Yes, intermodulation produces sum and difference tones. For instance; if you pluck the lowest string on a bass guitar (41hz) and the next string up (55hz) you will get both of those tones and the intermodulation tones at 96hz at 14hz.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Anybody PREFER listening to music on bookshelves or tower speakers only (without the subwoofer)?
- Thread starter NewbieAudiophileExpert
- Start date
Ahh thank you for the example. That explains a lot.
How far below the fundamentals are the intermodulation tones on a bass guitar in your example? Thanks
Looks like 41-14= 27Hz if that’s what you are asking.
Someone who knows better than me might describe it in fraction of an octave.
I was asking how many dB below fundamental i.e. how loud are IM tones compared to fundamental tones. Sorry for confusion.
Great question. Sorry.
I don’t know. It would depend on a lot of things such as how the guitar is made and the amp circuit if it is electric. If you have a guitar you can measure them. I know that when you tune a guitar to itself (relative tuning by fretting strings and matching tones) you can clearly hear the effect when the strings are not the same.
I came across this and it’s nothing new we haven’t already read here:
www.studybass.com
Also checked out some other bassist forums. Some of them even say that below a certain frequency tends to cut out at mastering time.
Probably better to look for evidence in recordings. Maybe that Telarc 1812 Overture has some in it. It was after all designed to give the audiophile a har…. You know what I mean.
If you don’t intend to watch movies or listen to special effects probably you are safe to keep it flat to 25Hz to be safe. Then there is electronica. Hard to say how much they really put in there.
Modulation happens but it’s really hard to say if it comes out at levels which are discernible. Might have to experiment with an actual bass and spectrum analyzer I guess.
Bass Frequency Range | StudyBass
In this part of the series we'll look at the frequency range of the bass and where it fits in with many other popular instruments.
www.studybass.com
Also checked out some other bassist forums. Some of them even say that below a certain frequency tends to cut out at mastering time.
Probably better to look for evidence in recordings. Maybe that Telarc 1812 Overture has some in it. It was after all designed to give the audiophile a har…. You know what I mean.
If you don’t intend to watch movies or listen to special effects probably you are safe to keep it flat to 25Hz to be safe. Then there is electronica. Hard to say how much they really put in there.
Modulation happens but it’s really hard to say if it comes out at levels which are discernible. Might have to experiment with an actual bass and spectrum analyzer I guess.
Stuff that was mastered for Vinyl, tended to keep the lower bass rolled off or completely filtered, so as to avoid the tonearm resonance - which should in a perfect world be between 7Hz and 12Hz - but all too often people don't understand matching cartridge/stylus compliance to tonearm mass - so put a low compliance MC (common nowadays) into a lovely vintage low mass arm.... and you can end up with a resonance frequency up around 18Hz or more, and affecting the frequencies up to 30Hz or more potentially....I came across this and it’s nothing new we haven’t already read here:
Bass Frequency Range | StudyBass
In this part of the series we'll look at the frequency range of the bass and where it fits in with many other popular instruments.
Also checked out some other bassist forums. Some of them even say that below a certain frequency tends to cut out at mastering time.
Probably better to look for evidence in recordings. Maybe that Telarc 1812 Overture has some in it. It was after all designed to give the audiophile a har…. You know what I mean.
If you don’t intend to watch movies or listen to special effects probably you are safe to keep it flat to 25Hz to be safe. Then there is electronica. Hard to say how much they really put in there.
Modulation happens but it’s really hard to say if it comes out at levels which are discernible. Might have to experiment with an actual bass and spectrum analyzer I guess.
Hence many recordings originally mastered in the Vinyl era, won't have much in the lower bass area. Those that do, would be considered "torture tests" - recordings to use to test whether the TT/Cartridge is optimally matched and set up! (and if it isn't the risk of mistracking, and permanent destruction of the record is ever present!).
Brothers in Arms in 1985 had quite good low bass - especially the kick drum... but it was remastered by 87? - and the lower bass was toned down (sadly).
Lots of (music) recordings that have "heavy bass" (mostly electronica) actually don't have much down below 50Hz
Yes I agree. Most of them don’t have a lot below 50hz. They have to sound “bassy” on normal everyday speakers and most won’t go below 50Hz so they may play with harmonics to make them seem like they have deep bass.
I guess we mention electronica only simply because they are not limited by fundamental notes of strings and instruments.
Now about Brothers in Arms - what’s wrong with them? They cut the deep bass for remastering on CD? Some crazy decisions taken by these mastering engineers.
My experience is for obvious reasons bookshelf speakers are much better in environments where you sit up to 6-8 feet from them - much better coherence and so on. Tower floor-standing speakers may perform better in a larger room. My -expensive- end game speakers for a larger room performed pitifully in my smaller down-sized environment when I moved.
IMO these days with a capable setup that is able to offload lower frequencies from your main speakers and offloads those to a carefully placed subwoofer is a superior option. It's more flexible, more coherent anywhere you place the stuff.
IMO these days with a capable setup that is able to offload lower frequencies from your main speakers and offloads those to a carefully placed subwoofer is a superior option. It's more flexible, more coherent anywhere you place the stuff.
Totally. The best position for imaging and reflection management is completely different from the best position for deep bass. I almost consider the tower style speaker a relic of a past era. Just how I think about it.
It's just a different capacity speaker for larger rooms and for peeps that want to really get some dynamic range happening in large rooms at louder SPLs. I've had large and small speakers and I would take a large speaker over a small one dependent on space constraints as you mentioned.
No - it was originally recorded digitally - and both the CD and the LP versions had great kickdrum bass...
Why the remastered and lowered the bass levels, I think ultimately was part of the "loudness wars" process - but it is really sad, as it completely lost the visceral "chest thump" impact the first editions had - none of the later remasterings got that back.
One of the first Sat/Sub setups I recall was the Revox Piccolo in the 80's....
Still, there is a big difference between a straight stereo setup, and something designed for home theatre.
The Sub's appropriate for stereo music - are typically anemic compared to those designed for LFE on movies. (often with little or nothing below 20Hz) - but in reality these are external woofers, and not Sub-Woofers.
And many of the subs designed for movie LFE.... are just not much good at rendering the texture and tone of acoustic bass instruments.... ie: they ain't "Hi-Fi" ... (and some of them make very good SUB-woofers... ie: below 20Hz, but need the support of external woofers, like the music appropriate types mentioned above, to properly cover the 20Hz to 80Hz range!)
But as we move into the era of "Spatial Room Correction" - where all the woofers in a system can be used together to boost and correct each other (as proposed by Dirac) - The Room matching issues will be minimised and gains maximised....
I think full range speakers are about to make a "comeback"
Bookshelf placed for imaging plus 4x15” subs placed optimally and managed optimally would be better than a tower right?
I see that makes sense. It’s really sad.
Maybe, maybe not. I would still go for a tower/large cabinet. Bookshelves are going on stands so the footprint is the same and the height is a factor that might be in the bookshelf speakers' favor. So it's 50:50 I think. Subs are required for a endgame system.
Yes definitely. You can optimize the woofers in the tower along with any other woofers or subs in the room. Still wouldn’t it be better for the DSP to access the woofer in the tower via digital crossover directly?
It’s not a terrible compromise to control it through the existing crossover in any case and towers are very space efficient.
Yes for 15” subs you still want the mains to be comfortable down to 50Hz.
The point made by dlaloum is right. Most of these are separate woofer systems.
I sort of made that mistake with my current system. It does go down to 43Hz but not with the power I want. Also I was trying to use the “sub” crossed over to 100hz to be a band aid for the issues the monitors were having around 80-100Hz vis a vis the room and their position. It’s not a good idea.
Better to treat the room and position the mains as best as possible then apply DSP to that. Then crossover at a lower frequency to true subs (I don’t define them as under 20Hz that would be infrasonics). Than DSP those.
Ideally the bass unit in a tower could be accessed directly either via a digital channel or with a pre amp input.
Last edited:
Similar threads
