• 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.

Sticky suggestion regarding Sub bass rigs. ModeratorsThoughts?

#22
hey, you are both right...
it's all about how it makes you feel in the end,
but there is a technical side to the gear we use....
both are equally important in the equation.
even more important in order to get a balance with an instrument that relies on electricity....
(from an f# .145 gauge 1990 initiate)
 
#23
spode master said:
I will refer you to this demonstration applet.
http://www.till.com/articles/PickupResponseDemo/index.html

Not saying lack of fundamental on open strings is good or bad.

It is what it is.

I was totally unaware of this until 3 years ago.

Doesn't mean I don't enjoy playing my bass as is, but I also Like messing with Sub Bass. Its good to know what your up against, if you want to try and recreate it through a stringed electric bass.

Its easier to do with a synth.

Antone-
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct about the relative level of the fundamental to the other harmonics. No argument there. You're just describing the reality in the most loaded way possible.

I am against using the word "lack" or "improve" in this context, as it implies that the usual bass puts out less fundamental than a person could need or want. Whether you really want to be producing more fundamental than the average rig is, IMO, the biggest question in the sub-bass realm. And the answer, in most cases, even for low-tuning bassists, is no.

Maybe you don't think those words are negative, but they are. A lack is a deficiency, a need for something that isn't there. "Improve" means making something better, which obviously means it was not as good before. How many misguided attempts into getting more fundamental do you want to inspire? :eyebrow:
 
#24
lemur821 said:
Yes, you are correct about the relative level of the fundamental to the other harmonics. No argument there. You're just describing the reality in the most loaded way possible.

I am against using the word "lack" or "improve" in this context, as it implies that the usual bass puts out less fundamental than a person could need or want. Whether you really want to be producing more fundamental than the average rig is, IMO, the biggest question in the sub-bass realm. And the answer, in most cases, even for low-tuning bassists, is no.

Maybe you don't think those words are negative, but they are. A lack is a deficiency, a need for something that isn't there. "Improve" means making something better, which obviously means it was not as good before. How many misguided attempts into getting more fundamental do you want to inspire? :eyebrow:
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying about absolute word usage.

It was not my intention to load the argument.

I will refrain from saying Lacks fundamental.

I will say that due to practicality issues, the electromagnetic pickup on a bass guitar is not in the ideal placement to pickup the maximum potential signal from an open strings fundamental vibration.

At the beginning I will change Improve Fundamental to Boost Fundamental.

Any FAQ should be as neutral and accurate as possible.

My reasoning for proposing a FAQ like this is to differ any potential misguiding threads.

I hear a lot of people say hey what rig can go this low ... 20X Hz.

Sometimes knowledgeable people will step in and try and steer the poster towards reality.

But I often see people posting unrealistic information.

Oh a Wappo 21" can

You need 18's

A 15 and 2 10s can.

Any speaker of any size can.

Bag Ends they go to 8Hz (but don't really understand how the ELF systems work and their limitations).

I agree that most of the time more fundamental and sub bass rigs aren't what 90% of bass players want. I think most people have not even been initiated into the 20Hz club (knowingly set aside that truck Idling outside the office). And most people won't know what to expect until they have been experienced.

Sub Bass is weird its uncanny, it takes an extraordinary effort to achieve Loads of power specialized speakers and cabinets. People either love it or hate it. Personally I'm a fan. I've gone the extra mile to experience it at moderately loud levels.

So hearing absurd claims about LF extension in comparatively tiny speakers really bugs.

Anyhow thats all I have to say about that for now.

Its to late to write anything intelligent.
 
#26
jaquo, you are a master of subvert elitism

and, topic point: Maybe not everyone wants fundamental, although I see that as somewhat of a point with sub-bass. although harmonics do have a lot with determining Bass players' greatest invisible pink unicorn: Tone
 
#27
I know that I would enjoy a sticky on the subject of sub bass. Stickies are posted on TB in regards to a variety of subjects. I find that any information that makes me think - whether or not I use it in a practical application - is worth reading and considering. TB stickies are generally well regarded and well documented. I would not want to see a sticky banned or not allowed unless it was found to be fradulent. To do so is, to me, akin to banning books in a library.

That being said, I would like to see ALL stickies posted in their own unique section like basses, amps, effects...etc., have their own sections. (I realize that this may technically change the status of the sticky to a post but the contents of the "sticky" and protocol regarding posting the "sticky" would remain the same.

To search the "Stickies" section for a particular topic is easy enough and moving them all to a central location would allow readers to enjoy a full, constantly changing page of posts in whatever section they choose to participate in and enjoy.

Regards,

Doug Brown
Rev. Cornelius
 
#28
To me stickies should have the character of Dogmas, and should contain information or advice or instructions or rules which are (largely undisputed). Advice such as 'Run a search before asking questions' or 'Be nice to fellow TB'ers'. That way people can rely on that information, advice, etc.

A topic which is contentious should not be stickied IMHO, even if it purports to put the facts right, because what is a fact to one person is not to another.
 
#30
I asked what might be done to improve that. To accurately cover 30 Hz, he got in to this massive scenario involving multiple JBL drivers, giant custom-built cabs and thousands upon thousands of watts, which at the time would have cost thousands and thousands of dollars and weighed hundreds and hundreds of pounds. No mention of the panel van I would also be needing. Not exactly the solution I was seeking for my bar gigs.
Click to expand...
Try an ELF/INFRA set up from Bag End. They've been using LF in the PA world for many years and it's nowhere near as inconvenient as players tend to assume.
Bag Ends they go to 8Hz (but don't really understand how the ELF systems work and their limitations).
Click to expand...
With all due respect, most players think within the box we seem to define for ourselves (i.e.where ported vs sealed seems to be a huge philosophical issue). The Bag End extended frequency systems do work. And also, BTW, they work with small speakers too, so try it before scoffing.
I use a 60lb (lighter than and about as compact as my 212) sealed Bag End 118 with a 5 lb rack mounted Integrator (that drives the extended lows). Cost (used) was the same or lower than most 118s. I haul this to bar gigs and everything else, because it really does deliver studio quality lows wherever I take it. FYI, though the ELF/INFRA systems do go as low as 8hz, this is way lower than the lowest audible, musical tones from a bass guitar. The techs at Bag End (great phone support) suggested switching out a resistor to limit the low extension to about 22hz (everything lower is string noise and junk). The only sacrifice of convenience is that I need a dedicated power amp channel to run the sub (8 ohm 500w) - so a mono head configuration is not practical. This is no problem with most power amps. It's not expensive, not heavy or cumbersome and delivers great sound. The kind of hairsplitting and technical argument we go through about psychoacoustics and harmonics are valid points, but you can have clean, accurate fundamental reproduction with attainable technology.

Does that give you the sound you are looking for? I'll bet it doesn't. Really reproducing the lows from a bass is something you don't hear every day (remember psychoacoustics?). But you learn to EQ to balance between "traditional" bass sound and the extended lows. Just another approach - not perfect (nothing is or ever will be), but worth more of a look than most players give it. :)
 
#31
bassman10096 said:
Try an ELF/INFRA set up from Bag End. They've been using LF in the PA world for many years and it's nowhere near as inconvenient as players tend to assume. With all due respect, most players think within the box we seem to define for ourselves (i.e.where ported vs sealed seems to be a huge philosophical issue). The Bag End extended frequency systems do work. And also, BTW, they work with small speakers too, so try it before scoffing.
I use a 60lb (lighter than and about as compact as my 212) sealed Bag End 118 with a 5 lb rack mounted Integrator (that drives the extended lows). Cost (used) was the same or lower than most 118s. I haul this to bar gigs and everything else, because it really does deliver studio quality lows wherever I take it. FYI, though the ELF/INFRA systems do go as low as 8hz, this is way lower than the lowest audible, musical tones from a bass guitar. The techs at Bag End (great phone support) suggested switching out a resistor to limit the low extension to about 22hz (everything lower is string noise and junk). The only sacrifice of convenience is that I need a dedicated power amp channel to run the sub (8 ohm 500w) - so a mono head configuration is not practical. This is no problem with most power amps. It's not expensive, not heavy or cumbersome and delivers great sound. The kind of hairsplitting and technical argument we go through about psychoacoustics and harmonics are valid points, but you can have clean, accurate fundamental reproduction with attainable technology.

Does that give you the sound you are looking for? I'll bet it doesn't. Really reproducing the lows from a bass is something you don't hear every day (remember psychoacoustics?). But you learn to EQ to balance between "traditional" bass sound and the extended lows. Just another approach - not perfect (nothing is or ever will be), but worth more of a look than most players give it. :)
Click to expand...


:D
 
#32
I vote "NO" for the sticky. There is a better way to find a thread topic: Use the search engine.

Also, relevant or engaging posts continually find their way to the top of the spool.

Or, sometimes folks with agendas just keep bumping them . . .
 
#33
spode master said:
I see what you are saying about absolute word usage.

It was not my intention to load the argument.

I will refrain from saying Lacks fundamental.

I will say that due to practicality issues, the electromagnetic pickup on a bass guitar is not in the ideal placement to pickup the maximum potential signal from an open strings fundamental vibration.

