Classical music, 2-channel, and sub-woofers?

[prufrock]

Thanks Jud. Times like these I wish I had more time to get tech savy. I guess what I want to know is what "should" I expect to hear differently, considering things like e.g the big brother is a 3 way, less efficient, more expensive etc. I realise its impossible to say for sure due to all the variables. A change to a bigger amp would probably be necessary for a start.

I was more just after what the specs would generally point to that's all.

[mayhem13]

 

 

 

Down to 29Hz +/- 3db with my current speakers is OK with me (and my budget, into which the F112s most definitely do not fit). The F112s would get 9Hz lower, still not enough to accurately reproduce the subsonics from the cannons in the Telarc 1812 Overture, or various audiophile recordings of pipe organ, at a cost of very roughly $2000-$3000. Don't think that's a high-value proposition for me. For folks with other speakers than mine, the value proposition could well be different.

 

They don't fit my budget either! Lol ....I used them for reference as a plug and play solution.

[mav52]

If you want a good measuring pair of speakers that will not break the bank and do go down low, plus have a killer midrange, look at Philharmonic audio if your in the states.

philharmonicaudio.com

The guy is awesome on crossovers and does work for Salk as well.

[mayhem13]

If you want a good measuring pair of speakers that will not break the bank and do go down low, plus have a killer midrange, look at Philharmonic audio if your in the states.

philharmonicaudio.com

The guy is awesome on crossovers and does work for Salk as well.

 

Haven't seen these before but again, great things often come from the DIY community. All the drivers used are top in their catagory with the RAAL tweeter sounding better than anything I've ever heard and the open back Neo 10 is a superb midrange solution. I'd have done dual 8" revelatory for the bottom end....just to be safe if you want to be emphatic about subwoofer needs. What's most impressive is the balance of driver costs vs enclosure costs.....they put the money where it counts. There's about $1800 worth of drivers and crossover components in a pair of these. Can't say that for a lot of commercial 'hi end' speaker systems.

[wgscott]

That's impressive. I wish they weren't so hideous-looking. As some guy in a pub in the Lake District told me when I was living in Cambridge, "that's flatter than a witch's tit."

 

[mav52]

That's impressive. I wish they weren't so hideous-looking.

I know the wife calls them little churches, but when the music starts, she just smiles.

[crisnee]

Thanks Chris-Yeah, I'm probably sub bashing a little too much. It's just that, the one thing that bothers me most is loose, boomy, slow, one note, fake, over-exaggerated bass/lower mid-bass/mid-bass.

 

I dislike that sound too and wouldn't put up with it. I think it may have more to do with poor setup and mixing the bass in too loud. I set my subs so that I can't hear them. Sometimes I have to put my ear down near them to double check if they're on. Nevertheless they make a subtle but significant difference when called by the recordings. I'm using little ones (inexpensive 8") that go down to about 32hz.

 

I'm looking for that foundation, especially for large orchestral works. It's hard enough to imagine an orchestra in one's listening room, but without that sturdy bottom of the double basses and the like, it becomes pretty much hopeless for me.

 

Earlier someone was talking about timing problems when woofers aren't in the same plane as the other speakers. Technically that may be true, but from personal experience phase issues seem to affect timing much more, and I've had that kind of problem where it was very disconcerting and unlistenable. Sub placement anywhere fairly near the main speakers has caused no timing problem in my system that couldn't be corrected by proper attention to phasing.

 

-Chris

[chg]

I've often wondered if subs are really only beneficial/needed if one listens to mostly full symphony/orchestral type music vs. rock/alternative/vocal? It seems there's not much below 40hz in recorded rock music. Either way, I will definitely keep a more open mind to the idea of incorporating a sub.

[crisnee]

I've often wondered if subs are really only beneficial/needed if one listens to mostly full symphony/orchestral type music vs. rock/alternative/vocal? It seems there's not much below 40hz in recorded rock music.

 

I think there are several benefits depending on your room and setup. In a previous setup I had monitors that sounded great with fantastic imaging but they only went down to about 65 hz. When I got it right with subs I got a smooth tuned sound down to about 32 hz. Rock's fundamentals mostly stop at 40 hz with the bottom bass guitar note, but synths go lower and probably something else I'm not thinking of. But that's neither here nor there.

 

What I found great about subs is that they can be eq'd with an outboard eq without affecting your main speakers. IOW, you can use your favorite dac AND use dsp solely for the subs. With a full range system you can't do this. By the way, I'm not pro or con subs, in fact I was hoping I wouldn't need the subs in my new setup (I'm pro "as simple as possible") but unfortunately it's not looking good for that as they still add too much.

 

-Chris

[Jud]

Thanks Jud. Times like these I wish I had more time to get tech savy. I guess what I want to know is what "should" I expect to hear differently, considering things like e.g the big brother is a 3 way, less efficient, more expensive etc. I realise its impossible to say for sure due to all the variables. A change to a bigger amp would probably be necessary for a start.

 

I was more just after what the specs would generally point to that's all.

 

I actually have to listen to speakers to know how they sound. I'm not at all intending that as any kind of cut or joke, I'm totally serious. I have nowhere near the tech knowledge to be able to understand how a speaker will sound, or how two speakers will differ from one another, from the usual specs. For example, the Vandy 1C freq response goes down to 38Hz and up to 22.5kHz, while the 2Ce Signature II goes down to 29Hz and up to 29kHz. I really don't know what that 9Hz at the bottom and the 7.5kHz at ultrasonic frequencies means in terms of music. But when I actually listened to these speakers' predecessors many years ago, I don't recall having any problem telling them apart or determining a preference.

