My monitor/subwoofer system
- Thread starter Al M.
- Start date
You should give Phoebe Bridgers a listen.
I especially like Helloween from the Punisher Album
The issue of positioning the subwoofers is an interesting one. JoeyGS was the first to ask the question on my system thread if the subs should not be more in front for better time alignment, next to the main speakers:
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/my-monitor-subwoofer-system.25101/page-6
JL Audio themselves send contradictory messages about this.
On one hand their technical consultant said that because of group delay of modern sealed subwoofers (I suppose that means high-powered subs with heavy motors), including JL Audio subs, these subs would need to be put far in front of the main speakers. In the case of JL Audio, with group delay of 9 milliseconds, this would amount to 10.1 feet in front of the main speakers, see the WBF thread:
Subwoofers and Time Relationships
On the other hand, JL Audio's manual for my subwoofer(s) states preferential positioning in a corner or at a wall, and does not mention a preferred distance.
If you would follow their first line of argument, even positioning of the subs along the main speakers, as is often advocated for better time alignment, would theoretically be only somewhat more sufficient than what I had until now, with subwoofer drivers about 5.5 feet behind the main speakers -- compared to my solution thus far it would eliminate only about 1/3 of the problem, with almost 2/3 still to go. So in terms of timing, putting the subwoofers closer to the main speakers seems not the most compelling argument; if you really want to go all the way, you would have to move the subs closer to the listening seat rather than to the main speakers. -- JL Audio's CR-1 crossover can correct for the time delay of subwoofers relative to the main speakers.
Several WBF members have argued that time alignment is not critical at subwoofer frequencies, see this thread:
Time aligning subs to main speakers
I had long resisted a move of the subwoofers away from the front wall for several reasons, apart from the above contradictory messaging:
1) as audiophile friends have acknowledged, rhythm & timing of my system has been excellent
2) I found the bass on a lot of material very precise, also compared to other systems, except on one type of material (I'll get to that)
3) as much as I tried (and I did!), I have never been able to hear any time delay between main speakers and subs, e.g., on drums (kick drums and others), and neither have others whom I asked to listen for it
4) I knew that the ASC SubTraps, which my subwoofers stood upon, were hugely beneficial for the sound, and I hesitated moving the relatively high stack of SubTraps plus subwoofers closer to my main speakers because of an expected detrimental effect on soundstaging.
Yet the issue came up again from time to time, such as in the comment of Brad (Morricab) here, which I replied to further below on that thread page.
Ultimately I decided that it would be worthwhile trying to move the subwoofers upfront, but then only under one condition. I would not use the SubTraps since they would be in the way, but I would have to find somewhat of a substitute. I decided to put the subs onto concrete plates, as I also have them under my monitor stands. This would avoid direct coupling to my suspended wood floor, which I knew was disastrous, and if I used two plates instead of one (4 inches total thickness) it might raise them sufficiently from the ground as well, so that the subs would not excite the wood floor right in front of them too much.
Yet then the pandemic hit, and I forgot about the project. After all, I did not have the concrete tiles necessary, and I was not going to go to Home Depot at that time (my health was too important to take the risk). Thankfully, a recent suggestion by Charles (Chops) on my thread reminded my again of the idea and so finally I went to work, now that in our state of Massachusetts the pandemic is much more under control. I bought four 16 x 16 inch concrete tiles at Home Depot for a whopping 17 bucks total, and then moved the subs together with Peter A. who had graciously agreed to help. With two persons, moving those heavy subs of 110 pounds each is actually easy, whereas JL Audio sternly warns against trying to do it alone, also because of the potential of back injuries.
The first spatial arrangement was this:
While there did not seem a sonic disconnect between subwoofers and main speakers, the bass did not seem quite right. It was less tight than before, and some frequencies, e.g., related to the impact of kick drum, were weaker. Another issue was that now -- something that I had not considered when planning this arrangement -- the main speakers would partially radiate onto the glossy surface of the subwoofers beneath them, possibly creating detrimental reflections. Peter suggested that we could get the subwoofers more out of the way of the main speakers by putting the subs next to the speakers. We could do this if we moved the main equipment rack further back.
In previous times I would have objected to a rack move because I did not want to get the equipment more in the direct fire of the sub bass, but since the subs were now in front, I welcomed the idea. So we moved the equipment rack 10 inches further back, also the amp rack, and moved the subs next to the speakers. The drivers now are about 4 inches in front of the main speaker drivers, and since they are closer to the listener, the measured sonic path to the ear is 6 inches shorter.
Now the bass was better than with the first arrangement with subs in front of the speakers, and in some ways I heard also better bass than with the subwoofers at the front wall. I'll get to that later.
Here is the new set-up (sorry about the whitish stripes in the pictures, they are reflections from the flash, cold not avoid it):
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/my-monitor-subwoofer-system.25101/page-6
JL Audio themselves send contradictory messages about this.