At the beginning I will change Improve Fundamental to Boost Fundamental.
Click to expand...
That's all I could ask for. :cool:
 
#34
bassman10096 said:
Try an ELF/INFRA set up from Bag End. They've been using LF in the PA world for many years and it's nowhere near as inconvenient as players tend to assume. With all due respect, most players think within the box we seem to define for ourselves (i.e.where ported vs sealed seems to be a huge philosophical issue). The Bag End extended frequency systems do work. And also, BTW, they work with small speakers too, so try it before scoffing.
I use a 60lb (lighter than and about as compact as my 212) sealed Bag End 118 with a 5 lb rack mounted Integrator (that drives the extended lows). Cost (used) was the same or lower than most 118s. I haul this to bar gigs and everything else, because it really does deliver studio quality lows wherever I take it. FYI, though the ELF/INFRA systems do go as low as 8hz, this is way lower than the lowest audible, musical tones from a bass guitar. The techs at Bag End (great phone support) suggested switching out a resistor to limit the low extension to about 22hz (everything lower is string noise and junk). The only sacrifice of convenience is that I need a dedicated power amp channel to run the sub (8 ohm 500w) - so a mono head configuration is not practical. This is no problem with most power amps. It's not expensive, not heavy or cumbersome and delivers great sound. The kind of hairsplitting and technical argument we go through about psychoacoustics and harmonics are valid points, but you can have clean, accurate fundamental reproduction with attainable technology.

Does that give you the sound you are looking for? I'll bet it doesn't. Really reproducing the lows from a bass is something you don't hear every day (remember psychoacoustics?). But you learn to EQ to balance between "traditional" bass sound and the extended lows. Just another approach - not perfect (nothing is or ever will be), but worth more of a look than most players give it. :)
Click to expand...

Not saying that Bag End ELF don't work I understand fully how they work I know exactly what a dual integrator circuit is. And I know how they apply it to EQ-ing the sealed cabinet. I have built a sealed cab that uses a variation on the Dual Integrator and Linkwitz Transform circuit.

But it is limited to SPL headroom down in the lower registers, due to the nature of the design. To get sufficient SPL to hear the sub tones you need to either play at very restrained levels or have a lot of ELF cabs. You also need to EQ your self so that the sub register is orders of magnitude louder than your upper mid bass range. For example 30Hz would have to be ~12dB louder for it to sound equally loud to a 60Hz tone that is about 100dB (equal loudness curves).

I do like the ELF approach. I don't agree with some of the claims they make, about what the integrator does to the phase response. But it is a reasonable design and a quality product.

That said it has limitations that I feel they should be up front about. But they're in the business to make money, so it makes sense they wouldn't want to highlight limitations of their system.

Anyhow I give a thumbs up to Bag End but again the design in itself is one of the compromises that one has to make when trying to reproduce Sub Bass. Not being negative, all sub bass systems have some inherent compromise.

I forget who came up with these rules but this is a basic rule of thumb.

For bass speakers you can pick 2 of the 3 choices.

Loud
Low
Small

That about sums up what is possible.

Antone-
 
#35
staccatogrowl said:
I vote "NO" for the sticky. There is a better way to find a thread topic: Use the search engine.

Also, relevant or engaging posts continually find their way to the top of the spool.
Click to expand...

I vote yes. Bill Fiztmaurice and other have posted many times explaining some of the parameters that go with getting deep bass. If they were put in one location, maybe that would reduce the number of posts relating to the same topic over and over.

Btw, unless you happen upon the exact correct search terms that are in the thread you are looking for, you won't find it. It's easy to miss the one good thread you're looking for that would answer your question. Thus, the posting of similar threads over and over.
 
#37
staccatogrowl said:
I vote "NO" for the sticky. There is a better way to find a thread topic: Use the search engine.
Click to expand...

It is impossible to search for "sub" because it is too short.

I think the sticky is a good idea, BUT I think both sides of the debate need to have their positions stated concisely (something that no one ever does :D). I see this debate (and the similar "tube watts" debate) as breaking down thusly:

When you use terms like 20hz or watts, you are using words that have a very specific, clearly-defined and undebatable meaning. However, what you are really talking about is something that is subjective. Instead of asking "what cab will reproduce 20hz?", what you really want to know is "what cab will make this very low note audible?" and these 2 are different. Ultimately, perception is all that matters, so, accordingly, you should only use words that describe what your bass will sound like, rather than words that describe how it would be measured.
 
#39
Yeah, but if you search "sub" on Talkbass, you will be searching the entire website, not just the amps forum, so the signal-to-noise level will be very, very low.

I just Googled sub on Talkbass and got 11,000 results. Is sifting through that really a better way to find a thread topic than having a sticky? :eyebrow:
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back