Help me decide a subwoofer for music only and high WAF

[dped90]

I have zero experience using room correction software like DIRAC Live or Audiolense, but after I've done some number of mic recording measurements and saved them to the app, doesn't the interfaces of those apps allow you to set the convolving filter to only take effect near the 70Hz and below crossover point? If yes, then would not the RC software and my stereo DAC alone make this all happen?

 

[ZolaIII]

two enclosed heavily linearized individually by dsp, 10 inches or more...
practically accept a small hole in the crossing more than the opposite especially in your case... ;-)
and diy can be a nice option there are so many thing available now... ;-)
(for music acoustic requirements etc. even if set back on the level side, pressing on 20/25-45hz is often useful ;-) )

No hole and more shallow crossing point (Buterrwor - 3 instead of L-R - 6) with lot effort (PEQ) that's in line on and after crossover point that's affected by it. Why? Scalability when below crossover point parameters change (ISO 226 2003) and that it can more faithful produce peaks directly in area crossover point affects.

 

[ZolaIII]

I have zero experience using room correction software like DIRAC Live or Audiolense, but after I've done some number of mic recording measurements and saved them to the app, doesn't the interfaces of those apps allow you to set the convolving filter to only take effect near the 70Hz and below crossover point? If yes, then would not the RC software and my stereo DAC alone make this all happen?

Those won't do this work, eventually to some point they will but you really don't want to pay for full Dirac licence (multi sub full range, or at least I don't) on anything (800+ $/€).

 

[morillon]

it's just from experience..then there is the theory and the actions ;-)
(and perhaps a level of requirement concerning the bass which means that I am often disappointed in the management of this register)

we can also only try to create a subwoofer dedicated to the extreme bass 20 /45..not the bass.. rather easy (and useful) because no big need for level but not where it presents the essential of our typical problems of our pieces....
easy and interresting
;-)

No hole and more shallow crossing point (Buterrwor - 3 instead of L-R - 6) with lot effort (PEQ) that's in line on and after crossover point that's affected by it. Why? Scalability when below crossover point parameters change (ISO 226 2003) and that it can more faithful produce peaks directly in area crossover point affects.

 

[ZolaIII]

@morillon low and sub bass but the area to mid bass and even uper bass needs to follow smoothly (actual influence is all way up to mid main tones 1 KHz - difference of straight to gently sloped down or better say falling in natural room response) and you won't achieve that either from woffer's (high crossover point, not enough dynamic power...) from mains or if crossings sub's low. And it charges with SPL a lot. It's not theory (most scientific researches ever done are about equal loudness compensation) but hard and tricky to achieve in reality.

 

[morillon]

@morillon low and sub bass but the area to mid bass and even uper bass needs to follow smoothly (actual influence is all way up to mid main tones 1 KHz - difference of straight to gently sloped down or better say falling in natural room response) and you won't achieve that either from woffer's (high crossover point, not enough dynamic power...) from mains or if crossings sub's low. And it charges with SPL a lot. It's not theory (most scientific researches ever done are about equal loudness compensation) but hard and tricky to achieve in reality.

just..
managing the extreme bass which does not require a high level in acoustic music and is very interesting is rather easy...
when whatever we say about demanding music the treatment of the bass remains difficult as it is linked to our acoustic concerns of our pieces etc even with dsp...
;-)
(so in case of problems, dedicating our sub to the extreme bass is not useless if it concerns us on the music side)
(ps the extreme bass is for me under the fundamental of a 4-string double bass (41hz)... often there is incomprehension in our exchanges because each other very poorly locates the relationship between what they hear and what it is in terms of frequencies ;-) )

 

[ZolaIII]

@morillon goal is to achieve that it translates as faithful as possible (true peaks in material to one's heard) and to SPL level.
It's not really possible with snapshot (RTA lags) but you can observe it by watching to it. So here goes nothing:

By all means it's not a sub or even very low bass.

