• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

[sfx] Micro Thumpinator test and survey

Which track has the [sfx] Micro Thumpinator in its chain?

  • Track 1 (on the left)

    Votes: 22 53.7%

  • Track 2 (on the right)

    Votes: 19 46.3%
  • Total voters
    41
icecycle66

icecycle66

Feb 4, 2009
1,005
62
Arizona
#1
WOOHOO!

I got my [sfx] Micro Thumpinator today!
So what’s the first thing I do? I try to figure it out.
Watch the video demo of the [sfx] Micro Thumpinator here:
[sfx] Micro Thumpinator test - YouTube

The two tracks in the linked video are running through the same chain with the same settings; other than one difference.

One of the tracks has the [sfx] Micro Thumpinator at the end of the chain. One of the tracks has no [sfx] Micro Thumpinator anywhere in the chain.

Track one is on the left, track two is on the right.

Which track has the [sfx] Micro Thumpinator in its chain?

[sfx] Micro Thumpinator test - YouTube



MORE DEMO:
[sfx] Micro Thumpinator demo 3
 
#2
I am a bit confused about the visual representation. From what I understand, the sfx MicroThumpinator is supposed to provide a drastic low cut in order to focus the low end and give the rest of the signal chain a bit of extra headroom from not having to reproduce subsonic frequencies. Judging from the graphics, this happened in none of the two tracks. Where in the signal chain did you apply the spectrum analysis?

Assuming that the graphics are misleading, and that the 'thumpinator works, I tried to judge with my ears as best I could and voted track two. I think there is less of the extreme lows in the track, and a bit more definition towards the end. But the difference wasn't obvious at all to me,at least not in my cheapish headphones.

Also, depending on your signal chain, shouldn't you be putting the 'thump as early in the chain as possible for the best results?

Martin
 
#5
cybersnyder said:
The thumpinator filters sub sonic content. I doubt you would hear a difference on a YouTube clip.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Though I've no personal experience with the MicroThumpinator, I always introduce a heavy low cut in my eq'ing, and even though I focus around 30hz, it is not immediately audible. The difference in low end that I think I heard was in too high frequencies for it to be a result of the 'thumps filtering. However, this is assuming that the filter works exactly as advertised, which might not be the case.

Martin
 
#10
I see little difference in the YouTube clip, certainly much less than I would of expected - That is unless the signal hitting the Thumpinator is already lacking in 30Hz ish frequencies...

I wouldn't want to guess which was which as it would be a total stab in the dark.
 
#14
I think you have missed the whole point of the mThumpinator if you expect results from softly plucked notes.

I have done my own testing and the visible results to a speaker is staggering, especially when slapped or pushed. One of the studios I work in a lot has an old set of JBL studio monitors with 15" woofers. We used to use a White Instruments EQ on my bass because it had the best lo-cut to keep the speakers from jumping off of the pedestals, the mThumpinator does a better job than a $3k EQ with the plus of a very nice buffer amp. I can also feel the difference in my live amps large and small, the amps sound a bit punchier, run cooler and have less speaker excursion than before.
 
#15
I admit the audible differences between the two were slight. I had to guess because of the softness of the sound samples. But, because the graph on the left fell off quicker, I attributed that to the mThump.

But, it was purely guessing.
 
#16
bassbrad said:
I think you have missed the whole point of the mThumpinator if you expect results from softly plucked notes.

I have done my own testing and the visible results to a speaker is staggering, especially when slapped or pushed. One of the studios I work in a lot has an old set of JBL studio monitors with 15" woofers. We used to use a White Instruments EQ on my bass because it had the best lo-cut to keep the speakers from jumping off of the pedestals, the mThumpinator does a better job than a $3k EQ with the plus of a very nice buffer amp. I can also feel the difference in my live amps large and small, the amps sound a bit punchier, run cooler and have less speaker excursion than before.
Click to expand...

Eh...I don't think I missed the point at all.

Cut 30 Hz and below.
Don't dick around with anything else.

That seems pretty simple.

I saw no indication that string striking method mattered.

Even still, when I do the DI test tonight I will do long sustained notes and short quick notes each with a pick, a finger pluck, and a slap.
 
#17
icecycle66 said:
Cut 30 Hz and below.
Don't dick around with anything else.

That seems pretty simple.
Click to expand...
That is correct and the mThump does an excellent job at this.

However string attack is very much a part and parcel to the issue when considering signal below 30Hz. The subsonic content in this matter not only comes from string vibration but also other subharmonic 'noise' picked up from body vibration, strings or fingers striking the pickup, dampening the string and other factors. The harder you play the more of this subsonic artifact is produced that may be picked up and transmitted so attack is very crucial. There is also a lot more of the subsonic signal in the actual attack of the note than in the sustained portion, unless some additional processing is added. As pickups, cables, strings, amplifiers, speakers and input devices improve and dealing with a digital medium that does not have a natural cut - having a lo cut device becomes more and more necessary.
 
#20
It's a filter, and it has a steep rolloff starting at about 31 Hz. It is not dynamic. The reason I/we commented on soft notes vs huge spiky thumps is that there is nothing below 31 Hz happening in any normal musical content from a bass (assuming open B is the lowest note). The subsonic content only occurs if you percussively pluck/slap/hit the strings in a way that creates a "thump" that's not a part of the frequencies of the actual note.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smittybass33

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back