Super Interesting Article by Phil Jones

[Nebadon2000]

Nebadon:

Silent stage or with amps?

In-ears or not (or was it each member choosing to do what he wanted in that regard).

Where were the members located relative to each other, and what were the approximate distances?

PS If you were referring to my comment on being told I seemed a millisecond behind

We had amps on smallish stage same L/C/R setup

 

[SunByrne]

It's pretty accurate until getting to the description of amplifier behavior (very dated and actually no longer correct with toady's class D amps), and one sided view with respect to multiple drivers being superior for the reasons given (which haven't been an issue for decades as the industry improvements have made those arguments a moot point),

Probably not too bad for 2002, though?

Other engineering arguments aside, I like PJB gear because it's very neutral.

 

[Joebone]

Here is a link to a super interesting article by Phil Jones. I, for one, am going to have to read it 3 or 4 more times before I understand everything that it says.

One thing that struck me is that I have played some larger (but not huge) venues with an SVT or similar rig behind me and I could swear that my bass was either out of tune or that I was playing the wrong notes, even though my fingers were in the right place and my tuner said otherwise. This article contains an explanation as to why that happens.

Can't tackle this until late tonight but highly curious, as I know exactly that sense of being out of tune while demonstrably (tuner!) not so. Always with several backline SVTs over 4 or 8x10 ampeg cabinets. However, last time I played an Ampeg 8x10 backline, the amp was a Hartke LH1000 and it sounded GREAT.

 

[eniac]

PS If you were referring to my comment on being told I seemed a millisecond behind

We had amps on smallish stage same L/C/R setup

Acoustic drums with mics on them?

Are you using a wireless for BG, and if so, what's its delay-time spec?

Anyway, being able to detect a millisecond delay in anything... I find that hard to believe.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

Closely related, so I could mention it here, is that the lows from a ported cab (the part that comes through the port) is delayed, with horrifying consequences with regard to its phase relationship with the rest of the note. I guess it never gets mentioned because we're so used to it that no one notices. And, I guess that most people who notice it like the way it feels.

 

[Phreaky Phriday]

Closely related, so I could mention it here, is that the lows from a ported cab (the part that comes through the port) is delayed, with horrifying consequences with regard to its phase relationship with the rest of the note. I guess it never gets mentioned because we're so used to it that no one notices. And, I guess that most people who notice it like the way it feels.

Never considered that, very interesting

 

[Nebadon2000]

Acoustic drums with mics on them?

Are you using a wireless for BG, and if so, what's its delay-time spec?

Anyway, being able to detect a millisecond delay in anything... I find that hard to believe.

His use of millisecond was just saying I sounded a tad late on timing

 

[agedhorse]

There has to be a difference in response time between different speakers due to different magnet strength/weight/etc causing them to accelerate at different rates, but would you assume the difference isn't perceptible?

Not really, it's not so much the response "time" though the differences in speakers are more generally measurable in frequency response as the signal rolls off and there will be phase shift with the high frequency roll off.

Probably not too bad for 2002, though?

Other engineering arguments aside, I like PJB gear because it's very neutral.

I didn't see the date, yes it's much better than average for that time period.

Closely related, so I could mention it here, is that the lows from a ported cab (the part that comes through the port) is delayed, with horrifying consequences with regard to its phase relationship with the rest of the note. I guess it never gets mentioned because we're so used to it that no one notices. And, I guess that most people who notice it like the way it feels.

Except that again, the delay is so small at the low frequency wavelengths defining the bottom end that it's not an issue for 99% of players. It doesn't get mentioned because this mechanism is well within the weeds compared with other mechanisms that affect the low frequency response and roll off.

This isn't to say that the roll off character isn't a little different, but not because of the delay. It's because of the tuning choices that are related to size, sensitivity and LF extension, all of which affect the LF character.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

I'm not able at this time to try to quantify and prove the following. Hope you don't mind that I post it anyway:

I have a favorite sealed 3x12 (slightly larger than average in one dimension, height), and a favorite ported cab (because it's tuned below 41Hz), an 8x8 that's about 2/3 as big as a fridge.
-When I play an open E with the sealed one, all of the sound comes out (practically) instantly.
-When I play an open E with the ported one, there's a dramatic "thump" (which I'm sure most people would like and would describe with a word we like, like "thump"), because - it seems to me - there's a noticeable delay, and then the big low comes out of the port. (I know it's coming from the port because I trust that the cones themselves started moving (practically) instantly).

Characteristic of most real-life (human-observable) resonant phenomena (or as far as I know all resonant systems) is that they don't reach maximum amplitude instantly. For example, push someone on a swing, wait for them to come back, then push again, and the amplitude increases, because the system is storing energy. My explanation for the delay in the ported cab is analogous to that.

I know that most people probably like that thump because I would also like to like it. But here is the problem in my mind: This delay probably varies with frequency. And just on principle (I'm not saying I can hear that it sounds bad), I don't want a variable delay in the fundamentals of my low notes while the higher harmonics are already on the fly. So this was "the last straw" that made me definitely switch to sealed.

Other threads talk about the many reasons why it's hard to keep chords clean (even just double stops), and I think a sealed cab could be one helpful ingredient.

I can't try to prove the above right now, but maybe someday "I'll be back" (Arnold voice).

 

[agedhorse]

The science and math behind it defies the ability to prove it.

You prefer the sound/feel of a sealed cabinet, great, but don’t go attributing why to something that simply doesn’t exist.

 

[eniac]

The claim of the bass player playing behind the beat can be proved only with a multitrack recording so the drum and bass iso tracks can be viewed one relative to the other, timing-wise, in a DAW. If the console(s) can do that, then the rest should be easy.

 

[rickdog]

Hmm... lost me in the second paragraph - "A 41 Hz bass fundamental has a wavelength twenty-five times the height of an average person.' This shortly after calculating (correctly, I think) that the wavelength is 8.3 m. Even in Munchkinland, I don't think the average person's height is 33 cm (13 in).

Carelessness like this at the start of a technical paper does not improve my confidence in its conclusions. But I'll read the rest of it anyway - with more than usual attention to the details

 

[gln1955]

Hmm... lost me in the second paragraph - "A 41 Hz bass fundamental has a wavelength twenty-five times the height of an average person.' This shortly after calculating (correctly, I think) that the wavelength is 8.3 m. Even in Munchkinland, I don't think the average person's height is 33 cm (13 in).

Carelessness like this at the start of a technical paper does not improve my confidence in its conclusions. But I'll read the rest of it anyway - with more than usual attention to the details

That's more like the thickness of an average bass player.

 

[HelpImaRock]

I had an issue like hearing a little higher tone with a Boss BC 1X in my chain. It's a digital device with some latency, may be that was the reason (in serial effect path of a Lehle Basswitch). With an analog compressor instead it's gone.

The BC-1x has a baked in EQ that definitely gives more treble. The buffer doesn't hurt either.

 

[frankie5string]

PS If you were referring to my comment on being told I seemed a millisecond behind

We had amps on smallish stage same L/C/R setup

How close were you to the drummer, and did your IEM setup have any processing that could introduce delay?

 

[fdeck]

Separating time response and frequency response is hard. The reason is that between two mainstream sealed or ported speakers, if they have the same frequency response, then they must also have the same time response. And equalizing the responses electronically adds further delay. There are "all pass" circuits that impose a time delay with no change to the response curve, but I've never seen one in a bass amp. And of course practical circuitry is limited by the fact that an effect has to come after a cause.

 

[VicDiesel]

"41 Hz bass fundamental has a wavelength twenty-five times the height of an average person."

Not unless that person is a dwarf. More like EDIT five-ish, as his own calculation shows.

But ok, I'll keep reading.

 

[frankie5string]

Phil can publish as many documents that explain his thesis for the direction he has taken, it's still up to the player to decide if they like the sound of the gear. I bought a Double Four years ago, and it's really cool given its size and power, and it definitely solves a problem for me, but I didn't really get on with the other options (like the C series cabs or the Cub combos) for general use.

Choice is good!

 

[brianrost]

Great article despite the typos in a few places.

On the first page he defines the wavelength at 41 Hz to be 8.3 meters and then says it is 25 times the height of the average person…unless the average person is only a foot tall I think he meant 5. On the timeline he shows the Fender Bassman amp introduced in both 1946 and 1951. I think he meant the first Ampeg amp was in 1946 to go with the “amplified peg” pickup. He dates the Ampeg B15 as arriving in 1952, it was actually in 1960. No big deal, unless you're an AI chatbot.

What I liked the best was when he wrote about 400 watts vs. 500 watts and “honest" rated watts versus “loosely" rated watts. Guitar Player magazine once printed the only lab review (by Phil Rivera) I’ve ever seen for a Walter Woods amp, the MI100-8. Rated as 100 watts at 8 ohms, the actual tested onset of clipping was 150 watts. That means the amp could put out the rated 100 watts with no sudden increase in THD because of clipping, no +/- 3 dB disclaimer needed.

Ss far as power increases being lower than expected at lower impedance, he explains why for example the Peavey Bass Mark IV amp sold as a 300 watt amp was rated as 130 watts at 8 ohms, 210 watts at 4 ohms, 300 watts at 2 ohms…only about 50% more wattage when the impedance is cut in half instead of the ideal 100%. So Peavey’s “300 watt amp” at 8 ohms isn’t really any more powerful than the 100 watt Walter Woods

 

[jdjk7]

Here is a link to a super interesting article by Phil Jones. I, for one, am going to have to read it 3 or 4 more times before I understand everything that it says.

One thing that struck me is that I have played some larger (but not huge) venues with an SVT or similar rig behind me and I could swear that my bass was either out of tune or that I was playing the wrong notes, even though my fingers were in the right place and my tuner said otherwise. This article contains an explanation as to why that happens.

I can already tell him that he's confused about his first point, because he's using transverse waves to represent sound travelling in space. Sound travels in space as longitudinal waves, which don't have the same problems with wavelength vs the physical size of a space.

And maybe it's just my paranoia, but aspects of this feel AI-written.