32-foot stops can play 16 Hz at the fundamental, though it depends on the stop design as to how much fundamental. An open diapason's fundamental is strong compared to the harmonics, but some testing shows that even removing the fundamental doesn't change the perception of the sound. By strong I mean 10-20 dB stronger than the next highest harmonic, not necessarily stronger than the sum of the upper harmonics. A closed 32-foot diapason (which is more like a flute) would only be audible in the harmonics, but I doubt there are many of those (just as there are only two organs with 64-foot pipes, and those absolutely depend on the harmonics to be heard at all). The amount of air that would be needed to make it felt would unmanageable, though it can certainly be simulated with electronics. As with a tuba, we overestimate the importance of the nominal fundamental frequency in producing the characteristic sound. But see my note below about acoustic performance requiring the effects of the space in which it is performed to sound natural and desirable.
For example, there is one well-known modernist tuba solo work that includes a 16-Hz "pitch." This is the double-pedal of a contrabass tuba in C (which is the standard orchestral tuba in American orchestras). It cannot be produced using a buzz by anyone I've ever heard, and most performers simulate it with flutter-tonguing. There's no way that includes even the slightest measurable fundamental, given that it's a series of thumps at 16 Hz, and not a continuous oscillating vibration.
I have two standard tests for low-frequency response. One is the bass drum hit in the opening of the third movement of Gustave Holst's First Suite for Military Band, as performed by the Cleveland Symphonic Winds on a Telarc recording made in the late 70's. I have it on vinyl and later bought it on CD to get the full effect of that one drum strike. Telarc was showing off with the way they recorded the bass drum, particularly when they reissued it on CD by my recollection, and it had a reputation for damaging speakers. In my case, it was the recording that first shredded the rotted foam surround on my Advent NLA's, at least the first time that happened maybe ten years after I bought them (I've replaced the surrounds several times on those speakers).
The other is also an old recording from the 70's--the Merlin the Magician track from Rick Wakeman's King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. The Moog solos (there are two) go low. I'm not sure quite how low, but lower and louder than most acoustic instruments that sustain recognizable tone and pitch.
I own several dozen recordings of tuba performance, and none of them test the bass response of a system as much as those two recordings, and certainly not the recordings of the Kraft Encounters II that includes that 16-Hz double-pedal.
Prokofiev 5th? Where? Zarathustra starts with a 32-foot diapason organ stop drone that most people, even when performed live with a large organ, hear only as its harmonics. But the lowest note in the Prok 5 that I recall is the low E in the tuba at the start of the slow movement, barely over an octave below the bass clef. Even I can play that. The Prok 7 has a low C#, and Holst's Planets goes down about that far. Other examples down to the bottom of the 1.5 octaves below the bass clef are not that uncommon. Some band works, including a Percy Grainger piece that I just performed (Children's March), has pedal Bb (~28 Hz), which you won't hear unless the band's tuba player on the low part has professional training. (I don't, but I was playing the upper part, thank God). There is very little fundamental in the sound of the pedal range of a tuba, no matter what tuba players think. The contrabassoon goes about down to a nominal 28 Hz with a good player, but with even less contribution from the fundamental. Low F the octave below the bass clef is within the reliable range of most amateurs, though if you want it loud, don't expect it to have a lot of fundamental in the spectra.
But Koyaanisqatsi is in a class by itself for the demand it makes on the two tuba players. Warren Deck and Sam Pilafian (RIP) played on the original recording, and that level of world-class performer is what that music demands. Still, it didn't go below the 28-Hz pedal Bb and, still, the sound is dominated by overtones.
As I mentioned elsewhere, I helped a buddy set up his new 7.2 system that uses a large (and expensive) Marantz DVR and all Revel speakers, including the subs. (Performa-class Revels, and the subs have 12" drivers and kilowatt amps.) After we balanced the system using Audessey (however that is spelled), it didn't play that Wakeman Moog solo noticeably more impressively than my system at home with Revel F12's (no subs) and a large amp. That material was made for vinyl LP's so it probably didn't go below about 30 Hz. Those subs are capable of much lower, but the music we listened to doesn't ask for it. (I didn't have my REW stuff with me, so I couldn't check the subs for how well they cancelled room modes. But the system and room sounded very good.)
But there is one question only hinted at so far, and that is: How much of the performance space's room resonances do we want to hear in orchestral performance? Sometimes, that low rumble is what contributes to the characteristic sound of a concert hall, and it's good when a recording captures that ambience in addition to what the instruments produce. Yes, sometimes what contributes to the rumble is the air handlers and the outside traffic, but in my house at least, the air handler hums along at 120 Hz. I like rock music that is recorded dry to maintain good clarity, but classical composers didn't write their works for outdoor performances.
I've heard systems with big subwoofers set up the way Sean Olive's inexperienced test subjects seem to prefer (referring to the graph upthread), and for me those systems sound boomy and unnatural. My reference is live performance. I want accurate bass, but I'm not one to start cheering when it is emphasized unnaturally.
Rick "much ado about nothing" Denney
