Fundamental frequency VS real world amplification

[greenboy]

Hey Rick,

If you want to add more info to your second graph just download my string tension spreadsheet and take a look - I have a table on the side of that that gives fundamental frequencies for quite a few octaves, with open strings for standard tunings and ERB tunings highlighted.

Good to see more graphic aids!

 

[Rick Auricchio]

Nice detailed sheet!

The graphic was designed to illustrate an essay that I haven't yet written.

I was planning to address the whole issue of bass-heavy guitars and the drop-tuned bass attempting to move clear of overlap. It seems that many of the younger players want a new instrument---one that seems impossible to achieve using existing equipment.

Of course, where does one post such an article? Under Basses, or Amps, or both?

 

[alexclaber]

The second drawing shows the overlap of guitar/bass frequencies; this helps us understand why bass-heavy electric guitars wreak havoc with electric bass, especially when the bass' fundamental is at a low SPL. High-pass the guitars!

That's one reason I love open-backed guitar amps - the cabinet acts as a first order highpass filter starting at about 200Hz.

Alex

 

[JustDavid]

Actually few synthesists will use patches that are almost entirely fundamental

Agreed. Just going for an extreme example, & pulled one out of my, er, hat.

I don't want OP extrapolating the 'implied fundamental' over to all instruments.

 

[greenboy]

I was planning to address the whole issue of bass-heavy guitars and the drop-tuned bass attempting to move clear of overlap. It seems that many of the younger players want a new instrument---one that seems impossible to achieve using existing equipment.

That's a conundrum I'm familiar with, hanging out on Extended Range Bass forums since their inception. Luthiers have built to so many different ERB specs that almost every instrument is its own entity. How do you name that when the ranges covered may go below bass guitar by an octave or more, and as high or even higher than a guitar? Amps and enclosures designed specifically for that are so far behind.

Anyway, the ERB is more about still being able to supply a bass function within an ensemble, while the guitars that are going lower are usually used in distortion contexts, with all the attendant masking. One could as easily play standard four-string basses in these ensembles as far as voicing goes, because the biggest difference is the longer scale length and string gauges still produce a different amplitude envelope and a different tonal emphasis.

Downtuning the bass means not only must masking be overcome, but also enclosure realities have become more of a burden yet.

Of course, where does one post such an article? Under Basses, or Amps, or both?

When I did the Waterfalls thread the intention was to show how important amps and cabs are as demands are placed into lower frequencies, but it seemed like a lot of people just wanted to look at pretty pictures of a gazillion different bass's outputs with no thought to the context. So good luck on that conundrum! ; }

 

[Rick Auricchio]

Yeah, the whole topic is tough. It would be more worthy as a college paper for my son (who plays no instrument, though he took a few years of piano and bass lessons).

In just a few minutes I realize there are many facets to the story: musical styles, lower costs, even the social effects of us parents having grown up with rock. Why not buy the kid the 4x12 guitar stack?

Heh...now if it could be a monthly column somewhere, I might have something.

 

[IvanMike]

another thing to consider is what tone you are actually going for. Michael tobias decided to go with a bolt on neck for his MTD series instead of the neck through design he used for tobias basses partly because a bolt on neck instrument produces less of the fundamental note. The resulting sound is "tighter" and "brighter".

On the same note, a lot of players choose rigs that produce less fundamental to get a tighter punchier sound. they may not know the physics involved, but they like what they hear.

Last but not least, the bass behaves a lot nicer after good dynamics processing and mastering of a recording. Often you can get away with more bass response when pumping recorded music through a system than when amplifying the untamed and very dynamic bass guitar. Very good technique and a quality compressor can help in this regard, but only so much.

 

[4Mal]

not to mention that we are impacted by what we've heard in the past and come to recognize as the sound of bass guitar ... there is an historic factor that is tough to ignore.

...and of course if you are playing in fairly small spaces - is there the possibility that having the fundamental present just promotes mud ?

I've been playing piezo equipped basses for about 6 months now and they seem to have more fundamental that I'm used to with my Fenders. Of course traditional J basses aren't generally thought of as having monster low end ... In some rooms I've found controlling the (at least) apparent low end of the Godin's a challenge ... lack of familiarity is no doubt an element in that equation though.

 

[greenboy]

not to mention that we are impacted by what we've heard in the past and come to recognize as the sound of bass guitar ...

That bucket holds a certain amount of water. But recorded bass guitar is often quite a bit different than live venue bass guitar - even when comparing the same bassist in the same time frame.

Obviously then, the ecomomies and tradeoffs of playback enclosures for home (and studio) have allowed the lowest octave of LF content to be treated differently in the mix when it becomes more practical, and people seem to like that.

 

[knuckle_head]

< snip >

... many of the younger players want a new instrument---one that seems impossible to achieve using existing equipment.

The equipment is there. If you consider that at this point G is reasonably common and the gear we have now can do reasonably the second harmonic. It's perennially where bass is - about an octave out of reach.

 

[holllowbody]

The equipment is there. If you consider that at this point G is reasonably common and the gear we have now can do reasonably the second harmonic. It's perennially where bass is - about an octave out of reach.

Yeah, the equipment is there.

Take a look at this...

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

It weighs 149 lbs, 1000 watts recommended and it is + / - 3db all the way does to 12hz. This ought to get ANY fundamental frequency of any bass guitar.

This company is known for publishing specs that are real........no bogus specs that serve no purpose beyond marketing.

What do you think?

 

[riker1384]

Yeah, the equipment is there.

Take a look at this...

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

It weighs 149 lbs, 1000 watts recommended and it is + / - 3db all the way does to 12hz. This ought to get ANY fundamental frequency of any bass guitar.

This company is known for publishing specs that are real........no bogus specs that serve no purpose beyond marketing.

What do you think?

It has 86b sensitivity, so the recommended 1000 watts should get you the same output level as just 100 watts through a cab with 96db sensitivity (which is probably still slightly below average).

 

[knuckle_head]

It weighs 149 lbs, 1000 watts recommended and it is + / - 3db all the way does to 12hz.

By extrapolation I could tune to 6 Hz.....

 

[edbutler3]

By extrapolation I could tune to 6 Hz.....

I'd love to see that string! I bet it would be as thick as my little finger.

 

[greenboy]

Yeah, the equipment is there.
Take a look at this... [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] It weighs 149 lbs, 1000 watts recommended and it is + / - 3db all the way does to 12hz. This ought to get ANY fundamental frequency of any bass guitar. This company is known for publishing specs that are real........no bogus specs that serve no purpose beyond marketing. What do you think?

I think that the spec is bogus, sort of. Because the 116 dB at 1000 watts output figure listed is not an actual measured figure - but a projected figure that makes no allowance for power compression, for one. How do I know? Because it's merely the same figure one gets when doing the extrapolation from the 86 dB figure. Where's the loss? And that too, hand in hand with 12 Hz almost seems a little too optimistic. Where's the graphs? Are they linked and I missed them? What's the technology?

All that said, hard to get excited about subwoofer levels at 116 dB at low frequencies. That's not very loud for say 20 Hz once you take Equal Loudness Contour into consideration.

It has 86b sensitivity, so the recommended 1000 watts should get you the same output level as just 100 watts through a cab with 96db sensitivity (which is probably still slightly below average).

There is little meaningful context for that statement. Show me something that goes real low that actually has 96 dB sensitivity at say 20 Hz. Anyone can take a 96 dB at 1w/1m figure from a general purpose woofer, a figure that was not referenced even, and think it actually means something special. But unless it relates to the same passband or specific frequency as what it is being compared to, it has no actual value.

So again: Show me something that goes real low that actually has 96 dB sensitivity at say 20 Hz.

 

[holllowbody]

I think that the spec is bogus, sort of. Because the 116 dB at 1000 watts output figure listed is not an actual measured figure - but a projected figure that makes no allowance for power compression, for one. How do I know? Because it's merely the same figure one gets when doing the extrapolation from the 86 dB figure. Where's the loss? And that too, hand in hand with 12 Hz almost seems a little too optimistic. Where's the graphs? Are they linked and I missed them? What's the technology?

I don't have the answers to all of this, but I can say that whenever someone did run tests on his product they were always spot on with the published specs. His product gets rave reviews in pro audio and home theater communities.

The owner (Jeff Permanian) seems to avoid giving out all the fine details for fear of getting copied by a bigger company. All of his product seems to take a bit of an original, unique approach. As unorthadox as his approach is, it works. That much I can say as an owner of 2 Growlers (their biggest seller) and 2 Triple 12s. I would have no problems putting complete faith in the specs of a JTR product.

All that said, hard to get excited about subwoofer levels at 116 dB at low frequencies. That's not very loud for say 20 Hz once you take Equal Loudness Contour into consideration

In this case it would make sence for the user to use the subwoofer in a cluster of multiples to increase the SPL to the desired level.

 

[greenboy]

I don't have the answers to all of this, but I can say that whenever someone did run tests on his product they were always spot on with the published specs.

So driver power compression does not exist?

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

Another interesting factor, which may have been mentioned, but if so I missed it..........

If you reproduce the entire signal from any instrument, and then filter out the fundamental, you will STILL HEAR IT.

You will NOT "FEEL" it, but your ear will 're-synthesize it".

What you will be missing is the actual physical body-shaking that the fundamental would produce.

Actually cutting it out would not affect the "sound" that much. Since it takes a lot more power to reproduce it, and the benefits may be pretty limited, unless you really want the audience to be shaken, you may accept the lack of the true acoustic fundamental.

 

[greenboy]

Fortunately for bass players and kick drum, a whole lotta lot of body shakin' is available in the 60 Hz region anyway. But for those few who've actually experienced big 15 Hz or 30 Hz "body shaking", it's a different kind of feeling when it's from sub-bass frequencies rather than the mid-bass ones almost everybody has been pummeled by at one time or another.

 

[JimmyM]

Fortunately for bass players and kick drum, a whole lotta lot of body shakin' is available in the 60 Hz region anyway. But for those few who've actually experienced big 15 Hz or 30 Hz "body shaking", it's a different kind of feeling when it's from sub-bass frequencies rather than the mid-bass ones almost everybody has been pummeled by at one time or another.

Right. The midbass freqs make you feel like gettin' it on, and the sub-bass freqs make you sterile.

See? I'm learning!