How many on ASR don't runs subs of any kind.? & why.....

[gwing]

Does the music you listen to contain no frequencies down to 40 Hz? That's about where the lowest note of a bass (upright or electric) and a kick drum live. (Some upright or electric basses are set up to go even lower)
Then there's synth and organ music, which can have lower fundamentals down to 20 and less.

I mainly listen to small scale acoustical music, with a bias towards female vocals and piano, where the most important element is usually the vocal range but, yes, there may on occasion be frequencies theoretically down to 41.2 from a double bass although usually a cello would be the lowest instrument playing. There may sometimes be drums playing as part of the mix but not at high sound pressure so, helped by some eq, even my smaller speakers manage on their own.

 

[goat76]

I mainly listen to small scale acoustical music, with a bias towards female vocals and piano, where the most important element is usually the vocal range but, yes, there may on occasion be frequencies theoretically down to 41.2 from a double bass although usually a cello would be the lowest instrument playing. There may sometimes be drums playing as part of the mix but not at high sound pressure so, helped by some eq, even my smaller speakers manage on their own.

I had to check how low in frequency a standard piano goes.

”The lowest note on a standard 88-key piano is A0, with a fundamental frequency of 27.5 Hz, though some specialized pianos (like Bösendorfer) extend lower, even to C0 (~16.35 Hz).”

 

[mj30250]

Why would one go to the expense of buying a high quality and accurate amplifier if you then deliberately destroy its accuracy because you can't choose and set up the rest of the system optimally without DSP?

Schroeder has entered the chat.

The most accurate electronics and speakers in the world will readily have their response shredded below the transition frequency of a typical room courtesy of the room. There are several ways to address this, and with a combination of careful positioning, room treatment, equipment selection, and some luck, a few fortunate listeners may actually achieve a smooth, full-range response without the use of DSP or subs. However, this is a rare thing that usually requires more expertise and possibly more expense than "simply" implementing DSP and/or multiple subs.

And yes, DSP and subs demand their own level of expertise and experience to work correctly, but modern tools make this easier than ever.

 

[Willem]

Why would one go to the expense of buying a high quality and accurate amplifier if you then deliberately destroy its accuracy because you can't choose and set up the rest of the system optimally without DSP?

As I've said before, I'm not saying that multi-speaker AV/HT systems won't benefit from DSP, but please try to fix problems in 2-channel systems without resorting to the spoiling of the amp's accuracy. If you are relying on DSP to "adjust" the signal such that your ears receive a flat response, why buy good quality amps and speakers in the first place? But I must admit that adding DSP to a poorly chosen or set up system may deliver what appears to be improved sound, so I accept your criticism of my opinion.

You are confusing things. What is needed is an accurate reproduction of the orginal sound. However, the room's acoustics always gets in the way, so you need to repair that, to get back to the accuracy of the original sound.

 

[Willem]

As for running subs, or not, I run three in my main system with high passed Quad 2805s in a large room, equalized by MSO. For the desktop system in my study I use Harbeth P3ESRs, without subwoofer. I am not convinced subwoofers are a good idea in smaller rooms, given that the room modes occur at higher and hence more problematic frequencies that are harder to equalize beyond a very narrow listening position.

 

[gwing]

I had to check how low in frequency a standard piano goes.

”The lowest note on a standard 88-key piano is A0, with a fundamental frequency of 27.5 Hz, though some specialized pianos (like Bösendorfer) extend lower, even to C0 (~16.35 Hz).”

A0 from a piano is a funny thing with not much energy at 27.5 i.e. most of the energy is concentrated in the harmonics and the human brain quite remarkably seems able to reconstruct the A0 note from those harmonics even if the fundamental is missing. This is a rather handy as it makes reproducing the sound easier and I think without this my fairly large home piano would probably be unsuitable for the far from concert hall size room it lives in.

An interesting discussion around this if anyone is really interested PianoWorld Discussion

 

[rdenney]

I had to check how low in frequency a standard piano goes.

”The lowest note on a standard 88-key piano is A0, with a fundamental frequency of 27.5 Hz, though some specialized pianos (like Bösendorfer) extend lower, even to C0 (~16.35 Hz).”

Yes, and those strings ring sympathetically every time the sustain pedal is down. There may not be much down in the thirties, but there’s something.

And then there’s the ambience of the performance space.

Rick “who also has a 76” grand piano in his listening room” Denney

 

[goat76]

A0 from a piano is a funny thing with not much energy at 27.5 i.e. most of the energy is concentrated in the harmonics and the human brain quite remarkably seems able to reconstruct the A0 note from those harmonics even if the fundamental is missing. This is a rather handy as it makes reproducing the sound easier and I think without this my fairly large home piano would probably be unsuitable for the far from concert hall size room it lives in.

An interesting discussion around this if anyone is really interested PianoWorld Discussion

I would still be interested to hear a few examples of music tracks you listen to, which contain bass instruments, and go as deep as you see fit your definition of being musically meaningful?

Anyway, there are probably a few people out there whose taste in music doesn't contain any or much low bass frequencies, and never listen to anything other than that, but I don't think they are very representative of what most people listen to.

And then there’s the ambience of the performance space.

Yes, I wanted to mention that too. It's not only the frequency response range of the instruments that goes into a recording, but the acoustics of the performance space can also contain low frequencies that add depth and space to the overall sound.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

The following comes from an ardent subwoofer user: 2 subwoofers in opposite corner in my (small) room.. I will add a 3rd (rather potent one) soon, but ordering things from abroads is not simple where I live

Subwoofers always add a considerable level of complexity to an audio system; a few of the issues that need to be addressed:

• Integration (easier said, than done) of the mains with the (multiple) subwoofers.
  you need to process the signal going to the subs and, often, the mains as in equalizing and , yes, applying delay , thus manipulating the phase to the ensemble of mains and subs.
• Often an equalized to flat response, from the subs, could introduce. other audible artifacts such as ringing... FR is nice and so smooth and so flat ... but the sound is not so good...
• It seems that bass directionality is a thing, for my part I have been satisfied with mono bass under 80 Hz.. leaving the directional clues to the mains or surround reproducing anything >80 Hz.
• The Audio system become more complex with more boxes and require a lot of care and measurements ...
  And you need to understand and be able to interpret these measurements. Not easy believe me

I get it, now (wasn't getting it before): Subwoofers make things more difficult for most audiophiles: It is not a simple as dropping subs , fire REW ,then MSO and be happy.. . It is more complicated and require understanding and, yes, reiteration as in You will not get right the very first time ... nor the second, nor the third ...

• But the hobby was never simple anyway: There are no systems that you just acquire drop in your room and ... results are great! Except in the case of those ridiculously good and inexpensive IEM ... , even those, may require that you experiment with different tips..
• The complexity come from what we are trying to achieve: have soundwaves reach our ears in such a way that it resembles what was/is on the medium... In a space that shall (could?) change the soundwaves coming out of the transducers, substantially, often to the point of unrecognizability ...
• And Bass, from many studies account for more than 30% of what people deem to be good hifi.
• and often needs to be reproduced at levels that are to be substantially higher than those from the rest of the spectrum ...
• and you need to make sure that all those boxes sound like one, or at the very least, that the sound seems to emanate from the same point/place as the rest of the spectrum ...

Nope! Being an audiophile, never was an easy hobby.
...

