talking of speakers here.
I use DSP for crossover and to delay so that the the speakers and subwoofers are time alined. People are talking about gain below 150hz up towards 6db. What I will mension is. The gain at low frequenzy is all up to taste and the spl level you listen to. The lower spl the bygger the raise you will have to make.
Also, its important to EQ at the normal spl level you listen to. For the same reason. I' ve used maybe 300hours on the placement and room treatment. But for a nut like me, its Worth it.
Also, its important to EQ at the normal spl level you listen to. For the same reason. I' ve used maybe 300hours on the placement and room treatment. But for a nut like me, its Worth it.
Anubis, I believe that when talking about Sub woofer levels, the 'blend' is the most important aspect. A seamless blend to the sats is IME imperative IF one is to not screw up the whole sound field and particularly the resolution of the system. Again, IME, the blend is not really so much to do with taste and the spl level you listen at, rather more to do with the ability to not impact the main sats and what they do best.
Rodney, I commend you for your sanity here and in another of your posts a few pages back which gave me a nice agreeable chuckle. It's nice to read a post in WhatsBestForum without rolling my eyes and I'll be sure to pay closer attention to your other posts going forward.
Just because your 1 friend doesn't have the experience to use a tool (measuring) doesn't equate to everyone's experience. Just the fact that he's going for a flat bass response is quite revealing.
Measuring is not the end all, however being able to hear and identify minute changes in sub settings repeatedly can be fatiguing. Also, we're not computers so our auditory recall commonly sucks. The more you measure and listen, the better you will be at recognizing patterns in the data that equate to audible changes (reducing future measure and listen times). And that's why you need to use both and of course, your ears are the final verdict.
And for all those that believe measuring isn't required for best results (because they have uber golden ears), find me one professional acoustic engineer who works solely by ear.
They won't find any
. Here is a recent example from Bob Hodas talk at AXPONA 2016In his talk which is online he emphasizes over and over again why he measures.
That said, I know Rodney also measures and what he is saying is that with respect to target curve, you do need to listen. That I agree with. See http://www.audiosciencereview.com/f...s/target-room-response-and-cinema-x-curve.10/
I'm a midrange guy- if that part isn't right, I don't care about bandwidth or deep bass. That said, my system has been bass shy from the get-go and I lived with it as a compromise, just as I did when I was a Quad electrostatic listener for decades- had various subwoofers over the years, but could never get them to gel and aside from coherence issues, the bass wasn't natural.
Recently, I decided to do some fiddling; I pulled out one of the old theatre subs- a 15" Velodyne (the 18" is the size of a coffin and now does duty as a stand for one of my record cleaners in another room). I dsp'd the 15" Velodyne and cross it over very low, using a separate set of outputs from my line stage- no high pass to the main system. I also bought a smallish -12" Rythmik and placed it in a mid-wall corner (I have an oddly shaped room but it is decent sounding). I've done some crude measurements- my tools here are somewhat limited, but I fooled around with placement, volume, phase, footers, etc. I am now getting a very nice, stable foundation that seems to open up the system- bigger, more dynamic, no thickening of the midrange. I can still hear hot spots in various places if I walk around the room, but with the existing bass traps and other modest room treatment that was already in place, the overall addition of multiple subwoofers seems to be effective. What I am really doing is augmenting the existing woofer system of the Duos, which will sound very discontinuous with the horns if turned up loud enough to provide "convincing" bass. So the captive woofers--which really aren't sub woofers, are blending pretty well with the subwoofers I've added. Some of the learning on "swarm" woofers is of interest and I have been having fun. I was very impressed with what DSP could do in our small home theatre system, using relatively modest gear, and using one add-on DSP unit for one woofer has been fairly effective, though it is really targeted to a narrow sweet spot. I think all of the factors play a role: room treatment, placement, multiple woofers, multiple sizes-- running 4 10", one 12' and one 15" seems a little kludged together (and it is)--but it also has been a fascinating learning experience.
I have a french test disc with pink noise tracks that I've played with; have the Studio Six basic tools on an iPad (which has a lousy mic- I have better microphones here that could probably be used), an old SPL meter and my ears.
Next time I'm at my local club, I'll try and walk around the room and see how uneven the bass is in a live venue- most of the time, it's amplified electric bass, rather than acoustic bass, so that may not count for much. I'm not listening for "blow me away" bass, I want to hear Ray Brown sound like he did live in a club. Many of those recordings seem to be close-miked, though, so even acoustic bass is a little artificially enhanced in the recording.
Recently, I decided to do some fiddling; I pulled out one of the old theatre subs- a 15" Velodyne (the 18" is the size of a coffin and now does duty as a stand for one of my record cleaners in another room). I dsp'd the 15" Velodyne and cross it over very low, using a separate set of outputs from my line stage- no high pass to the main system. I also bought a smallish -12" Rythmik and placed it in a mid-wall corner (I have an oddly shaped room but it is decent sounding). I've done some crude measurements- my tools here are somewhat limited, but I fooled around with placement, volume, phase, footers, etc. I am now getting a very nice, stable foundation that seems to open up the system- bigger, more dynamic, no thickening of the midrange. I can still hear hot spots in various places if I walk around the room, but with the existing bass traps and other modest room treatment that was already in place, the overall addition of multiple subwoofers seems to be effective. What I am really doing is augmenting the existing woofer system of the Duos, which will sound very discontinuous with the horns if turned up loud enough to provide "convincing" bass. So the captive woofers--which really aren't sub woofers, are blending pretty well with the subwoofers I've added. Some of the learning on "swarm" woofers is of interest and I have been having fun. I was very impressed with what DSP could do in our small home theatre system, using relatively modest gear, and using one add-on DSP unit for one woofer has been fairly effective, though it is really targeted to a narrow sweet spot. I think all of the factors play a role: room treatment, placement, multiple woofers, multiple sizes-- running 4 10", one 12' and one 15" seems a little kludged together (and it is)--but it also has been a fascinating learning experience.
I have a french test disc with pink noise tracks that I've played with; have the Studio Six basic tools on an iPad (which has a lousy mic- I have better microphones here that could probably be used), an old SPL meter and my ears.
Next time I'm at my local club, I'll try and walk around the room and see how uneven the bass is in a live venue- most of the time, it's amplified electric bass, rather than acoustic bass, so that may not count for much. I'm not listening for "blow me away" bass, I want to hear Ray Brown sound like he did live in a club. Many of those recordings seem to be close-miked, though, so even acoustic bass is a little artificially enhanced in the recording.
agree on being a 'mid-range' guy.
with my active bass towers that cross over at 37hz with the main towers, it is very interesting with vocals when I turn off the bass tower amplifiers......some of the 'life' and 'fullness' of the vocals or cello's is lost.
so what we perceive as mid-range obviously contains lots of deep bass overtones and harmonics. the main towers extend into the mid 20hz range and roll off but real music is a full range endeavor.
my twin tower speakers are an integrated system not meant to be used by themselves. I think that is the key point.
Mostly agree, but the spl level that you get from adding a subwoofer down at the bottom will have to fin nicely into the spl level of the midbass and mid frequenziz. If not you will get what I call one note bass. The blend is important yes, bougth in phase alinment, time and spl.
Would you for example have the same spl rize from lets say 150hz down towards 20hz if you listened to music in 70db at the sweetspot or at 90db in the seetspot?
Here`s two grafs that show my target the woofers is added at 50hz. The long wave in the waterfall graph at 50hz is my computers power. It comes and goes, sometime it`s there and sometimes its not.
I find this very homogenic with no subsound. It only makes the speaker sound bigger and better. An extension of the speakers you may say.
I haven't heard your speakers yet but I can concur to recent experiences of using a Kef LS50 with sub.. Not exactly the same level as your speakers but close enough
... ... for the purpose of the discussion ...I have not found and do not expect to find the perfect blend between the LS50 and 3 Sunfire subwoofers in a Geddes configuration ... It is too level dependent, I know why but didn't expect it to manifest itself so clearly. At reduced volume, there is a realism to vocal that , yes, subwoofers or better linear bass reproduction brings that is beguiling.
I agree. A system must be full range to mimic the real thing else you hear a truncated version of the truth
Agreed entirely and it could be one of the reasons why most mini-monitors continue to sound like .. small monitors even with subs. Few manage the trick of sounding like larger speakers.
Frantz, this is exactly why you don't understand where I'm coming from - in my world, all speakers sound like "larger speakers", I'm not interested in the sound unless that happens. And why that "trick" happens is because the quality of the sound coming from the "mini-monitors" is adequate - if it's not then, yes, it just sounds like a small, a very small speaker ...
Similar threads
Members online
- Al Stewart
- jadis
- marty
- Robifabs
- IlyaP
- Bbock
- Downtheline
- trekpilot
- jturbo
- Mr P
- DLS
- Emorante
- Prn78
- sugama
- 3rdRock
- Another Johnson
- Alex G
- Cutlr7
- Macattack
- Opabin
- JFRMusic
- pk_LA
- Nathanu
- Walnut Horns
- wcheng
- Jackl3y
- pt999
- BruceD
- thedudeabides
- WildPhydeaux
- aublumberg
- Designsfx
- LeoMarvin
- MRJAZZ
- vermaxis
- dminches
- StereoLogic
- dodger0629
- AudioLibertarian
- jazzdude99
- Zdude
- ticktock
- JimmyJet
- jbrrp1
- Jazzhead
- moon1
- Bobvin
- MarkusBarkus
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |