Best subs for strictly music that'll make me feel the drums?

[Nathan Rieben]

Based on your desires I would recommend going with two quality front loaded PA subs with 18" drivers. The QSC KW181 or perhaps the B-52 Matrix 2000 (if you can find them still) are both solid choices. The price is within your budget and they utilize onboard amplification so you'll side step the extra cost there. These PA subs won't have much for output below about 30Hz but most metal music wont need it anyway. After all these are going to be the same kinds of speakers you would be hearing if you attended a metal concert live.

In my experience PA subs can integrate well into a two channel hi-fi environment when you take the time to set them up properly. Just avoid folded horn designs since most (in my experience) sacrifice musicality for raw SPL.

Let us know what you end up deciding on

 

[Sigberg Audio]

I have found over time that the kick drum each person is after can be slightly different. However what I have found to be critical is that the audio system can produce the important parts of the kick itself well and in balance. The initial mallet strike or attack of the kick is actually quite high in the frequency band depending upon how it was recorded. That can be through the mid-bass band well up to the 3k range depending upon the mallet used and the kit itself.

The fundamental of the kick will come from the tuning on the drum and the harmonics/resonance properties of each drum. That is where the sub itself will come in to help add the proper weight. The main speakers should be adequate to support the SPL levels you want to achieve. I would suggest that if you have a 45hz or 50hz fundamental in a kick drum you want a speaker capable of delivering strong performance 1 and 2 octaves above (harmonics) to match the SPL of the sub.

As one poster mentioned earlier the recording of the drum kit is important. However the system as a whole is critical in terms of the proper balance. The attack and perceived punch comes from the 1st & 2nd octaves above the fundamental (usually the mains) combined with a proper balance of the sub doing the lower end work.

When I EQ our kickdrum at our church you would be surprised how much upper frequency information is not only contained, but needed, in order to give it the punch it needs. I bump one of the eqs up a bit below the fundamental to add more "weight" and depth but there is a lot of fine tuning above that to make it sound great.

Fully agree, the 100-300hz area (tempted to say 100-500hz) is often neglected. And people also often make it worse by trying to turn up their subwoofers chasing that punch, but in effect making the 100-300hz area even less powerful in comparison.

If you can get away with it in your room (and have enough power in the speakers) I'd be trying to get almost full power from 20hz up to 200hz, maybe 1-2dB lower at 100-200hz compared to 20-100hz (many drop off pretty hard at 100hz), and then an even/gradual drop up to 1-2khz from there. It can be tricky to get right in some rooms (100-300hz can get muddy, it's a fine balance), but is VERY impactful when you get it right.

 

[TLS Guy]

Fully agree, the 100-300hz area (tempted to say 100-500hz) is often neglected. And people also often make it worse by trying to turn up their subwoofers chasing that punch, but in effect making the 100-300hz area even less powerful in comparison.

If you can get away with it in your room (and have enough power in the speakers) I'd be trying to get almost full power from 20hz up to 200hz, maybe 1-2dB lower at 100-200hz compared to 20-100hz (many drop off pretty hard at 100hz), and then an even/gradual drop up to 1-2khz from there. It can be tricky to get right in some rooms (100-300hz can get muddy, it's a fine balance), but is VERY impactful when you get it right.

Yes, this is what I refer to as the power band response. In my design I have allowed major resources to that power band, which is shared by the two 7.5" drivers, and the upper 10" driver.

Most people think the sub is crucial for reproducing drums, and yet the sub contributes little to the issue. The major output of a kick drum is from 50 Hz to 500 Hz. There is significant harmonic content from 500 Hz to 7KHz!

Now I believe to properly reproduce a drum, and actually pretty much everything, is to preserve the correct time relationships across the whole spectrum.
To me it is intuitive that Ted Jordan's research at Goodmans 60 odd years ago showing that it was a bad idea to separate fundamentals from harmonics is correct. Everything I have done with speakers confirms that truth. Without that you have no chance of a realistic impulse response, and percussive sounds especially will be short changed.

So spreading subs around a room to even out room response creates even greater ills. I have long maintained that subs need to be part of the total design of the speakers they are matched with. I would never do a reference design without designing it that way, and I have a feeling you would not either.

I certainly have no trouble getting my rig to produce extremely accurate transients, or kicks and what ever else you want to call them.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

I don't think it's right that you can't accurately reproduce transients and drums with a number of subs spread out into the room. If the frequency response is good within the range the subwoofer covers as well as the crossover area, then you're basically good.

