Can you trust a subwoofer by ear?

[FireEmblem]

Hey everyone, I've got another question until I finally pull the trigger tonight and either go with 5" + sub or just 7" without a sub.

I was under the impression that if I..

a) dial the sub down until it blends perfectly fine with the music, and I can't localize it and
b) I don't hear any room modes in my listening position, nor nulls

..the subwoofer would be somewhat usable for making mixing decisions, as the two big problems are avoided.

But thinking about it, boost can be only partially right?

So let's assume that at some dB the bass gets boomy. So I dial it down by 6dB and voila -> it sounds perfect.

But that perfect result is a mix of the subwoofers output plus whatever my room adds on top.

So if I actually want to precisely control and mix the lowend I assume headphones + spectrum analyzer are still superior?

So to speak, the sub would only be an addition for more joy and fun, but not necessarily something I want to rely on for mixing decision,
unless I'm in a acoustically well treated and measured place?

 

[Everett T]

When speaking of subs, or any mid to low bass output, your room is most important generally. Without knowing your listening habits, speakers, room size,.etc, you're flying blind looking for answers without them being just generic.

 

[FireEmblem]

When speaking of subs, or any mid to low bass output, your room is most important generally. Without knowing your listening habits, speakers, room size,.etc, you're flying blind looking for answers without them being just generic.

Okay, so headphones + spectrum analyser it is, unless one can afford an acoustically treated, measured and calibrated place.

 

[DVDdoug]

For "pro mixing" I'd recommend larger woofers or a subwoofer. A 7-inch woofer isn't going to give you "realistic bass" like what you hear from a kick drum or an amplified bass guitar, etc.

And of course, measurement and then acoustic treatment and EQ room correction.

Headphones can be helpful since you don't have "room problems". Headphones are a "different experience" and most pros avoid using them for mixing and mastering but they can help as long as you have some good reference recordings and you learn what a good mix sounds like on your particular headphones.

A spectrum analyzer doesn't tell you what the mix sounds like. It's more helpful for analyzing problems that you're hearing or to see high or low frequency background noise that you might not be hearing... Our hearing is less-sensitive at high & low frequencies and some "audio" frequencies are too high for some of us to hear.

 

[FireEmblem]

For "pro mixing" I'd recommend larger woofers or a subwoofer. A 7-inch woofer isn't going to give you "realistic bass" like what you hear from a kick drum or an amplified bass guitar, etc.

The idea is that if a sub isn't really of use without measurement and all, the 7" will just create fewer problems out of the box, because it doesn't transmit as much energy so it doesn't trigger so much of modes. (Although I had more modes with the 7" here than with 5" + sub, because I was able to dial down the sub until it blended well..)


Regarding room measurement, how's the error margin? If I do everything according to manual and post my REW measurements here, can I be sure that whatever EQ is being suggested based on that will make my room mostly neutral for mixing, or could simple, easily overlooked small measurement mistakes already completey screw the EQ correction?

Because that's the main reason I've been avoiding measurement yet, I feel it's a bit too hot for me as I am not very knowledgable in that regard. So I have to completely trust that I did nothing wrong + recommendations are correct, that bothers me a bit.

So finding a naturally more 'tame' setup that provide okayish cirumstances for mixing feels a bit more convenient to me. Most stuff is anyways evaluated better in headphones.

The only downside for the lowend in headphones is that I have to consider that any natural room will amplify it. But that can be done by using references as you said, and also by using analysing tools that objectively show the amount of low end energy.

 

[Everett T]

Okay, so headphones + spectrum analyser it is, unless one can afford an acoustically treated, measured and calibrated place.

How far do you sit from your mains? How large is your room? What are your current speakers? What is the music you're working with? More info is better...

 

[RickS]

Yes, subwoofers have been around since the mid 70s. We did not get automated measurement tech until the first AVRs and, somehow managed to enjoy subwoofers long before that.

 

[FireEmblem]

How far do you sit from your mains? How large is your room? What are your current speakers? What is the music you're working with? More info is better...

