Woofer/Subwoofer Volume

[karma]

Panel/Woofer/Subwoofer Volume Relationships

HI All,
I would like to start a general discussion about the subject of this thread. I have a lot of years of experience with subwoofers both with my CLS's and other panel speakers going back to about 1975. I have learned some important things. I want to pass this knowledge along.

I'm going to talk primarily about separate subwoofers in a music system, not HT. To a degree, the discussion also applies to ML hybrid designs.

The relative volume setting between the subs and the panels is critical and variable. There is no single setting that works for all recordings. In fact I will go so far to say the relationship changes for every record or CD and often from track to track. Remember, many recordings are made in multiple studios and with a collection of different engineers.

Getting the relationship right is critical to a satisfying musical balance. Further, your personal tastes often will determine the correct settings. These may be different from what the recording engineer had in mind when the recording was mixed. IOW, what YOU think is right, in your room, on your system, is the most important consideration. There is absolutely no reason to tie your sound to the engineer’s ideas.

A major consideration when setting up a system is to be able to control the relative volumes easily, in real time, and from the listening position. Today, this is easier than in the past because of remote controls. Yet this capability is often ignored. Also, many systems do not have the required control over the subs volume. In the past, remote control did not exist. To maintain control over relative volumes from the listening position required that the major system controls could be accessed from the listening chair at finger tip distance.

This is how my system is set up and has been for decades. My preamp and the subs active crossover do not have remote capability. Having good access to the controls means I have experimented with relative volumes endlessly. I find myself adjusting the sub level control all the time by ear. With a little practice it becomes very easy. I refuse to be without this capability. It is too important for my overall satisfaction.

With real time, convenient relative volume control access you will discover that very small changes can make a world of difference in the musical balance. Often, I make 1 or 2 db sub volume changes that takes the sound from bloated or sterile to evenly balanced by my tastes. This is true. I think you will find the same thing. Sometimes I will emphasize the bass on purpose. Electronic synthesized music or large pipe organs can benefit from this kind of unrealistic tweaking. Given the shortcomings of even the best subs and the relatively small size of the average listening room, this "cheating" is not out of bounds.

Most folks don't realize how sensitive the balance issue is because it is too much of a hassle to make the adjustments. You are satisfied with one setting for all situations. The principle is the same for hybrids but the easy sub/woofer control access is typically not available. This is unfortunate and a big drawback with hybrid designs lacking remote capability as most are.

OK, that's it, more or less. Let me know what you think and we can discuss it.

Sparky

 

[Rich]

Sparky,

Regarding your idea of changing subwoofer volume differently for every disc or even for different tracks on the same disc: I understand that this works for you and increases your personal enjoyment of your system. And that is fine and good. But I really don't buy into the premise that this is the correct way to achieve a proper sound balance on your stereo system.

I personally feel that a sound system should reproduce exactly what is on the source material in as accurate a manner as possible. That is its purpose and that is why we pay a lot of money for a high end system. I believe Subwoofer volume should be set using test tones and a sound level meter to ensure you have even frequency response all the way from 20,000 Hz. down to 20 Hz. That is how you get accurate sound reproduction.

Your electrostatic panels are designed to give you an even frequency response all the way down to the crossover point. Why should this change below the crossover point? Sure, some recordings are bass shy. Some are bass heavy. That's the way they were recorded. I just don't see the utility in using the subwoofer volume control as a bass boost / bass filter to adjust individual tracks to your liking. You ever notice that they don't put bass and treble controls on most high end equipment? There is a reason.

To take your premise to its extreme, you could have complete control over the entire frequency range of every track by inserting a parametric equalizer in your loop and adjust the levels for each frequency range separately to get it to sound absolutely perfect for your ears in your room with your system -- for every single track. To me, this is absurd.

Like I said, I understand that constantly changing the volume on your sub is a method that works for you and makes you enjoy your system more and that is fine. But personally, I will work very diligently to set my system up so that it has an even frequency response through the entire range and let the recording engineers decide how the music should sound. That's why they get paid the big bucks. I would rather just sit back and enjoy the music than think about whether I need a smidgen more or less bass on this particular track. Just my humble opinion, of course.

