Bass and subwoofers

[livinon2wheels]

Except that almost all recordings mono the bass, not keeping it "as it was" to start with. Now, some variation in phase at low frequencies might be a good idea, or not, but you DO NOT KNOW if there was any in the original master, because most often it's been removed, and the bass is mono.

There are many issues involved in why this started to happen (LP cutting), continued (woofer excursions, etc), and just lives on. The discussion and various ideas remain, with much unhelpful name calling (don't mean here!) and tossing about of metrics that "do not mean what you think they mean". Yeah, it's a bit frustrating.

I didn't realize that making the bass monaural was the common practice. As I think about orchestral positioning on stage, I seem to remember that kettle drums and Contrabass instruments are in the back and to left of stage center with tubas and such on the right of center. It seems to me as I think about this that its an attempt to spread instruments that play in the lower octaves across the sound field so that the bass energy is relatively evenly distributed but that in no way makes the live performance monaural...I can only wonder why throwing all the low frequency content into one bucket is necessary or useful...is there some technical limitation when pressing LP's that forces this to be done?

 

[anotherhobby]

I didn't realize that making the bass monaural was the common practice.

It's not in Jazz, most electronic genres, or folk/Americana. I don't know what genres it even is common to. I just see people claim it online, meanwhile my visualizer shows the opposite to me all day long. I've asked 3 friends that operate recording studios, and none of them do it and they all looked confused when I asked. I mean, it must be common in some genre since people like to make the claim?

 

[j_j]

It's not in Jazz, most electronic genres, or folk/Americana. I don't know what genres it even is common to. I just see people claim it online, meanwhile my visualizer shows the opposite to me all day long. I've asked 3 friends that operate recording studios, and none of them do it and they all looked confused when I asked.

Ask mastering people.

I have analyzed (and continue to analyze) lots of things. Remember we are only talking in the 20-300 range or so, and unless you filter your L and R signals to include only low frequencies you won't see anything. (Or alternatively if you have a system that shows you band by band, that would show stuff up.)

So, we don't agree.

 

[audiofooled]

While I agree with @j_j that bass is usually mono, there's this track as an example of large toms panned hard to the left:

 

[Sokel]

While I agree with @j_j that bass is usually mono, there's this track as an example of large toms panned hard to the left:

It's WAV analysis shows differences,yes,as the one I posted at the start of this thread:

 

[anotherhobby]

and unless you filter your L and R signals to include only low frequencies you won't see anything

Yes, that's precisely what my display does, which I thought the pic I posted in this thread showed quite clearly, but maybe you didn't look at it or understand what it was showing. It's a split screen with the top half full spectrum and the bottom half 10-80 Hz. I created the display because I was specifically interested in this topic. We clearly have observed different music, and that's fine. I do believe your analysis of whatever music you analyzed and I'm not debating the findings of what you found, I'm simply saying that depending on the genres one listens to (i.e. jazz, electronic, folk/Americana), there may actually be a lot of stereo bass in what they listen to.

 

[Thomas Lund]

We clearly have observed different music, and that's fine. I do believe your analysis of whatever music you analyzed and I'm not debating the findings of what you found, I'm simply saying that depending on the genres one listens to (i.e. jazz, electronic, folk/Americana), there may actually be a lot of stereo bass in what they listen to.

While LPs have restricted L/R difference at low frequency, the pick-up itself actually contributes enjoyable LF difference. Linear digital formats, however, often offer the actual LF fluctuations intended by the artist.

Perceptually, auditory envelopment (AE) may be regarded a messenger of friendly motion, and new 3D formats have the capacity to influence AE more in both directions than stereo. If you haven’t listened to extraordinary recordings by e.g. Morten Lindberg or Kimio Hamasaki on a decent 3D system, you may not know how high the AE bar has recently been raised.