I'm sitting 60cm away from my speakers, which is just a consumer 2.1 system with subwoofer. 2"5 is the size of the speakers. My room is 4,30m long and 3,80m wide, but halfways the width decreases by 30cm, and the room is also L-shaped so on one end there's that L-kitche-niche.

I'm doing soundtrack and electronic synthesizer based music.

My mixes do translate pretty well everywhere, from bluetooth speakers to earbuds, even checked back on Adam T5V and T7V in my room (with and without sub) and of course in other people's homes on their systems. I use studio headphones additionally to my consumer system, but I know both, my pair of headphones and my consumer system pretty well. Never have I found something in my mixes somewhere else that was off or that I could only or not at all hear in my room with my system.

So the upgrade for me would be more based on having more fun during mixing than attempting to fix 'problems'. Maybe it would make me mix a bit faster, but that's something I could only evaluate after a long time, since my current system just has the big advantage of me knowing what good sound has to sound like on it.
But of course I don't know what I don't know, so maybe upgrading to studio monitors will give me any advantage I'm yet not aware of. The idea with the subwoofer was to control room modes (dedicated volume knob opposed to the otherwise minor LF and HF +/-2dB switches on monitors) better and having more lowend (my consumer sub goes only down to 50Hz).

But if I am introducing problems into my setup that I don't have now, I would spend money to actually get a down- and not an upgrade. Based on the fact that my mixes translate well, I assume my room must be naturally good enough for mixing. Maybe I just tend to listen more to what my headphones tell me though, I'm strongly believe that headphones, despite minor things like stereo-image, are superior for mixing because they just get the entire room out of the equation. It's not much of an issue to fix some spacing on speakers in the room later, but headphones give me a rock solid, always-the-same stage to work with.

I'm not sure, as I stated in my previous post, how accurate I could measure and EQ my place to make studio monitors (or a sub) worthwhile, simply because of the fact that I think if I can not myself guarantee that I know what I'm doing when I'm measuring, even doing it step by step after a manual, I cannot surely know that I measured things right and get correct EQ suggestions. And not ultimatively knowing whether or not my space is objectively neutral works straight against the idea of getting 'more neutral' studio gear.

So I've got a few options..

A) Just get a 7" monitor, assuming that it will just not stimulate room problems as much as a 5" + sub, and assuming that my room otherwise is good enough for mixing in terms of acoustics. However, as I said the 7" created two big room modes (not at my listening spot, but 2 metres away from me) while the 5" + sub didn't, as I could just dial the sub down until it blends better. Which brings me to..

B) Getting 5" + sub for better low end control. *If* that's actually true, simply derived from 7" creating a big mode while the sub didn't.

C) Getting whatever I like just for the fun of it, ultimatively making final decisions only in the headphones. But taking the advantage with me of things like improved stereo imaging with studio monitors

D) Doing the room measurement thing, but that would bother me, see above. I can't estimate how big the chance for errors is? Is there an absolute bulletproof method?


Personally I tend to C as of now. I think with headphones I should get the technical biggest precision when mixing, as long as the alternative isn't a very well acoustically treated, measured and callibrated studio space. I know the "feeling" of physical pressure is mostly missing in headphones, but that shouldn't affect working with the actual source audio if objectivity without room manipulations is the goal, and consumer and/or studio speakers should even straight out of the box be good enough to at least check back what it sounds like in the room. After all, we listen to thousands of songs in our places which provides us with a feeling for what good songs should sound like.

Thoughts?

 

[FireEmblem]

Yes, subwoofers have been around since the mid 70s. We did not get automated measurement tech until the first AVRs and, somehow managed to enjoy subwoofers long before that.

Somehow I cannot paste your reply into my previous post, so I'll respond here: For just the joy I wouldn't bother, I would buy it immediately. What I'm concerned with is how much precision I can expect. My current system is something I know inside out and that works for me. Introducing a new pair of speaker might introduce new problems, if those bigger drivers stimulate bigger reflections and therefore dips, boosts and whatnot.

