[doug s.]

Thanks for the comments guys.  So would the crossover in a Rythmik FS12 sub for example be considered a "quality" unit or would I have to step up to something like a Behringer be the best option?

i wouldn't want to be hi-passing my mains thru a sub amp's x-over.  but, i am not sure a behringer (unless modded) would be a step up.  i would look at the offerings by marchand - really quality stuff, for the price, imo.  consider the xm9 or xm44, unless you have a lot of cash; then you could choose one of the tube x-overs...

http://marchandelec.com/

doug s.

[jtwrace]

I always find it amazing when someone can comment on something that they have never heard...it's very obvious that Elizabeth hasn't heard a proper system that does bass properly. 

Also, if you've ever been to a LIVE rock concet, there is bass.  In the end, THAT'S what we're trying to reproduce.

BTW-Kodo is a blast to see in person.   

[JohnR]

But again, in fairness, your speakers require subs, they aren't a standalone solution.

[jtwrace]

But again, in fairness, your speakers require subs, they aren't a standalone solution.

Yes, they require subs if you want < 65 Hz content.  Even when I had other speakers, I had subs.  In fact, when I had my ML Summits I thought the bottom end on them was horrible (among other things) and then I moved to another pair of stats which I then integrated with a pair of Rythmiks.  Those stats went to 38 Hz.  Not bad but still needed subs to complete the sound. 

This topic is just one of those that can go one forever unless you hear the muliple sub approach done right. 

[JohnR]

But... going on forever is what discussion boards are all about 

I guess my point is that the whole thing is a system, it's not about having subs or not but how to achieve the kind of reproduction that you want.

[JohnR]

With regard to crossover frequency and directionality, I was able to locate this paper again, it may be of interest:

http://www.acoustics.hut.fi/research/cat/psychoac/papers/kelloniemiaes118.pdf

[DougSmith]

Yes, it is all about the system - which includes the room!  Having multiple low frequency sources smooths out the bass response by reducing the large peaks and notches in the response as measured a the listening position(s), which invariably occur in average size listening rooms.  You can have 3 or 4 subs overlapped with the mains, and still maintain a flat frequency response.  The piano keyboard goes down to 27 Hz, and the four strings of a bass guitar (or double bass, for that matter) cover the range from 41 to 97 Hz.  If you want to hear all of the notes across that range at the same volume they were originally played at, you need multiple low frequency sources.  Even if your mains are flat down to 20 Hz, the addition of one or two subs (properly integrated) will improve your bass response.

Oh yeah, I guess I am guilty of committing that second blasphemy as well, but I would rather do that than have absorbers hanging all over my living room.

I posted something earlier in this thread, but here is what my current response looks like with 2 subs + Geddes Abbeys:

The response varies a bit, but is quite similar across my couch, three feet to either side   

[Ronm1]

Blasphemy... Naaah, Common Sense is the more appropriate phrase, IMHO, of course.

[ctviggen]

Yes, it is all about the system - which includes the room!  Having multiple low frequency sources smooths out the bass response by reducing the large peaks and notches in the response as measured a the listening position(s), which invariably occur in average size listening rooms.  You can have 3 or 4 subs overlapped with the mains, and still maintain a flat frequency response.  The piano keyboard goes down to 27 Hz, and the four strings of a bass guitar (or double bass, for that matter) cover the range from 41 to 97 Hz.  If you want to hear all of the notes across that range at the same volume they were originally played at, you need multiple low frequency sources.  Even if your mains are flat down to 20 Hz, the addition of one or two subs (properly integrated) will improve your bass response.

Oh yeah, I guess I am guilty of committing that second blasphemy as well, but I would rather do that than have absorbers hanging all over my living room.

You still need absorbers or you won't affect decay time.  Just because you have more even response throughout the room doesn't mean you affect physics.  There's still going to be boominess caused by ringing.  Show a decay plot with and without absorbers, and you'll see what I mean. 

[Letitroll98]

You still need absorbers or you won't affect decay time.  Just because you have more even response throughout the room doesn't mean you affect physics.  There's still going to be boominess caused by ringing.  Show a decay plot with and without absorbers, and you'll see what I mean.

To expand on the posts from Elizabeth's to this one, is there any thought to bass being bad for some rooms?  In other words if one is limited to none or little room treatment, the room is not large, and/or you have cohabitant problems, maybe you should go with a speaker rolling off around 60hz and no sub.  We used to have an entire industry devoted to such setups using the Celestion SL-600, Acoustic Energy AE1, Spica TC50 and others which were all highly regarded in the day.  Lots of bass reinforcement can cause problems that may be very difficult and/or expensive to solve.  Shouting Elizabeth down and declaring you have to have subs or you can't have a musically satisfying system might not be the way to go, just sayin'.

Just a note for those who don't like backtracking several pages, I love my subs and have lots of them all over the house, you should keep several spares in the closet in case guests come over.  But in many situations you may get much better results with a simple two way system.       

[rollo]

  Yes one can enjoy their music with limited bass response. Saying that having bass to 20Hz flat will enhance every aspect of the presentation. Getting there is the issue. Room correction for bass [ only] is essential in our tough rooms. That is where I would stop. For me I havn't met a crossover that did not muck up the rest of the signal, especially digital crossovers. I find them unmusical for the most part. Thin, threadbare and all that. Bass however a different story. The Berhinger as per the review was better suited for bass management.
  I'm sure it can be "done right" , but that is subjective to the listener. We run the Pipedreams full range [ output to 40Hz ] and set the sub at 34Hz. No issues great intergration with no crossover. The Berhinger did improve focus but lost the tone. More slam for sure but it sounded Hi Fi not real. my findings anyway.


charles

[DougSmith]

You still need absorbers or you won't affect decay time.  Just because you have more even response throughout the room doesn't mean you affect physics.  There's still going to be boominess caused by ringing.  Show a decay plot with and without absorbers, and you'll see what I mean.

Yes, I'm sure it would make a difference.  There is a fair amount of absorption in my room, however, with a large oriental rug + 2 couches, upholstered chair and curtains.  Boominess and sidewall reflections are not a problem.  In fact, reduction in boominess is one of the benefits of having a relatively flat bass response.  There is a noticeable reflection from the window behind my listening position (7 ms), but ringing does not become an issue unless I play the system really loud (> 95 db average level).  I actually prefer the sound of a more lively room.  Someday I will get around to making some heavy curtains for that window, however, and perhaps replace the wallboard with 1/2" fiberglass panels on the front wall as well - which should improve the imaging and soundstage a bit. 

A gradual rise in LF by 5 db or so starting at around 100 Hz (and gradual tail-off of the high end as well, for that matter) sounds more natural to me for most music (I've tried it flat as well).  This doesn't result in an over-emphasized bass response (which is what Elizabeth was ranting about, I believe).  In fact, you really don't notice the subs at all.  The system just reproduces whatever is in the music (or on the DVD). 

I agree with last two posts as well.  I liked the sound of my system before I added the subs, and it was certainly deficient in the low end at that point.  It sounds a lot better now, though. 

[JohnR]

To expand on the posts from Elizabeth's to this one, is there any thought to bass being bad for some rooms?  In other words if one is limited to none or little room treatment, the room is not large, and/or you have cohabitant problems, maybe you should go with a speaker rolling off around 60hz and no sub.

Hm... well, there's no law that says that you can't put a sub underneath (or just beside) the listening chair. It's not something I've tried but in a small room with those kinds of issues I think it would be worth trying (along with measurement and eq).

[ratso]

i have poked around some on dr. geddes website but i am having a hard time locating a good source for his multiple sub setup. i am curious to learn more about this. can someone give me a link?

[poseidonsvoice]

i have poked around some on dr. geddes website but i am having a hard time locating a good source for his multiple sub setup. i am curious to learn more about this. can someone give me a link?

Read this.

Best,
Anand.

[neobop]

i wouldn't want to be hi-passing my mains thru a sub amp's x-over.  but, i am not sure a behringer (unless modded) would be a step up.  i would look at the offerings by marchand - really quality stuff, for the price, imo.  consider the xm9 or xm44, unless you have a lot of cash; then you could choose one of the tube x-overs...

http://marchandelec.com/

doug s.

My results are the same about putting the mains through a crossover. Have you used a Marchand crossover successfully this way?
I find the use of subs extremely problematic in the hook up. Splitting the output signal from the preamp, degrades the sound and somehow causes bass cancellations in the mains, above the frequency being augmented, irrespective of placement. Maybe I haven't stumbled on the right placement, but it doesn't seem possible hooked up this way. I'm about to try a different hook up configuration, so I'll see.