Subwoofers have got a really bad reputation in music circles, I think is in part that many subwoofers in the earlier days weren't very necessarily very accurate, and in part that it's difficult to integrate a subwoofer well (or at least requires some competence and patience). So a lot of people who claim "subwoofers won't work for music" simply base that on experience with poorly integrated subwoofers.

But it IS possible to properly integrate subwoofers so that they sound as a seamless extension of the speakers. It's possible with multiple subwoofers, and it's possible with subwoofers spread out in the room as well.

 

[TLS Guy]

I don't think it's right that you can't accurately reproduce transients and drums with a number of subs spread out into the room. If the frequency response is good within the range the subwoofer covers as well as the crossover area, then you're basically good.

Subwoofers have got a really bad reputation in music circles, I think is in part that many subwoofers in the earlier days weren't very necessarily very accurate, and in part that it's difficult to integrate a subwoofer well (or at least requires some competence and patience). So a lot of people who claim "subwoofers won't work for music" simply base that on experience with poorly integrated subwoofers.

But it IS possible to properly integrate subwoofers so that they sound as a seamless extension of the speakers. It's possible with multiple subwoofers, and it's possible with subwoofers spread out in the room as well.

I can tell you what it does do, spreading the subs about. It decreases the sweet spot. Moving subs away from the main speakers upsets the transient response. You can time the mains with the subs integrated with the mains and time it all with the main speakers. After many years doing this I know that Ted Jordan was correct, and we have been far too cavalier about it. Even in a single speaker the more phase disparity you have introduced then the less a square wave looks like one. By the time you use fourth order filters, then a square wave becomes a perfect sine wave. We have turned a blind eye to all this out of expediency. However active filters with DSP will show that coherent phasing matters, as quite honestly you would expect it to. The more percussive the sound, the more a good transient response matters. We tolerate aberrations in speakers, that we would roundly condemn in any amplifier. But we have let speakers get away with wholesale rounding of square waves for ever. Now we do have the tools to do better, and it is time we did.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

I can tell you what it does do, spreading the subs about. It decreases the sweet spot.

I suspect the cinema crowd on this forum will disagree with you there. But that's perhaps a discussion you've had with them before, so no need to revisit perhaps.

 

[TLS Guy]

I suspect the cinema crowd on this forum will disagree with you there. But that's perhaps a discussion you've had with them before, so no need to revisit perhaps.

Well I suppose it depends on which ills are greatest. Certainly there is more deep bass at times in the cinema, but I can't believe transient response isn't important in that program either. I agree that moving subs about does help smooth the low end room response. But as with everything in life there is a price to be paid.

I have to say I really favor a good transient response, as it keeps the excitement in music, and gets it closer to the live experience.

 

[dlaloum]

I suspect the cinema crowd on this forum will disagree with you there. But that's perhaps a discussion you've had with them before, so no need to revisit perhaps.

Cinema effects are mostly boom crash rumble - they don't actually require high levels of "fidelity"

Musical instruments, kick drums, require high fidelity.... and that is a whole different ball of wax

 

[dlaloum]

Well I suppose it depends on which ills are greatest. Certainly there is more deep bass at times in the cinema, but I can't believe transient response isn't important in that program either. I agree that moving subs about does help smooth the low end room response. But as with everything in life there is a price to be paid.

I have to say I really favor a good transient response, as it keeps the excitement in music, and gets it closer to the live experience.

I think that was always my problem with matching subs to ESL's....

 

[TLS Guy]

I think that was always my problem with matching subs to ESL's....

Yes, you have to use a di-pole sub and the reason is obvious. A sub operates below the transition frequency and is an in phase omnidirectional radiator. the Quad ESL on the other hand is a dipole with the rear radiation 180 degrees out of phase with the front radiation. So a conventional sub can be in phase with either the front or back radiation, but not both. So that is a totally unsatisfactory situation, resulting on poor FR as there will be either front or rear cancellation. It is the same with Maggies.

 

[shadyJ]

Yes, you have to use a di-pole sub and the reason is obvious. A sub operates below the transition frequency and is an in phase omnidirectional radiator. the Quad ESL on the other hand is a dipole with the rear radiation 180 degrees out of phase with the front radiation. So a conventional sub can be in phase with either the front or back radiation, but not both. So that is a totally unsatisfactory situation, resulting on poor FR as there will be either front or rear cancellation. It is the same with Maggies.