The listening sessions I had here however sounded nice with all options, whether that was T5V + T10s subwoofer or the T7V alone. Sounded lovely, no audible resonances or muffling or bass buildups in my listening positon. But of course I would probably not be able to tell by ear if something was boosted or decreased by a few decibels here and there. On the other hand, small changes probably don't matter much and I tend to believe that anything that isn't audible/recognizable is nothing to worry about. If there were frequencies resonating, sticking audibly out or getting swallowed, that would be very clear indicators of room issues but I couldn't spot any of that with the songs I know.

Decisions decisions..

 

[Curvature]

Hey everyone, I've got another question until I finally pull the trigger tonight and either go with 5" + sub or just 7" without a sub.

I was under the impression that if I..

a) dial the sub down until it blends perfectly fine with the music, and I can't localize it and
b) I don't hear any room modes in my listening position, nor nulls

..the subwoofer would be somewhat usable for making mixing decisions, as the two big problems are avoided.

But thinking about it, boost can be only partially right?

So let's assume that at some dB the bass gets boomy. So I dial it down by 6dB and voila -> it sounds perfect.

But that perfect result is a mix of the subwoofers output plus whatever my room adds on top.

So if I actually want to precisely control and mix the lowend I assume headphones + spectrum analyzer are still superior?

So to speak, the sub would only be an addition for more joy and fun, but not necessarily something I want to rely on for mixing decision,
unless I'm in a acoustically well treated and measured place?

This approach is fine, although it is much harder compared to measurement plus listening.

For mixing, use headphones and a few different systems to check, and monitoring tools on top. Below 500Hz it is very easy to make mistakes. I would also recommend reading books. It is easier to train your hearing once you understand the physical events and psychoacoustic phenomena, and much easier to make practical purchasing decisions.

 

[TurtlePaul]

If you are buying a new set of monitors and maybe a sub, then just pay the hundred bucks for a UMIK…

 

[dualazmak]

...
Below 500Hz it is very easy to make mistakes. ...
...

I essentially agree with you.
For OP @FireEmblem, my post here would be of your reference and interest, I assume and hope.

 

[Keith_W]

Amir has repeatedly said that subwoofers are not for beginners, they are for advanced users. Yes, they have been around since the 1960's, and it has only been possible for home enthusiasts to take measurements affordably since the early 2000's. Before then, subwoofer use was rare, and subs had a bad reputation for ruining the sound as much as helping it.

It is now 2025, microphones are cheap, REW is free. IMO there is no excuse for any subwoofer owner to dial them in subjectively without measurements. I would even go so far as to say that if you don't have DSP, you should forget about subs. Only a very small minority of extremely lucky people can get away without DSP. If you don't want to learn how to take and read measurements, or spend some money on a microphone, that's fine - pay someone to come and do it for you, or hope you have a friend who knows how to do this.

 

[FireEmblem]

Okay so the overall verdict here seems to be that I can basically spare the sub unless I want to measure and calibrate things, as it wouldn't benefit me at all.

I'm still baffled though about reading this

I would even go so far as to say that if you don't have DSP, you should forget about subs.

because as I said, all my mixes translate fine, and I've been mixing with my consumer sub all the time. Wherever I listen to my tracks, no matter the room / audio system, there's never suddenly too little lowend or too much of it. It just fits.

Might be because I fix it in the headphones though. I don't really spend attention as in "and now I'm going to fix in the headphones" of course. I just switch between devices and adjust, maybe headphones just always bring me on the right track. Or my room is luckily very good for this, or both.

However, I like that thought a lot! Like, just buying a pair of Adam T7V or maybe the Kali LP6, enjoying the wider sound and better stereo-imaging and just knowing they're more neutral, so maybe I'll see some improvments how fast I can make the right mixing decisions, regardless of room topics.

But ultimatively I rely on my headphones for final decisions. Sounds like a good effort / output ratio.

