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

[MattHooper]

The problem with Quad's and subs is that as dipoles the main speakers do not suffer as much from room modes, so the contrast with ordinary subs that do excite room modes is clearly audible. I tried to use a good subwoofer that way, and the result was deeply disappointing. Adding dsp room equalization for the sub was a revelation: suddenly integration was near perfect, and sub and Quads sounded as one speaker.

I’ve heard a ton of hybrid ESL’s, and a few ESL plus subwoofer set ups, and none have ever sounded fully coherent to my ears. It’s like the bass frequencies have a different character than the rest of the dipole ESL spectrum.

The most seamless sub/ESL blend I’ve personally heard where my Quad 63s placed atop the Gradient dipole subs that were especially made for the quads. Those subwoofers didn’t go as low as most subwoofers but they did fill out the sound in an almost seamless way (not my pair):

 

[bungle]

@bungle it does fine and you can adjust limits manually. First peek is fundamental and it skips it's first two harmonics and first belonging deeps. Why did it skip 700 Hz peek still in reach of IIR PEQ Q factor limit I don't know, I wouldn't leave it like that.

Thanks! I try to add it manually. Not sure why it didn't correct that. But as far as I understand it is close to region where GLM stops doing corrections in general. I guess they reason that in two ways (hopefully I don't say it wrong). The first is that on higher frequencies measurements get error-prone (move a bit and results can start varying a lot, not sure if it is already issue in 720 Hz, perhaps someone knows), but I see GLM automatically added these:

It could be that when it starts to approach higher frequencies, it starts to do milder changes (and after 800 Hz, almost nothing).

I could adjust the Notch 8:

And then get this estimation:

I might try it. Thanks.

But now I remembered second reason. Genelec prefers to do symmetric correction to L & R (you can do individual, but for 2.0 they in general don't recommend it).

So why it didn't do it, I can only guess:
1. the R wouldn't benefit as much when doing that (though I checked and it would be alright)
2. it is already close to 800Hz where GLM drops the ball with automation

Next, some listening tests .

 

[Sokel]

I guess there isn't one answer for all devices but what is the poor automated room correction DSP going to do if there is a null in the bass response? Sure it can implement a tone curve so that you have cuts everywhere else in the frequency response and indeed technically no boost in the bass but what happens then? It just sounds quieter so you turn up the volume and there you have your bass boost.

Pretty much right, here's a dirty example with Math audio does, mic at 1 meter, where one can see the nulls are essentially the same and the overall level is down so if I center short of align them they look smaller.

(don't worry , the full correction is only for demonstration and drama, I'm not completely newbie to this)

... and (short of) aligned.

 

[Keith_W]

Did it????
I wouldn't imagine any acoustics engineer understanding little enough to think they could do the impossible

Why not. Some of them don't know what the speed of sound is. See Denon - uses 300m/s instead of 343m/s.

 

[Putter]

Subwoofers that are not seamlessly integrated with the rest of the loudspeakers in the system will never sound natural, but if you get that right, you and everyone else will prefer a system capable of reproducing a full-range sound over a limited sound. The real-world sounds out there are never frequency-limited in any sort of way, and if you could put something in the ears to limit the bass extension in a similar way to a pair of small loudspeakers not capable of a full-range sound, I find it hard to believe anyone would find that sounding ”more natural”, and rather incomplete.

I get it, it’s pretty hard to integrate subwoofers seamlessly, and many people fail to get that right. But you should all recognize that the main problem isn’t with the subwoofers; it’s you failing to get them to integrate seamlessly with the main speakers. When you get that right, the subwoofers will only act like ”bass extensions” for the main speakers, unless you already have large speakers capable of doing that on their own, but I’m sure most of us don’t have main speakers capable of a true full-range sound.

And beyond that, there is also the issue of room acoustics, where nearly every room has bass problems to address, which can be very challenging to solve with room acoustic treatment (but if you can, that's the way to do it). However, thanks to EQ, REW measurements, and a little time on your hands, most of us should be able to sort that out with or without the help of other members. There are also many threads here on ASR that should be helpful in this regard.

I have managed to integrate my two subwoofers completely seamlessly with the main speakers. The result is that I never hear the subwoofers as separate transducers, but if I turn them off, the obvious thing that happens is that the full-range bass extension goes missing.

I recall reading that one of the best tests of a subwoofer is that you don't know it's on until you turn it off, i.e. it adds a subtle boost to music.

 

[dlaloum]

I recall reading that one of the best tests of a subwoofer is that you don't know it's on until you turn it off, i.e. it adds a subtle boost to music.

That's how I like it.... but I feel that I am in the minority.

The use of subs in movie oriented setups, have led to their being associated (with good reason) with flashy explosions, crashes and fireworks...

The antithesis of subtlety!

Within the music end of the spectrum, the rise of synths and heavier rock genres have been driven by and supported by speakers with massive low frequency capabilities... again an example of "anti-subtlety".

The subtle examples are mostly to do with reproducing acoustic music, natural, unamplified voices and acoustic instruments.

The real ART (! ) is in setting up ones system so it can do both... a lot of systems are an either/or proposition, fireworks or subtlety - my objective has always been to have a system that can do both... but like anything it is always a balancing act!

 

[Keith_W]

Meh, HT. It's a different world! I watched a demo of Dirac ART back to back with Trinnov Waveforming at a hifi show. Close the door, and you feel the door slam in your guts. Drop a wrench, and you hear the echo from everywhere around you. Even a 5 year old girl walking can be made to sound like a T-Rex. Utterly exaggerated and unrealistic. I wouldn't want to play music on such a system, maybe that's why AVR's have such a bad name!

 

[Matt34]

Meh, HT. It's a different world! I watched a demo of Dirac ART back to back with Trinnov Waveforming at a hifi show. Close the door, and you feel the door slam in your guts. Drop a wrench, and you hear the echo from everywhere around you. Even a 5 year old girl walking can be made to sound like a T-Rex. Utterly exaggerated and unrealistic. I wouldn't want to play music on such a system, maybe that's why AVR's have such a bad name!

Haha, that’s just from them running those systems +12db hot at above reference levels with 8x21” subs.
I will always run subs because good, full range 20hz-20khz speakers are above my pay grade.

 

[dlaloum]

Meh, HT. It's a different world! I watched a demo of Dirac ART back to back with Trinnov Waveforming at a hifi show. Close the door, and you feel the door slam in your guts. Drop a wrench, and you hear the echo from everywhere around you. Even a 5 year old girl walking can be made to sound like a T-Rex. Utterly exaggerated and unrealistic. I wouldn't want to play music on such a system, maybe that's why AVR's have such a bad name!

That's how they master a lot of the movies...

But then there are drama's where as they walk down the street, under autumn trees, you can hear the leaves faintly rustling, and the soft sound of feet crunching on fallen leaves...

Really good immersion is subtle... it isn't just the laser beams in star wars, and the massive boulder thundering down from behind in Indiana Jones.

Systems that can do that subtlety, typically do music well too.

When I first started into HT, I was using my Quad ESL57's on either side of a Barco Monitor - 42" I think... large by the standard of the day... (1985)

I've always sought to capture the midrange delicacy & detail of the ESL57... and combine it with the drama and fireworks that can be provided with a more full range setup...

The Gallo speakers are a damn good balancing act.... (and with 24Hz low end, make a sub somewhat redundant)

 

[bungle]

The first is that on higher frequencies measurements get error-prone (move a bit and results can start varying a lot, not sure if it is already issue in 720 Hz, perhaps someone knows)

I tried today measure this, and I probably could not put mic anymore to exactly same position. And now while I do not see peak in 700 Hz (after manually correcting it), I do see similar at 600 Hz. Perhaps they are related, not sure. But feels like correcting that is a bit of hit/miss. Need to do more experimenting and learn about the topic.

 

[Frank Dernie]

But feels like correcting that is a bit of hit/miss.

Trying to correct resonant effects using DSP is a bit hit or miss anyway. It is best to get the speaker position, listener position and listening space as good as possible first.
A room mode which does not coincide with one of standard musical instrument pitch frequencies will mostly only be excited by percussion instruments. This impulse may never be long enough to allow the resonance to fully develop - so the magnitude of the peak may be (probably will be) different every time it is excited.
Even if it does coincide with a frequency on a standard scale a sustained note will excite it to a higher peak than the same note momentarily played in a tune. How does the DSP programme compensate for this? It has to be pretty clever to get it something like right - the correction systems I have used use "chirps" as excitation presumably to estimate the peaks in a more typical way than a slower sweep would.

Personally I would not try to deal with anything other than room mode peaks. Audyssey does and maybe that is why I segued into using it for films but not music?

I don't know anything about these correction programmes and how they deal with the Q of the peaks and dynamics, but I do know it must be difficult and complex and I would be amazed if it worked well for all tytpes of sound signal.

 

[Axo1989]

I’ve heard a ton of hybrid ESL’s, and a few ESL plus subwoofer set ups, and none have ever sounded fully coherent to my ears. It’s like the bass frequencies have a different character than the rest of the dipole ESL spectrum.

The most seamless sub/ESL blend I’ve personally heard where my Quad 63s placed atop the Gradient dipole subs that were especially made for the quads. Those subwoofers didn’t go as low as most subwoofers but they did fill out the sound in an almost seamless way (not my pair):

View attachment 496597

I can see the aesthetic issue of course, but I would like to have heard those.

 

[Keith_W]

I’ve heard a ton of hybrid ESL’s, and a few ESL plus subwoofer set ups, and none have ever sounded fully coherent to my ears. It’s like the bass frequencies have a different character than the rest of the dipole ESL spectrum.

The most seamless sub/ESL blend I’ve personally heard where my Quad 63s placed atop the Gradient dipole subs that were especially made for the quads. Those subwoofers didn’t go as low as most subwoofers but they did fill out the sound in an almost seamless way (not my pair):

What do you think is the cause of your two observations?

 

[ZolaIII]

What do you think is the cause of your two observations?

It's simple physics how they work. Wide coverage without physically moving almost any air and too fast. There is no slam as there is nothing to make it. To return properties you would need both mid bass and bass traditional woffers to do it (preferably XO 120, 250 Hz).
Edit: you can try to emu it back more or less successfully like it's done on DC Stelth headphones.

 

[Hear Here]

I’ve heard a ton of hybrid ESL’s, and a few ESL plus subwoofer set ups, and none have ever sounded fully coherent to my ears. It’s like the bass frequencies have a different character than the rest of the dipole ESL spectrum.

The most seamless sub/ESL blend I’ve personally heard where my Quad 63s placed atop the Gradient dipole subs that were especially made for the quads. Those subwoofers didn’t go as low as most subwoofers but they did fill out the sound in an almost seamless way (not my pair):

View attachment 496597

The first time I heard modern QUADS at a friend's home (the 2805s), I was astonished at how much bass there was and how loudly they could be played, even without the subs that the owner used for AV or SACD listening.

I was persuaded to buy a used pair of 2905s (modified with 2912 transformers, etc by QUAD UK) to establish if I wanted to switch from my ageing horns to ELS. These sounded remarkably good in my difficult room, but I had no intention of keeping these "barn door" speakers that seriously blocked my views.

I researched alternative ELSs and thought the Martin Logan 13A Expressions would be great. After reading reviews and a convincing showroom demo, I rashly bought a new pair. They suited my room visually, but unfortunately their sound seriously disappointed, despite the efforts of the distributor's guys and Anthem's “room correction”. They just didn't like my room and were undoubtedly less good than my 17-year old horns or the QUADs. The MLs were sold at a big loss after a few months and I bought newer and better used Avantarde Duo speakers. A couple of years later I bought my present ones.

Moral of the story - NEVER buy speakers (at least new ones) without a long home demo first and choose speaker TYPE to suit your room's acoustic. I failed on both counts with the MLs, despite my research and shop demo. Also "room correction" DSP cannot be relied upon to redeen a poorly selected speaker however good the speaker is. I've never worked out exactly why the QUADS sounded so much better than MLs (at twice the price), even though both were placed in the same positions in the same room.

 

[ehabheikal]

Different rooms:

Main listening room - Sanders 10e. - no subs needed

Master bedroom. - KEF R3 with dual SVS subs

Office. - JBL 308 with single SVS Sub

Dining room. - JBL 305 - no sub, but needs one. Sadly, there is not space available due to room configuration

Master bedroom. - KEF R3 with dual SVS subs
Have the same great combo.

