How to find what music has stereo bass (with EasyEffects)

[thcdru2k]

No, they are the same problem.
From my understanding:
If the bass from the left speaker sounds much louder to you then the bass from the right speaker that will impact spatial ques if stereo bass at these frequencies is relevant in your room.

I truly do not see how it could be otherwise, either stereo effects matter at these frequencies, which means it also matters how loud you hear them at listening location.
Or it does not and we can just sum it to mono and focus our efforts on getting the bass level as good as possible for multiple seats.

That is fair. If the left and right low-frequency responses are wildly different at the listener, then any spatial information down there is probably being distorted or masked by the room.

The question is whether, after the bass response is reasonably controlled, preserving some left/right low-frequency difference gives a useful benefit compared with summing everything to mono. Griesinger’s work suggests low-frequency envelopment and externalization depend partly on interaural time-delay behavior, and that small rooms can either preserve or destroy those cues.

 

[john61ct]

My (admittedly too ambitious for most) approach is to give primary focus to the thcdru2k approach

but to ALSO deploy MSO-like overlapping mono subs for the "mode wrangling" smoothing over MLP goal.

They are likely in conflict, to be tested

But unless I go fully one way or the other will continue to test, try blending

meantime be able to switch been strict either/or for different conent / context use cases

 

[Hayabusa]

You double the displacement (assuming identical subs). Again, that's 3dB. You might get better room interactions, you might get worse. Now, I'm not saying you should stick with1 sub, if you MUST have subs, have one PER CHANNEL, co-located with the main.

Yes, there are room interaction problems. Always.

it's 6dB, I also measured it: 6dB

 

[Hayabusa]

1) Mains should go down to 40Hz.
2) Mains should go down to 40Hz.
3) Mains should go down to 40Hz.
And, of course, the LF radiator should be co-located with the rest of the speaker.

If I have two colocated subs at my mains, I see no reason why I can't choose a higher x-over if my subs do a better job at these frequencies than my mains.
My mains ('full'range electrostatics don't do a good job under 100Hz)

 

[levimax]

As for experimentation with stereo bass, I'd have to try it on headphones first to see if I the effect is big enough for me to try and test this myself.

I am simply wondering how one could implement this in a room and I might very well be missing something, as this is not my area of expertise.
However, I only learn by asking questions and as noted in my previous post, this raised several for me.

Stereo bass with colocated subs ( or full range speakers) works with the same mitigation techniques like placement, room treatments, and DSP. The end result may be different than mono distributed subs for FR smoothness but it depends on the room. In addition to potential envelopment effects, stereo bass also sounds different on some recordings compared to a summed to mono system.

 

[j_j]

it's 6dB, I also measured it: 6dB

depends on direction. You've made an array. Not a very big one. You are also having trouble sorting this with room response. Did you use the 4-axis measurement?

 

[j_j]

If I have two colocated subs at my mains, I see no reason why I can't choose a higher x-over if my subs do a better job at these frequencies than my mains.
My mains ('full'range electrostatics don't do a good job under 100Hz)

Well, yes, they are part of your mains. No problem.

 

[john61ct]

Well, yes, they are part of your mains. No problem.

Aha, I guess I misunderstood your

> Mains should go down to 40Hz

assertions above, my apologies.

I interpreted it as saying (mains = floorstanders only) "colocated subs should only be used below 40Hz".

So if "mains" includes multiple enclosures, do you think that

A. the stack should be crossed over to minimise overlap in frequencies served (steep slopes)

or B. woofers + sub unit(s) should reinforce each other by overlapping as much as possible

or C. it depends, try to determine in each space by testing

?

 

[j_j]

Aha, I guess I misunderstood your

> Mains should go down to 40Hz

assertions above, my apologies.

I interpreted it as saying (mains = floorstanders only) "colocated subs should only be used below 40Hz".

So if "mains" includes multiple enclosures, do you think that

A. the stack should be crossed over to minimise overlap in frequencies served (steep slopes)

or B. woofers + sub unit(s) should reinforce each other by overlapping as much as possible

or C. it depends, try to determine in each space by testing

?

C entirely, it depends on speakers, acoustics, etc. And time alignment, which can be "interesting" with steep crossovers, unless you've got lots of DSP behind it, which I recommend.

 

[Ype]

Stereo bass with colocated subs ( or full range speakers) works with the same mitigation techniques like placement, room treatments, and DSP. The end result may be different than mono distributed subs for FR smoothness but it depends on the room. In addition to potential envelopment effects, stereo bass also sounds different on some recordings compared to a summed to mono system.

Thank you for the response as well as @thcdru2k

Makes sense to me, I am just curious how well it is working for people in practice.
Once I have a room with multiple subs again I might test some of this myself, right now I am doing the opposite with cross-feed for headphones.

At home I up-mix from stereo, which is a definitely improvement in envelopment for me.
All bass below 80Hz is currently send to my mains, who in turn are connected to a subwoofer, effectively turning them into 4-way speakers with mono bass source below 80Hz regardless of the recording.

Without that sub my sub-bass was a disaster in my room, which in turn make it seem pointless to me to try and experience stereo bass that way currently.
Doing things this way simplified many things but it should be easy enough to convert my setup to stereo bass at a later date once I own multiple subwoofers.

However, I doubt I'd be able to manage all bass modes as effectively, even for a single seat.
Without that, I am sure it will sound different but I will *have no idea what is impacting my preference as there are multiple variables at play.

At the end of the day this seems way more sensible to experience on binaural recordings first, which would be easy enough to turn closer to mono bass with cross-feed.
Should be a simple way to see what we prefer.

This however still does not answer the question as to how this interaction will be in the room.
Will go back to just reading for now.