I've got two questions though, as the headphone thing interests me especially:

Shouldn't be mixing in headphones be absolute superior? Put aside the air pressure thing for a while. In terms of frequency response, nothing will perhaps ever be as rock solid and reliable as headphones. Stuff like stereo imaging or reverb amount can be fixed on any system because here it's not about linear response, but just hearing the sound in the room. And I assume there'd be technical ways of objectively monitoring low end with analysing tools in a track to dial it in as precise as possible. I always trusted my ears and it worked, last but not least because I heard thousands of songs on these too of course, but I mean if someone wants the best certainty possible.

Let's assume a room is treated super well acoustically, and everything's measured and callibrated. There's still some % error margin, no? And some reflections and whatnot.
But on headphones, one could analyse the low end and just work technical with exact numbers, simply by comparing it to usual values and of course the dynamic of a given track. The 'hard math' should be more accurate than trying to estimate things through a room, no matter how well treated. This could even already take into account the average expected amounts of reverbation that a room will add to the low end. Do you guys think that's true?


The other question is:

If you don't want to learn how to take and read measurements, or spend some money on a microphone, that's fine - pay someone to come and do it for you, or hope you have a friend who knows how to do this.

If I wanted to learn this, how long will it take me? Are we talking about a couple of evenings learnig the basics, or many months and a lot of trial and error and experimenting?

Because from what I read, even placing the microphone a few centimeters more to one side could cause wrong measurements. The manual shared here in the forum looked pretty foolproof though. But I'd assume people who are really good with this would know how to avoid the typical pitfals or double-check some things, and they know what to spend attention to or be careful with. I however could only work off a step by step guide and not being certain that I didn't make mistake in the process, thus making the EQ that comes out of my shared results useless.

So.. am I overestimating how difficult it is, or to phrase it differently, how easily it is to mess the process up, or is it in fact like this? Also, could it be the cheapest $30 measurement microphone or does it have to be an expensive one?

Thanks everyone! And @dualazmak thanks for the link, but I really don't understand any of that.

 

[dualazmak]

....
....
.... And @dualazmak thanks for the link, but I really don't understand any of that.

Then, I fully agree with all the points of @Keith_W in his above post #13.

 

[Keith_W]

because as I said, all my mixes translate fine, and I've been mixing with my consumer sub all the time. Wherever I listen to my tracks, no matter the room / audio system, there's never suddenly too little lowend or too much of it. It just fits.

Good for you. It takes some intuition to adjust bass that you can't hear. Some sound engineers are like that, they just "know" what a level should be. If you can already get your mixes perfect, then you don't need to do anything.

Shouldn't be mixing in headphones be absolute superior? Put aside the air pressure thing for a while. In terms of frequency response, nothing will perhaps ever be as rock solid and reliable as headphones.

Not really. I discussed this with Sean Olive. He said that the range between 300Hz - 2-3kHz is where the performance of the headphone on your head most closely correlates with the test fixture. Above 2-3kHz, issues such as pinna shape and angle, length of ear canal, hearing loss, etc. means that what you hear isn't necessarily what is measured. Below 300Hz, issues such as headphone fit, spectacles, adequacy of seal, positional issues, etc. have a major influence on the frequency response.

The problem with headphones is that you have no way of measuring them on your head, unless you invest in a pair of in-ear microphones. Even the very best headphones need to be EQ'ed to remove all the unique variables your head and ears introduce.

The truth is, speakers and headphones have different sets of strengths and weaknesses. Certainly, headphones are cheaper and you don't have to worry about the room. But it is more difficult to obtain consistent measurements of headphones. Having said that, deviations from the measured response probably isn't as great as speakers. OTOH headphones give that "sound in your head" which is nowhere near realistic.

If I wanted to learn this, how long will it take me? Are we talking about a couple of evenings learnig the basics, or many months and a lot of trial and error and experimenting?

Look at the REW eBook and decide for yourself if that is something you want to spend time learning. It's okay if you don't want to learn all this stuff. Like I said, you could pay someone to dial it in for you, or hope that you know someone who is nice enough to do it for free. Or maybe a few beers.

So.. am I overestimating how difficult it is, or to phrase it differently, how easily it is to mess the process up, or is it in fact like this? Also, could it be the cheapest $30 measurement microphone or does it have to be an expensive one?

If you have an interface with 48V Phantom Power (which I presume you do, since you are making mixes) - a calibrated $50 Behringer ECM 8000 will do. If not, then get a UMIK-1 or UMIK-2 USB microphone. These start at about $120.

 

[RickS]

Have been using subwoofers since the late 70s for sound reproduction. As I mentioned, this was long before any automated calibration was available. I used in many different rooms, and while likely not “perfect”, always found I liked having the bottom octave reproduced. Getting better bass might take some speaker positioning, but my preference has been to have it. Until ARC, you had to judge using an SPL meter and your ears.

While am a measurement advocate, there rarely are any perfect speaker measurements. Ime, your likelihood of accurate bass is better with a subwoofer than without. Just because the measurements are not perfect, does not mean you will get an enjoyable result without a subwoofer rather than with. Most research bears this out. Does knowing the flaws in bass reproduction affect one’s opinion of how good the bass is? Anyone here arguing the impact of our brain’s many ways to bias what we hear, cannot be ignorant that measuring likely affects our perception as well.

When my stereo pair is full range, I could (and currently often) do without a subwoofer. I will note I am not doing music production, listening in nearfield, or have an unusual room shape. I may be an exception but I know many lay people that prefer low bass when listening. Producing music without having equipment that represents a major segment of listeners seems shortsighted to me. Am not one to spend top dollar for my car audio but have not bought a vehicle without a subwoofer in the last couple of decades. If I find using a subwoofer objectionable, can always turn it down or off. Forgoing a subwoofer when my stereo pair has limited bass capability is simply not an option for me. YMMV.

 

[Juhazi]

I don't do mixing, but some notes from personal experience with speakers and subs and what I have read

- If one sets up a subwoofer(s) without measurements, it has at least 10dB too much spl and many interferences with mains, because crossover parameters are from outer space...
- modern small desktop active speakers (even cheap ones with 5" woofers like JBL LSR305 and Adam Audio T5V) have ok bass response down to 50Hz, but desktop installation will cause very bumpy spl response - measurements and eq should be used! 7" woofers would be optimum for desktop IMO
-obviously your mixing software can show frequency spectrum so you can avoid overly exaggerated signal levels below 50-60Hz that aren't reproduced by small monitors
- headphones have huge variation in bass spl and distortion
- perfectly flat measured response is not necessarily "right" even at nearfield - allow a little low freq wiggles and boost

SOS and other websites have useful info for setting up speakers etc. studio work

Techniques | Sound On Sound

www.soundonsound.com

Recording Magazine: The Magazine For the Recording Musician

Recording Magazine: The Magazine For the Recording Musician. Learn how to make better recordings and read rich reviews of recording gear.

www.recordingmag.com

https://www.keyboards.de/tontechnik/ (use translation)

 

[FireEmblem]

Good for you. It takes some intuition to adjust bass that you can't hear. Some sound engineers are like that, they just "know" what a level should be. If you can already get your mixes perfect, then you don't need to do anything.

I can hear it, just in headphones. My SuperluxHD681 extend all the way down to 10Hz and they can produce very massive rumble below 50Hz, so I can evaluate how strong or weak low end is present.. my consumer 2.1 system with sub goes down to 50Hz, so the low-end until up that point feels very punchy too.

However, I thought about the fact that I mainly work with VSTs which are usually more neutral, and with self-designed synth patches that are as well linear out of the box. And I don't use excvessive EQing. My rule is, without exceptions, not to go past +/-6dB, and most often I rather cut a few nasty resonant peaks (filter EQ sweep method with narrow Q , so I'm not mixing against my room, but with objective resonances that could potentially clash in other people's rooms) than doing heavy EQ work.

