Low C# Clarity

[JAUQO III-X]

Some people are in search of a clear low C# string(17hz). Some players falsely believe that you have to have a super heavy gauge string to obtain this( but if they want a super thick string, that's kool). I say not true. And some people claim that my 17hz claims are not on point. Well if not and they seem to be the authorities. Please tell me if possible, how am I able to get a very very clear C# live and on recordings?

[Stereo Joe]

I have nothing to contribute to your question but I'm curious what gauge string you use for your C#...

[UncleFluffy]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

And some people claim that my 17hz claims are not on point.

I'm not sure exactly what your 17Hz claims are, but I'm guessing that it would take all of 5 minutes with a DAW to test them one way or the other if you have them in recorded form.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by Stereo Joe

I have nothing to contribute to your question but I'm curious what gauge string you use for your C#...

.195

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by UncleFluffy

I'm not sure exactly what your 17Hz claims are, but I'm guessing that it would take all of 5 minutes with a DAW to test them one way or the other if you have them in recorded form.

I'm not making the claim. some people say they don't hear a 17hz because it's not possible.

But I want the ones who say that it's not possible to tell me why they feel it's not.

[Nightlyraider]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

I'm not making the claim. some people say they don't hear a 17hz because it's not possible.

But I want the ones who say that it's not possible to tell me why they feel it's not.

Some people can't hear that low, maybe some can?

I doubt you can hear 20kHz at your age, but a small child should have no problem. Every ear is different, and they all change over time.

[UncleFluffy]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

I'm not making the claim. some people say they don't hear a 17hz because it's not possible.

But I want the ones who say that it's not possible to tell me why they feel it's not.

Well, the usual accepted lower limit for human hearing is 20Hz, but given that we're all different there's going to be some people who can hear lower than that and some that can't. So it's entirely possible that the people who say they don't hear 17Hz as a "tone" are right, and the people who say that they do are right as well.

I just tried it here with a signal generator and a 17Hz sine wave - i.e. just the fundamental - sounds to me like a cat purring. Not quite a continuous tone, but not completely separated events either. So it's possible that with a bit of harmonic content mixed in that it'd sound more like a note.

But that's my ears.

[ixlramp]

http://www.rotarywoofer.com/howlowcanwehear.html

[DougD]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

I'm not making the claim. some people say they don't hear a 17hz because it's not possible.

But I want the ones who say that it's not possible to tell me why they feel it's not.

Whats more interesting to me is; what cab can accurately produce a note that low at gigging volume? It's hard enough to find a cab that does the low B justice.

[BrianVengeance]

Even more importantly, don't forget that a vibrating string is more than just the fundamental 17Hz. The second harmonic is of 17Hz is 34Hz which is far more easily heard, as well as the third, fourth, fifth, etc....

If the question is whether or not the frequencies created by an open bass string tuned to low C# can be heard, I'd say yes, with the caveat that the fundamental may be out of the audible range. The combination of frequencies will still be heard / perceived as a low C# (psychoacoustics).

If the question is whether or not 17Hz can be heard... that will likely vary from person to person.

As to the recording / reinforcement question, I'd focus on ensuring that your harmonics are being represented when your fundamentals are lower than the range that the human ear can hear or your speakers can reproduce.

[JAUQO III-X]

UncleFluffy you are on point. Your exsperience is your exsperience and I respect that. I have great hearing and some people cant hear below a certain point.


Nightlyraider,I have always practiced not abusing my ears. And it paid off. Just last month I had an appointment with an audiologist because I was experiencing a problem with my right ear. My hearing results were great and the audiologist said that I can hear well below the softest whisper and that every thing that she sent through the headphones I was able to hear. Normal hearing is above 20db's. Anything under that and you are experiencing hearing loss. I came in at about 17-18db's. SHe was also impressed that I could har so cleary at my age. But like I said I have always practiced not to abuse my ears.




And this test took place while I was dealing with a ear problem with my right ear that the ear specialist(not the audiologist) called eustation tube dysfunction. And he informed me that the level of it that I had would basically cure itself. And it has since cleared up.



Foe those who may be interested, below is a link with info on eustation tube dysfunction and what causes it.

http://www.dizziness-and-balance.com...ysfunction.htm


Guys, all great posts. But it really does come down to each persons own level of hearing.

[DougD]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

UncleFluffy you are on point. Your exsperience is your exsperience and I respect that. I have great hearing and some people cant hear below a certain point.


Nightlyraider,I have always practiced not abusing my ears. And it paid off. Just last month I had an appointment with an audiologist because I was experiencing a problem with my right ear. My hearing results were great and the audiologist said that I can hear well below the softest whisper and that every thing that she sent through the headphones I was able to hear. Normal hearing is above 20db's. Anything under that and you are experiencing hearing loss. I came in at about 17-18db's. SHe was also impressed that I could har so cleary at my age. But like I said I have always practiced not to abuse my ears.




And this test took place while I was dealing with a ear problem with my right ear that the ear specialist(not the audiologist) called eustation tube dysfunction. And he informed me that the level of it that I had would basically cure itself. And it has since cleared up.



Foe those who may be interested, below is a link with info on eustation tube dysfunction and what causes it.

Eustachian tube dysfunction


Guys, all great posts. But it really does come down to each persons own level of hearing.

Good point about not abusing your ears. Unfortunately for me, 20+ years of jet noise has left me with tinnitus. so I have substantial loss on the same frequency as the ringing. But I'm still curious as to what cab that can go that low.

[Alexander Eddy]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

Some players falsely believe that you have to have a super heavy gauge string to obtain this... ...Please tell me if possible, how am I able to get a very very clear C# live and on recordings?

Might I suggest that if the string has little to do with it, you ask this same question in the Amps forum where you will get some engineers to answer your question using thei knowledge of physics that govern sound reproduction. Granted you could also place it in the basses forum, but it's not really where the likes of Bill, and Greenboy hang out.

[Selta]

Originally Posted by DougD

Good point about not abusing your ears. Unfortunately for me, 20+ years of jet noise has left me with tinnitus. so I have substantial loss on the same frequency as the ringing. But I'm still curious as to what cab that can go that low.

I'm pretty sure there's no bass cab that reproduces 17Hz, or even the 34Hz harmonic effectively. Just because it's there, doesn't mean that is what you are hearing at all.

[JAUQO III-X]

For those who keep saying something about I said I have a cab that goes down to 17hz. that is not true.




But they still haven't told me how I'm able to get a clear 17hz.

[FunkMetalBass]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

For those who keep saying something about I said I have a cab that goes down to 17hz. that is not true.




But they still haven't told me how I'm able to get a clear 17hz.

My response would be the same as BrianVengeance.

Given that the fundamental is not the most prominent harmonic heard (although your light string is definitely causing the lower harmonics to be quite prevalent), I would argue that you aren't getting a clear ~17Hz so much as you are a clear ~34 and ~68Hz. Our brains are filling in that gap and hearing the low ~17Hz.

Originally Posted by BrianVengeance

Even more importantly, don't forget that a vibrating string is more than just the fundamental 17Hz. The second harmonic is of 17Hz is 34Hz which is far more easily heard, as well as the third, fourth, fifth, etc....

If the question is whether or not the frequencies created by an open bass string tuned to low C# can be heard, I'd say yes, with the caveat that the fundamental may be out of the audible range. The combination of frequencies will still be heard / perceived as a low C# (psychoacoustics).

If the question is whether or not 17Hz can be heard... that will likely vary from person to person.

As to the recording / reinforcement question, I'd focus on ensuring that your harmonics are being represented when your fundamentals are lower than the range that the human ear can hear or your speakers can reproduce.

[Alexander Eddy]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

For those who keep saying something about I said I have a cab that goes down to 17hz. that is not true.




But they still haven't told me how I'm able to get a clear 17hz.

They have, a number of times that I have witnessed, but here you go -

"A sound is said to have a missing fundamental, suppressed fundamental, or phantom fundamental when its overtones suggest a fundamental frequency but the sound lacks a component at the fundamental frequency itself. However, the brain perceives the pitch of a tone not only by its fundamental frequency, but also by the ratio of the higher harmonics. Thus, we may perceive the same pitch (perhaps with a different timbre) even if the fundamental frequency is missing from a tone.
For example, when a note (that is not a pure tone) has a pitch of 100 Hz, it will consist of frequency components that are integer multiples of that value (e.g. 100, 200, 300, 400, 500.... Hz). However, smaller loudspeakers may not produce low frequencies, and so in our example, the 100 Hz component may be missing. Nevertheless, a pitch corresponding to the fundamental may still be heard."

"A low pitch (also known as the pitch of the missing fundamental or virtual pitch) can sometimes be heard when there is no apparent source or component of that frequency. This perception is due to the brain interpreting repetition patterns that are present.[1][2][3]
It was once thought that this effect was because the missing fundamental was replaced by distortions introduced by the physics of the ear. However, experiments subsequently showed that when a noise was added that would have masked these distortions had they been present, listeners still heard a pitch corresponding to the missing fundamental, as reported by J. C. R. Licklider in 1954.[4] It is now widely accepted that the brain processes the information present in the overtones to calculate the fundamental frequency. The precise way in which it does so is still a matter of debate, but the processing seems to be based on an autocorrelation involving the timing of neural impulses in the auditory nerve."

What you are experiencing is nothing new Jauqo...

"Timpani (kettle drums) are tuned by listening for the missing fundamental. Hit in the usual way (half to three-quarters the distance from the center to the rim), the fundamental note of a timpano is very weak in relation to its second through fifth harmonics.[10] A timpano tuned to 100 Hz will produce sound most strongly at 200, 300, 400 and 500 Hz.[11]
A violin's lowest air and body resonances generally fall between 250 Hz and 300 Hz. The fundamental frequency of the open G3 string is below 200 Hz in modern tunings as well as most historical tunings, so the lowest notes of a violin have an attenuated fundamental, although listeners seldom notice this.
Most common telephones cannot reproduce sounds lower than 300 Hz, but a male voice has a fundamental frequency approximately 150 Hz. Because of the missing fundamental effect, male voices still sound male over the telephone.[12"

Now that's all from Wikipedia, so it's about as dumbed down as you can get. If you still don't understand, just accept that it's not some mystical voodoo you, and you alone have stumbled across - it's science. I don't fully understand sub atomic physics, but that doesn't mean I totally ignore the work of those who do.

[JAUQO III-X]

To give you guys an idea of how good my hearing is.

A few years ago I was attending a NAMM show and luthier Dan DeMars of DeMars guitars asked me to check out one of his basses. The Long Trail model(it has a piezo system in it). He said that he wanted to know what my thoughts on it were. Well I spent some time playing it and it played great, sounded great(except for a minor issue that was not of his doing. But I was not the builders fault)t and overall a well crafted bass. But I kept noticing the most faint uneveness of the A string tonal and volume output, in open position and up and down along the fingerboard. So I kept playing it and I kept noticing the same issue with the A string. The volume was extremely faint but I could hear the unbalanceness in it's volume output. So I mention this to him and with all due respect to Dan I could feel that he was not interested in hearing that. So I thank him and I leave.



A year later he see's me and now he has a 5 string version with a mag and piezo system. He asks me to check it out so while I'm playing the bass he tells me that he would like to apoligise to me. I ask why? and he tells me that the year before when I was telling him about the A string output problem that he thought I was just talking bs. He said that so many bass players had played that bass and I was the only one who pointed out that issue. He just could not believe it. So he said that when he got home he took the bass to his tech and told the tech about what I was telling him and that he wanted the tech to give the bass a good going over and clean up. He says that the tech thought it was odd what I said but later told Dan that upon further investigation he found the most minute piece of dust between the piezo and the A string saddle on the bass. That micro particle was the culprit.


Dan DeMars said that he nor the tech could believe that I was correct in what I heard.

I told Dan that he asked for my thoughts and I told him what I was and was not hearing.

[Selta]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

To give you guys an idea of how good my hearing is.

A few years ago I was attending a NAMM show and luthier Dan DeMars of DeMars guitars asked me to check out one of his basses. The Long Trail model(it has a piezo system in it). He said that he wanted to know what my thoughts on it were. Well I spent some time playing it and it played great, sounded great(except for a minor issue that was not of his doing. But I was not the builders fault)t and overall a well crafted bass. But I kept noticing the most faint uneveness of the A string tonal and volume output, in open position and up and down along the fingerboard. So I kept playing it and I kept noticing the same issue with the A string. The volume was extremely faint but I could hear the unbalanceness in it's volume output. So I mention this to him and with all due respect to Dan I could feel that he was not interested in hearing that. So I thank him and I leave.



A year later he see's me and now he has a 5 string version with a mag and piezo system. He asks me to check it out so while I'm playing the bass he tells me that he would like to apoligise to me. I ask why? and he tells me that the year before when I was telling him about the A string output problem that he thought I was just talking bs. He said that so many bass players had played that bass and I was the only one who pointed out that issue. He just could not believe it. So he said that when he got home he took the bass to his tech and told the tech about what I was telling him and that he wanted the tech to give the bass a good going over and clean up. He says that the tech thought it was odd what I said but later told Dan that upon further investigation he found the most minute piece of dust between the piezo and the A string saddle on the bass. That micro particle was the culprit.


Dan DeMars said that he nor the tech could believe that I was correct in what I heard.

I told Dan that he asked for my thoughts and I told him what I was and was not hearing.

All I have to say is good for you. You're not the "average" person obviously. What do you want us to do, bow down to your mightiness? Do you feel you would've heard that same difference of a true 17Hz note (NOT what you're hearing from your bass cabs - a generated 17Hz note sent through equipment that can truly reproduce it, and not it's harmonic content).
Also, you're side tracking your own argument here. You heard a minute difference on an A string. Ok. That's still not qualifying how your cabs "reproduce" 17Hz as you claim, nor how anyone hears the actual fundamental.

[ugly_bassplayer]

Dude, even with concrete science like this you will never get Jauqo to get your point. He's going to answer with more questions & more ambiguous arguments.

Sorry , Jauqo , you might be the coolest dude ever but, your threads are often like this.

Originally Posted by Alexander Eddy

They have, a number of times that I have witnessed, but here you go -

"A sound is said to have a missing fundamental, suppressed fundamental, or phantom fundamental when its overtones suggest a fundamental frequency but the sound lacks a component at the fundamental frequency itself. However, the brain perceives the pitch of a tone not only by its fundamental frequency, but also by the ratio of the higher harmonics. Thus, we may perceive the same pitch (perhaps with a different timbre) even if the fundamental frequency is missing from a tone.
For example, when a note (that is not a pure tone) has a pitch of 100 Hz, it will consist of frequency components that are integer multiples of that value (e.g. 100, 200, 300, 400, 500.... Hz). However, smaller loudspeakers may not produce low frequencies, and so in our example, the 100 Hz component may be missing. Nevertheless, a pitch corresponding to the fundamental may still be heard."

"A low pitch (also known as the pitch of the missing fundamental or virtual pitch) can sometimes be heard when there is no apparent source or component of that frequency. This perception is due to the brain interpreting repetition patterns that are present.[1][2][3]
It was once thought that this effect was because the missing fundamental was replaced by distortions introduced by the physics of the ear. However, experiments subsequently showed that when a noise was added that would have masked these distortions had they been present, listeners still heard a pitch corresponding to the missing fundamental, as reported by J. C. R. Licklider in 1954.[4] It is now widely accepted that the brain processes the information present in the overtones to calculate the fundamental frequency. The precise way in which it does so is still a matter of debate, but the processing seems to be based on an autocorrelation involving the timing of neural impulses in the auditory nerve."

What you are experiencing is nothing new Jauqo...

"Timpani (kettle drums) are tuned by listening for the missing fundamental. Hit in the usual way (half to three-quarters the distance from the center to the rim), the fundamental note of a timpano is very weak in relation to its second through fifth harmonics.[10] A timpano tuned to 100 Hz will produce sound most strongly at 200, 300, 400 and 500 Hz.[11]
A violin's lowest air and body resonances generally fall between 250 Hz and 300 Hz. The fundamental frequency of the open G3 string is below 200 Hz in modern tunings as well as most historical tunings, so the lowest notes of a violin have an attenuated fundamental, although listeners seldom notice this.
Most common telephones cannot reproduce sounds lower than 300 Hz, but a male voice has a fundamental frequency approximately 150 Hz. Because of the missing fundamental effect, male voices still sound male over the telephone.[12"

Now that's all from Wikipedia, so it's about as dumbed down as you can get. If you still don't understand, just accept that it's not some mystical voodoo you, and you alone have stumbled across - it's science. I don't fully understand sub atomic physics, but that doesn't mean I totally ignore the work of those who do.