Stereo, however, also offers golden AE examples, though the format depends even more on the listening room. Many Telarc recordings are extraordinary in this respect, for instance Jack Renner's recordings from Walthamstow Assembly Hall outside London, or Bruce Swedien’s Count Basie recordings at Universal Studios in Chicago as early as 1959. Contemporary pop/rock is also ripe with examples of AE contrasts, for instance much of George Massenburg’s work, Yello and Beyoncé; or listen to Billie Eilish’s I Didn’t Change My Number, where, in a bone-dry track, verses have correlated bass, developing into AE explosions in the choruses. Unless listened to in linear audio with neutral LF time-domain (i.e. headphones or a transparent stereo system/room), you may entirely miss such joy.

To know in which tracks/versions one ought to be able to hear this dimension, I prefer my ears and temporal integrity over a meter. Simply listen to the L/R difference and notice if it has VLF or at least LF content; and that the diff is without space monkeys (data reduction artefacts).

 

[j_j]

I have to point out that amplitude (or power) spectra are not the way to resolve stereo effects at any frequency. They are a part, but only a part. Time arrival is a key issue.

 

[Doodski]

@Thomas Lund. Hi Thomas. I have not seen you here before. What company do you hail from?

 

[Sokel]

@Thomas Lund. Hi Thomas. I have not seen you here before. What company do you hail from?

He is around quite a while,Genelec.

 

[Doodski]

He is around quite a while,Genelec.

O' cool... Great having Genelec here.

 

[Steven Holt]

This is a very intelligent discussion, so let me jump in and dumb it down a little. First, name me one integrated amp that has multiple subwoofer inputs. Less than 1500US please. It's simply not practical to have four damn subwoofers for the semi-casual listener. Not gonna happpen. Second, why can't you locate the subwoofer in the middle, between the speakers? Wouldn't this give you a nice LF average as opposed to a summed total? The way I understand it, this should give you a very nice radiant spread throughout the entire room, provided that it's not 'too big'.

 

[sigbergaudio]

This is a very intelligent discussion, so let me jump in and dumb it down a little. First, name me one integrated amp that has multiple subwoofer inputs. Less than 1500US please. It's simply not practical to have four damn subwoofers for the semi-casual listener. Not gonna happpen. Second, why can't you locate the subwoofer in the middle, between the speakers? Wouldn't this give you a nice LF average as opposed to a summed total? The way I understand it, this should give you a very nice radiant spread throughout the entire room, provided that it's not 'too big'.

I don't think anyone is expecting or suggesting that a semi-casual listener with a 1500usd integrated Amp should employ 4 subwoofers?

 

[Chromatischism]

This is a very intelligent discussion, so let me jump in and dumb it down a little. First, name me one integrated amp that has multiple subwoofer inputs. Less than 1500US please. It's simply not practical to have four damn subwoofers for the semi-casual listener. Not gonna happpen. Second, why can't you locate the subwoofer in the middle, between the speakers? Wouldn't this give you a nice LF average as opposed to a summed total? The way I understand it, this should give you a very nice radiant spread throughout the entire room, provided that it's not 'too big'.

If you only have one subwoofer, that is often the best place for it, on average.

 

[Steven Holt]

I don't think anyone is expecting or suggesting that a semi-casual listener with a 1500usd integrated Amp should employ 4 subwoofers?

Point taken; perhaps I was reading into things a bit too much.

 

[Duke]

This is a very intelligent discussion, so let me jump in and dumb it down a little. First, name me one integrated amp that has multiple subwoofer inputs. Less than 1500US please. It's simply not practical to have four damn subwoofers for the semi-casual listener. Not gonna happpen. Second, why can't you locate the subwoofer in the middle, between the speakers? Wouldn't this give you a nice LF average as opposed to a summed total? The way I understand it, this should give you a very nice radiant spread throughout the entire room, provided that it's not 'too big'.

I don't know whether any of my customers would describe themselves as "semi-casual", but the four-sub system I make (the "Swarm") uses a single amplifier to drive the four subs.

Note that a voltage divider network can be used to derive a line-level signal from a speaker-level signal if needed. REL subs have a voltage divider network built into them, as do many plate amps. Suitable voltage divider networks are available online, but by now we've probably exited the "semi-casual listener" category.