Subwoofer gain based on corner location/proximity, how to do the arithmetic?

[TLS Guy]

As I said before, I like minimal cone excursion, because that minimizes distortion. So, yes the Klipsch are, bringing something to the table.

But I have to ask, TLS, is this the Frankenstein bass response you expected, from my monster? I'd love to see your measured REW response, I do appreciate data, especially deep in the bass region (where most, without bass mangement (such as Dirac), are listening to their room, not their expensive subwoofer!

It is better than I expected, but this may be a huge endorsement of Dirac. However, there is that old saying that "if you get run over by a bus, you don't necessarily get killed!"

 

[Paul McNeil]

It is better than I expected, but this may be a huge endorsement of Dirac. However, there is that old saying that "if you get run over by a bus, you don't necessarily get killed!"

Yeah, it is an endorsement of Dirac but they are not paying me, I'm just going with what I see and hear, as objectively as possible. Isn't this what we are all about in a forum like this.

I'm happy to hear that the bass is 'better than expected"! I look forward to seeing from you an REW response that is better than, 'better than expected"!

 

[TLS Guy]

Yeah, it is an endorsement of Dirac but they are not paying me, I'm just going with what I see and hear, as objectively as possible. Isn't this what we are all about in a forum like this.

I'm happy to hear that the bass is 'better than expected"! I look forward to seeing from you an REW response that is better than, 'better than expected"!

I don't use REW but Omni mic. I also don't use any so called room correction.

So this is my room.

This is the 1 meter FR and impulse response of a main speaker.

Now I will show you the FRs at front center sets, center middle seat, which is the MLP and the rear center seat. All speakers are driven. The impulse response form all speakers is coincident at the MLP, and obviously they can only be coincident at one spot.

Front center.

MLP (center, center row)

Rear center.

There is some room gain below 25 Hz, but that is not unpleasant. The HF rolls off a little with distance from the speakers, which it should. You do not want to Eq this out, or the sound will be very unnatural.

So the room actually sounds excellent in all seats.

A mix of equipment that spans over half a century, actually over 60 years.

There are 18 power amp channels totalling 3200 watts.

 

[Paul McNeil]

I don't use REW but Omni mic. I also don't use any so called room correction.

So this is my room.

This is the 1 meter FR and impulse response of a main speaker.

Now I will show you the FRs at front center sets, center middle seat, which is the MLP and the rear center seat. All speakers are driven. The impulse response form all speakers is coincident at the MLP, and obviously they can only be coincident at one spot.

Front center.

MLP (center, center row)

Rear center.

There is some room gain below 25 Hz, but that is not unpleasant. The HF rolls off a little with distance from the speakers, which it should. You do not want to Eq this out, or the sound will be very unnatural.

So the room actually sounds excellent in all seats.

A mix of equipment that spans over half a century, actually over 60 years.

There are 18 power amp channels totalling 3200 watts.

A very handsome home theater indeed! I've also got bookshelves in the rear, for diffraction (and books).

I would send you pics of my HT but I would risk another Frankenstein assessment, I'm sure!!

One thing I notice, is that your center channel is above the screen. So is mine, aimed down at the primary listening position (a mere couch, in my case). I believe this is far better than a location below the screen, where floor bounce clearly indicates the position of the center, i.e. below the image being viewed.

I must admit that I don't understand those measurements (I'm used to seeing REW, without smoothing) but I'm glad to hear that the sound is excellent.

Cheers!

 

[PENG]

I think I was using the updated version of the phone app (is this what you mean by
D+M. But in fact the processor alone gave a better, but still inadequate low end bass response. I did manually correct the Audyssey bass, of course. I had to! But I lost faith in Audyssey, as I previously posted, and spent +$800 dollars for Dirac including Bass Control. I had to, otherwise I had a $7k AV that, out of the box, sucked in the bass region. And, by the way, the high end is also better with Dirac, no 'curtain' necessary at the S frequency.

Yes, before acquired by Sound United, Denon and Marantz were known as the D+M Group. Sound United would include other corp, groups I assumed so I usually just say D+M meaning Denon and Marantz.

I also find Dirac does a good job for the range above the room transition frequency, that's why when I use Dirac, I go with full range correction, with Audyssey I would limit it to around 5-6kHz.

Here an example of a default target curve:

In this case, the bass tilt is only +1 dB, but it could have been anywhere from 1 to even +10 dB, most of time it was around 3.5 to 5 dB. Audyssey's always flat, as far as I can remember.

 

[PENG]

It is better than I expected, but this may be a huge endorsement of Dirac. However, there is that old saying that "if you get run over by a bus, you don't necessarily get killed!"

I posted mine several times, if you saw them you would have thought those were a superb endorsement....

 

[TLS Guy]

A very handsome home theater indeed! I've also got bookshelves in the rear, for diffraction (and books).

I would send you pics of my HT but I would risk another Frankenstein assessment, I'm sure!!

One thing I notice, is that your center channel is above the screen. So is mine, aimed down at the primary listening position (a mere couch, in my case). I believe this is far better than a location below the screen, where floor bounce clearly indicates the position of the center, i.e. below the image being viewed.

I must admit that I don't understand those measurements (I'm used to seeing REW, without smoothing) but I'm glad to hear that the sound is excellent.

Cheers!

Yes, my center is above the screen, and the drivers coaxial, so the main driver is right above the screen. The 'fill' driver is above the main driver. The front panel slopes to the audience. This design is a through wall transmission design and is a very accurate speakers with phenomenally natural speech and speech discrimination. Musically it matches the mains perfectly. Again it in an active speaker with variable BSC.

The surrounds are somewhat large for bookshelves and were my original on location monitors when I did radio broadcasts and some other recording in my spare time. Those speakers are from 1984 and the first speakers I designed using box and crossover software.

The rears are my active studio monitors from my home studio I had for many years during my working years.

 

[Paul McNeil]

Yes, before acquired by Sound United, Denon and Marantz were known as the D+M Group. Sound United would include other corp, groups I assumed so I usually just say D+M meaning Denon and Marantz.

Yes, my center is above the screen, and the drivers coaxial, so the main driver is right above the screen. The 'fill' driver is above the main driver. The front panel slopes to the audience. This design is a through wall transmission design and is a very accurate speakers with phenomenally natural speech and speech discrimination. Musically it matches the mains perfectly. Again it in an active speaker with variable BSC.

The surrounds are somewhat large for bookshelves and were my original on location monitors when I did radio broadcasts and some other recording in my spare time. Those speakers are from 1984 and the first speakers I designed using box and crossover software.

The rears are my active studio monitors from my home studio I had for many years during my working years.

OK. I do everything very differently. I've got the fronts and center, out into the room (plus 1 m front wall), along with the video monitor. I've always felt that speakers sound best, not crowded next to a wall (for obvious acoustic reasons).

And I've got some very 'small' surrounds, side and back, and Atmos also are small, not nearly full range, in the league of yours! I've wondered if this is a problem, this disparity in size but had thought that the surrounds are minimally stressed even by the loudest movie playback.

Here an example of a default target curve:

In this case, the bass tilt is only +1 dB, but it could have been anywhere from 1 to even +10 dB, most of time it was around 3.5 to 5 dB. Audyssey's always flat, as far as I can remember.

View attachment 68025

Yes, my center is above the screen, and the drivers coaxial, so the main driver is right above the screen. The 'fill' driver is above the main driver. The front panel slopes to the audience. This design is a through wall transmission design and is a very accurate speakers with phenomenally natural speech and speech discrimination. Musically it matches the mains perfectly. Again it in an active speaker with variable BSC.

The surrounds are somewhat large for bookshelves and were my original on location monitors when I did radio broadcasts and some other recording in my spare time. Those speakers are from 1984 and the first speakers I designed using box and crossover software.

The rears are my active studio monitors from my home studio I had for many years during my working years.

Yes, before acquired by Sound United, Denon and Marantz were known as the D+M Group. Sound United would include other corp, groups I assumed so I usually just say D+M meaning Denon and Marantz.

I also find Dirac does a good job for the range above the room transition frequency, that's why when I use Dirac, I go with full range correction, with Audyssey I would limit it to around 5-6kHz.

Here an example of a default target curve:

In this case, the bass tilt is only +1 dB, but it could have been anywhere from 1 to even +10 dB, most of time it was around 3.5 to 5 dB. Audyssey's always flat, as far as I can remember.

View attachment 68025

This reminds me, I love the 'tilt' bars, for the low and high end. One can fiddle without total destruction...

 

[Paul McNeil]

Yes, my center is above the screen, and the drivers coaxial, so the main driver is right above the screen. The 'fill' driver is above the main driver. The front panel slopes to the audience. This design is a through wall transmission design and is a very accurate speakers with phenomenally natural speech and speech discrimination. Musically it matches the mains perfectly. Again it in an active speaker with variable BSC.

The surrounds are somewhat large for bookshelves and were my original on location monitors when I did radio broadcasts and some other recording in my spare time. Those speakers are from 1984 and the first speakers I designed using box and crossover software.

The rears are my active studio monitors from my home studio I had for many years during my working years.

One thing I also noticed were the reel-to-reel tape players! Wow, when I was a young one, I"m now 71, well those were the citadel, that I could only dream about! Bose 901s, JBL 100s or even better McIntosh ML1s.

Do you still use these tape decks?

 

[TLS Guy]

One thing I also noticed were the reel-to-reel tape players! Wow, when I was a young one, I"m now 71, well those were the citadel, that I could only dream about! Bose 901s, JBL 100s or even better McIntosh ML1s.

Do you still use these tape decks?

Yes, I do but not a lot. They are Revox machines except for one. That is a bespoke very rare Brenell Mark VI which was made to my specification in 1973. Most of these were made for the BBC. The Revox A700 was bought at the same time. I also bought the first dbx 1 unit then. I used them to make recordings and also used them a lot for outside broadcast work for the local public radio station. In 1984 I transitioned to the VHS based PCFM system which is still in the system. So I was making digital recordings for broadcast at a very early date.

I built my first DAW in 2002. This did me until 2019 when I built my current DAW. It uses the RME mixer DAC (external) and Steinberg WaveLab software. I also have an HTPC for streaming, this was last rebuilt two to three years ago, and is my third iteration
There are two cassette machines and TEAC Z6000 master recorder, and a Nak. There are two dbx 1 code/encoders in the rig and a dbx 2 decoder which will decode handle dbx tapes and LPs. The Revox A77s are restorations of mine from wrecks. There is also an Advent Dolby B encode/decoder and two single channel Dolby A code decoders, made by Dolby.

I do have some tapes still, but I mainly keep this for interest but especially to digitize prize reel to reel master tapes that people will bring me.
It is known by the pro community what I have here, and some of them make use of it from time to time.

There are also rare vintage turntables some items of which I have owned for nearly sixty years. In fact the actual three turntables are around sixty years old. The Decca ffss arm and heads date from 1971. There is an H4E LP head and a mark 2 78 head. The Quad 22 preamp to that turntable, which is one of two Garrard 301s is tube and I bought it in 1966 I think. It has the correct playback codes for just about every brand of 78 RPM disc that ever existed. The other PU arms are by SME with Shure V15xmr cartridges. The other preamps are Quad 34 and Quad 44. Power amps are Quad 909s for the bedlayer speakers, seven of them and two Quad 404 II for the four Atmos ceiling speakers.

I think the thing that astounds people the most is how good this vintage gear actually sounds. No it is not as good as state of the art digital equipment and programs, but if it was then there would be serious questions to answer. But with the right LP on a turntable you really would be very hard pressed to tell it was an old analog recording.

So, I am not a nut who pretends you can achieve audio nirvana with a diamond needle in a groove, because you can't, no matter how much you spend.
That is why I call that end of the system my museum, even if it is a working one to an extent. That is the honest way to look at it. However I would put those turntables against any audiophool turntable costing thousands.

I call this analog and early digital part of the system my "museum", which is what it is.

I think museum is the best description of that end of the room.

 

[Paul McNeil]

Yes, I do but not a lot. They are Revox machines except for one. That is a bespoke very rare Brenell Mark VI which was made to my specification in 1973. Most of these were made for the BBC. The Revox A700 was bought at the same time. I also bought the first dbx 1 unit then. I used them to make recordings and also used them a lot for outside broadcast work for the local public radio station. In 1984 I transitioned to the VHS based PCFM system which is still in the system. So I was making digital recordings for broadcast at a very early date.

I built my first DAW in 2002. This did me until 2019 when I built my current DAW. It uses the RME mixer DAC (external) and Steinberg WaveLab software. I also have an HTPC for streaming, this was last rebuilt two to three years ago, and is my third iteration
There are two cassette machines and TEAC Z6000 master recorder, and a Nak. There are two dbx 1 code/encoders in the rig and a dbx 2 decoder which will decode handle dbx tapes and LPs. The Revox A77s are restorations of mine from wrecks. There is also an Advent Dolby B encode/decoder and two single channel Dolby A code decoders, made by Dolby.

I do have some tapes still, but I mainly keep this for interest but especially to digitize prize reel to reel master tapes that people will bring me.
It is known by the pro community what I have here, and some of them make use of it from time to time.