 

[john61ct]

C entirely, it depends on speakers, acoustics, etc. And time alignment, which can be "interesting" with steep crossovers, unless you've got lots of DSP behind it, which I recommend.

Thanks, and although I prefer to start out analog-only (in some cases even passive devices)

if I hear delay / phase issues that "actually need*" fixing then it seems DSP is the best (only?) solution.

As to "lots of" DSP, if many channels require it that starts to exceed my budget short term, will need to save over time.

But the DRC domain opens up, a whole 'nother rabbit hole, trying to keep the learning curve on the "speaker bulding" bass management aspect for now.

*relevant thread

Principles: Time of Arrival Delays, vs Phase tuning ?

Relevant https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/sub-with-2ch-amp-and-no-bass-mgmt.71655/post-2608483

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Hayabusa]

depends on direction. You've made an array. Not a very big one. You are also having trouble sorting this with room response. Did you use the 4-axis measurement?

No, the measurement was on the listening position after Audysey did its thing. The sum is +6dB above the single channels over a broad range.

 

[LSPhil]

Aha, I guess I misunderstood your

> Mains should go down to 40Hz

assertions above, my apologies.

I interpreted it as saying (mains = floorstanders only) "colocated subs should only be used below 40Hz".

So if "mains" includes multiple enclosures, do you think that

A. the stack should be crossed over to minimise overlap in frequencies served (steep slopes)

or B. woofers + sub unit(s) should reinforce each other by overlapping as much as possible

or C. it depends, try to determine in each space by testing

?

Ah, I think I misunderstood your statement that

'mains frequency should drop to 40 Hz'

—sorry about that.

I interpreted it as meaning that (only floorstanding speakers) 'subwoofers in one place should only be used below 40 Hz.'

So if 'mains frequency' involves multiple cabinets, do you think:

The tower speaker should be crossed over to minimize frequency overlap (steep slopes),
The woofers + subwoofers should reinforce each other by overlapping as much as possible,
It depends—try to determine it per room through testing?

In my opinion, it’s not a good idea to set the subwoofer crossover as low as 40 Hz with the main speakers. In that case, you only have one octave below for the sub, while the main speakers cover three octaves from 40 Hz to 160 Hz.

It’s much better to let the subwoofer operate from its 30 Hz up to 120 Hz, and then roll off gently with a calm LR2 filter. No filtering of the main speakers is needed at all. This system I favor is much simpler in terms of timing, and has the advantage that the membrane areas sum together, giving great results.

Even if someone managed to cleverly cross over the speakers at 40 Hz, the low-end frequency would only increase by 10–20 Hz. No real gain. Many recordings don’t even go that low to hear a big difference.

 

[john61ct]

I interpreted it as meaning that (only floorstanding speakers) 'subwoofers in one place should only be used below 40 Hz.'
...
In my opinion, it’s not a good idea to set the subwoofer crossover as low as 40 Hz with the main speakers

I think not, no one's that nuts.

I originally inferred "freestanders down to 40Hz are the ONLY way to go".

Now allowance for possible overlap, higher xover, all to be tested for what's best in that case

so long as the co-located channel grouping forms a magnitude + time domain "cohesive stack" in the end

that counts as mains, maybe as good as "one enclosure that does it all"

 

[thcdru2k]

Yeah, a bookshelf plus a colocated sub that's properly integrated with DSP is basically a pseudo full-range tower. The goal is for it to sound like one speaker. The advantage is that you can tailor the crossover and integration to your room instead of being stuck with a fixed design. It can also provide deeper bass extension and more low-frequency output than many conventional towers because the subwoofer is effectively acting as the woofer section of the main speaker.

 

[john61ct]

Well I personally sure hope that is literally true.

I doubt we should infer that @j_j would wholeheartedly agree once the premise moves to "bookshelf" and the much higher crossove frequency that may imply.

But maybe with the right kind of powerful high-bandwidth Sub, or addition of MBM as I'm planning, **and** if the room is enabling of overlap / reinforcement

annd...and...

 

[thcdru2k]

Well I personally sure hope that is literally true.

I doubt we should infer that @j_j would wholeheartedly agree once the premise moves to "bookshelf" and the much higher crossove frequency that may imply.

But maybe with the right kind of powerful high-bandwidth Sub, or addition of MBM as I'm planning, **and** if the room is enabling of overlap / reinforcement

annd...and...

A bookshelf with good bass extension gives more freedom because you are not forced into a high crossover. Higher crossovers increase the risk of hearing the sub as a separate source. The best crossover is the range were the speaker and corresponding subwoofer both have useful output and can be made to sum smoothly. I believe this is the problem you are trying to solve with your LS50, MBM, multiple subs idea? You want to reduce excursion of the LS50. If I were to try to do what you are doing I would do individual sweeps of each component and set crossovers where there is good output/overlap. It sounds like a lot of work though...

 

[john61ct]

Exactly. But looking forward once the time comes!

 

[j_j]

A bookshelf with good bass extension gives more freedom because you are not forced into a high crossover. Higher crossovers increase the risk of hearing the sub as a separate source. The best crossover is the range were the speaker and corresponding subwoofer both have useful output and can be made to sum smoothly. I believe this is the problem you are trying to solve with your LS50, MBM, multiple subs idea? You want to reduce excursion of the LS50. If I were to try to do what you are doing I would do individual sweeps of each component and set crossovers where there is good output/overlap. It sounds like a lot of work though...

How small is 'bookshelf'? (subtitled "should I just post a design here?")

 

[thcdru2k]

How small is 'bookshelf'? (subtitled "should I just post a design here?")

That's fair. Small bookshelves and deep bass generally don't go hand in hand.