Bass

[sterling shoote]

That's just silly. You've been reading too much Stereophile and The Absolute Sound bs, or you just don't know what you're talking about.

What is silly is expecting any particular crossover or volume level for a sub to give the perception of being accurate for all music. Bottom-line, to get the best result, adjustment of the sub to the particular music/movie might provide the most satisfying experience. I keep notes on what adjustments sound best. This can also extend the life of disintegrating woofer or subwoofer foam surrounds caused by possible extreme woofer excursion when playing at realistic volume.

 

[herbu]

What is silly is expecting any particular crossover or volume level for a sub to give the perception of being accurate for all music.

sterling,
I think you're confusing "accurate" with "preferred".
Once your system is "accurate", it will reproduce exactly what the recording sound engineers intended... on every recording. You may "prefer" more bass for this music, or less bass for that music. But if you start with "accurate" equipment and settings, your tweaking will actually move you away from "accurate"... even though it may be more to your liking.

 

[sterling shoote]

sterling,
I think you're confusing "accurate" with "preferred".
Once your system is "accurate", it will reproduce exactly what the recording sound engineers intended... on every recording. You may "prefer" more bass for this music, or less bass for that music. But if you start with "accurate" equipment and settings, your tweaking will actually move you away from "accurate"... even though it may be more to your liking.

No, I am not confusing accurate with preferred. It's why I used the modifier "perception". The reality is to have an understanding of what is most accurate, or what the recording engineers intended, is as elusive as it may be moot, unless you have the same studio monitors as listened to by the recording engineers. Certainly, we all have a preference for all sensual things; and, most here I think simply want what sounds to their ears as being the best presentation of their recordings.

BTW, in my marketing career I produced several thousand radio commercials. In no instance, did the recorded commercials I produced sound as the recording engineer intended when listened to outside the recording studio where the commercials were originally produced.

 

[Irvrobinson]

No, I am not confusing accurate with preferred. It's why I used the modifier "perception". The reality is to have an understanding of what is most accurate, or what the recording engineers intended, is as elusive as it may be moot, unless you have the same studio monitors as listened to by the recording engineers. Certainly, we all have a preference for all sensual things; and, most here I think simply want what sounds to their ears as being the best presentation of their recordings.

BTW, in my marketing career I produced several thousand radio commercials. In no instance, did the recorded commercials I produced sound as the recording engineer intended when listened to outside the recording studio where the commercials were originally produced.

Your misconception is that the crossover frequency to a subwoofer needs to change to be more accurate with different music selections. The achievement of something approaching flat in-room frequency response is music-independent. Measurements and comparisons to reference recordings - recordings best made in-room - are what will tell if the speaker-sub system is near accurate. The rest is preference, or high-end audio nonsense. Also, that "matching" challenge is just a figment of high-end audio reviewers' imagination, and mostly refers to old subwoofers that just had rather poor performance.

As for "in no instance sound as the recording engineer intended", I have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm now sure you don't either. Congratulations, you just earned a slot on my ignore list.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

What is silly is expecting any particular crossover or volume level for a sub to give the perception of being accurate for all music. Bottom-line, to get the best result, adjustment of the sub to the particular music/movie might provide the most satisfying experience. I keep notes on what adjustments sound best. This can also extend the life of disintegrating woofer or subwoofer foam surrounds caused by possible extreme woofer excursion when playing at realistic volume.

I agree 100% with adjusting the VOLUME level of the subwoofers because some songs have a lot more bass than others.

But I disagree with adjusting the XO point in the AVR from song to song.

 

[sterling shoote]

I agree 100% with adjusting the VOLUME level of the subwoofers because some songs have a lot more bass than others.

But I disagree with adjusting the XO point in the AVR from song to song.

Certainly, you'd agree that any crossover point produces a product which will sound different than the product produced from another point. You will either like the result or not. Given that you like the result does not assure that you will like the result when listening to something else in your music library. You might find too much or too little bass emphasis; and, volume adjustment does not address emphasis as would just moving crossover up or down, especially when you are listening at what you believe is a realistic music level. Earlier, I brought attention to two house/dance music selections which can not be enjoyed with the same sub settings. It's in this genre of music which subwoofer performance can be a real godsend or a frustration. In most other genres of music I don't even find a benefit to subwoofer integration since there is no low level sound within the performance that can not be reproduced by my mains. For movies, I can enjoy pretty much any movie with what the pre/pro suggests when I've matched channel volume levels.

Perhaps, of some interest here is the equipment I am using from which my impressions are based: My sub is a JBL B380. This is a JBL 2235H 15 inch low frequency driver housed in a JBL walnut veneer enclosure. The amp used to power this sub is a Sony TA-N80ES bridged to produce about 560 watts, which so far has worked without clipping.

 

[sterling shoote]

Your misconception is that the crossover frequency to a subwoofer needs to change to be more accurate with different music selections. The achievement of something approaching flat in-room frequency response is music-independent. Measurements and comparisons to reference recordings - recordings best made in-room - are what will tell if the speaker-sub system is near accurate. The rest is preference, or high-end audio nonsense. Also, that "matching" challenge is just a figment of high-end audio reviewers' imagination, and mostly refers to old subwoofers that just had rather poor performance.

As for "in no instance sound as the recording engineer intended", I have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm now sure you don't either. Congratulations, you just earned a slot on my ignore list.