On the other hand, years ago I heard a system that used electrostatic speakers run full range and 2 large Entecs were uses to augment the bass. Ahead of the Entecs was an Audio Control Richter Scale III. This was a crossover/bass EQ, with 5 bands from 100Hz down. It came with a calibrated mic and a warble tone generator. The Richter Scale was run off a tape out, so it didn't degrade the main output. Results were astounding.

I suspect very good results could also be had in this way, provided the main speakers didn't distort badly with with a full range input. Speakers and speaker designs vary widely in this respect. It might take lots of trial an error with an EQ, but I think it would be possible. I'd be reluctant to invest the money for a Marchand, in the hope that it wouldn't degrade the mains.
neo

[JohnR]

I posted something earlier in this thread, but here is what my current response looks like with 2 subs + Geddes Abbeys:

I've taken the liberty of cutting out your frequency response and comparing to my most recent measurement on roughly the same scale. I'm told that my system is bass-heavy! On the other hand I could see/hear that I might prefer more a bit more of a down-slope a little earlier. Perhaps some overall eq experiments will yield some insight into the differences here.

DougSmith:



JohnR:

[doug s.]

My results are the same about putting the mains through a crossover. Have you used a Marchand crossover successfully this way?
I find the use of subs extremely problematic in the hook up. Splitting the output signal from the preamp, degrades the sound and somehow causes bass cancellations in the mains, above the frequency being augmented, irrespective of placement. Maybe I haven't stumbled on the right placement, but it doesn't seem possible hooked up this way. I'm about to try a different hook up configuration, so I'll see.

On the other hand, years ago I heard a system that used electrostatic speakers run full range and 2 large Entecs were uses to augment the bass. Ahead of the Entecs was an Audio Control Richter Scale III. This was a crossover/bass EQ, with 5 bands from 100Hz down. It came with a calibrated mic and a warble tone generator. The Richter Scale was run off a tape out, so it didn't degrade the main output. Results were astounding.

I suspect very good results could also be had in this way, provided the main speakers didn't distort badly with with a full range input. Speakers and speaker designs vary widely in this respect. It might take lots of trial an error with an EQ, but I think it would be possible. I'd be reluctant to invest the money for a Marchand, in the hope that it wouldn't degrade the mains.
neo

when i first bought subs (a pair of the original upright-style vmps largers), i also purchased a marchand xm9ll x-over, as several folks i queried said it was as good or better than the much more expensive bryston 10b.  it brought immediate improvements in transparency and soundstaging to the thiel 3.5's i was using at the time.  (besides improving the bass.)  i have tried this set-up w/many different speakers, and it has always sounded great - proac's, coincident, swans, meret, spendor, totem, piega, zu, gr-research, and others.  i always used a pink noise generator, graphic eq and mic to get it set up.  and, the subs have always been flanking the mains.  lately, i have been using a deqx dsp processor/x-over, and i like the results even more...

ymmv,

doug s,

[JohnR]

Also, if you've ever been to a LIVE rock concet, there is bass.  In the end, THAT'S what we're trying to reproduce.

I missed this part. In all honesty I wouldn't use a live rock concert as a benchmark. The last one I went to (and I was in the enclosure with the mixing desk so it can't have gotten too much better anywhere else...) was really "not that great" in that department. It was a big-$$ production, any money that could have been spent, would have been. Live (amplified) sound struggles with so many issues, the issues faced by in-home reproduction are really so much less in many respects. It's just a different thing and a different set of standards.

[Watson]

The GedLee enthusiasts on this forum run their speakers full range. The active crossover (whether it be attached to the subs or separate like Behringer DCX that I use) is only used for low pass on the subwoofers themselves. Nothing is mucking with the mains at all.

I was under the impression Dr. Geddes runs his mains highpassed (filtered). I can't see why he wouldn't... although he doesn't believe strongly in the audibility of nonlinear distortion beyond a certain threshold, there's no reason not to reduce it. I was also under the impression this was one of the main benefits of using a cheap home theatre receiver, as Dr. Geddes recommends, since it can do the high pass crossover in the digital domain. Is there anywhere online where Dr. Geddes recommends running the mains full range?