 

[dped90]

This all looks even worse than I thought; harder to achieve and the final results may not sound all too good.
FWIW, my mains are at least 93db/w/m, placed about 10 ft from chair. Room 20 ft x 12; empties into a 9 ft x 8 ft kitchen. Both rooms have same triangular ceiling that peaks at 11 ft. Not much furniture in listening room.

Presumably, my average listening level will be ~ 4 sones, perhaps less. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sone
My hearing is pretty sensitive, so I can't imagine setting the main volume to be much more than ~ 65db @
70db at 10 ft away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contour Do any of these facts improve the chances for better sound when trying to integrate these Rythmik subs with the mains?

 

[ZolaIII]

@dped90 I am in a bad small room tho deticated (A/V) and minimal (regarding furniture and stuff) but close to back wall listening position and I with lot effort and work achieved that it sounds very good and with not really expensive nor top tire equipment. It's not franken, bad looking or hard to operate either.

 

[dped90]

Would I get MUCH better results if instead of using a two channel DAC I used this?

Merging Technologies | Hapi MkII Mic Pre & AD/DA Converter with RAVENNA & AES67

Hapi MkII is a small format RAVENNA and AES67 compatible Network Mic Preamp and ADDA converter with operating sample rates from 44.1 to 384kHz DXD/DSD256. Supporting the same I/O options as its big brother, Horus; Hapi is perfect for smaller budgets where compromise on sound is not an option.

www.merging.com

 

[ZolaIII]

Would I get MUCH better results if instead of using a two channel DAC I used this?

Merging Technologies | Hapi MkII Mic Pre & AD/DA Converter with RAVENNA & AES67

Hapi MkII is a small format RAVENNA and AES67 compatible Network Mic Preamp and ADDA converter with operating sample rates from 44.1 to 384kHz DXD/DSD256. Supporting the same I/O options as its big brother, Horus; Hapi is perfect for smaller budgets where compromise on sound is not an option.

www.merging.com

Nope, you would get better results if you work hard and put a lot of effort into it. I would say how MiniDSP Flex or Flex HT are more than good enough, only thing missing is equal loudness compensation. Some of RME DAC's and interfaces have it along with some others. But you don't want interface if you don't intend to go balanced and all the way (sub's, amplifier or active speakers inputs). It costs more and you can't get ground loops caused by cable but you don't really need balanced in home, unbalanced with normal cables to 5~10 m will work perfectly fine.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Loudness compensation isn't necessarily a must, especially if you dont vary your normal listening volume a lot.

 

[ZolaIII]

Loudness compensation isn't necessarily a must, especially if you dont vary your normal listening volume a lot.

Well it does vary a lot. From background listening to mood, shout-out, active focused listening, late night and so on and from person to person. Creating two or three profiles with it accounted in works but it's much better when it simply scale with SPL level.

 

[dped90]

Loudness compensation isn't necessarily a must, especially if you dont vary your normal listening volume a lot.

I live in an 1100 sq ft two story co-op apartment. I'm on the top floor and the walls are reasonably thick, but the floor is crappy and the woman below me would complain if too loud. Of course, I still will decouple the mains and the subs from the floor as best I can, for better sound quality, not just for her sake. But as I said, I rather doubt I'd be doing SPLs much above ~ 65db @ 1kHz from 10 ft away.

What worries me is that given how hearing sensitivity changes vs frequency, wouldn't I still need some kind of Fletcher-Munson based Windows plug-in (all music via pc; no CDs, vinyl or tape), even if the only time that I likely change listening levels is to lower it?

 

[dlaloum]

I live in an 1100 sq ft two story co-op apartment. I'm on the top floor and the walls are reasonably thick, but the floor is crappy and the woman below me would complain if too loud. Of course, I still will decouple the mains and the subs from the floor as best I can, for better sound quality, not just for her sake. But as I said, I rather doubt I'd be doing SPLs much above ~ 65db @ 1kHz from 10 ft away.

What worries me is that given how hearing sensitivity changes vs frequency, wouldn't I still need some kind of Fletcher-Munson based Windows plug-in (all music via pc; no CDs, vinyl or tape), even if the only time that I likely change listening levels is to lower it?

