| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
"Serge Auckland" wrote As to phasing, I really don't understand the point of a variable phase control. 0 & 180 switched should be provided to phase up the sub with the mains (which hopefully will be in phase with each other), but apart from that, I can't see it's possible to match the phase of the main LF, as it will be frequency dependant. As you suggest, with two subs, trying to get the phase right would be a nightmare. I've twiddled it back and forth and can't say it makes a lot of difference anyway and it ends up back at 0 deg! Other controls needed are a crossover frequency selector and a level control. Ideally, if the main speakers are small (say don't go below 70Hz) then the extreme bass should be rolled-off to the mains considerably improving their power handling and lowering distortion. Not sure I understood that....?? If the main 'speakers are small, they won't reproduce deep bass. Feeding them with deep bass from the power amp will only serve to stress the bass unit suspension and heat up the voice coil without actually producing any sound. OK, but this happens a million times a day on a million setups with small speakers, does it not.....??? It is therefore better to limit the bass drive to small speakers so that they are only given what they can deal with. It is actually much better if the bass reduction can be done *before* the power amplifier so that the PA isn't being asked to generate unusable volts. This way, the power amp driving the small 'speakers will be able to generate more volts that the 'speakers *can* handle, and so effectively produce a higher output. Hmm, OK..... For my son's Christmas present some years ago, I built him a subwoofer 'Built' - as in 'done up an old bicycle'?? Nowadays, your kids could/would divorce you for that....!! ;-) system consisting of an electronic filter removing bass below a preset frequency, a mono combiner and filter providing a balanced output to a single subwoofer. The filter frequencies were selectable as was levels to the subwoofer. The main 'speakers (small Missions) were connected to the L&R output of a Quad 303 and were driven from 70Hz upwards. 70Hz downwards was monoed to a balanced output driving a 100wpc AIWA power amp in bridge mode into the subwoofer which was a large bass-reflex box tuned to 20Hz. It was most successful, and saw him through his University days and afterwards, not always to the pleasure of his neighbours however.... :-) OK, with this setup (Oktavas): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/submicsetup01.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/submicsetup02.JPG I grabbed these sub/no sub snippets (the filename gives you the clue): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 And these longer samples (because it impossible to shorten it too much): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 (The dreaded heartbeat has crept in here again and if they come up *absolutely identical* then I'll have buggered up the file-saving!! :-) Now, unless I'm missing summat, I can't see how the (In)Fidelios are benefitting from the sub - the omnipresent 'traffic noise' (with the sub up loud enough to 'count' - which it is) and the 'wha wha wha' tail-off (way behind the speakers) is far more of a PITA than any extra whoomph on the deep stuff....?? The problem is the sub's gotta go back tomorrow and I've got only a small 'WOO' to experiment with it! |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Keith G wrote:
Keith G wrote: "Serge Auckland" wrote As to phasing, I really don't understand the point of a variable phase control. 0 & 180 switched should be provided to phase up the sub with the mains (which hopefully will be in phase with each other), but apart from that, I can't see it's possible to match the phase of the main LF, as it will be frequency dependant. As you suggest, with two subs, trying to get the phase right would be a nightmare. I've twiddled it back and forth and can't say it makes a lot of difference anyway and it ends up back at 0 deg! Other controls needed are a crossover frequency selector and a level control. Ideally, if the main speakers are small (say don't go below 70Hz) then the extreme bass should be rolled-off to the mains considerably improving their power handling and lowering distortion. Not sure I understood that....?? If the main 'speakers are small, they won't reproduce deep bass. Feeding them with deep bass from the power amp will only serve to stress the bass unit suspension and heat up the voice coil without actually producing any sound. OK, but this happens a million times a day on a million setups with small speakers, does it not.....??? It is therefore better to limit the bass drive to small speakers so that they are only given what they can deal with. It is actually much better if the bass reduction can be done *before* the power amplifier so that the PA isn't being asked to generate unusable volts. This way, the power amp driving the small 'speakers will be able to generate more volts that the 'speakers *can* handle, and so effectively produce a higher output. Hmm, OK..... For my son's Christmas present some years ago, I built him a subwoofer 'Built' - as in 'done up an old bicycle'?? Nowadays, your kids could/would divorce you for that....!! ;-) system consisting of an electronic filter removing bass below a preset frequency, a mono combiner and filter providing a balanced output to a single subwoofer. The filter frequencies were selectable as was levels to the subwoofer. The main 'speakers (small Missions) were connected to the L&R output of a Quad 303 and were driven from 70Hz upwards. 70Hz downwards was monoed to a balanced output driving a 100wpc AIWA power amp in bridge mode into the subwoofer which was a large bass-reflex box tuned to 20Hz. It was most successful, and saw him through his University days and afterwards, not always to the pleasure of his neighbours however.... :-) OK, with this setup (Oktavas): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/submicsetup01.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/submicsetup02.JPG I grabbed these sub/no sub snippets (the filename gives you the clue): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 And these longer samples (because it impossible to shorten it too much): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 (The dreaded heartbeat has crept in here again and if they come up *absolutely identical* then I'll have buggered up the file-saving!! :-) Now, unless I'm missing summat, I can't see how the (In)Fidelios are benefitting from the sub - the omnipresent 'traffic noise' (with the sub up loud enough to 'count' - which it is) and the 'wha wha wha' tail-off (way behind the speakers) is far more of a PITA than any extra whoomph on the deep stuff....?? The problem is the sub's gotta go back tomorrow and I've got only a small 'WOO' to experiment with it! "Serge Auckland" wrote As to phasing, I really don't understand the point of a variable phase control. 0 & 180 switched should be provided to phase up the sub with the mains (which hopefully will be in phase with each other), but apart from that, I can't see it's possible to match the phase of the main LF, as it will be frequency dependant. As you suggest, with two subs, trying to get the phase right would be a nightmare. I've twiddled it back and forth and can't say it makes a lot of difference anyway and it ends up back at 0 deg! Other controls needed are a crossover frequency selector and a level control. Ideally, if the main speakers are small (say don't go below 70Hz) then the extreme bass should be rolled-off to the mains considerably improving their power handling and lowering distortion. Not sure I understood that....?? If the main 'speakers are small, they won't reproduce deep bass. Feeding them with deep bass from the power amp will only serve to stress the bass unit suspension and heat up the voice coil without actually producing any sound. OK, but this happens a million times a day on a million setups with small speakers, does it not.....??? It is therefore better to limit the bass drive to small speakers so that they are only given what they can deal with. It is actually much better if the bass reduction can be done *before* the power amplifier so that the PA isn't being asked to generate unusable volts. This way, the power amp driving the small 'speakers will be able to generate more volts that the 'speakers *can* handle, and so effectively produce a higher output. Hmm, OK..... For my son's Christmas present some years ago, I built him a subwoofer 'Built' - as in 'done up an old bicycle'?? Nowadays, your kids could/would divorce you for that....!! ;-) system consisting of an electronic filter removing bass below a preset frequency, a mono combiner and filter providing a balanced output to a single subwoofer. The filter frequencies were selectable as was levels to the subwoofer. The main 'speakers (small Missions) were connected to the L&R output of a Quad 303 and were driven from 70Hz upwards. 70Hz downwards was monoed to a balanced output driving a 100wpc AIWA power amp in bridge mode into the subwoofer which was a large bass-reflex box tuned to 20Hz. It was most successful, and saw him through his University days and afterwards, not always to the pleasure of his neighbours however.... :-) OK, with this setup (Oktavas): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/submicsetup01.