There are also rare vintage turntables some items of which I have owned for nearly sixty years. In fact the actual three turntables are around sixty years old. The Decca ffss arm and heads date from 1971. There is an H4E LP head and a mark 2 78 head. The Quad 22 preamp to that turntable, which is one of two Garrard 301s is tube and I bought it in 1966 I think. It has the correct playback codes for just about every brand of 78 RPM disc that ever existed. The other PU arms are by SME with Shure V15xmr cartridges. The other preamps are Quad 34 and Quad 44. Power amps are Quad 909s for the bedlayer speakers, seven of them and two Quad 404 II for the four Atmos ceiling speakers.

I think the thing that astounds people the most is how good this vintage gear actually sounds. No it is not as good as state of the art digital equipment and programs, but if it was then there would be serious questions to answer. But with the right LP on a turntable you really would be very hard pressed to tell it was an old analog recording.

So, I am not a nut who pretends you can achieve audio nirvana with a diamond needle in a groove, because you can't, no matter how much you spend.
That is why I call that end of the system my museum, even if it is a working one to an extent. That is the honest way to look at it. However I would put those turntables against any audiophool turntable costing thousands.

I call this analog and early digital part of the system my "museum", which is what it is.

I think all of us here, on this forum, are 'nuts', please forgive me, those who are not!

Wow, that (audiophile) history makes my mind spin!

But I understand and do play vinyl. I can't defend it, objectively, but that's what I heard when young.

 

[Tankini]

I think all of us here, on this forum, are 'nuts', please forgive me, those who are not!

Wow, that (audiophile) history makes my mind spin!

But I understand and do play vinyl. I can't defend it, objectively, but that's what I heard when young.

Umm,yeah, We, Us, Them, lol with this Audio/Video we are nuts lol. Your setup is awesome brother. I enjoy reading your thread and comments. Doc, aka TLS Guy, comment "Frankenstein" has me rolling Lolo over here. Doc is a No nonsense kinda guy, he has Tons of experience, designed his own speakers he's definitely the King here on AH for his Analog gear especially with his turntables which I myself would love to have any one of them. He is very well respected here on AH pretty much everywhere else.

I made a comment about having a HT setup on another forum. They were Discussing the difference between the two movies of "Lord of The Rings" theatrical release (Theater version) and the extended versions on 4K Blu-ray disc and got hammered by a few quote: "you don't need all that! I enjoy the LOTR on my iPad". Lol. Yep they said I was nuts for having all of my audio/video gear to enjoy LOTR extended version.

 

[Paul McNeil]

Umm,yeah, We, Us, Them, lol with this Audio/Video are nuts lol. Your setup is awesome brother. I enjoy reading your thread and comments. Doc, aka TLS Guy, comment "Frankenstein" has me rolling Lolo over here. Doc is a No nonsense kinda guy, he has Tons of experience, designed his own speakers he's definitely the King here on AH for his Analog gear especially with his turntables which I myself would love to have any one of them. He is very well respected here on AH pretty much everywhere else.

I made a comment about having a HT setup on another forum. They were Discussing the difference between the two movies of "Lord of The Rings" theatrical release (Theater version) and the extended versions on 4K Blu-ray disc and got hammered by a few who were says quote: "you don't need all that! I enjoy the LOTR on my iPad". Lol. Yep they said I was nuts for having all of my audio/video gear to enjoy LOTR extended version.

A toast, may we long enjoy our insanity!

 

[ski2xblack]

We may be nuts, but the music sounds damn good.

 

[Paul McNeil]

We may be nuts, but the music sounds damn good.

That's the thing, it does!

 

[Tankini]

A toast, may we long enjoy our insanity!

I have a iPad, laptop, iPhone 14 pro max, I can not take much watching any move or stream music on any of those devices. Only if I'm researching or want to sample something, but other than that, I run a HDMI cable out from my laptop to my AVR than switch to that input source on my AVR so I use my 65" as a Monitor. I can't stand to use just a TV for moves.

That goes back to the early 80's, had a 25 inch Magnavox console TV. A Realistic stereo receiver 100 X 2, VHS stereo tape deck. I pulled the back off of that Magnavox T V. Ran speaker wire off of the built in TV speakers, Added RCA plugs on the end of the speaker wires so I could input them into my stereo receiver so I could have stereo coming out my audio speakers. VHS tape deck had L/R audio out all ready. Wife thought I was nuts.