What you obviously did not interpret as intended was my use of the phrase perception of accuracy, which I could have instead written as perception of being right. Also, for me to hear anything as the recording engineer intended is a marketing gimmick. After all, wouldn't we all really like to hear something as intended; but, to assure hearing as intended would also mean a playback system exactly like that used in studio mastering. Interestingly, "as intended" for the most part has been a palatable sound from a radio in a car rolling down the highway. Listening at home, the compression of such music is certainly not as intended but a consequence of a producer's interest in satisfying radio station operators and the market listening to music out of home.

 

[herbu]

The achievement of something approaching flat in-room frequency response is music-independent... The rest is preference

Exactly.
The OP would have us believe that after your system is calibrated, particular songs require crossover changes to be "accurate". Yet his justification is various examples of "preference".

 

[sterling shoote]

Exactly.
The OP would have us believe that after your system is calibrated, particular songs require crossover changes to be "accurate". Yet his justification is various examples of "preference".

You should re-read my last post, crossover changes are useful in getting a PERCEPTION of accuracy. I said this could also be written as perception of what sounds right, or what sounds correct. There is no justification required for any comments here. But really, you should be a little more "accurate" in your reading comprehension or perhaps just read the whole thread. BTW, not doggin ya, I think you're a neat guy, and I enjoy your comments.

 

[herbu]

a PERCEPTION of accuracy... perception of what sounds right

Both of those statements are an adequate description of "preference". After all, what is preference if not perception?

Never mind. No need to answer. I'm done here.

 

[sterling shoote]

Both of those statements are an adequate description of "preference". After all, what is preference if not perception?

Never mind. No need to answer. I'm done here.

I think you might be on the right page now, preference is what it's all about; and, getting the preferred sound from the sub and mains may be a matter of volume, as well as crossover control. The control may be useful from going from one music selection to another. Just selecting a particular crossover point for the sub, whether it's 65, 80, or even a 1000Hz, does not mean that setting is what will get you the sound you want, prefer, or think is correct for all media you play. Experiment, make notes of what settings do indeed sound best. You can then make playlists to listen without need to reset anything. Interestingly, some media player do allow for volume leveling, like iTunes.

 

[agarwalro]

I set my XO @ 150Hz because I want to hear that "Stereo Bass" that Gene talks about.

I think Gene sets the XO for his Main Subs @ 250Hz.

Surely you can't be serious .

"Stereo bass" is another audio myth that should be deep sixed.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Surely you can't be serious .

"Stereo bass" is another audio myth that should be deep sixed.

I think the first time I heard someone mention using XO above 80Hz (even when your main speakers are flat down to 40Hz) was when Nathan & Mark @ Funk Audio mentioned it.

The first time I heard of "Stereo Bass" was when Gene mentioned it. And in his latest article & YouTube video, he also mentioned it w/ XO @ 250Hz, but only for the main 2 subs.

I don't think Funk Audio or Gene are joking.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I think the first time I heard someone mention using XO above 80Hz (even when your main speakers are flat down to 40Hz) was when Nathan & Mark @ Funk Audio mentioned it.

The first time I heard of "Stereo Bass" was when Gene mentioned it. And in his latest article & YouTube video, he also mentioned it w/ XO @ 250Hz, but only for the main 2 subs.

I don't think Funk Audio or Gene are joking.

If you are crossing at 250 Hz and the sub playing it back to 250 Hz, then you would differentiate as stereo above a certain freq. to 250 Hz. Not sure how low can you go to differentiate or rather get a stereo perception of low frequency.

 

[agarwalro]

I think the first time I heard someone mention using XO above 80Hz (even when your main speakers are flat down to 40Hz) was when Nathan & Mark @ Funk Audio mentioned it.

The first time I heard of "Stereo Bass" was when Gene mentioned it. And in his latest article & YouTube video, he also mentioned it w/ XO @ 250Hz, but only for the main 2 subs.

I don't think Funk Audio or Gene are joking.

Can you please link the Funk Audio discussion and Gene's video. I'll like to understand the context in which those statements were made before commenting on them. Thanks.

 

[sterling shoote]

Surely you can't be serious .

"Stereo bass" is another audio myth that should be deep sixed.

Ditto!

 

[herbu]

I don't think Funk Audio or Gene are joking.

If you have strong L/R speakers, it seems it might not be unlike using Direct and simply bypassing your subs.

But what if your subs are not next to your L/Rs? Maybe one in front and one in back? With a crossover at 250Hz, it seems some of instruments and voices would sound like they were front & back of you. Think I'll try it and see.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Actually Gene sets the XO @ 250Hz for the bass cabinets of his 8T speakers (8T is modular with treble/midrange cabinet + bass cabinet).

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/the-perfect-solution-for-home-theater-bass-optimization-here.98037/page-2#post-1122973

I am setting the XO @ 150Hz for the bass cabinets of my five T2 speakers ( T2 is modular with treble/midrange cabinet + bass cabinet).

When I say "my subs", I mean the 5 bass cabinets beneath the 5 treble/mids cabinets of the T2 speakers.

I am not sure I am willing to set the XO beyond 150Hz.

By setting the XO @ 150Hz, the ten 10" woofers are playing 20-150Hz. I think in conjunction with Audyssey Dynamic EQ, the mid-bass is strengthened and more pronounced, which I believe is called "stereo bass", unless there is a different definition of it.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

When I say "my subs", I mean the 5 bass cabinets beneath the 5 treble/mids cabinets of the T2 speakers.

...

Well, that is a different animal altogether.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Well, that is a different animal altogether.

If only we could read each other's mind.

What I think and how that comes out may be 2 different things.