I find a fletcher-munson (or equivalent) loudness/late night listening mode invaluable...

However - the level of "adjustment" needs to either be based on calibrated reference levels (as provided by movies under normal circumstances) - or, primarily for music - needs to be manually adjustable for material where there is no reference level (like old style integrated amps of the 1980's that had a "loudness" dial)

If you have an AVR/AVP with Audyssey, it will also include DynamicEQ and DynamicVol... which do the job (EQ does the Loudness, DynVol does compression, which can be usefull late at night).
Other AVR/AVP's with Dolby Surround will have Dolby's Late Night and Loudness modes, if they have THX processing, then THX also has a fletcher munson "loudness" mode.
All the above are of variable value for music, due to the lack of a valid reference level... (unless you can vary the level at the source - but that is done digitally, and risks potentially degrading the dynamic range.... still... )

So options are available depending on how you design & setup your rig...

Although the core of my setup is a Windows10 HTPC, I do not do any processing/filtering on the source, as I leave that to the AVR/AVP.... they key thing being, there is no way (without massive amounts of messing about, and expense) - to get a proper decoded, mixer applied output from a Win PC into 5.1.4 channels (my setup)... for a base/basic 5.1 or 7.1 setup it is much more viable - but even then, the cost of the DAC to output those channels, is pretty much the same as the cost of an AVR/AVP.
So although everything I play comes from the PC.... I simply feed the raw output in its original format, straight out to the AVR/AVP, and let it do all the decoding, mixing, and EQ.

Last time I checked what it would take to do everything the AVR does on my PC, it ended up costing substantially more than the AVR.... in addition to which integrating the software, and then keeping it stable, every time any of the various bits of software involved get an update, is a headache I didn't want... every few months there will be a glitch when some driver or software is updated... and I still need to do troubleshooting several times a year, but its an order of magnitude less than if I tried to do everything on the PC... as a PC guy since the 80's that's a bit sad... but it is also pragmatic, and ensures that other members of the household can reliably enjoy the setup too.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I live in an 1100 sq ft two story co-op apartment. I'm on the top floor and the walls are reasonably thick, but the floor is crappy and the woman below me would complain if too loud. Of course, I still will decouple the mains and the subs from the floor as best I can, for better sound quality, not just for her sake. But as I said, I rather doubt I'd be doing SPLs much above ~ 65db @ 1kHz from 10 ft away.

What worries me is that given how hearing sensitivity changes vs frequency, wouldn't I still need some kind of Fletcher-Munson based Windows plug-in (all music via pc; no CDs, vinyl or tape), even if the only time that I likely change listening levels is to lower it?

You're probably overcomplicating it a bit . If you cross the sub reasonably high, you can get the correct level in the bass by adjusting the gain of the sub.

 

[dped90]

You're probably overcomplicating it a bit . If you cross the sub reasonably high, you can get the correct level in the bass by adjusting the gain of the sub.

The problem is that my completed midwoofers which I had shipped to Troy-and which were perfectly cloned by Jim Salk a few years ago-were designed by Gary Dahl https://www.diyaudio.com/community/members/g3dahl.12216/ Gary's a brilliant DIYer, but perhaps in overzealous pursuit of further minimizing IM distortion-from the already superbly performing GPA Altec 416-8B drivers-he chose to use sealed 3 cu ft cabinets and some quantity of Bonded Logic denim insulation to restrict the cut off to 70Hz. Indeed, Gary did achieve his goal, as Troy's measurements show when he tested my Altec clones.

Not surprisingly, Gary's plan was to fill in the bottom end with his DIYed pair of Acoustic Elegance 15" subs with passive radiators, as he did some time ago. But last year, posting at the above forum, I was shocked to learn that Gary only uses those subs for home theater, and that for music he gets adequate (real???????) bass from corner room gain. But I'm fearing that the real reason why he stopped using the subs was because the Altec midwoofers' 70Hz cutoff leaves too big an acoustic hole to seamlessly cross and/or because of too big a tonality difference between the Altecs and the subs, when having to cross that high.
Obviously, I thought that Gary had this all worked out so I didn't question the size of the sealed cabinets and therefore the Fr and other parameters which set the low frequency limit of the cabinets.