 

I don't know whether the efficiency difference would necessitate a bigger amp. Are you turning the volume near full to achieve your preferred listening levels now?

[harmonica2]

Rock's fundamentals mostly stop at 40 hz with the bottom bass guitar note, but synths go lower and probably something else I'm not thinking of. But that's neither here nor there.

 

In my experience with a single subwoofer crossed over at 55 Hz, the kick drum is greatly improved. It's a more realistic "thunk" that you feel as much as hear. Although I set the volume pretty low on my subwoofer, much is gained.

 

On a side note, I suffered from an unpredictable, annoying, boomy, generic bass sound for a few weeks until I removed a glass-top side table from my living room.

[prufrock]

Jud

 

I think I should probably organise to give the 2Ce's a listen. Fair bit of travelling and mucking around though getting them back to my place for a listen. It has got to the stage now where my mains are now worth less than most of the other individual components. Its just that I am totally satisfied with what I have got. I guess we Vandie guys are lucky in that respect. I recently heard some other makes, multiples of the price of my 1Cs and I thought they all sounded like crap, i.e a horrible boxy sound.

[Jud]

Jud

 

I think I should probably organise to give the 2Ce's a listen.

 

It's just that I am totally satisfied with what I have got. I guess we Vandie guys are lucky in that respect.

 

Nailed it. :-)

[brunk]

I can agree here. I have found that while my midrange drivers sounds clear (not muddied) down to ~40hz, the impact of ~55hz is lost, though that varies across speakers. However, most people still don't implement it correctly because they don't know how, or lack the tools. Even if you don't have EQ software and measurement instruments there's still a quick and easy method. I know this isn't optimal, but here it goes. To achieve the right volume in your sub implementation, slowly turn up the sub until you know it sounds out of balance. Turn it off and listen to your speakers response. Turn the sub back on and turn it down until you think it isn't overpowering the speakers response. Turn it off again and listen. Turn it back on and perform small adjustments in that volume "sweet spot" while listening to a wide sample of your music collection. It should be dialed in quite satisfactorily. Before all this is done, just make sure the placement (subwoofer crawl method) and phase is set properly. Hope that helps someone that doesn't have the software/hardware at their disposal

In my experience with a single subwoofer crossed over at 55 Hz, the kick drum is greatly improved. It's a more realistic "thunk" that you feel as much as hear. Although I set the volume pretty low on my subwoofer, much is gained.

 

On a side note, I suffered from an unpredictable, annoying, boomy, generic bass sound for a few weeks until I removed a glass-top side table from my living room.

[chg]

wgscott- Here's a solution to your dual woofer dilemma.

 

These Woofers Are for the Dogs

[audiventory]

Correctly tuned sub extend speaker's frequency range. It only positively affects the sound.

 

Correctly tuned: nor more nor less levels of sub, and right approved with other (frontal speakers) by frequency characteristic and placing.

 

Dual woofer (if its cost available for installation) recommended use.

 

P.S. Pro-studio monitor systems use subs.

[wgscott]

I've found integrating the sub connected at speaker-level works really well with Dirac, but part of the trick was to set the gain a bit higher on the sub to start out with and allow Dirac to attenuate it relative to the main speakers. This in turn permits me to keep the Dirac gain attenuation at about -3 db instead of the default -8 db.

[bikemig]

20' X 24' with 19' peak "cathedral" ceiling.

 

Big room. I'd get a sealed sub for that room. I just picked up a sealed sub, a SVS SB2000 which is kicka@@ with music and movies, SVS SB-2000 - 500 Watt DSP Controlled, 12" Compact Sealed Subwoofer. They have a great return policy and first rate support. If you want something that plays down low, it is hard to beat a sub. I run a sub in my desktop system as well.

[wgscott]

I just blew my audio budget for the next 50 years on a custom road bike...

[bikemig]

I just blew my audio budget for the next 50 years on a custom road bike...

 

LOL, what did you get? The SVS subs aren't silly expensive btw. I think I just blew my bike budget for the year on the SVS sub, a marantz cd player, the PSB mini speakers, and refurb peachtree idecco. What a great combo for a desktop system. I'm loving the sub as well.

[wgscott]

I'm having a local frame builder make it. Frame is at the paint shop. Steel. Ultegra Di2/hydraulic road discs.

[bikemig]

I'm having a local frame builder make it. Frame is at the paint shop. Steel. Ultegra Di2/hydraulic road discs.

 

Sweet, I have three custom steel bikes but none of them were built for me, . This is one of my favorites:

 

[wgscott]

I don't have a picture of mine yet, but here is the maternity ward:

 

Factory Tour: Caletti Cycles’ Handmade Steel, Titanium Bicycles

[wkhanna]

Serious stuff.

I so love cottage industry type businesses that maintain the craftsmanship & handmade traditions of a time not so long ago.

Mass produce CNC machined & robotic welded products have no soul.

[wgscott]

I've been thinking about this some more, and watched Jim Smith's DVD again. Two points he emphasizes:

 

(1) Don't set the crossover too low on the sub, as this makes it harder to integrate into the main system.

 

(2) Subs run as stereo pairs are better for preserving a sense of presence than the identical subs run as dual mono. (Also, one sub is worse than none, as one sub, or two subs as dual mono, will tend to collapse the soundstage, etc).

 

I wonder if (1) is what is responsible for (2). In other words, if the sub crossover was set to eg: 50 Hz with a steep 4th-order crossover, would the stereo pair be superior to two subs run in mono?