"Book shelf" speakers put on speaker stands = less bass??

[March Audio]

On 11/5/2020 at 5:37 AM, fas42 said:

Speakers on stands are less stable - the simple exercise of pushing lightly on the side of the speaker while mounted on the stands shows how precarious it is; close to zero resistance to wobbling around, from the slightest nudge. From experience, the best solution is do something which gives the speaker cabinet enormous effective mass - imagine creating a pillar of several tonnes, and concreting the cabinet to that pillar; no need to actually do that 😉, but the closer you effectively get to that situation, the better.

 

So what do you get doing that? "Big" sound, very authoritative, meaning not boomy, bass, high levels of detail - provided the replay chain is clean, it's a win in every area.

It's nothing to do with this.  It's the (reduced) effect of boundary reinforcement. Plus you may have a cancellation at a specific frequency dependant on the distance from the boundary(ies).

 

https://www.prosoundtraining.com/2011/08/29/how-boundaries-affect-loudspeakers/

 

[March Audio]

On 5/14/2021 at 7:27 AM, fas42 said:

 

I've been using my method of stabilising for over 3 decades - and I never have problems of bass booming, etc. Until now, with my current active speakers - these can force the whole house to start throbbing from the bass line, on the 'wrong' track and with the volume up. But that's my fault ... I didn't stabilise them as well as I should have, and I used add mass, on top, to help. Just a day ago I adjusted that extra weight, and so far it seems to have helped matters ... more testing today. The long term solution is to redo completely how the speakers are supported - the Round Tuit moment, 😁.

That's got nothing to do with you "stabilising" the speakers. It's almost certainly a room mode that is being excited by that particular track.

[March Audio]

Oh why did I take you off ignore?

 

Frank, speaker mounting (insecure) won't create boom.  Boom will be a resonance, a peak in amplitude at a certain frequency.  Either a fundamental speaker characteristic, or more likely a room mode.

 

There are some obvious reasons why your previous set ups may not have excited the room mode but I won't go into it as you will no doubt ignore and carry on guessing and fiddling and convincing yourself of improvement.

[March Audio]

15 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

Attention seeking perchance?

Funnily enough you are the only other person I usually have on ignore.  This is one of your usual jibes.

 

Do you have any comment to make on the actual subject or are you just stirring for a reaction?  

 

This is the objective part of the forum and the misinformed commentary Frank insists on posting everywhere should be corrected.

[March Audio]

6 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

You introduced the subject of 'ignore' by asking a question. I responded to that question with my own hypothesis. Feel free to falsify it.

So you didn't spot it was an obviously rhetorical statement.

 

So I take it you have no useful contribution to make to the Subject?

[March Audio]

12 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Of course there are room modes - but our hearing adapts to them ... a real grand piano being played by a real person in a real, relatively small room, doesn't sound boomy - when the bass notes are being forcibly played ... at least, I have never heard such an instrument irritate me with 'resonances'.

 

So, a simple question: why is a piano OK - but a recording playback setup needs all this, umm, fiddling?

No it doesn't and no they are not fixed by securing the speaker.

[March Audio]

3 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

Seemed reasonable to speculate on, rhetorical or not.

You understand what rhetorical means don't you?

[March Audio]

7 minutes ago, opus101 said:

Yep. So?

 

(of a question) asked in order to produce an effect or to make a statement rather than to elicit information.

 

So why did you respond to a clearly rhetorical statement that obviously didn't require a response?  Simple, it was one of your typical jibes rather than anything useful or relevant to the subject.

 

So on topic, do you think franks assertions are correct?  That more secure speaker mounting will stop boom?

[March Audio]

12 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

You're welcome to your own hypothesis. I replied because it was interesting to speculate on, as I've already said.

 

I don't have a formed opinion on your secondary question, it would depend a lot on particular details.

Well I was obviously right about you having nothing relevant or useful to contribute to the discussion.   Your speculation was wrong.

 

Can we get back on topic now?

[March Audio]

11 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

How was your rhetorical question deemed relevant?

It was clearly expressing frustration at franks behaviour of bombing every thread he can with misinformed commentary about his elusive and impenetrable "methods".

 

Might be barely acceptable in a subjective thread but certainly not in an objective thread where the basis is factual/science led.

 

This was all plainly obvious.  So as you admit you have nothing useful or relevant to contribute to the actual subject under discussion, can you allow the rest of us to get back to discussing it?

[March Audio]

16 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

I concur with this - mention of, or even allusion to personal frustration is about as far off-topic as can be in a thread in the 'objective' zone.

Eh?

 

No it's quite reasonable to make a point that what someone is doing is not relevant, correct, reasonable etc. 

 

BTW it's not just my opinion or personal frustration, just take a look at others similar comments in other threads.

 

As I am going to do right now.  I will ask you, for another time, to stop unless you have something actually relevant to say.  I'm putting you back on ignore so have the last word if you wish, its obvious you are only playing games.

[March Audio]

Back on topic,  Frank, can you explain why you think an audible boom is connected to the security of the speaker mount?

 

How have you tested your theory?