OP
- Thread Starter
- #41
We mounted some in our ceiling at Madrona too.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Subwoofer / Low Frequency Optimization
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Can I ask where this graph came from?
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Hypothetically:
Would 2 x 10" almost always be better than 1 x 12-15"?
Would 2 x 10" almost always be better than 1 x 12-15"?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #44
It is from the original AES paper by Welti that started it all: http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=11355
How Many Subwoofers are Enough
Todd Welti
Harman International Industries, Inc.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #45
From what point of view? For evenness of response, two is better than one.
Simplistically, with everything else equal, 2 * 10 is more displacement than one 12, but less than one 15, so for max low and loud the 15" wins. If you were asking about movies you would be told to buy the 15.
Two 10" drivers have only about 89% of the cone area as a single 15" but there are a lot of other parameters... Just like comparing two subs that have different amplifier power ratings; not enough to really say which is better without some test results.
Yes, I know you said "simplistically"...
In a contrary mood today, long week.
Still, I'd usually go for two good subs with lower output over a single larger one due to the uneven bass response in most rooms. Even better are two good subs, so sometimes the best advice is to buy one good one now and start saving for the next.
Yes, I know you said "simplistically"...
In a contrary mood today, long week.Still, I'd usually go for two good subs with lower output over a single larger one due to the uneven bass response in most rooms. Even better are two good subs, so sometimes the best advice is to buy one good one now and start saving for the next.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Yay, I finally get to use my membership for something actually practical, instead of theoretical!
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Two 10" drivers have only about 89% of the cone area as a single 15" but there are a lot of other parameters... Just like comparing two subs that have different amplifier power ratings; not enough to really say which is better without some test results.
Yes, I know you said "simplistically"...
Still, I'd usually go for two good subs with lower output over a single larger one due to the uneven bass response in most rooms. Even better are two good subs, so sometimes the best advice is to buy one good one now and start saving for the next.
Luckily, or unfortunately, depending on your POV, I have the luxury / curse of optimizing for concealment as opposed to cost.
Basically, I have much more freedom of movement on cost than something big the wife will frown at, aesthetically.
Put a plant on it.
"Honey, the new plant stands are here..."
"Honey, the new plant stands are here..."
4 small 8" asw608 B&W subs yielded excellent results for me. I will post some plots later.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Earl Geddes designed his speakers to be used with multiple subs.
Here are a couple of his papers that touch on LF behavior of small rooms.
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/multiple subs.pdf
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Philosophy.pdf
Generally her recommends 1 sub in a corner, preferable in a front corner near the main speakers and the other 2 in positions to affet the room modes differently, even elevating to ear level.
Here are a couple of his papers that touch on LF behavior of small rooms.
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/multiple subs.pdf
http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/Philosophy.pdf
Generally her recommends 1 sub in a corner, preferable in a front corner near the main speakers and the other 2 in positions to affet the room modes differently, even elevating to ear level.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Here is a question for the academy:
Ceiling in my living room slopes, from about 8' up to about 14'.
Is that good, bad, or indifferent for bass production?
Ceiling in my living room slopes, from about 8' up to about 14'.
Is that good, bad, or indifferent for bass production?
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Okay, there are some things he says that seems to contradict the Harman papers. Example:
"1)If there are corners, then one sub should probably go in a corner. Corners have the unique characteristic of see all of the modes. But using two corners is not an effective use of two subs because the symmetrical situation makes these two sources less statistically independent. A less symmetrical location for the second sub would be better.
2) One of the subs should be relatively close to the mains, but not too close. Ideal here might be to locate the first sub close to the mains, but back in a corner, if in fact the mains are pulled out slightly from the wall behind them, as they should be.
3) The rest of the subs locations become far less important if the first two points above are adhered to"
This seems quite different from the Harman stuff, which, with 2 subs, seems to recommend the 2 front corners.
Here is a 1 hr presentation where he notes disagreements with Toole and the reasons for his approach. IMO Earl is one of the better speaker designers, however he has retired from speakerbuilding.
BTW Earl went to the MINIDSP for eq and crossovers of his stuff a few years ago this presentation os 6 years old now.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 332
- Likes
- 243
So that's pretty different views on subs placement discussed in this thread:
1) Harmann/Welti: Symmetric Sub placement is key (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/00da/51387c572cfd27c0256cb15e44e976a1a72e.pdf)
2) Geddes: Asymetrical Sub Placement is key (http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/multiple subs.pdf)
Is there any statistical evidence/furthere research on these 2 views?
I found this Celestinos/Nielsen paper that deals with some variation of the C.A.B.S approach (among them shifting into slightly asymetrical set-ups), but their basic finding is still that symetrical sub placement is best: http://webistem.com/acoustics2008/acoustics2008/cd1/data/articles/000837.pdf
1) Harmann/Welti: Symmetric Sub placement is key (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/00da/51387c572cfd27c0256cb15e44e976a1a72e.pdf)
2) Geddes: Asymetrical Sub Placement is key (http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/multiple subs.pdf)
Is there any statistical evidence/furthere research on these 2 views?
I found this Celestinos/Nielsen paper that deals with some variation of the C.A.B.S approach (among them shifting into slightly asymetrical set-ups), but their basic finding is still that symetrical sub placement is best: http://webistem.com/acoustics2008/acoustics2008/cd1/data/articles/000837.pdf
Similar threads
