• 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.

Speaker size v. Tone: I don't hear any correlation

#221
Interesting discussion here. Makes me think about where the real low end is with a bass (independent of style and context - if possible).

I'm a freelancer, playing for a living, playing all kinds of music and the rig I've been using over the last 10 years is an SWR SM-400s with goliathIII 4x10 cab. (amp set to 'classic settings': aural enhancer 1 o'clock, lowest band of param eq set to -15dB@30Hz).

That setup is able to reproduce that 30Hz (boosting that control to 15dB is always a good way to expose any loose screws in any venue :D ) - it even reproduces up to DC![turn up the bass on my active instrument, hold the low B between thumb and index and move it slowly in and out of the pickup's magnetic field makes my speakers follow... that's around 1Hz if I'm not mistaking :cool:]
I'd like to think that the faithfully reproducing everything you put into the amp (frequency and dynamically) has made me play the way I do - how do you learn to tame your dynamics if your amp craps out? How would you know which notes don't 'push' as hard as others or how your FX settings translate on the other side if your amp doesn't push as hard as a P.A. system?


JimmyM mentions a bass not really having any content below 125Hz... I have to disagree with that. 125Hz is the fundamental of B2 (4th fret on your Gstring) - that's about 99,5% of the notes most bass players use..


For the most part my rig is my personal monitor (I play with P.A. almost all the time) but I found through experimenting that turning the amp a notch up and slightly cutting the Bass knob (which is a shelf at 80 I think) makes it easier to get my message across without upsetting the FOH mixer. (that and cutting the 30Hz-trick).

What I have found is that I do prefer the low basses (<100) to the low-mid - probably the reason I prefer setups like mine to Ampeg-like ones.



Anyway, carry on, just some thoughts.


Herwig
 
#223
JimmyM mentions a bass not really having any content below 125Hz... I have to disagree with that. 125Hz is the fundamental of B2 (4th fret on your Gstring) - that's about 99,5% of the notes most bass players use..
Jimmy's right, what you hear on those notes is the harmonics, starting with the first @ 250Hz.
 
#224
someone explain to me how a whoop de doo cabinet will make you play better than Jamerson, Rainey, Babbitt, Carol Kaye, Willie Weeks, Jaco, etc.? They all played on pretty lo fi gear, and did OK.

But back to gear wanking- OK then let's throw flat panels, like Magna pans, into the discussion of speaker size. And the Bose type columns, too.
 
#225
azureblue said:
someone explain to me how a whoop de doo cabinet will make you play better than Jamerson, Rainey, Babbitt, Carol Kaye, Willie Weeks, Jaco, etc.? They all played on pretty lo fi gear, and did OK.

But back to gear wanking- OK then let's throw flat panels, like Magna pans, into the discussion of speaker size. And the Bose type columns, too.
Click to expand...

Who ever said anything about gear making you play better. It can surely make you sound better in a live setting. In the studio, where many go direct (and where most of us get our impression of what these great players sound like) amps are for the most part not really in the equation anyway.

And, these players WERE actually using the state of the art gear of the day when they became 'famous'. Things are just much better now, especially for those who aren't interested in the 'old flatwound' sort of string tone (i.e., having a more full range tone in a live setting).

Finally, remember that those Bose columns come with a very traditional subwoofer for low end, but that still has a small driver, so +1.
 
#227
Seems to be some disagreement about the terms. Apparently one person's 'boom' is another person's 'deep'. For me, deep would be in the region of the fundamentals of the B and E string (~30 - 50 Hz). And that's the region which is not reproduced well by most bass cabinets, as they tend to produce more of the second harmonic than the fundamental.

Boosting the lows on the Acme would probably be counterproductive, as it would be enhancing those really low frequencies, taking up a lot of power, and not effectively bumping up the level of the midbass boom that many perceive as 'deep' bass, which is probably an octave higher.
 
#228
billfitzmaurice said:
It did. The problem lay in your definition/expectation of what 'low end' is, as opposed to what the Acme produced. The average listener is a full octave off from where they perceive a fat bottom comes from versus where it really comes from. That applies to all sources, from electric bass to home theater low frequency effects.
Click to expand...

Indeed! And here we have a fine example:

KJung said:
...the driver being able to really handle 'mid bass' (i.e., the 50hz thing) well at high volumes without crapping out...
Click to expand...

50Hz is low bass! Mid-bass is more like 100Hz.

More ponderings on this here: http://barefacedbass.com/technical-information/Huge-lows.htm
 
#229
alexclaber said:
50Hz is low bass! Mid-bass is more like 100Hz.
Click to expand...

+1 It is as deep as I need to go. I was just contrasting to the IMO useless low end extension of the Acme down to 30 or whatever (which many roll off anyway with hi pass filters). All that seems to do is cause the drivers to piston wildy and suck power, versus a nice, full, low punchy tone under 100hz.
 
#231
12bass said:
Hmmm... I likes the fundamentals... but can be a struggle reproducing and hearing them. Been finishing up a mixing project and it is difficult to slot the low end so that it sounds deep, but isn't going to send woofers flailing. Bit of a black art....
Click to expand...

Yeah, there are very few bass tones that you hear after mastering on a recording that rumble like that. I feel the same way about live performance, where the deep low end (i.e., the fundamental from the E string through the notes on the B string... i.e., 40hz and under) just kind of gets in the way of the mix, and eats up massive amounts of power.

A good response down to 50hz or even higher almost automatically slots the bass where it needs to be. I typically beg the sound board guys to go easy on the subs and/or hi pass me at a level mostly above that.
 
#232
KJung said:
A good response down to 50hz or even higher almost automatically slots the bass where it needs to be. I typically beg the sound board guys to go easy on the subs and/or hi pass me at a level mostly above that.
Click to expand...


Agreed, I'm finding that I like a hi pass anywehre from 40 to even 60 hz depending.

The exception is for people who play in really heavy bands. If you have a good amount of power and speakers, I can see a 30-35 hz hi-pass being a good thing... :ninja:
 
#233
#234
RickenBoogie said:
JimmyM mentions a bass not really having any content below 125Hz... I have to disagree with that. 125Hz is the fundamental of B2 (4th fret on your Gstring) - that's about 99,5% of the notes most bass players use..
Jimmy's right, what you hear on those notes is the harmonics, starting with the first @ 250Hz.
Click to expand...
either i did a poor job of writing or you misinterpreted, most likely my fault. what i meant to say was that while those lower freqs below 125 hz definitely come into play, for me there comes a point of diminishing returns with them and anything below around 55-60 hz just seems to create mud in the mix. but the power area of the bass where you can feel it seems to me to to be centered in the 125-200 hz range.
 
#236
KJung said:
+1 It is as deep as I need to go. I was just contrasting to the IMO useless low end extension of the Acme down to 30 or whatever (which many roll off anyway with hi pass filters). All that seems to do is cause the drivers to piston wildy and suck power, versus a nice, full, low punchy tone under 100hz.
Click to expand...

Something that's important to note is that the Acme cabs putting out 30hz doesn't mean that that's all they do. Whether they are putting out "useless" 30hz energy is dependent on the amplifier.

Also, the Acme cabs are -6db @ 30.87hz -- not exactly tons of content down there. The main thing Acmes do is that they're actually really flat to 50hz, which almost no cabinets on the market can claim.

Lots of guys (like me) really care about being flat to 50-60hz, and being able to take a lot of power there. This is what makes the 37" scale B string thunderous.

So I guess I'll give you +.5 -- most guys who use Acmes should be using a 24db/octave high pass at 30-50hz, but there's still something to be achieved with those cabinets. They are pretty much unvoiced, so if you put the right thought into your signal, there's a lot of reason to use them.
 
#237
rpsands said:
So I guess I'll give you +.5 -- most guys who use Acmes should be using a 24db/octave high pass at 30-50hz, but there's still something to be achieved with those cabinets. They are pretty much unvoiced, so if you put the right thought into your signal, there's a lot of reason to use them.
Click to expand...

+1...almost. I read or was told not to use a 50 hz HPF as this works against the ported design and creates a gosh-awful bump an octave (?) higher. I do use the 30 hz filter. Wish I could give a better explanation as to the how's and why's but it made sense at the time.

Riis
 
#238
Zooberwerx said:
+1...almost. I read or was told not to use a 50 hz HPF as this works against the ported design and creates a gosh-awful bump an octave (?) higher. I do use the 30 hz filter. Wish I could give a better explanation as to the how's and why's but it made sense at the time.

Riis
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure whoever told you that was blowing smoke up your ass. I've used a HPF ranging from 20-80hz extensively and around 50hz 24db/octave (sometimes with a little corrective boost) is what I like the best.
 
#239
Zooberwerx said:
+1...almost. I read or was told not to use a 50 hz HPF as this works against the ported design and creates a gosh-awful bump an octave (?) higher. I do use the 30 hz filter. Wish I could give a better explanation as to the how's and why's but it made sense at the time.

Riis
Click to expand...

I think that is not an issue with an active HPF in your signal chain, but if you just use a straight up cap for the 6db slope they give, you get some sort of bump elsewhere, which may explain what you were told.
 
#240
rpsands said:
I am pretty sure whoever told you that was blowing smoke up your ass. I've used a HPF ranging from 20-80hz extensively and around 50hz 24db/octave (sometimes with a little corrective boost) is what I like the best.
Click to expand...

I believe it was alexclaber (UK) a few years back but I can't recall the context but pretty sure it was regarding speaker protection. I'll see if I can dig it up.

Riis
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back