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/submicsetup02.JPG I grabbed these sub/no sub snippets (the filename gives you the clue): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 And these longer samples (because it impossible to shorten it too much): http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...20No%20Sub.mp3 http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...With%20Sub.mp3 (The dreaded heartbeat has crept in here again and if they come up *absolutely identical* then I'll have buggered up the file-saving!! :-) Now, unless I'm missing summat, I can't see how the (In)Fidelios are benefitting from the sub - the omnipresent 'traffic noise' (with the sub up loud enough to 'count' - which it is) and the 'wha wha wha' tail-off (way behind the speakers) is far more of a PITA than any extra whoomph on the deep stuff....?? The problem is the sub's gotta go back tomorrow and I've got only a small 'WOO' to experiment with it! I haven't listened to your samples as I'm currently using the internal 'speakers on my laptop, and they're not the best thing to use for evaluating subwoofers. In my view, the best way to set up a sub is to set the crossover frequency at whatever you reckon is the -3dB point of your existing 'speakers, in your case, I'd start with 50Hz. Start with the level control turned right down, and listening to normal music (say an orchestra) turn the sub level up until you can hear it filling in the bottom. Then try some bass heavy music and make up/down adjustments until it sounds right. If you can't get it sounding right, then try changing the crossover frequency, say 40Hz. When I first set mine up, the biggest surprise was on some chamber music which didn't have any deep bass *in the music*, but there was plenty in the recorded ambiance, and it went from sounding like a studio recording to sounding live. It was, by the way, recorded in a hall rather than a studio, but with the subs, you could hear distant traffic noise. S. |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: Now, unless I'm missing summat, I can't see how the (In)Fidelios are benefitting from the sub - the omnipresent 'traffic noise' (with the sub up loud enough to 'count' - which it is) and the 'wha wha wha' tail-off (way behind the speakers) is far more of a PITA than any extra whoomph on the deep stuff....?? The problem is the sub's gotta go back tomorrow and I've got only a small 'WOO' to experiment with it! I haven't listened to your samples as I'm currently using the internal 'speakers on my laptop, and they're not the best thing to use for evaluating subwoofers. The trick is to drop 'em to a CDRW and bang 'em through your main system, but no worries... In my view, the best way to set up a sub is to set the crossover frequency at whatever you reckon is the -3dB point of your existing 'speakers, in your case, I'd start with 50Hz. Start with the level control turned right down, and listening to normal music (say an orchestra) turn the sub level up until you can hear it filling in the bottom. Then try some bass heavy music and make up/down adjustments until it sounds right. If you can't get it sounding right, then try changing the crossover frequency, say 40Hz. Thank you for that Serge, but it has all been done - I'm fairly Oh Fay with the methodology and the 40 Hz setting is the best. (You have not heard these InFidelios Serge - they are a whole new ballgame, especially as the drivers are starting to come on song, the Jerichos that you have heard now reside in the garage...!! ;-) When I first set mine up, the biggest surprise was on some chamber music which didn't have any deep bass *in the music*, but there was plenty in the recorded ambiance, and it went from sounding like a studio recording to sounding live. It was, by the way, recorded in a hall rather than a studio, but with the subs, you could hear distant traffic noise. Well.... One should take a length of Universal Beam about 1200mm long (not too big - the 178 x 102mm section will do), drill a hole in the neutral zone (halfway up the web, where compression and tension neutralise each other) about 2/3 of the way along (at the 800/400mm mark) and suspend it from one's scrotum by means of a noose at the end of a suitable length of prickly sisal garden twine so that the 'short end' is about 200mm from the ground, with the other end remaining in continuous contact with the ground. This done, one should then attempt to engage fully and enthusiastically in a game of 'five a side football'... Is how much I need this sub for music... But never mind me, after all WTF do I know? I made Swim sit through the first couple of minutes of no less than 7 or 8 tracks of *unbridled techno bass* (Yello 'The Eye') with and without the sub just now and she picked the 'no sub version' *unfailingly* 'til the very last one and, having lost it by then, said she wasn't sure! (I have the opportunity to hook it up for a movie now and asked if she wanted to try it on summat 'explosive' - *Nope* was the reply, once again....!!) Tbh, it puts me in mind of an E-Type towing a caravan which desperately needs its tyres pumping up!! (And this sub is the best I've had here so far, sans doute...!! ;-) There ya go.... |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
"Roy O Roy is that Your Horse ? " But if they work well with others too, then why not? ** If the moon were really made of green cheese we could send all the mice there.... ...... Phil |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Keith G wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: Now, unless I'm missing summat, I can't see how the (In)Fidelios are benefitting from the sub - the omnipresent 'traffic noise' (with the sub up loud enough to 'count' - which it is) and the 'wha wha wha' tail-off (way behind the speakers) is far more of a PITA than any extra whoomph on the deep stuff....?? The problem is the sub's gotta go back tomorrow and I've got only a small 'WOO' to experiment with it! I haven't listened to your samples as I'm currently using the internal 'speakers on my laptop, and they're not the best thing to use for evaluating subwoofers. The trick is to drop 'em to a CDRW and bang 'em through your main system, but no worries... I've finally got a computer that's connected t'internet, to newsgroups, to a hifi :-) And, I couldn't tell a great deal of difference in the bass. The subbed tracks sounded 'fuller', but a clear issue hear is that my speakers only go down to 61Hz (Dynaudio 42s), so it's unlikely (I think) that much bass would come through your recordings. The biggest difference is the sense of 'airiness', but here I preferred the non-sub tracks. This is exactly the thing I find, but yours are quite an exaggerated example. Sub on - almost like one of those 3D virtualiser switches; sub off sharp focus/soundstage. I've no idea why this is happening - I'd have thought that amplifying such low frequencies could not possibly affect, say, female vocals. I've never read anything about this in reviews. I'd add that the sub does introduce sounds I haven't heard before, and on the whole and at lowish levels it's impressive - that's with tiddly Dynaudio Contours (43Hz) on the main non-computer hifi. If I get time I'll try your tracks on my subbed system. In my view, the best way to set up a sub is to set the crossover frequency at whatever you reckon is the -3dB point of your existing 'speakers, in your case, I'd start with 50Hz. Start with the level control turned right down, and listening to normal music (say an orchestra) turn the sub level up until you can hear it filling in the bottom. Then try some bass heavy music and make up/down adjustments until it sounds right. If you can't get it sounding right, then try changing the crossover frequency, say 40Hz. Thank you for that Serge, but it has all been done - I'm fairly Oh Fay with the methodology and the 40 Hz setting is the best. (You have not heard these InFidelios Serge - they are a whole new ballgame, especially as the drivers are starting to come on song, the Jerichos that you have heard now reside in the garage...!! ;-) The REL manuals are good, particularly for me - there's one good summary paragraph - "Hint: There is a tendency among audiophiles to set the crossover point too high and the gain too low when first learning how to integrate a REL with the system, the fear being one of overwhelming the main speakers with bass. But in doing so, the resulting set-up will be lacking in bass depth and dynamics. The proper crossover point and gain setting will increase overall dynamics, allow for extended bass frequencies, and improve soundstage properties. Please note: gain must be adjusted in conjunction with crossover changes. In general, when selecting a lower crossover point, more gain may need to be applied." I've settled on a 36Hz xover frequency for the Contour 1.3/IIs, with the volume at about half. However, tracks with 'big bass' played loud like the one on this page: http://patchoulian.googlepages.com/audiosamples don't work well at all, but this may be a limitation of my room. The sub is one of these: http://www.rel.net/strata5.htm When I first set mine up, the biggest surprise was on some chamber music which didn't have any deep bass *in the music*, but there was plenty in the recorded ambiance, and it went from sounding like a studio recording to sounding live. It was, by the way, recorded in a hall rather than a studio, but with the subs, you could hear distant traffic noise. Well.... One should take a length of Universal Beam about 1200mm long (not too big - the 178 x 102mm section will do), drill a hole in the neutral zone (halfway up the web, where compression and tension neutralise each other) about 2/3 of the way along (at the 800/400mm mark) and suspend it from one's