I wouldn't think it matters that the sub be dipole for integrating with a dipole design, because the crossover point is going to be below the room's transition frequency no matter what, so there will be phase cancellation issues in any room that isn't gigantic. There has to be low-frequency phase cancellation problems with a speaker like that no matter what, sub or no sub, and not just in off-axis nulls.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

@TLS Guy @dlaloum

Since we released a special version of our Inkognito subwoofer literally last week that is made specifically for the Quad ELS63, I have to disagree again. It has been tuned and optimized by Quad experts Robin Wyatt of Robyatt Audio and Kent McCollum of ElectroStatic Solutions, who I understand is somewhat of an authority on Quads in the US. And they think it's terrific.

The subwoofer replaces the stands of the Quads and is a traditional sealed enclosure (so not a dipole). Timing and phase behaves a bit differently in the lowest octaves compared to further up in the frequencies.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Kick drums are between 50Hz and 90Hz depending on tuning - so they are clearly in woofer rather than "sub" woofer territory! (debatable I know)

But the point I want to make, is that in days of yore I used to listen to Boston Acoustics A400 speakers - with dual 8" woofers - and the kickdrum thump - would definitely hit you in the chest....

That floor standing speaker, was a sealed infinite baffle design...

Also sealed subs are often better with that sort of tight fast sound (from my own experience) - It doesn't need to be overly large - Subs with 8" to 10" drivers can do this job just fine - and often will do so with lower distortion and more clarity.

This isn't about low subsonic bass - but it will be about the ability to achieve the desired SPL's cleanly within that 50Hz to 90Hz range.

I agree. That’s why I boost the EQ between 40-100 Hz for my subs.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I agree. That’s why I boost the EQ between 40-100 Hz for my subs.

Haha. Try that with some sealed 8-10” subs he recommended in your room, and not yours.

 

[TLS Guy]

I wouldn't think it matters that the sub be dipole for integrating with a dipole design, because the crossover point is going to be below the room's transition frequency no matter what, so there will be phase cancellation issues in any room that isn't gigantic. There has to be low-frequency phase cancellation problems with a speaker like that no matter what, sub or no sub, and not just in off-axis nulls.

The di-pole Gradient sub, was the only one that Peter Walker approved and recommended be used with the Quad ESL 63.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

The di-pole Gradient sub, was the only one that Peter Walker approved and recommended be used with the Quad ESL 63.

What matters is whether the bass is in phase at the listening position, and it may very well be even though the subwoofer isn't dipole.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Haha. Try that with some sealed 8-10” subs he recommended in your room, and not yours.

My living room is 15,000+ Cubic-Ft ,and I use dual 1212 ported subs.

Not so sure about dual 8" sealed subs, though.

BTW, I think the last time the OP posted was about 3 weeks ago.

 

[TLS Guy]

What matters is whether the bass is in phase at the listening position, and it may very well be even though the subwoofer isn't dipole.

The trouble is that it gets it all down to luck, and the rear radiation will not be correct. I have heard the ESL 63 with monopole subs, and the result was strange, but not right.
Alistair Robertson-Aikman had a strong steel frame made that held four Quad ESLs. So four per side, 8 in all. Obviously in a planer speaker that increases the bass response and lowers F3 greatly. Those were in his demo room at SME. I never heard the rig, but by reports it sounded awesome.

 

[Sigberg Audio]

I have heard lots of speakers matched with poorly integrated subwoofers as well, but that doesn't mean that has to be the case, dipole or otherwise.

 

[dlaloum]

@TLS Guy @dlaloum

Since we released a special version of our Inkognito subwoofer literally last week that is made specifically for the Quad ELS63, I have to disagree again. It has been tuned and optimized by Quad experts Robin Wyatt of Robyatt Audio and Kent McCollum of ElectroStatic Solutions, who I understand is somewhat of an authority on Quads in the US. And they think it's terrific.

The subwoofer replaces the stands of the Quads and is a traditional sealed enclosure (so not a dipole). Timing and phase behaves a bit differently in the lowest octaves compared to further up in the frequencies.

Thanks for that - if/when I get the opportunity to go back to a set of ESL's I will definitely look into this product!!!