On one hand their technical consultant said that because of group delay of modern sealed subwoofers (I suppose that means high-powered subs with heavy motors), including JL Audio subs, these subs would need to be put far in front of the main speakers. In the case of JL Audio, with group delay of 9 milliseconds, this would amount to 10.1 feet in front of the main speakers, see the WBF thread:
Subwoofers and Time Relationships
On the other hand, JL Audio's manual for my subwoofer(s) states preferential positioning in a corner or at a wall, and does not mention a preferred distance.
If you would follow their first line of argument, even positioning of the subs along the main speakers, as is often advocated for better time alignment, would theoretically be only somewhat more sufficient than what I had until now, with subwoofer drivers about 5.5 feet behind the main speakers -- compared to my solution thus far it would eliminate only about 1/3 of the problem, with almost 2/3 still to go. So in terms of timing, putting the subwoofers closer to the main speakers seems not the most compelling argument; if you really want to go all the way, you would have to move the subs closer to the listening seat rather than to the main speakers. -- JL Audio's CR-1 crossover can correct for the time delay of subwoofers relative to the main speakers.
Several WBF members have argued that time alignment is not critical at subwoofer frequencies, see this thread:
Time aligning subs to main speakers
I had long resisted a move of the subwoofers away from the front wall for several reasons, apart from the above contradictory messaging:
1) as audiophile friends have acknowledged, rhythm & timing of my system has been excellent
2) I found the bass on a lot of material very precise, also compared to other systems, except on one type of material (I'll get to that)
3) as much as I tried (and I did!), I have never been able to hear any time delay between main speakers and subs, e.g., on drums (kick drums and others), and neither have others whom I asked to listen for it
4) I knew that the ASC SubTraps, which my subwoofers stood upon, were hugely beneficial for the sound, and I hesitated moving the relatively high stack of SubTraps plus subwoofers closer to my main speakers because of an expected detrimental effect on soundstaging.
Yet the issue came up again from time to time, such as in the comment of Brad (Morricab) here, which I replied to further below on that thread page.
Ultimately I decided that it would be worthwhile trying to move the subwoofers upfront, but then only under one condition. I would not use the SubTraps since they would be in the way, but I would have to find somewhat of a substitute. I decided to put the subs onto concrete plates, as I also have them under my monitor stands. This would avoid direct coupling to my suspended wood floor, which I knew was disastrous, and if I used two plates instead of one (4 inches total thickness) it might raise them sufficiently from the ground as well, so that the subs would not excite the wood floor right in front of them too much.
Yet then the pandemic hit, and I forgot about the project. After all, I did not have the concrete tiles necessary, and I was not going to go to Home Depot at that time (my health was too important to take the risk). Thankfully, a recent suggestion by Charles (Chops) on my thread reminded my again of the idea and so finally I went to work, now that in our state of Massachusetts the pandemic is much more under control. I bought four 16 x 16 inch concrete tiles at Home Depot for a whopping 17 bucks total, and then moved the subs together with Peter A. who had graciously agreed to help. With two persons, moving those heavy subs of 110 pounds each is actually easy, whereas JL Audio sternly warns against trying to do it alone, also because of the potential of back injuries.
The first spatial arrangement was this:
While there did not seem a sonic disconnect between subwoofers and main speakers, the bass did not seem quite right. It was less tight than before, and some frequencies, e.g., related to the impact of kick drum, were weaker. Another issue was that now -- something that I had not considered when planning this arrangement -- the main speakers would partially radiate onto the glossy surface of the subwoofers beneath them, possibly creating detrimental reflections. Peter suggested that we could get the subwoofers more out of the way of the main speakers by putting the subs next to the speakers. We could do this if we moved the main equipment rack further back.
In previous times I would have objected to a rack move because I did not want to get the equipment more in the direct fire of the sub bass, but since the subs were now in front, I welcomed the idea. So we moved the equipment rack 10 inches further back, also the amp rack, and moved the subs next to the speakers. The drivers now are about 4 inches in front of the main speaker drivers, and since they are closer to the listener, the measured sonic path to the ear is 6 inches shorter.
Now the bass was better than with the first arrangement with subs in front of the speakers, and in some ways I heard also better bass than with the subwoofers at the front wall. I'll get to that later.
Here is the new set-up (sorry about the whitish stripes in the pictures, they are reflections from the flash, cold not avoid it):
Sound changes, Part I: Changes independent of subwoofer performance
This is the first part of my report on the sonics of the new set-up, dealing mainly with midrange and highs, as well as with changes to the bass of the monitors themselves. The second part will describe the entire bass experience with the new monitor/subwoofer set-up.
Creating a clean front wall, without the subwoofers there, appears to have drastically changed the acoustic behavior of the room. Without me knowing, apparently the backwave of sound from the monitors suffered a lot of complex and deleterious reflections by the relatively high standing towers of subwoofers on their SubTrap stands, and moving the subs to the front unexpectedly led to a much cleaner, less distorted sound in midrange and treble. Moving the equipment rack 10 inches back may similarly have helped as well.
Moving the monitors inward over time, away from the sidewalls, had already removed a lot of distortion caused by sidewall reflections, and as a result the speakers appeared to play more and more effortlessly. Another major jump in apparent effortlessness -- totally unexpected yet very welcomed -- occurred with the changed acoustics in the new set-up. The speakers appear to play orchestral music with yet less strain, more emulating what I hear from multi-way floor standers in other systems. I like to listen rather loudly, with peaks of orchestral tutti around 95 dBa (ca. 100 dB), and the monitors now seem to be quite at ease with this demand on complex music.
Stravinsky's 'Song of the Nightingale' (Dorati/London Symphony on Mercury Living Presence) starts with a loud orchestral outburst, and the prominent piccolo flute had sounded strained and uncontrolled. Now it is far more well behaved, with an ease to the presentation that just was not there before. While brass on the XRCD of Reiner's interpretation of Scheherazade had sounded quite effortless before, there was some strain as massed violins played louder and louder during the first movement. Now the strain has largely subsided, and the resolution of the massed strings has also improved.
The resolution of massed strings in general increased, also when they play rather softly. Usually massed violins have a quite natural sound in my system, but on a good number of recordings within my beloved cycle of the complete Haydn symphonies, with Dennis Rusell Davies conducting the Stuttgart Chamber Orchestra, the sound of the violin section had been a bit metallic. This character has ameliorated with recent speaker set-up changes, but now it goes a step further. There is a previously unheard fine resolution of string texture that dissolves, as it were, a good part of the residual metallic gloss.
Harmonic richness increased as well. The sound of brass on the Reiner Scheherazade on XRCD had already been full and colorful sounding, but now it displays a voluptuous saturation and richness of tone that I find intoxicating. The baritone sax of Pepper Adams on Lee Morgan's 'The Cooker' sounds with a rounder, weightier, harmonically more complex tone, while at the same time keeping its incisive raspiness and dynamic jump factor -- quite a thrill to have all this combined in reproduction. Lee Morgan's trumpet has a rounder, richer sound as well, while keeping cutting transients alive, yet now with an effortless sound -- again at quite loud playback levels. In general, the realism of tone of jazz brass has reached a new, very satisfying level.
The acquisition of the Octave HP 700 preamp last year transformed the sound of my system, not the least by transmitting more of the harmonic richness and depth of tone color of music. I would estimate that the new changes in sound account for another 30-50 % jump in these areas over the change from the Pass B1 buffered preamp to the Octave HP 700. That is quite something, especially since it came so unexpected.
In summary we have advances in three major areas, just by a favorable change in the acoustic environment due to the new set-up of gear:
a) effortlessness of sound
b) resolution of sound, in particular on orchestral strings
c) harmonic richness and saturation
***
Over time, changes in set-up have brought the upper/midbass performance of the system more in line with what you would expect from high quality multi-way floor standers. The infamous midbass 'hole' of monitor/subwoofer combos became smaller and smaller. Now, with a clean, uncluttered front wall, the bass performance of just the monitors took another leap forward, perhaps by allowing better support for the workings of the bass reflex port. Rock drums gained yet more weight, to a point where the sound can be really satisfying even without subs, e.g., on the jazz rock of the Trio of Doom (only the kick drum suffers dramatically without aid from the subs). The pulsing synth bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish had been quite impressive in combination with the subwoofers, but with the monitors alone there was a steep drop in performance. Yet now the amount of high quality bass pumped out by just the monitors on this track is just ridiculous! A listener unfamiliar with the full bass performance possible on this track might not even realize that the subwoofers are off. And that with the mid-woofer of the monitor being a full seven feet from the front wall, thus without special assistance from wall bounce!
There had always been a discrepancy between the glowing reports of the bass performance of the Reference 3A Reflector monitors in several reviews on one hand, and my own experience of the bass from those monitors in my room on the other. Now I am starting to understand what those other reviewers may have heard.
The next installment, tomorrow or on Friday, will deal with the bass experience from the combined monitor/subwoofer set-up.
This is the first part of my report on the sonics of the new set-up, dealing mainly with midrange and highs, as well as with changes to the bass of the monitors themselves. The second part will describe the entire bass experience with the new monitor/subwoofer set-up.
Creating a clean front wall, without the subwoofers there, appears to have drastically changed the acoustic behavior of the room. Without me knowing, apparently the backwave of sound from the monitors suffered a lot of complex and deleterious reflections by the relatively high standing towers of subwoofers on their SubTrap stands, and moving the subs to the front unexpectedly led to a much cleaner, less distorted sound in midrange and treble. Moving the equipment rack 10 inches back may similarly have helped as well.
Moving the monitors inward over time, away from the sidewalls, had already removed a lot of distortion caused by sidewall reflections, and as a result the speakers appeared to play more and more effortlessly. Another major jump in apparent effortlessness -- totally unexpected yet very welcomed -- occurred with the changed acoustics in the new set-up. The speakers appear to play orchestral music with yet less strain, more emulating what I hear from multi-way floor standers in other systems. I like to listen rather loudly, with peaks of orchestral tutti around 95 dBa (ca. 100 dB), and the monitors now seem to be quite at ease with this demand on complex music.
Stravinsky's 'Song of the Nightingale' (Dorati/London Symphony on Mercury Living Presence) starts with a loud orchestral outburst, and the prominent piccolo flute had sounded strained and uncontrolled. Now it is far more well behaved, with an ease to the presentation that just was not there before. While brass on the XRCD of Reiner's interpretation of Scheherazade had sounded quite effortless before, there was some strain as massed violins played louder and louder during the first movement. Now the strain has largely subsided, and the resolution of the massed strings has also improved.
The resolution of massed strings in general increased, also when they play rather softly. Usually massed violins have a quite natural sound in my system, but on a good number of recordings within my beloved cycle of the complete Haydn symphonies, with Dennis Rusell Davies conducting the Stuttgart Chamber Orchestra, the sound of the violin section had been a bit metallic. This character has ameliorated with recent speaker set-up changes, but now it goes a step further. There is a previously unheard fine resolution of string texture that dissolves, as it were, a good part of the residual metallic gloss.
Harmonic richness increased as well. The sound of brass on the Reiner Scheherazade on XRCD had already been full and colorful sounding, but now it displays a voluptuous saturation and richness of tone that I find intoxicating. The baritone sax of Pepper Adams on Lee Morgan's 'The Cooker' sounds with a rounder, weightier, harmonically more complex tone, while at the same time keeping its incisive raspiness and dynamic jump factor -- quite a thrill to have all this combined in reproduction. Lee Morgan's trumpet has a rounder, richer sound as well, while keeping cutting transients alive, yet now with an effortless sound -- again at quite loud playback levels. In general, the realism of tone of jazz brass has reached a new, very satisfying level.
The acquisition of the Octave HP 700 preamp last year transformed the sound of my system, not the least by transmitting more of the harmonic richness and depth of tone color of music. I would estimate that the new changes in sound account for another 30-50 % jump in these areas over the change from the Pass B1 buffered preamp to the Octave HP 700. That is quite something, especially since it came so unexpected.
In summary we have advances in three major areas, just by a favorable change in the acoustic environment due to the new set-up of gear:
a) effortlessness of sound
b) resolution of sound, in particular on orchestral strings
c) harmonic richness and saturation
***
Over time, changes in set-up have brought the upper/midbass performance of the system more in line with what you would expect from high quality multi-way floor standers. The infamous midbass 'hole' of monitor/subwoofer combos became smaller and smaller. Now, with a clean, uncluttered front wall, the bass performance of just the monitors took another leap forward, perhaps by allowing better support for the workings of the bass reflex port. Rock drums gained yet more weight, to a point where the sound can be really satisfying even without subs, e.g., on the jazz rock of the Trio of Doom (only the kick drum suffers dramatically without aid from the subs). The pulsing synth bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish had been quite impressive in combination with the subwoofers, but with the monitors alone there was a steep drop in performance. Yet now the amount of high quality bass pumped out by just the monitors on this track is just ridiculous! A listener unfamiliar with the full bass performance possible on this track might not even realize that the subwoofers are off. And that with the mid-woofer of the monitor being a full seven feet from the front wall, thus without special assistance from wall bounce!
There had always been a discrepancy between the glowing reports of the bass performance of the Reference 3A Reflector monitors in several reviews on one hand, and my own experience of the bass from those monitors in my room on the other. Now I am starting to understand what those other reviewers may have heard.
The next installment, tomorrow or on Friday, will deal with the bass experience from the combined monitor/subwoofer set-up.
Sound changes, Part II: Changes in overall bass performance
As I mentioned above, the initial arrangement with the subwoofers right in front of the monitors did not yield satisfying bass; the second and current arrangement with the subwoofers next to the monitors did. Yet I had forgotten that the subwoofers had been optimized to the position on the front wall with D.A.R.O. (Digital Automatic Room Optimization) by calibration using a microphone:
https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-u...Digital-Automatic-Room-Optimization-D-A-R-O-#
This calibration had not changed upon the subwoofer move, and probably makes the assessment of sound with the initial arrangement, featuring the subwoofers right in front of the monitors, invalid. Yet of course I still could recalibrate for the current arrangement. My first attempt was marred by noises from the open built-in wood cabinet to the right side of the listening seat. During the calibration, the bass test tones from the subwoofers that would be picked up by the microphone are very loud, with wild excursions of the driver membrane that just do not occur upon normal listening to music (you usually don't see the membrane move). They caused something inside the cabinet, apparently in or behind the wood, to rattle very loudly, a noise which would have had to influence the calibration.
So I decided at first to run the subs at standard setting, without DSP using calibration via test tones. The kick drum on the wild, energetic jazz rock of the Trio of Doom (John McLaughlin, Jaco Pastorius, Tony Williams) was still rather weak. Also, while the heavy synth bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish sounded clean and tight without subwoofers, there was some smearing with the subwoofers turned on. Both those things were a setback in sound quality from the original subwoofer arrangement at the front wall, a few feet behind the speakers. There were advances, like the bass now going much deeper at 2:30 into the Billie Eilish song, and other things, but it was not optimal.
Then I decided to try to tackle the calibration problem. I brought back the large absorbing panel (8 x 3.5 feet) that until recently had been in the middle of the front wall, and put it in front of the open built-in cabinet. The rattling sound was completely gone, and I could complete the calibration. While this 2 inch thick absorbing panel would somewhat influence the midrange and high frequencies in the room, the influence on the bass in the room should be relatively negligible. -- There was still some rattling in the right hand rear corner of the room when I calibrated the left subwoofer, but this was relatively minor, and probably even less than rattling during my calibration of the subs when they had sat at the front wall.
With calibration successfully accomplished, and the absorbing panel once more removed from the room, I was listening again. What a transformation of the bass! Now the kick drum on the Trio of Doom recording was strong once more, and the precision of the bass surpassed the already high level of performance that I had heard with the subwoofers positioned on the front wall. Small accents in the bass were now audible that I had not heard before. You just don't know high precision bass until you hear it. The bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish kept sounding clean and tight also with subwoofers on, but now with extra power over the already prodigious bass with monitors alone, and going much deeper than the monitors; you could feel it in the gut. The freakishly precise repeated start/stop of the deep bass in the passage starting at 2:30 is just amazing.
Given the vast difference in bass quality with and without DSP through calibration by test tones and feedback to the subs by microphone (D.A.R.O.), I would never want to go back to a subwoofer that does not have such calibration. It is simply essential!
It is confirmed now that with the old arrangement, featuring the subwoofer drivers more than 5 feet behind the speaker drivers, the problem with the bass was not basic timing; the new arrangement does not suddenly reveal fundamental changes to it, such as in the already previously explosive rhythm & timing of the Trio of Doom. Yet it also has become clear that there was another problem, which is some "dilution" of precision over the previously much longer path from sound source to ear than there is now -- even though the bass had been very precise already in many instances.
The newfound precision with the current arrangement is also audible in one particular passage that had always been proven to be a vexing one in my system. It is the drum/bass guitar intro on Pink Floyd's 'Shine On You Crazy Diamond' from the 'Wish You Were Here' album, at 4:16:
While the bass had been very tight on a lot of other music, here there had always been some overhang and blur. In the beginning, with my old REL subwoofer and previous monitors, it had been quite bad, but over time things improved and there was less and less of an issue. Yet now, for the first time after all those years, the passage sounds really precise and completely clean! (It sounds also more precise and incisive than in above YouTube video.)
Some recordings that sounded better with subwoofers off now sound just fine with them on, even though bass can be somewhat strong. One of these recordings is Lee-Way by jazz trumpeter Lee Morgan. Now the stand up bass is loud and proud with subs on, but precise. This is also the type of music where, even in light of all the other improvements, the bass has taken the musically most meaningful step forward.
Bass guitar and large drums had often sounded spectacular, and solos from stand up bass in jazz had also mostly been rewarding. Yet the typical accompanying "walking" stand-up bass lines in a lot of jazz had seemed unfocused and lacking pitch precision, especially on older recordings, like hard bop from the Fifties and Sixties, including the music of Lee Morgan. This was the area where I also heard the most negative difference with the bass on the Magico Q3 and M Project speakers of Peter and Ian, respectively; on those speakers I had always admired the ease with which you could follow such bass lines. Now those accompanying bass lines are also relatively easy to follow in my system, given the much greater tightness and pitch precision with the current arrangement. I am not sure how much of this improvement is attributable to just the better performance of the subwoofers; I suspect that the aforementioned better bass performance of the monitors in the current configuration of the system is also essential to the advance in quality.
The lack of good (pitch) definition of "walking" bass lines had been the one thing that had disappointed me in the presentation of jazz by my system. Now I feel that it has become an all around competent performer on this music, which is thrilling to me. The major improvements in brass sound that I described earlier also contribute to the enhanced and more involving experience.
Not just on the Billie Eilish song, but in general the bass now goes much deeper than it had before, with subwoofers at the front wall. On the aforementioned passage in Pink Floyd the bass is not just more precise but also hits deeper, and so does the bass in Trio of Doom. The bass drum on Stravinsky's Rite of Spring has more extension as well. There are many instances where I can now feel the bass much more.
In summary, the current spatial configuration of my system is a huge advance in sound quality, not just in the bass, but also, as I outlined in my previous post, in midrange and treble. Thanks to Peter for suggesting and helping me with the current spatial arrangement, and thanks to all who suggested the subwoofer move!
As I mentioned above, the initial arrangement with the subwoofers right in front of the monitors did not yield satisfying bass; the second and current arrangement with the subwoofers next to the monitors did. Yet I had forgotten that the subwoofers had been optimized to the position on the front wall with D.A.R.O. (Digital Automatic Room Optimization) by calibration using a microphone:
https://jlaudio.zendesk.com/hc/en-u...Digital-Automatic-Room-Optimization-D-A-R-O-#
This calibration had not changed upon the subwoofer move, and probably makes the assessment of sound with the initial arrangement, featuring the subwoofers right in front of the monitors, invalid. Yet of course I still could recalibrate for the current arrangement. My first attempt was marred by noises from the open built-in wood cabinet to the right side of the listening seat. During the calibration, the bass test tones from the subwoofers that would be picked up by the microphone are very loud, with wild excursions of the driver membrane that just do not occur upon normal listening to music (you usually don't see the membrane move). They caused something inside the cabinet, apparently in or behind the wood, to rattle very loudly, a noise which would have had to influence the calibration.
So I decided at first to run the subs at standard setting, without DSP using calibration via test tones. The kick drum on the wild, energetic jazz rock of the Trio of Doom (John McLaughlin, Jaco Pastorius, Tony Williams) was still rather weak. Also, while the heavy synth bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish sounded clean and tight without subwoofers, there was some smearing with the subwoofers turned on. Both those things were a setback in sound quality from the original subwoofer arrangement at the front wall, a few feet behind the speakers. There were advances, like the bass now going much deeper at 2:30 into the Billie Eilish song, and other things, but it was not optimal.
Then I decided to try to tackle the calibration problem. I brought back the large absorbing panel (8 x 3.5 feet) that until recently had been in the middle of the front wall, and put it in front of the open built-in cabinet. The rattling sound was completely gone, and I could complete the calibration. While this 2 inch thick absorbing panel would somewhat influence the midrange and high frequencies in the room, the influence on the bass in the room should be relatively negligible. -- There was still some rattling in the right hand rear corner of the room when I calibrated the left subwoofer, but this was relatively minor, and probably even less than rattling during my calibration of the subs when they had sat at the front wall.
With calibration successfully accomplished, and the absorbing panel once more removed from the room, I was listening again. What a transformation of the bass! Now the kick drum on the Trio of Doom recording was strong once more, and the precision of the bass surpassed the already high level of performance that I had heard with the subwoofers positioned on the front wall. Small accents in the bass were now audible that I had not heard before. You just don't know high precision bass until you hear it. The bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish kept sounding clean and tight also with subwoofers on, but now with extra power over the already prodigious bass with monitors alone, and going much deeper than the monitors; you could feel it in the gut. The freakishly precise repeated start/stop of the deep bass in the passage starting at 2:30 is just amazing.
Given the vast difference in bass quality with and without DSP through calibration by test tones and feedback to the subs by microphone (D.A.R.O.), I would never want to go back to a subwoofer that does not have such calibration. It is simply essential!
It is confirmed now that with the old arrangement, featuring the subwoofer drivers more than 5 feet behind the speaker drivers, the problem with the bass was not basic timing; the new arrangement does not suddenly reveal fundamental changes to it, such as in the already previously explosive rhythm & timing of the Trio of Doom. Yet it also has become clear that there was another problem, which is some "dilution" of precision over the previously much longer path from sound source to ear than there is now -- even though the bass had been very precise already in many instances.
The newfound precision with the current arrangement is also audible in one particular passage that had always been proven to be a vexing one in my system. It is the drum/bass guitar intro on Pink Floyd's 'Shine On You Crazy Diamond' from the 'Wish You Were Here' album, at 4:16:
While the bass had been very tight on a lot of other music, here there had always been some overhang and blur. In the beginning, with my old REL subwoofer and previous monitors, it had been quite bad, but over time things improved and there was less and less of an issue. Yet now, for the first time after all those years, the passage sounds really precise and completely clean! (It sounds also more precise and incisive than in above YouTube video.)
Some recordings that sounded better with subwoofers off now sound just fine with them on, even though bass can be somewhat strong. One of these recordings is Lee-Way by jazz trumpeter Lee Morgan. Now the stand up bass is loud and proud with subs on, but precise. This is also the type of music where, even in light of all the other improvements, the bass has taken the musically most meaningful step forward.
Bass guitar and large drums had often sounded spectacular, and solos from stand up bass in jazz had also mostly been rewarding. Yet the typical accompanying "walking" stand-up bass lines in a lot of jazz had seemed unfocused and lacking pitch precision, especially on older recordings, like hard bop from the Fifties and Sixties, including the music of Lee Morgan. This was the area where I also heard the most negative difference with the bass on the Magico Q3 and M Project speakers of Peter and Ian, respectively; on those speakers I had always admired the ease with which you could follow such bass lines. Now those accompanying bass lines are also relatively easy to follow in my system, given the much greater tightness and pitch precision with the current arrangement. I am not sure how much of this improvement is attributable to just the better performance of the subwoofers; I suspect that the aforementioned better bass performance of the monitors in the current configuration of the system is also essential to the advance in quality.
The lack of good (pitch) definition of "walking" bass lines had been the one thing that had disappointed me in the presentation of jazz by my system. Now I feel that it has become an all around competent performer on this music, which is thrilling to me. The major improvements in brass sound that I described earlier also contribute to the enhanced and more involving experience.
Not just on the Billie Eilish song, but in general the bass now goes much deeper than it had before, with subwoofers at the front wall. On the aforementioned passage in Pink Floyd the bass is not just more precise but also hits deeper, and so does the bass in Trio of Doom. The bass drum on Stravinsky's Rite of Spring has more extension as well. There are many instances where I can now feel the bass much more.
In summary, the current spatial configuration of my system is a huge advance in sound quality, not just in the bass, but also, as I outlined in my previous post, in midrange and treble. Thanks to Peter for suggesting and helping me with the current spatial arrangement, and thanks to all who suggested the subwoofer move!
The new sound: my larger view
While the chances that I would ever want to have multi-way floor standers instead of monitors in my mid-sized room *) had already been very low, they now have taken yet another precipitous nosedive. Given the many great strengths of this monitor/subwoofer combo, it would be very hard and very expensive to find multi-way floor standers for my room that could deliver improvements in some areas without any drawbacks over the sound that I have now. Also, it would be hard to replicate the beguiling intimacy and immediacy that the monitors are capable of, and which I love, on some small-scale music -- while at the same time they can deliver a deep and rather expansive soundstage on large-scale music.
For me, this monitor/subwoofer system is it.
In a considerably larger room of course it would be an entirely different situation. Monitors just cannot fill a large room with loud music, that is simple physics. And in such a room multi-way floor standers (cones or other designs) also have more space to breathe in order to develop their strengths.
___________________________
*) Dimensions of 24 x 12 x 8.5 feet (13.5 feet wide at small window bay). I consider the lack of width the relatively biggest issue.
While the chances that I would ever want to have multi-way floor standers instead of monitors in my mid-sized room *) had already been very low, they now have taken yet another precipitous nosedive. Given the many great strengths of this monitor/subwoofer combo, it would be very hard and very expensive to find multi-way floor standers for my room that could deliver improvements in some areas without any drawbacks over the sound that I have now. Also, it would be hard to replicate the beguiling intimacy and immediacy that the monitors are capable of, and which I love, on some small-scale music -- while at the same time they can deliver a deep and rather expansive soundstage on large-scale music.
For me, this monitor/subwoofer system is it.
In a considerably larger room of course it would be an entirely different situation. Monitors just cannot fill a large room with loud music, that is simple physics. And in such a room multi-way floor standers (cones or other designs) also have more space to breathe in order to develop their strengths.
___________________________
*) Dimensions of 24 x 12 x 8.5 feet (13.5 feet wide at small window bay). I consider the lack of width the relatively biggest issue.
Hey Al, good to hear you finally tried moving those subs. And you got good results.
A couple questions:
1) Do you need to employ the JLAudio trim function to the same extent?
2) Does your current configuration improve cello in string quartets to your satisfaction?
I'm looking forward to hearing the results!
A couple questions:
1) Do you need to employ the JLAudio trim function to the same extent?
2) Does your current configuration improve cello in string quartets to your satisfaction?
I'm looking forward to hearing the results!
Awesome write up!
Your and Peter's observations/experiences constantly push me to question/experiment with my speaker positions.....
Your and Peter's observations/experiences constantly push me to question/experiment with my speaker positions.....
Hey Al, good to hear you finally tried moving those subs. And you got good results.
A couple questions:
1) Do you need to employ the JLAudio trim function to the same extent?
2) Does your current configuration improve cello in string quartets to your satisfaction?
I'm looking forward to hearing the results!
Hi Ian,
1) No, I turned it up again to my previous setting of -8 dB at 24 Hz instead of -13 dB at 24 Hz, the setting that I had last. I am not sure if I like it though, there's just so much deep bass... it's all very new and I'll play with it a bit more
2) Haven't checked in detail yet, but no, a miracle did not happen. Cello is still not as well delineated and powerful as on your and Peter's Magico speakers. This remains one of the shortcomings of my system; however, cello is actually pretty good nonetheless, and I am happy enough. I remember when you were surprised that the cello pizzicati in the second movement of Beethoven's string quartet op. 59/3 (Julliard Quartet) were actually better than you -- and for that matter, myself! -- expected.
I look forward to you hearing the results as well!
Al
Last edited:
Thanks, I'm glad that you like it, and that perhaps we can all make some progress!
Great news Al. Congratulations. I was going to ask the exact same question about cello that Ian asked. For me that is where a full range floorstanding speaker demonstrates its value.
For my own part I’ve had two failed attempts to integrate subwoofers with my Magico mini twos, so I commend you on your efforts and success. I think in my room trying subwoofers for the very low spatial information using my Q threes would be very interesting. And experiment for another time.
Now for the really serious question: how does that Black Sabbath sound with the new subwoofer position and calibration?
For my own part I’ve had two failed attempts to integrate subwoofers with my Magico mini twos, so I commend you on your efforts and success. I think in my room trying subwoofers for the very low spatial information using my Q threes would be very interesting. And experiment for another time.
Now for the really serious question: how does that Black Sabbath sound with the new subwoofer position and calibration?
Thanks, Peter!
Or rather, a multi-way floor stander. Full range speakers by definition should not require subs. Ron's and MikeL's speakers with their dedicated bass towers are very likely full range speakers.
As for cello, it also depends on the recording. Brahms cello sonatas with du Pre/Barenboim sounded very good to me today.
Excellent!
Upon spinning Black Sabbath, I decided to slightly lower the subwoofer output. Bass is now more credible on this and a variety of material, with less crazy, but still very satisfying, low bass. I'm still learning this new thing.
Thanks for an interesting and cogent write-up Al, about changing your subwoofer positions and vibration traps. I think both you and Peter challenge us to do some work!
Tim, I appreciate the sentiment, but I think we are both simply reporting our own experiences and not suggesting that others do the same. Al and I are both New England yankees, though Al is a transplant, so we appreciate exploring ways to improve the sound of our systems without spending money.
I have found, with the help of others, that the importance of proper set up is often overlooked and under appreciated for its contribution to good sound. One simply needs to be willing to experiment, approach the process with an open mind, and be patient and methodical in his approach. Curiosity is important, along with a clear reference or goal in mind. I found the process quite enjoyable, especially with the rewards of better sound.
Thanks, Tim, for the sentiment, but my reported findings have not been without flaws.
I am eating crow right now, and I am happy to do so because my sound is better. Ian (Madfloyd) came over last weekend, and he pointed out that I was lacking midbass, even though I had more low bass than before. Eventually I concluded that of course he was entirely correct; my frequency spectrum had a hole somewhere in the bass guitar range. I had been so taken by the newfound precision of the bass that I had not really noticed. It is always good to have friends who thankfully can correct you when you go astray. All our circle of audiophile friends have helped each other over the years, it seems.
Unfortunately I did not think of the relevant fix until after Ian left, but it was resetting the subs from in-room D.A.R.O calibration to default linear. Apparently something had gone wrong with the calibration. It could have been putting in the absorbing panel over the right side built-in open cabinet during calibration in order to suppress the rattling from my cabinet, even though I would be surprised that this two inch thick localized panel could make such a difference in the bass across the room (bass absorption is better at greater thickness). Regardless, I decided that I would return to calibration only after solving the "rattling" problem another way, which I currently have no easy fix for.
The flaws with the default linear setting that I had experienced, as reported in # 506, turned out to be a nothingburger. The weakness of kick drum was easily fixed with a slight volume correction on the sub, as well as lowering the LF trim setting from maximum, which is about -13 dB at 24 Hz, to -8 dB at 24 Hz (I have not played with other LF trim settings yet). The slight smearing of bass on 'Bad Guy' by Billie Eilish was only on two notes. On one note it only accentuated an emphasis that was already there without subs, and on another note it really was not overhang, but rattling of my built-in open cabinet. I guess I grew impatient far too quickly, assuming that the sound without calibration would be no good.
But actually it is good, and I got midbass back, and low bass is not exaggerated anymore. Heightened bass precision is still there, and with judicious adjustments I managed to find a consensus setting that serves most recordings very well -- it is easier to cover a wide range of recordings satisfactorily now with a single volume setting on the subs than it was when the subwoofers were at a greater distance, at the front wall. Almost on all recordings tested bass is better now than before, on this standard single volume setting. There are the few anemic outliers of rock recordings that still require a sub boost, but even there I found progress: with bass boost on the somewhat anemic CD mastering of LZ's Physical Graffiti, Bonzo's drums on 'In My Time of Dying' never sounded so heavy, while being very dynamic and with quick transients -- it is exhilarating.
So I am very happy with my sound after the correction.
Similar threads