My pair or Rythmik F12 subs were also built by Jim Salk. Unfortunately, they have the aluminum diaphragms, so right off the bat that could create tonality issues between them and the Altecs.
https://greatplainsaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Classic-Series-416-8B-Spec-Sheet.pdf

I can't do anything about that potential problem but what, if anything, can I do to minimize coloration and incoherence when having to crossing them so high?

 

[ZolaIII]

I live in an 1100 sq ft two story co-op apartment. I'm on the top floor and the walls are reasonably thick, but the floor is crappy and the woman below me would complain if too loud. Of course, I still will decouple the mains and the subs from the floor as best I can, for better sound quality, not just for her sake. But as I said, I rather doubt I'd be doing SPLs much above ~ 65db @ 1kHz from 10 ft away.

What worries me is that given how hearing sensitivity changes vs frequency, wouldn't I still need some kind of Fletcher-Munson based Windows plug-in (all music via pc; no CDs, vinyl or tape), even if the only time that I likely change listening levels is to lower it?

ISO 226 2003

JRiver ISO 226 2003 in practice.
There are no self stand plugins either.
There are Denon AVR's and Yamaha amplifiers and AVR's that have it and I am afraid that's all that has left as it whose standard thing 20 years ago. Some interfaces also have it and EQ-APO.

 

[sigbergaudio]

The problem is that my completed midwoofers which I had shipped to Troy-and which were perfectly cloned by Jim Salk a few years ago-were designed by Gary Dahl https://www.diyaudio.com/community/members/g3dahl.12216/ Gary's a brilliant DIYer, but perhaps in overzealous pursuit of further minimizing IM distortion-from the already superbly performing GPA Altec 416-8B drivers-he chose to use sealed 3 cu ft cabinets and some quantity of Bonded Logic denim insulation to restrict the cut off to 70Hz. Indeed, Gary did achieve his goal, as Troy's measurements show when he tested my Altec clones.

Not surprisingly, Gary's plan was to fill in the bottom end with his DIYed pair of Acoustic Elegance 15" subs with passive radiators, as he did some time ago. But last year, posting at the above forum, I was shocked to learn that Gary only uses those subs for home theater, and that for music he gets adequate (real???????) bass from corner room gain. But I'm fearing that the real reason why he stopped using the subs was because the Altec midwoofers' 70Hz cutoff leaves too big an acoustic hole to seamlessly cross and/or because of too big a tonality difference between the Altecs and the subs, when having to cross that high.
Obviously, I thought that Gary had this all worked out so I didn't question the size of the sealed cabinets and therefore the Fr and other parameters which set the low frequency limit of the cabinets.

My pair or Rythmik F12 subs were also built by Jim Salk. Unfortunately, they have the aluminum diaphragms, so right off the bat that could create tonality issues between them and the Altecs.
https://greatplainsaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Classic-Series-416-8B-Spec-Sheet.pdf

I can't do anything about that potential problem but what, if anything, can I do to minimize coloration and incoherence when having to crossing them so high?

That there's an inherent "tonality" in different driver materials is somewhat of a myth. In our speaker systems (with speakers and subwoofers explicitly designed to work together) we have aluminium cones in the subwoofers and paper cones in the midbass. There's no special reason to believe the Rhythmiks can't be integrated properly with the midwoofers.

Can you control the gain of the midwoofers independently of the rest? And how high do they go? If you can get some kind of EQ with a tilt function on your PC that should work too, so you can just lift up the low-end across both subwoofers and midwoofers.

 

[Mnyb]

Re loudness compensation the RME DAC has this as a calibrated feature you can decide a level for when it’s influence is nothing.

Solves half the problem there still no standard monitoring level for music production so we still have no idea about which level it was when the producers thought that the tonal balance was ok .

But this has to work fairly good , compared to other solutions.

Another good one was Yamaha that had variable loudness on thier amps in the old days , when listening at low levels you could twiddle the knob a bit until it sounded ok to you .