Science and experience have shown us that:

• The best position for the bass transducers, for a smooth FR in the region, is not the same as that for the mains speakers.
• And that speakers that are full range tend to be big and expensive. Still despite being full range the positon/location that they force upon you is not the best for bass reproduction.. ( see above).
• That it is relatively trivial for commercially available subwoofer s, to reproduce with substantial vigor ( aka SPL ) frequencies from 30 to 200 Hz. All you need is a box with an amp and a decent driver .. not the complex thing that full range enclosure is per nature ...
• That we now have serious computing power in relatively inexpensive boxes, say a Raspbery Pi at $60 or an old PC for <$100 on eBay
• That there exist a few software some of these free that could help a lot ... REW, MSO.. etc
• That as the end, we (most here) seem to be a group of people that require accurate audio reproduction on our rooms .. THus us posting about our experiences all the time and discussing subwoofers and amplifiers and SAC those 2 last things, completely solved problems, yet we discuss things as irrelevant and entirely inaudible as the ESS hump ...

Based on the above, it is clear that subwoofers are necessary to achieve full FR, accurate reproduction in most rooms, even if our main speakers are Full range.

I hasten to add that Subwoofers are necessary, not Sufficient

 

[rdenney]

I would still be interested to hear a few examples of music tracks you listen to, which contain bass instruments, and go as deep as you see fit your definition of being musically meaningful?

Anyway, there are probably a few people out there whose taste in music doesn't contain any or much low bass frequencies, and never listen to anything other than that, but I don't think they are very representative of what most people listen to.



Yes, I wanted to mention that too. It's not only the frequency response range of the instruments that goes into a recording, but the acoustics of the performance space can also contain low frequencies that add depth and space to the overall sound.

I'm not sure how many recordings have intended content in the 30-40-Hz range, but if it's there, I want my system to reproduce it accurately to the extent possible. That's the point of pursuing audio as a hobby, it seems to me. If one just wants to listen to music that's pleasing irrespective of what's on the recording, that's fine with me, but that seems to me a different hobby than "audio science", and other forums that accommodate those discussions with little more than the occasional mild derision from the folks here.

Of course, all of any one person's choices have to fit within a range of constraints. I don't use subs on my main system because 1.) my speakers are adequate in that range to faithfully reproduce what's on the recordings I listen to, and 2.) I simply have no room for subs, especially in the locations they'd probably need to be to address the resonance modes in the room. (I should add that the resonances in the room are reasonably controlled even without subs simply because of the irregular ceiling slope and the many openings to other spaces. There are couple of nulls that the subs might fill, but no ringing in the low frequencies.)

Note that my movie/TV system does have a subwoofer and uses it. And my test-bench system, whose bookshelf speakers are particularly lacking under 60 Hz in a space that does little to reinforce it, now has a sub to fill out the bass.

Rick "who plays an instrument for which music has been composed down to about 32 Hz" Denney

 

[gwing]

I would still be interested to hear a few examples of music tracks you listen to, which contain bass instruments, and go as deep as you see fit your definition of being musically meaningful?

By 'musically meaningful' I wasn't intending to do more than make a distinction between musical notes deliberately played as part of the music and unwanted background noises that might regrettably be on the recording but which shouldn't be there. I'll leave noises that are intentionally there but are not notes, such as explosions and cannon fire, in a convenient grey area.

But as you ask for an example try 'Home' (or 'Rise' or other tracks on her album 'Nameless') by Dominique Fils-Aime as a good example of something I might listen to and which has a bit of bass. The track 'unstated' on that album makes me wish my system had a bit *less* bass response than it does but you have to take the music as it comes.

 

[Adis]

I'm not sure how many recordings have intended content in the 30-40-Hz range, but if it's there, I want my system to reproduce it accurately to the extent possible. That's the point of pursuing audio as a hobby, it seems to me. If one just wants to listen to music that's pleasing irrespective of what's on the recording, that's fine with me, but that seems to me a different hobby than "audio science", and other forums that accommodate those discussions with little more than the occasional mild derision from the folks here.

Of course, all of any one person's choices have to fit within a range of constraints. I don't use subs on my main system because 1.) my speakers are adequate in that range to faithfully reproduce what's on the recordings I listen to, and 2.) I simply have no room for subs, especially in the locations they'd probably need to be to address the resonance modes in the room. (I should add that the resonances in the room are reasonably controlled even without subs simply because of the irregular ceiling slope and the many openings to other spaces. There are couple of nulls that the subs might fill, but no ringing in the low frequencies.)