Maybe that plays into part of my mixes being able to translate well. Since my ears are used to whatever my room sounds like, a potential +6dB boost in any frequency won't perceived by me like "Oh that's 6dB too loud, I need to tone it down by 6dB".

It can be measured but it won't affect how I mix I guess. Which brings me to the next question, which is..

He said that the range between 300Hz - 2-3kHz is where the performance of the headphone on your head most closely correlates with the test fixture. Above 2-3kHz, issues such as pinna shape and angle, length of ear canal, hearing loss, etc. means that what you hear isn't necessarily what is measured. Below 300Hz, issues such as headphone fit, spectacles, adequacy of seal, positional issues, etc. have a major influence on the frequency response.

Are these actual huge differences or once again things that can be measured, but that don't really play a big role in practice? If it was like you described here, I'd expect that after mixing in headphones and going back to speakers, I must end in a shock because things wouldn't translate at all. But it sounds just the same on both systems. So I assume the impact isn't that strong, although it can be measured.

Also I'd argue that whatever the ear does in terms of changing the sound due to its individual shape would be true for sound coming out of monitors too, I don't see how this would be a unique disadvantage specifically tied to headphones.

Look at the REW eBook and decide for yourself if that is something you want to spend time learning. It's okay if you don't want to learn all this stuff. Like I said, you could pay someone to dial it in for you, or hope that you know someone who is nice enough to do it for free. Or maybe a few beers.

It doesn't look too complex to learn, but will that really cover all I need to know? Or are there still occasional problems that an experienced person would be able to identify during measurement, that I can't be aware of after that book, that could mess up my measurement? Also, how strong can one mess up measurement? Is it just minor, or big, so that the EQ that comes out of it could introduce more problems than it solves?

If you have an interface with 48V Phantom Power (which I presume you do, since you are making mixes) - a calibrated $50 Behringer ECM 8000 will do. If not, then get a UMIK-1 or UMIK-2 USB microphone. These start at about $120.

Yes I have phantom power. The ECM 8000 seems to be sold out everywhere in my country currently though. Checked both the largest music stores (thomann and music store) and amazon as well and they all can deliver the earliest in 3-7 months.

I feel not less confused than before I started the thread.. I don't know which of the options is the best. I totally liked the one where I'd rely on headphones and just get 7" for the fun of a better sound and a more neutral frequency response, but the comments about headphones allgedly having big different responses due to the ears and any lowend in the room not being reliable without DSP kinda give me the feeling that I would just waste my money and could as well just keep working with the cheaper gear I've been using, until I can day totally sure apply proper calibration.

 

[FireEmblem]

While am a measurement advocate, there rarely are any perfect speaker measurements. Ime, your likelihood of accurate bass is better with a subwoofer than without. Just because the measurements are not perfect, does not mean you will get an enjoyable result without a subwoofer rather than with. Most research bears this out.

Yeah but my idea wasn't sub versus no sub as in no way to monitor the low end, but sub versus headphones for evaluating the lowend. If people say that a sub without measurement and calibration (and perhaps even absorbers?) doesn't add any value apart from listening enjoyment, then a pair of headphones + objective analysing values from plugins would give me a much better and technical correct way of mixing the bass. Could follow hard math rather than feeling in this case, no?

That was the idea..

But thinking about it now, isn't adjusting the sub's volume basically doing the same thing as DSP, just by hand? Sure, a bit more rough and general, but let's assume that my room has a boost of 7dB in the lows.

So I'm going to dial down the sub by 7dB, until it sounds sweet. No booming, no cancellations. Now the -7dB I applied isn't applied in the mix, but only on the hardware.

If I am now working with my mix, which is neutral in its source, and I do the occasional +3/-3dB changes, I'm operating in absolute correct realms.

I don't see how the fact that my room has a 7dB boost down there should play a role now anymore since I dialed the sub down until it aligned with my room?

I think when the sub sounds well aligned with the music and blends seamlessly in the back, and does so with a few reference tracks, things should be fine?

With the Adam T10s I could crossover at 120Hz and therefore get better control of the more critical low end through that.