 

[krabapple]

Trying to correct resonant effects using DSP is a bit hit or miss anyway. It is best to get the speaker position, listener position and listening space as good as possible first.
A room mode which does not coincide with one of standard musical instrument pitch frequencies will mostly only be excited by percussion instruments. This impulse may never be long enough to allow the resonance to fully develop - so the magnitude of the peak may be (probably will be) different every time it is excited.
Even if it does coincide with a frequency on a standard scale a sustained note will excite it to a higher peak than the same note momentarily played in a tune. How does the DSP programme compensate for this? It has to be pretty clever to get it something like right - the correction systems I have used use "chirps" as excitation presumably to estimate the peaks in a more typical way than a slower sweep would.

Personally I would not try to deal with anything other than room mode peaks. Audyssey does and maybe that is why I segued into using it for films but not music?

if by 'room mode peaks' you mean, modal peaks below Schroeder for that room, the Audyssey app lets you confine correction to that...but it's up to you to figure out where Schroeder is for your room!

 

[dlaloum]

The first time I heard modern QUADS at a friend's home (the 2805s), I was astonished at how much bass there was and how loudly they could be played, even without the subs that the owner used for AV or SACD listening.

I was persuaded to buy a used pair of 2905s (modified with 2912 transformers, etc by QUAD UK) to establish if I wanted to switch from my ageing horns to ELS. These sounded remarkably good in my difficult room, but I had no intention of keeping these "barn door" speakers that seriously blocked my views.

I researched alternative ELSs and thought the Martin Logan 13A Expressions would be great. After reading reviews and a convincing showroom demo, I rashly bought a new pair. They suited my room visually, but unfortunately their sound seriously disappointed, despite the efforts of the distributor's guys and Anthem's “room correction”. They just didn't like my room and were undoubtedly less good than my 17-year old horns or the QUADs. The MLs were sold at a big loss after a few months and I bought newer and better used Avantarde Duo speakers. A couple of years later I bought my present ones.

Moral of the story - NEVER buy speakers (at least new ones) without a long home demo first and choose speaker TYPE to suit your room's acoustic. I failed on both counts with the MLs, despite my research and shop demo. Also "room correction" DSP cannot be relied upon to redeen a poorly selected speaker however good the speaker is. I've never worked out exactly why the QUADS sounded so much better than MLs (at twice the price), even though both were placed in the same positions in the same room.

The only ML's that I really liked were the legendary full range ELS panels - the CLS...

The ML hybrid speakers with the built in woofer, never sounded right to me

The Quad 63 and all its descendants have enough bass to be considered "full range" - the earlier 57's less so - but even those have a surprising amount of bass detail, texture, timbre....

Once Quad added the extra bass panels creating the 989 (and its descendants) - there was that bit of additional extension some had been missing.

Yes, they aren't 20Hz speakers - but running a surround setup with 989's for front (no center), and 63's for surround - I really did not find it to be lacking in bass, and the detail levels and resulting immersion was just stunning (yes even with a phantom center).

But visually they do tend to overwhelm the room - and WAF drove them out ultimately.

If you get a chance to audition the CLS' I would recommend it... lovely speaker!

Still as others have said - they (ELS's) are particularly sensitive to room effects due to their bipolar radiation patterns - large soundstage is very easily achieved - really good imaging can also be achieved but that is where optimised room treatment and placement is essential... you need to control the back sound of the ELS, and direct, delay, disperse the reflected sound.

 

[Oddball]

Meh, HT. It's a different world! I watched a demo of Dirac ART back to back with Trinnov Waveforming at a hifi show. Close the door, and you feel the door slam in your guts. Drop a wrench, and you hear the echo from everywhere around you. Even a 5 year old girl walking can be made to sound like a T-Rex. Utterly exaggerated and unrealistic. I wouldn't want to play music on such a system, maybe that's why AVR's have such a bad name!

Well, a lots of really bad crap in this post - so let's digest it. What is ART vs Tinnov, just to stay scientific. What you heard is what someone else has set up and it is not for you to judge that. What you you would set up would be probably completely different.

With all the weight you have for the obvious reasons, this post is pretty shallow based on your own standards.

 

[kyuu]

With all the weight you have for the obvious reasons, this post is pretty shallow based on your own standards.

Agreed. Keith is obviously a smart guy, hopefully he knows not to judge home theater in general based on one a single obviously poor setup at a high show (known for bad setups).