Note that my movie/TV system does have a subwoofer and uses it. And my test-bench system, whose bookshelf speakers are particularly lacking under 60 Hz in a space that does little to reinforce it, now has a sub to fill out the bass.

Rick "who plays an instrument for which music has been composed down to about 32 Hz" Denney

5 string bass guitar?

 

[Mort]

makes me wish my system had a bit *less* bass response

I don't suppose you use DSP to manage in-room bass response? I can name a few tracks of my own that resonate in-room unbearably without DSP.

 

[Mort]

I listen to music with a good deal of sub bass, and a subwoofer and DSP are necessary. I have nearly full-range capacity in my mains (8361a) but only at modest overall volume and even then, sacrificing the 20-35hz range almost completely. It wasn't for me.

Bass reproduction expectations are complex and generally considered a matter of preference among audiophiles.
Some are not satisfied with, for example, -6db 35hz, and some are satisfied or don't notice.

It's not dissimilar to the directivity discussion in that there is room for reasonable differences in opinion.

 

[rdenney]

5 string bass guitar?

Not quite.

Rick "does have a Fender P-bass Plus, however" Denney

 

[krabapple]

Why would one go to the expense of buying a high quality and accurate amplifier if you then deliberately destroy its accuracy because you can't choose and set up the rest of the system optimally without DSP?

You can 'get used to' (some) of the inevitable room-induced flaws, but that doesn't mean they can't be mitigated. But not even the most accurate amp, on its own, can do it.

As I've said before, I'm not saying that multi-speaker AV/HT systems won't benefit from DSP, but please try to fix problems in 2-channel systems without resorting to the spoiling of the amp's accuracy. If you are relying on DSP to "adjust" the signal such that your ears receive a flat response, why buy good quality amps and speakers in the first place? But I must admit that adding DSP to a poorly chosen or set up system may deliver what appears to be improved sound, so I accept your criticism of my opinion.

Have you verified that your system is optimized by any means other than your ears?

And you misunderstand multichannel. If anything, a multi-speaker system is more forgiving of sonic flaws than a two-channel rig. (A single-speaker rig is the least forgiving).

See Dr. Toole's book.

 

[krabapple]

I mainly listen to small scale acoustical music, with a bias towards female vocals and piano, where the most important element is usually the vocal range but, yes, there may on occasion be frequencies theoretically down to 41.2 from a double bass although usually a cello would be the lowest instrument playing. There may sometimes be drums playing as part of the mix but not at high sound pressure so, helped by some eq, even my smaller speakers manage on their own.

So I'm guessing this isn't acoustic jazz, since a double bass is a very common accompaniment there.

 

[gwing]

So I'm guessing this isn't acoustic jazz, since a double bass is a very common accompaniment there.

Not exclusively, but I do listen to a bit of acoustic Jazz. For example the Dominique Fils-Aime recording I listed above.

 

[gwing]

I don't suppose you use DSP to manage in-room bass response? I can name a few tracks of my own that resonate in-room unbearably without DSP.

On the contrary I do run room correction and wouldn't be without it now.
It isn't only subs that should have the benefit of electronic response control .

 

[AaronJ]

For as long as I have owned a hifi system I have run at least one subwoofer. Even added a second sub, and DSP. I always had a nagging feeling that it wasn't properly integrated. Either the tiny knobs were getting hit when dusting/cleaning the tops of the subs, or what sounded good at one SPL wouldn't sound good with another (gain matching issues?), I just never felt like I could get it right. Plus I had two subwoofers being powered 24/7. Finally I had the opportunity to audition and purchase at an amazing used price a pair of Revel F206 for the purpose of eliminating the M106 w/ subs, and I am never going back to subs again. Much better for my purpose and taste to just run full-range speakers that will respond better to EQ.