scrotum by means of a noose at the end of a suitable length of prickly sisal garden twine so that the 'short end' is about 200mm from the ground, with the other end remaining in continuous contact with the ground. This done, one should then attempt to engage fully and enthusiastically in a game of 'five a side football'... Is how much I need this sub for music... :-) But never mind me, after all WTF do I know? I made Swim sit through the first couple of minutes of no less than 7 or 8 tracks of *unbridled techno bass* (Yello 'The Eye') with and without the sub just now and she picked the 'no sub version' *unfailingly* 'til the very last one and, having lost it by then, said she wasn't sure! (I have the opportunity to hook it up for a movie now and asked if she wanted to try it on summat 'explosive' - *Nope* was the reply, once again....!!) Tbh, it puts me in mind of an E-Type towing a caravan which desperately needs its tyres pumping up!! (And this sub is the best I've had here so far, sans doute...!! ;-) There ya go.... I think Serge has explained it well - I can hear the advantages he describes. It's just for me, with the woolly soundstage issue and overblown bass on certain recordings, I'm not too sure overall. Rob |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Phil Allison wrote:
"Roy O Roy is that Your Horse ? " But if they work well with others too, then why not? ** If the moon were really made of green cheese we could send all the mice there.... ..... Phil OK I admit it, I've no idea what planet you are from or what you are talking about. |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
" O Roy, O Roy is that Your Horse ? " ** Click to hear song and see lyrics: http://www.conniekaldorusa.com/long_tall_texan.htm But if they work well with others too, then why not? ** If the moon were really made of green cheese we could send all the mice there.... OK I admit it, I've no idea what planet you are from or what you are talking about. ** Roy Boy has no ****ing idea what planet this is nor what anyone here is talking about. ....... Phil |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
"Rob" wrote I've finally got a computer that's connected t'internet, to newsgroups, to a hifi :-) And, I couldn't tell a great deal of difference in the bass. The subbed tracks sounded 'fuller', but a clear issue hear is that my speakers only go down to 61Hz (Dynaudio 42s), so it's unlikely (I think) that much bass would come through your recordings. The biggest difference is the sense of 'airiness', but here I preferred the non-sub tracks. This is exactly the thing I find, but yours are quite an exaggerated example. Sub on - almost like one of those 3D virtualiser switches; sub off sharp focus/soundstage. Exactly... The REL manuals are good, particularly for me - there's one good summary paragraph - "Hint: There is a tendency among audiophiles to set the crossover point too high and the gain too low when first learning how to integrate a REL with the system, the fear being one of overwhelming the main speakers with bass. But in doing so, the resulting set-up will be lacking in bass depth and dynamics. The proper crossover point and gain setting will increase overall dynamics, allow for extended bass frequencies, and improve soundstage properties. Please note: gain must be adjusted in conjunction with crossover changes. In general, when selecting a lower crossover point, more gain may need to be applied." I've settled on a 36Hz xover frequency for the Contour 1.3/IIs, with the volume at about half. However, tracks with 'big bass' played loud like the one on this page: http://patchoulian.googlepages.com/audiosamples Well, I'm sorry to say it but that track (Mighty Sparrow) only serves to *better* show what a disconnected, omnipresent, rubbery drone these subs create! don't work well at all, but this may be a limitation of my room. The sub is one of these: http://www.rel.net/strata5.htm Blue LEDs, eh.....??? Well, *OK*.......!! :-) I think Serge has explained it well - I can hear the advantages he describes. It's just for me, with the woolly soundstage issue and overblown bass on certain recordings, I'm not too sure overall. I think Serge explained it very well, but I am more interested in a clear, unsullied depiction of the music than the *ambience* - I'm at a loss as to how 'traffic noise' can enhance a chamber music recording! My own view is that ambience may well *add* to the music performance for some people but it is not *part* of the music - I can add all the ambience I want, at this end!! Different story for movies though - where the pace and timing isn't quite so critical and the continuous, catarrhal thrum can actually add something to the 'excitement'. Shortly, before it has to go back, I will run up 'Screen 2' and give SPR an airing to see if it's worth building one for movies. (Been ruled out for 'Screen 1' already, though...!! ;-) |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Keith G wrote:
I think Serge explained it very well, but I am more interested in a clear, unsullied depiction of the music than the *ambience* - I'm at a loss as to how 'traffic noise' can enhance a chamber music recording! My own view is that ambience may well *add* to the music performance for some people but it is not *part* of the music - I can add all the ambience I want, at this end!! Traffic noise in itself doesn't add to the music, but, to me, it adds to the sense of a live performance rather than a studio recording. I've found myself enjoying far more live recordings even with the inevitable audience cough than "perfect" studio sessions. That's just a personal thing though, I can quite accept that others would prefer the studio. However, even on studio recordings and even on jazz/rock music the extended LF response improves things like kick drums, double basses and on organ music recorded in a natural acoustic, the extended LF makes a huge difference to the feeling of a real venue. I would love to try one of the ultra-low sub-sub woofers that work on the variable vane principle. They should go down to 0 Hz theoretically...you could dry your socks in front of one....... but I doubt there's much actually recorded below 20Hz as current studio mics don't go down below that. S. |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: I think Serge explained it very well, but I am more interested in a clear, unsullied depiction of the music than the *ambience* - I'm at a loss as to how 'traffic noise' can enhance a chamber music recording! My own view is that ambience may well *add* to the music performance for some people but it is not *part* of the music - I can add all the ambience I want, at this end!! Traffic noise in itself doesn't add to the music, but, to me, it adds to the sense of a live performance rather than a studio recording. I've found myself enjoying far more live recordings even with the inevitable audience cough than "perfect" studio sessions. That's just a personal thing though, I can quite accept that others would prefer the studio. It's not a cut and dried thing - provided there's some 'air' I don't have to have too much 'room' to enjoy ensemble music. I have some commercial recordings with birdsong in the background which I would have thought was more accidental than incidental and it certainly adds to the feeling of it being recorded in a 'real' setting (ruined abbey?) and I have even added birdsong/distant dogs to some of my own stuff - it can work very well and create an illusion of great space, but I suspect 'ambient noises' being added to recordings is in danger of being done to death these days and it has put my previously-mentioned ideas of a digital recorder on hold for the time being. (That and the recent splash-out on 3 x HDMI/DLP cinema upgrade setups which has run the coffers dry for the moment/forseeable/rest of my life...!! ;-) However, even on studio recordings and even on jazz/rock music the extended LF response improves things like kick drums, double basses and on organ music recorded in a natural acoustic, the extended LF makes a huge difference to the feeling of a real venue. Sure, but it would work better for me if it wasn't so fekkin' *rubbery* and disjointed/late. I have just tried sub/no sub on Saving Private Ryan battle scenes where the timing isn't quite so important and I'm still not convinced.... I would love to try one of the ultra-low sub-sub woofers that work on the variable vane principle. They should go down to 0 Hz theoretically...you could dry your socks in front of one....... Don't need one - I've got 300Bs for that!! :-) but I doubt there's much actually recorded below 20Hz as current studio mics don't go down below that. My own mics don't seem to claim much below 30 Hz - hence the difficulty trying to 'record' a sub! I'm out of time with the sub I have got here and would have liked a week or two more with it, but 'gun to my head', I would have to say 'not really worth the bother' atm - they bring too much to the party for too much of the time and it's a faff to make them go away. Get the gain right so there isn't a continual 'engine room' thrum and the effect is reduced to not much more than a little rush of huffing and puffing from time to time - and most of that arriving just too late to save a drowning witch! I can see they might work with 'normal' speakers better than the paper-coned FR jobbies like my Lowthers, but having striven towards clarity and 'speed' it doesn't seem to make much sense to ladle in the exact same *blurry slurry* I have been seeking to remove!! Jury's back in and it don't look good..... |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Serge Auckland wrote:
I would love to try one of the ultra-low sub-sub woofers that work on the variable vane principle. They should go down to 0 Hz theoretically...you could dry your socks in front of one....... but I doubt there's much actually recorded below 20Hz as current studio mics don't go down below that. You could try this sub: http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/buttkicker.htm Perhaps bolt it under your armchair. I thought there were some organ recordings and that Telarc 1812 with sub 20Hz energy. -- Eiron. |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Eiron wrote:
Serge Auckland wrote: I would love to try one of the ultra-low sub-sub woofers that work on the variable vane principle. They should go down to 0 Hz theoretically...you could dry your socks in front of one....... but I doubt there's much actually recorded below 20Hz as current studio mics don't go down below that. You could try this sub: http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/buttkicker.htm Perhaps bolt it under your armchair. I thought there were some organ recordings and that Telarc 1812 with sub 20Hz energy. I fear the Buttkicker could result in too much excitement..... There's no fundamental reason why modern digital recordings couldn't go down below 20Hz, it's just that studio mics generally don't, so how do you capture the extreme LF? Measurement mics can be made to be flat to 2-3 Hz, but they tend to be rather noisier than "normal" kit and you have to find a way of protecting them from vlf air movements which can swamp the recording. I don't know about the Telarc 1812 specifically, but I understand they used real cannon which would generate huge amounts of vlf. I wonder what mics they captured it with. Also, the direct to disk analogue recordings would have to roll off the lf to save the cut and for the later CD release which was done, if I recall, on an analogue machine, that would have not gone down below 20Hz, and even 30Hz flat was a struggle for the Studers and Ampexs of the era. S. |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:11:08 +0000, Eiron wrote:
Serge Auckland wrote: I would love to try one of the ultra-low sub-sub woofers that work on the variable vane principle. They should go down to 0 Hz theoretically...you could dry your socks in front of one....... but I doubt there's much actually recorded below 20Hz as current studio mics don't go down below that. You could try this sub: http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/buttkicker.htm Perhaps bolt it under your armchair. I thought there were some organ recordings and that Telarc 1812 with sub 20Hz energy. Or this one: http://www.eminent-tech.com/main.html It can also dry your laundry. Kal |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Serge Auckland wrote:
I don't know about the Telarc 1812 specifically, but I understand they used real cannon which would generate huge amounts of vlf. I wonder what mics they captured it with. The sleeve notes say 2-3kHz for the crack of the initial charge with a follow up boom going down to 6Hz. As for mics, it just says Schoeps Colette - though I suspect they are referring to the orchestral recording there, not the cannon which were done in separate takes. Also, the direct to disk analogue recordings would have to roll off the lf to save the cut and for the later CD release which was done, if I recall, on an analogue machine, that would have not gone down below 20Hz, and even 30Hz flat was a struggle for the Studers and Ampexs of the era. Are you still referring to the Telarc 1812? If so, it's actually a digital master. Roy. |
Connecting subwoofers to a 2-channel audio amp.
Roy wrote:
Serge Auckland wrote: I don't know about the Telarc 1812 specifically, but I understand they used real cannon which would generate huge amounts of vlf. I wonder what mics they captured it with. The sleeve notes say 2-3kHz for the crack of the initial charge with a follow up boom going down to 6Hz. As for mics, it just says Schoeps Colette - though I suspect they are referring to the orchestral recording there, not the cannon which were done in separate takes. Also, the direct to disk analogue recordings would have to roll off the lf to save the cut and for the later CD release which was done, if I recall, on an analogue machine, that would have not gone down below 20Hz, and even 30Hz flat was a struggle for the Studers and Ampexs of the era. Are you still referring to the Telarc 1812? If so, it's actually a digital master. Roy. OK, if that's the case, then theoretically the recorder could well have gone down to DC. There still remains the question of what mics were used to record the cannon. S. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:40 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk