cabinet frequency response

[R Baer]

... would only add that many of the anti-low bass posts seem to contradict your last paragraph, because they insist that it is in larger venues, not club settings where bass is bad, because the house systems can't or won't reproduce those fundamentals anyway.

But as I said, the explanations tend to be all over the map, and mostly don't make sense, with some exceptions.

Thanks,
Andy

In my experience, the ability to reproduce those deep lows seems to be the most useful on the outdoor gigs. Once there are no walls to now act as a larger speaker cabinet, if you will, the lack of fundamental becomes more apparent to me. For these gigs, I usually prefer a bigger cab that can can reach lower, even when I have FOH support.

 

[bgavin]

I get excellent results outdoors with only three T39 bass horns at the center of the stage.

These generate very robust bass for both live and recorded music.
They were sufficient to bring in the cops with a noise complaint from 1+ miles away..

I find bass horn clarity and throw to be far superior to direct radiator boxes.

 

[GRollins]

Having been involved in several disagreements about low frequencies here at talkbass, I am relieved to see acmebass say some of the same things I have been saying all along.

There is, clearly, a dogma here at talkbass--at least among a certain very vocal subset of members--and any who dare question that dogma are subjected to abuse. I coined a term, Decemites, to refer to such people. Interestingly, some people then took offense at my made-up word.

Anyone who has the temerity to want to reproduce anything below, say, 50-60Hz, is ridiculed, mocked, and belittled. Not to mention having to endure bad science thrown at them by self-appointed "experts."

I will say in JimmyM's defense that, at least in the threads I've been in, he's been quite honest about wanting a specific tone, without necessarily thrusting that same preference on others as something handed down from on high. If he's happy with rolling off the low end below 50-60Hz, then more power to him. I gather his audience is on the older side and is likely to be quite content with the suggestion of low end, rather than having it shoved in their faces. If they're happy and he's happy, then what's not to like?

I do disagree with the idea that instruments clash if played in the same frequency range. I've used the example of St. Saens 3rd Symphony (aka Organ Symphony) for bass, but it's such obvious bull hockey that I'm always amazed that it persists. Consider human vocal ranges. Should guitars not play while the singer is singing? First violins, second violins, and violas all occupy the same frequencies. Cellos and basses have a lot of overlap. Tubas...French and English horns...flutes...on and on and on... The problem is not overlap of frequencies. The problem is frequently the PA system--or the person at the sound board.

As someone who is fond of deep fundamentals, I can say that it can be done. Ignore those who preach "the human mind can rebuild the fundamental from the overtones" as an excuse not to reach deep. The statement, as a standalone statement, is true, but that doesn't mean that you have to settle for less than your desired tone.

Incidentally, note that horns have a hard limit at their lower frequency cutoff, quite unlike sealed or reflex cabinets. Your standard "large cabinet" horn (e.g. Acoustic 301, Ampeg V4B) has a ridiculously high cutoff and any attempt to drive below that cutoff only produces distortion, not true low end. The distortion may be what you want, tonally, but it isn't deep fundamentals. The one thing that horns have in buckets is efficiency. They can produce a lot of loud for a relatively paltry amount of power. But deep? Not unless they're really, really really, huge. Edgar Winter had an interesting PA when I saw him back in the '70s. Monster horns, 12-15' on a side, that unbolted in sections that then nested for transport. Clever solution to the size problem, but even the nested sections were much too large for anything less than an 18-wheeler.

Grey

 

[Downunderwonder]

Most young players think they are getting 40 Hz from their 4 string and 4x10 when they aren't. Then they go buying 5 strings or droptuning and the 4x10 carks it. So they go chasing 30 Hz, or less, thinking they need it to get the equivalent tone from a low B or whatever droptuning they have. Major disconnect.

A few who really do go down that low seem to discount their privileged experience.

 

[RS66LB]

Ok, this can't be just me. I play a 5-string bass, and sometimes it's in Dropped A tuning, which is 27.5Hz. I have not found a SINGLE cabinet that goes below 28Hz at -10dB. I want 27.5Hz FLAT!!! I know it can be done. Does anyone know of a cab that does this already, or do I have to make one?

BJ

I'm using a bridged Crest amp to drive a 2x18" cab ( the lows in a bi-amp rig), it's great for a 40-50 hz percussive thud however to flatly get down below 30 while maintaining decent sensitivity, portability and power handling might require going into a 21" sub, The Carvin Trx2121 is actually kind of small for a 21" speaker however its stated 3db down point is 30hz (10 db down at 20 hz) -this would supposedly be around 94 db at 1 watt/1 meter which if true is actually pretty loud for 30 hz, of course if you wanted to give up portability you could go with an EAW BH822 -a 300 lb, 2x12 beast that does around 106 db (1w/1m) at 24 hz

 

[RS66LB]

Was just about to post that thread!

Read the thread B-String 2 posted, and don't get so caught up in raw numbers. The idea that your cab has to go as low as your lowest note in order to be heard is rubbish.

Jimmy! -stop saying the "R" word

 

[RS66LB]

Name one thing I said that isn't true. And then come to one of my gigs where thousands of people show up specifically to see my band and ask anyone in that crowd if they feel let down. And then you can ask my fellow bandmates and see if they feel let down by me.


lol! Jimmy, you're priceless -almost like one of your autographs

 

[Downunderwonder]

There's PM's for loveletters.

 

[JimmyM]

Oh boys, don't fight...there's enough of me to go around.

 

[acmebass]

Anyone who has the temerity to want to reproduce anything below, say, 50-60Hz, is ridiculed, mocked, and belittled. Not to mention having to endure bad science thrown at them by self-appointed "experts."

I will say in JimmyM's defense that, at least in the threads I've been in, he's been quite honest about wanting a specific tone, without necessarily thrusting that same preference on others as something handed down from on high. If he's happy with rolling off the low end below 50-60Hz, then more power to him.

Grey

Thanks for chiming in, Rollins.

I agree that Jimmy seems to be a reasonable person of goodwill.

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to reproduce fundamentals, as a matter of personal taste, and he is certainly under no obligation to defend his personal taste any more than anybody else is.

It's for that very reason that all the silliness and mythology surrounding this subject is so non-productive. Hey, it's all good! If low bass doesn't float your boat that's OK! But if you try to justify your personal taste by saying things which aren't true, there are those among us who will point out the fallacies you present.

I'm certainly not singling out Jimmy. His posts are probably the most rational of the folks who share his tastes.

Thanks,
Andy

 

[GRollins]

As a practical response to the original poster, I'd say to consider the following options:
1) Consider building your own.
2) Buy something like the Bag End (ELF?) cabinet with the active EQ. This sort of thing is relatively common in high end audio, but rare in bass gear.
3) Build a biamped system, either DIY or bought. In fact, I'd recommend this regardless.

There are bass cabinets that go fairly deep, but if you want anything approximating flat response into the upper 20's you're going to run into difficulty. I personally regard -10dB specs as laughable. That is not "useable" low end in any sense of the word--it's 1/10 of the nominal response. For that matter, I regard +-3dB specs (that's half power) as of limited use, but you can hardly expect to get a driver with an 8dB peak at 3kHz to conform to any sort of "flat" response curve. This, then, begs the question: To what are you comparing the 27Hz? Bass drivers ain't flat in the same way that stereo drivers are. You're going to have to pick something to compare to. And that's going to start an ugly fight.

Grey

 

[Mike Arnopol]

I think that the biggest problem when guys say that when they're trying to get the fundamental on even an open E let alone anything below that is that most reflex cabs---even many that claim a huge low end---are tuned in the mid 40's on up. (I know that Andy tunes them lower) I'm surprised that the issue of the driver being unloaded below the tuning frequency hasn;t been mentioned.

Duke and I are buddies and I know that his design parameters were balancing smaller size with a strong, functional low end. (it's all compromises here) So he's tuning to get the first harmonic above the fundamental of the B string above the -3db point . Again, a large many of the cabs noted for their huge low end are in the 40's. So if you eq up the 32 to 45 hz region you're just throwing more into the area where the speaker is unloaded. So all of the harmonics above that will suffer too. You can eq in the "quantity" but the quality can suffer.

Also, the drivers that are capable of reproducing that lower bass (in an enclosure tuned to be capable of that) may not necessarily be the best in the midrange. So I think that the other part of the equation is balancing bass quantity with bass quality. Which is one of the reasons that Roger went the route of sacrificing some of the low end extension for a driver and tuning that had more impact in the midbass region. While the lowest end is enticing, our bills (as bassists) are paid for the "thump", pulse, and pitch definition we produce which is not in the lowest range--more mid to upper bass. Which is why many of the top bassists in the world play rigs that don't reproduce the lowest octave.

I know that Andy is one of the best in the world at approaching that balancing act. And Duke is one of the best in the world at his aesthetic choices and the functionality of his cabs. And Roger did his homework to find a cab that puts real world function in a live setting as a priority for his. There are many practical reasons why an SVT 810 is the most effective solution for many top bassists.

I LOVE to get that low end. Again--as long as I don't have to sacrifice quality in the areas above that.

I'm pretty into high end home audio. There are many high end hifi speakers that go way, way low. But I found that I would gladly (well maybe not gladly) give up the low octave for a speaker that would allow me to hear the pulse and pitch definition better. As a professional bassist,if I have to choose between pulse and pitch definition and low end extension it's no contest----if I want to be paid to play bass for a living.

So my point again is---we're talking about the fact that great low end extension is audible---and functional----if properly applied.If you can have that extension---and have the utmost in function in the "meat and potatoes" two octaves above---life is good.

 

[JimmyM]

I will say in JimmyM's defense that, at least in the threads I've been in, he's been quite honest about wanting a specific tone, without necessarily thrusting that same preference on others as something handed down from on high. If he's happy with rolling off the low end below 50-60Hz, then more power to him. I gather his audience is on the older side and is likely to be quite content with the suggestion of low end, rather than having it shoved in their faces. If they're happy and he's happy, then what's not to like?

Thank you Grey...sort of I don't think it's generational at all, though, when I still see a whole lot of current music being played on sealed 810's and other cabs that don't reach way down low and being mixed accordingly. There are some who want that big low end for sure, but I hardly think I'm a relic of a bygone generation. Evidence on stages across the world tells me I'm not.

I do disagree with the idea that instruments clash if played in the same frequency range. I've used the example of St. Saens 3rd Symphony (aka Organ Symphony) for bass, but it's such obvious bull hockey that I'm always amazed that it persists. Consider human vocal ranges. Should guitars not play while the singer is singing? First violins, second violins, and violas all occupy the same frequencies. Cellos and basses have a lot of overlap. Tubas...French and English horns...flutes...on and on and on... The problem is not overlap of frequencies. The problem is frequently the PA system--or the person at the sound board.

Symphonies aren't artificially adding lows to bass drums between 30-60hz like popular music styles. And anyone who has tried to play triad chords on the lowest notes of a bass or the lowest notes of a piano or organ can tell you how easy it is to make mud out of the lows. It's a heck of a lot easier to keep instruments from clashing up higher than down low, and any symphony that's well-written will take that into consideration and write so it doesn't clash. Frequency range is a very important part of the equation. So no, I don't find that to be bull hockey at all.

As someone who is fond of deep fundamentals, I can say that it can be done. Ignore those who preach "the human mind can rebuild the fundamental from the overtones" as an excuse not to reach deep. The statement, as a standalone statement, is true, but that doesn't mean that you have to settle for less than your desired tone.

Agreed, but that doesn't make frequency slotting bull hockey. At least not in the lows. Other ranges, sure, cram a few instruments in there.

 

[Downunderwonder]

bearjew bearjew is offline
Registered User

Last Activity: 04-24-2013 02:40 AM

Lownered

 

[rpsands]

Until you've tried a cab that can put out serious output at the first harmonic I wouldn't waste your damned time with anything seriously under 50hz or so.

If you set something that starts distorting when you ask for for much 60hz out of it against an Acme that produces down to 35hz, it'll sound weak for sure.

But if you set that same Acme style cab against a 3015LF that puts out lots of sound down to 45hz, you're in for another shocking introduction to our friend Mr. Sensitivity.

 

[JimmyM]

Huh?

 

[12bass]

... But if you set that same Acme style cab against a 3015LF that puts out lots of sound down to 45hz, you're in for another shocking introduction to our friend Mr. Sensitivity.

Which appears to illustrate how people tend to settle for certain compromises in bass reproduction - the ff approach getting low-ish, but still retaining relatively high sensitivity. Hoffman's Iron Law comes to mind....

Still, I'm curious to know if cleanly reproduced fundamentals below 50 Hz really contribute to muddying a mix. Or is that folklore?

 

[acmebass]

As a practical response to the original poster, I'd say to consider the following options:
1) Consider building your own.
2) Buy something like the Bag End (ELF?) cabinet with the active EQ. This sort of thing is relatively common in high end audio, but rare in bass gear.
3) Build a biamped system, either DIY or bought. In fact, I'd recommend this regardless.

There are bass cabinets that go fairly deep, but if you want anything approximating flat response into the upper 20's you're going to run into difficulty. I personally regard -10dB specs as laughable. That is not "useable" low end in any sense of the word--it's 1/10 of the nominal response. For that matter, I regard +-3dB specs (that's half power) as of limited use, but you can hardly expect to get a driver with an 8dB peak at 3kHz to conform to any sort of "flat" response curve. This, then, begs the question: To what are you comparing the 27Hz? Bass drivers ain't flat in the same way that stereo drivers are. You're going to have to pick something to compare to. And that's going to start an ugly fight.

Grey

I suggested the Bag End, for the same reasons. Duke also was giving some thought to EQ.

Something occurred to me: I think the SVT, also a sealed box, could be EQ'd to achieve the same thing, if he wants to live with it, and likes the SVT sound.

Andy

 

[rpsands]

Depends on your placement relative to the room and the subs but in general it is more of a problem to have your rig trying to produce lows and failing than to produce them successfully.

The lows have never been a problem for me with any of my rigs.

Sent from my HTC6990LVW using Board Express

 

[acmebass]

I think that the biggest problem when guys say that when they're trying to get the fundamental on even an open E let alone anything below that is that most reflex cabs---even many that claim a huge low end---are tuned in the mid 40's on up. (I know that Andy tunes them lower) I'm surprised that the issue of the driver being unloaded below the tuning frequency hasn;t been mentioned.

Duke and I are buddies and I know that his design parameters were balancing smaller size with a strong, functional low end. (it's all compromises here) So he's tuning to get the first harmonic above the fundamental of the B string above the -3db point . Again, a large many of the cabs noted for their huge low end are in the 40's. So if you eq up the 32 to 45 hz region you're just throwing more into the area where the speaker is unloaded. So all of the harmonics above that will suffer too. You can eq in the "quantity" but the quality can suffer.

Also, the drivers that are capable of reproducing that lower bass (in an enclosure tuned to be capable of that) may not necessarily be the best in the midrange. So I think that the other part of the equation is balancing bass quantity with bass quality. Which is one of the reasons that Roger went the route of sacrificing some of the low end extension for a driver and tuning that had more impact in the midbass region. While the lowest end is enticing, our bills (as bassists) are paid for the "thump", pulse, and pitch definition we produce which is not in the lowest range--more mid to upper bass. Which is why many of the top bassists in the world play rigs that don't reproduce the lowest octave.

I know that Andy is one of the best in the world at approaching that balancing act. And Duke is one of the best in the world at his aesthetic choices and the functionality of his cabs. And Roger did his homework to find a cab that puts real world function in a live setting as a priority for his. There are many practical reasons why an SVT 810 is the most effective solution for many top bassists.

I LOVE to get that low end. Again--as long as I don't have to sacrifice quality in the areas above that.

I'm pretty into high end home audio. There are many high end hifi speakers that go way, way low. But I found that I would gladly (well maybe not gladly) give up the low octave for a speaker that would allow me to hear the pulse and pitch definition better. As a professional bassist,if I have to choose between pulse and pitch definition and low end extension it's no contest----if I want to be paid to play bass for a living.

So my point again is---we're talking about the fact that great low end extension is audible---and functional----if properly applied.If you can have that extension---and have the utmost in function in the "meat and potatoes" two octaves above---life is good.

Well said, Mike. Thanks for taking the time.

Except for one thing. I ain't nowhere near the best in the world at any of this. I can tell you who is. I didn't make any of this loudspeaker theory up myself. I just know who to read, and have a lot of experience.

If I've done anything innovative other than my stressed enclosures, it has been to redefine what needs to be done. I sacrificed efficiency for (Hofman's) low end extension, and made accuracy a design consideration. I learned how to do it from people a lot smarter than I am, but I sure didn't invent anything.

Thanks for the kind words. I hope to hear your stuff sometime soon.

See if you can make it to the Rocky Mountain Bass Slam, on June 9! You can buy fresh roasted green chiles on the street here.

Andy