Really drives home the importance of matching good subwoofers with most speakers to get reasonable bass performance!
Thanks,
Lee
why with a good subwoofer can provide better sound quality ?
- Thread starter tony ky ma
- Start date
Really drives home the importance of matching good subwoofers with most speakers to get reasonable bass performance!
Thanks,
Lee
Dear Lee: The main target of adding a pair of self powered subwoofers in true stereo fashion through my approach ( yes Frantz I know and I posted that way that you are an enthusiactic audiophile on the subwoofers approach you have. ) is to improve the quality performance level of the main speakers and as a side advantages achieve: better low bass quality performance level, lowest/deeper low bass response, more accurate low bass response, better main speaker room integration with better quality response, lowest speaker system THD and IMD, better low bass room integration with better and coherent whole quality performance along the main speakers, etc, etc. I think that with this approach exist only " better's " and almost no trade-offs other that that additional high-pass filter for the main speakers. In my system there is almost no that trade-off because I made/make the crossover/high-pass filter inside my Levinson's adding nothing!! Both signals that goes to the speaker amplifiers and to the subs is the same non-touched/untouched one.
IMHO lowering distortions ( any kind ) in a home audio system always improve the quality level performance of that system and with my subs approach you made exactly that.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Last edited:
Hi
There is a type of subwoofers whose utter neglect by audiophiles I am unable to comprehend: The Infinite Baffle Subwoofers. Simply stated. An IB use a part of the house adjacent to the listening room as a HUGE sealed box with multiple low frequency drivers. Could be the crawling space under the floor.. A basement, another room or the attic.
This type of subwoofer easily offers performance NO commercial subwofer can even (or could ever) dream of... Things like amplifers-like low distortion < 1% THD, 120 dB at 20 Hz. flat down to single digits ( <10 Hz) with up to 110 dB at the listening position, very low cost and total invisibility are routine with IBs.. Yet. You hardly , ever hear mention of these in audiophile circles.
They are derided as "shaking" the house (which they can) and bass noise, too difficult to make, etc..
I have often written about IBs.. I have implemented IB for friends, could not in my house because the listening room offered no place to IB except the outside which I was going to consider at one point but ... they are easy to make, easier than one would think and produce all by themselves a level of bass that is uncanny both in power, refinement and unusually distortion.. yet.
You mention "IB subwoofer" to most audiophiles and it either draw a blank or a snicker... What an interesting breed we seem to be
@Raul
Smoothness of response is a very important aspect of sound reproduction. The auditory system routinely accept high level of distortion. It would be a shock for many to know that we easily accept 50 % of THD in the bass...most woofers distort seriously in the low bass anyway and that includes numerous commercial woofers of distinction and great price. Smoothness of response means that the listening room-subwoofer system responds in a linear fashion to change in frequency. Peaks and valleys that are so common in bass reproduction impart that artificiality to the sound... So it is important to seek smoothness if not necessarily flatness in bass reproduction. It can be shown rather easily that the vast majority of people prefer a smooth but rising bass curve.. in other words a response skewed toward the lowest frequencies sloping down in the highest frequencies... So while it is good to reduce IMD and that usually involves addressing it at the level of drivers and the simplest way to do that is to use more subwoofers.. since the sheer number afford individual drivers to work less, the sum produces less distortion anyway so.. you have the best of both worlds.. Smoothness of response and reduced distortion level both audibly and measurable.. One reason I love this solution and before we go into the debate about "slow" woofers and "fast" mains... a nonsense by the way, let it be said that thanks to Home Theater and the Car enthusiasts, yes, them we have a plethora of excellent low frequency drivers on the market .
There is a type of subwoofers whose utter neglect by audiophiles I am unable to comprehend: The Infinite Baffle Subwoofers. Simply stated. An IB use a part of the house adjacent to the listening room as a HUGE sealed box with multiple low frequency drivers. Could be the crawling space under the floor.. A basement, another room or the attic.
This type of subwoofer easily offers performance NO commercial subwofer can even (or could ever) dream of... Things like amplifers-like low distortion < 1% THD, 120 dB at 20 Hz. flat down to single digits ( <10 Hz) with up to 110 dB at the listening position, very low cost and total invisibility are routine with IBs.. Yet. You hardly , ever hear mention of these in audiophile circles.
They are derided as "shaking" the house (which they can) and bass noise, too difficult to make, etc..
I have often written about IBs.. I have implemented IB for friends, could not in my house because the listening room offered no place to IB except the outside which I was going to consider at one point but ... they are easy to make, easier than one would think and produce all by themselves a level of bass that is uncanny both in power, refinement and unusually distortion.. yet.
You mention "IB subwoofer" to most audiophiles and it either draw a blank or a snicker... What an interesting breed we seem to be
@Raul
Smoothness of response is a very important aspect of sound reproduction. The auditory system routinely accept high level of distortion. It would be a shock for many to know that we easily accept 50 % of THD in the bass...most woofers distort seriously in the low bass anyway and that includes numerous commercial woofers of distinction and great price. Smoothness of response means that the listening room-subwoofer system responds in a linear fashion to change in frequency. Peaks and valleys that are so common in bass reproduction impart that artificiality to the sound... So it is important to seek smoothness if not necessarily flatness in bass reproduction. It can be shown rather easily that the vast majority of people prefer a smooth but rising bass curve.. in other words a response skewed toward the lowest frequencies sloping down in the highest frequencies... So while it is good to reduce IMD and that usually involves addressing it at the level of drivers and the simplest way to do that is to use more subwoofers.. since the sheer number afford individual drivers to work less, the sum produces less distortion anyway so.. you have the best of both worlds.. Smoothness of response and reduced distortion level both audibly and measurable.. One reason I love this solution and before we go into the debate about "slow" woofers and "fast" mains... a nonsense by the way, let it be said that thanks to Home Theater and the Car enthusiasts, yes, them we have a plethora of excellent low frequency drivers on the market .
Hi
There is a type of subwoofers whose utter neglect by audiophiles I am unable to comprehend: The Infinite Baffle Subwoofers. Simply stated. An IB use a part of the house adjacent to the listening room as a HUGE sealed box with multiple low frequency drivers. Could be the crawling space under the floor.. A basement, another room or the attic.
This type of subwoofer easily offers performance NO commercial subwofer can even (or could ever) dream of... Things like amplifers-like low distortion < 1% THD, 120 dB at 20 Hz. flat down to single digits ( <10 Hz) with up to 110 dB at the listening position, very low cost and total invisibility are routine with IBs.. Yet. You hardly , ever hear mention of these in audiophile circles.
They are derided as "shaking" the house (which they can) and bass noise, too difficult to make, etc..
I have often written about IBs.. I have implemented IB for friends, could not in my house because the listening room offered no place to IB except the outside which I was going to consider at one point but ... they are easy to make, easier than one would think and produce all by themselves a level of bass that is uncanny both in power, refinement and unusually distortion.. yet.
You mention "IB subwoofer" to most audiophiles and it either draw a blank or a snicker... What an interesting breed we seem to be
@Raul
Smoothness of response is a very important aspect of sound reproduction. The auditory system routinely accept high level of distortion. It would be a shock for many to know that we easily accept 50 % of THD in the bass...most woofers distort seriously in the low bass anyway and that includes numerous commercial woofers of distinction and great price. Smoothness of response means that the listening room-subwoofer system responds in a linear fashion to change in frequency. Peaks and valleys that are so common in bass reproduction impart that artificiality to the sound... So it is important to seek smoothness if not necessarily flatness in bass reproduction. It can be shown rather easily that the vast majority of people prefer a smooth but rising bass curve.. in other words a response skewed toward the lowest frequencies sloping down in the highest frequencies... So while it is good to reduce IMD and that usually involves addressing it at the level of drivers and the simplest way to do that is to use more subwoofers.. since the sheer number afford individual drivers to work less, the sum produces less distortion anyway so.. you have the best of both worlds.. Smoothness of response and reduced distortion level both audibly and measurable.. One reason I love this solution and before we go into the debate about "slow" woofers and "fast" mains... a nonsense by the way, let it be said that thanks to Home Theater and the Car enthusiasts, yes, them we have a plethora of excellent low frequency drivers on the market .
Dear Frantz: I'm for smooth and even low bass response, nothing against it and nothing that couldn't achieve almost alway through two subwoofers in stereo fashion integration.
When I talk about the critical importance and paramount difference that makes reducing/lowering IMD I'm refering to the IMD in the main speakers: passive full range or not . This means that with my approach the main speakers does not run in its full frequwency range but liberated of the low bass range, say from 60hz-80hz and down where the self powered subs take from there to its subwoofer deep bass limit.
If you read what I posted including the link I posted you can see that I'm not talking to add subs mainly to even bass performance or to reinforce the bass system reinforcement that you can do it adding several subs and running the main speakers full range.
Well this is not my approach that's way different and specific for a two channel system and certainly not for HT like the Geedes/Harman approach.
I repeat the main target in my approach is to lower the IMD in the main speakers and to achieve this you need not only two subwoofers in true stereo integration but that the main speakers don't handle any more the low bass frequency range. All this in favor to achieve Excellence level reproducing music in any passive ( in some active too. ) speakers home audio system and don't worry about " smooth/even " bass response because if you can't achieve it with two subs ( that through my experiences and other people experiences almost always can. ) you always can add additional ones for that smooth/even bass response target.
Frantz, IMHO you and me are talking of different subjects with different targets where we need different " approachs " to achieve those targets. What you are doing is totally different of what I'm doing and your results are different from what I achieve/result.
To understand what I mean with this Excellence level target in a two channel audio system the only way IMHO is to hear it experience it sampling my approach in an audio system. I already experienced the Harman/Geedes approach and mine and for that Excellence target IMHO the approach I have works just great like no other one I experienced before.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul
Again this is not MY approach. it is Dr GEddes .. I understand your point. ALl speakers do not suffer from IMD when they have to reproduce bass some actually take it away from the "mains" anyway by their one selves. An approach I personally like. Some speakers like the top of the line Von Shweikert and the Evolution Acoustics do that. They have a powered low bass. What I have found whoever is that I need the mains to be able to reproduce with ease 50 Hz, with power and definition.. Mini-monitors plus subs however good the subs may be have always sounded to me like, well, mini-monitors with subs added ... I prefer a full range doing its thing .. I also don't like to mess with the main signal.. I am not against active crossovers.
I am pleased you have achieve good results with your approach ..
as you so well put it:
Enjoy the Music
Again this is not MY approach. it is Dr GEddes
.. I understand your point. ALl speakers do not suffer from IMD when they have to reproduce bass some actually take it away from the "mains" anyway by their one selves. An approach I personally like. Some speakers like the top of the line Von Shweikert and the Evolution Acoustics do that. They have a powered low bass. What I have found whoever is that I need the mains to be able to reproduce with ease 50 Hz, with power and definition.. Mini-monitors plus subs however good the subs may be have always sounded to me like, well, mini-monitors with subs added ... I prefer a full range doing its thing .. I also don't like to mess with the main signal.. I am not against active crossovers.I am pleased you have achieve good results with your approach ..
as you so well put it:
Enjoy the Music
Raul
Again this is not MY approach. it is Dr GEddes
I am pleased you have achieve good results with your approach ..
as you so well put it:
Enjoy the Music
Dear Frantz: Yes, that's why I point out " passive speaker designs ".
I wonder if in those active ( low bass ) full range speakers designs, like the VS/Evolution you name it and other ones out there, could receive a benefit ( other that even/smooth response in room. ) adding two stand alone active top subs design.
I'm thinking that if in those LB active speakers you add those two subs by-passing/switching off the speakers LB active module could be at least one advantage: that you can set up the main speakers position to achieve its best in the room whith ( in its frequency range that is almost impossible to do it when the bass range is there too. In someway or the other always will be a " co0mpromise ", nothing is perfect. ) out " matter/unaware "/take in count the bass range and at the same time and due that the subs are stand alone units you will have the best in-room set up for the bass frequency range performance too.
Even I could think ( I can't be sure about. ) that top designs subwoofers coming from a manufacturer that is a especialist in subs design and where they have years of research/test to know almost you have to know on the subject and in no other kind of speakers could outperform in quality performance the main speaker subs design. I'm not saying this is happening or that the main speakers designers are not good enough but IMHO the subwoofer design is a very specific/stand alone/unique area on transducers designs, it is only a " question " and the possibility that that can/could happen.
The subwoofer whole subject is really interesting and I think that is an audio area where some of us need to " explore " more in deep, I'm doing this because I would like to improve my knowledge level on the subject in favor of better quality performance to reproduce music.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Raul
I am of the opinion, now, that subwoofers are always needed regardless of the low bass capabilities of the mains. I mentioned some of the speakers I know with active woofers to point that these speakers have addressed the issue of Intermodualtion Distortion. I also believe such can be addressed with particular care with a passive system. I personally prefer speakers with Active low bass units, although I have never owned one, I have had extensive experience with such. In particular Genesis 2 and Genesis 200.
It could appear quite comical to marry a speaker such as the Genesis 200 or the 1.1 (These speakers have independently active movable column sub/woofers) with additional separated subwoofers.. By their lone selves they are as capable as the better subwoofers... yet, I believe one could obtain better bass reproduction by adding one or more subs to such speakers..
I also would like to try the multi subs approach with something like the TacT or the DeQX.. these units can get the timing absolutely right. In my experiences with multi subs, helped by the wonderful and ultra-cheap Behringer DCX-2496.. i could get the timing right for the subwoofers in front of the mains but it is impossible to get it perfect for the subwooer in the back as this would necessitate the signal from the subwoofer to be (slightly) launched before that of the mains ... that the DCX can't do since it is not in the mains signal chain. I think someone here, terryJ is doing just that ...
I am of the opinion, now, that subwoofers are always needed regardless of the low bass capabilities of the mains. I mentioned some of the speakers I know with active woofers to point that these speakers have addressed the issue of Intermodualtion Distortion. I also believe such can be addressed with particular care with a passive system. I personally prefer speakers with Active low bass units, although I have never owned one, I have had extensive experience with such. In particular Genesis 2 and Genesis 200.
It could appear quite comical to marry a speaker such as the Genesis 200 or the 1.1 (These speakers have independently active movable column sub/woofers) with additional separated subwoofers.. By their lone selves they are as capable as the better subwoofers... yet, I believe one could obtain better bass reproduction by adding one or more subs to such speakers..
I also would like to try the multi subs approach with something like the TacT or the DeQX.. these units can get the timing absolutely right. In my experiences with multi subs, helped by the wonderful and ultra-cheap Behringer DCX-2496.. i could get the timing right for the subwoofers in front of the mains but it is impossible to get it perfect for the subwooer in the back as this would necessitate the signal from the subwoofer to be (slightly) launched before that of the mains ... that the DCX can't do since it is not in the mains signal chain. I think someone here, terryJ is doing just that ...
I was always fascinated with the Infinite Baffle Subwoofers (IBS) since I read a enthusiastic description of the bass quality of a system in Japan with an IBS built in the basement.
When can we consider that a subwoofer is an IBS? Is there any expression relating Vas and the minimum volume of a IBS?
The rule of thumbs is r the cavity volume in which the drivers are placed has to be at least 10 times the sum of the Vas... The main advantage of such subs is the number of drivers one can use.. which afford the owner to use the drivers in their most linear region... Output is galactic and they reach the single digits with ease outputs .. They can shake the whole house because of that if called (and even when not called) for. They are built-in in the house, not portable a major inconvenient if one is an apartment dweller. They are incredibly efficient, cost effective and extremely high performance ... There is forum exclusively dedicated to Infinite Baffle subwoofers. They are really easy to make and completely invisible if one needs to ... The people there, are very knowledgeable but have at times what I find to be an anti-audiophile bent .. The amount of information and knowledge is however nonpareil and the willingness to help anyone in such projects most enthusiastic.
Cult of the Infinitely Baffled
Thanks for the link. Do you think that it is possible to use one IFB at the front wall and two subs using the Geddes placement? BTW, can one of the three subs be located at the back wall ?
Microstrip
That is my new dream set up.. IB as "main" sub and two sealed subs in the front plane. I have never tried subs in the back in 2-ch. I find the arrangement odd.. I think however Terryj is using such an arrangement and with devices such as the TacT or DeQX or even the Behringer DCX, it should be possible as one can adjust the delay to have the subs in correct timing.. Since most of the music is in front of me in 2-ch I have never tried a sub in the back...
That is my new dream set up.. IB as "main" sub and two sealed subs in the front plane. I have never tried subs in the back in 2-ch. I find the arrangement odd.. I think however Terryj is using such an arrangement and with devices such as the TacT or DeQX or even the Behringer DCX, it should be possible as one can adjust the delay to have the subs in correct timing.. Since most of the music is in front of me in 2-ch I have never tried a sub in the back...
I use two DCX2496's in my system. I have one dedicated to front mains, and the other dedicated to center and surrounds. The front mains controls timing of the mids/highs and the mid bass and sub bass drivers. When all are properly aligned in time, the results with bass transients are breathtaking.
You would need to delay the mids/uppers, and for that, the DCX would have to be controlling them as well.
I use them as-delivered from the factory. I lab-tested each unit before installation, to make sure that it was operating per specifications. They replace the State-Variable (later came to be known as Linkwitz-Reily) filter / crossover that I designed in 1981. I was concerned at first that they would degrade the imaging, transparency, etc., but that has not been the case. I did have one unit with noisy IDC ribbon cable, which I had to repair. It is now a spare, in the closet.
I use them as-delivered from the factory. I lab-tested each unit before installation, to make sure that it was operating per specifications. They replace the State-Variable (later came to be known as Linkwitz-Reily) filter / crossover that I designed in 1981. I was concerned at first that they would degrade the imaging, transparency, etc., but that has not been the case. I did have one unit with noisy IDC ribbon cable, which I had to repair. It is now a spare, in the closet.
Mark
I am pleased they are working for you.. Many audiophiles are suing them in rather serious systems, I must say. I didn't find their sound to my liking above the bass region YMMV.. Now this the thing one must get used to with Behringer: They are incredibly inexpensive for what they can do and their performance when they work is very, very good. Quality control is not always stellar and bad units come once in a while ...
There is a lot of activity on the DCX 2496 transforming into a super unit ... I haven't venture beyond bass with it but for the adventurous ...
Have a look at this website
DCX 2496 Tweaks SITE
I am pleased they are working for you.. Many audiophiles are suing them in rather serious systems, I must say. I didn't find their sound to my liking above the bass region YMMV.. Now this the thing one must get used to with Behringer: They are incredibly inexpensive for what they can do and their performance when they work is very, very good. Quality control is not always stellar and bad units come once in a while ...
There is a lot of activity on the DCX 2496 transforming into a super unit ... I haven't venture beyond bass with it but for the adventurous ...
Have a look at this website
DCX 2496 Tweaks SITE
Not much I could find on tweaks, but the site has lots of good links to articles about the pitfalls of passive Xovers, which I found interesting reading.
Similar threads