I also have to question your statement that you make a 1 or 2 db change in bass volume and the sound goes from bloated or sterile to evenly balanced. I honestly don't believe you are going to hear that big a difference from such a small change in volume level. Isn't 3 db the smallest difference the human ear can perceive? Anyway, I don't mean to rain on your parade. Just offering a different perspective.

 

[karma]

HI Rich,
Well, you can believe it or not. Makes no difference to me. I'm only giving you the results of my experience.

I would bet that you can not actually comment knowledgeably because you have not tried it. I have - for many years. It seems to me that if you wish to comment so skeptically you should have something to stand on. You seem to be dealing with the idea on a conceptual level. I'm coming at it from a purely practical level based on what I've learned.

The balance is not cast in concrete by some higher decree. There are no standards in the recording studio. The engineer is making a guess determined by their idea of what the recording will sound like in some theoretical listening situation. This, plus we should not forget the monitoring tools the engineer has available. Are they the same as yours or mine? Certainly there are some engineers and record labels whose judgment I find to be consistently on the money. But, not very many.

Consequently, we are tied to the engineer’s ideas. For what room and system is the engineer setting balance? Yours, mine, Tom's, Robin's, Roberto's? Not one of us will get identical results from any recording due to differences in our listening situations. Also, our tastes factor into the equation. It's these differences over which I am trying to claim control.

For a gross example, a very common issue the vinyl junkie has to deal with is the groove velocity that the average playback system can tolerate. It was (is?) commom practice for the cutting engineer to reduce the recorded bass levels so the playback stylus would stay in the goove. It's not as common now because of equipment advances. Check out the great Sheffield direct to disk recordings. Now, these are recorded with full bore bass. They require a first rate playback system to not generate horrendous tracking distortion. No corrections are needed here.

This practice resulted in recordings with light bass. Should we tolerate this just because the cutting engineer was making records for the masses? Well, we don't have to. This is just one example of the manipulation of the recording.

I put the idea out because I was sure that most folks don't realize how sensitive the panel/subwoofer balance is and that it is possible and desirable to optimize the balance. You prove my point. Try it if your system allows you to do so.

BTW, the bass balance varies all over the place. While most recordings need only small corrections, it is not uncommon that larger adjustments are needed.

Just food for thought :band: .

Sparky

 

[Brad225]

I biamped by sl3 recently by running interconnects from a second set of preamp out on my ARC LS -25 to my Aragon 24k preamp then to Aragon power amps and finally to the woofers on the SL3s. I was then able to match the output of the ARC 120s for the panels which previously over powered the low end when I tried to biamp with out the preamp in the set up to control it by increasing the output of the power amp.
On some recordings, not many, the bass for me was to much or not enough. To go from not enough to to much might be a 1/16" turn of the volume knob. I don't know how it related in db as I didn't bother to check but I was surprised how small a change was enough.

 

[Rich]

Sparky,

Actually, I have played with the volume button on my descent many times. Just for playing around I have tweaked the volume to see the differences on different tracks and different cds. That is a fun part of owning all this equipment, is playing around with all the settings and seeing what each different setting does. That is why I say I understand what you are doing and why it works for you.

The fundamental difference between us is that I expect my system to properly recreate what is coming from the source. I expect it to exactly replicate the source material. I expect my speakers to produce a dead even frequency response from the top to the bottom. That is the goal of any true hi fi system, in my opinion.

You, on the other hand, want to use your system to play mastering engineer and decide how the bass response on a song "should" sound to your ears. And the tool you are using to accomplish this is simply a volume knob that controls all frequencies below an arbitrary crossover point (which will be different for every sub / speaker combination). Again, I understand that this gives you pleasure out of your system and I am happy for you that it works to bring you closer to the music.

I guess the reason I posted was that your post seemed to indicate that this is the "correct" way to set up a system and that others should do it this way or they won't get proper frequency balance. And I wholeheartedly disagree with that idea. What you are really saying is that you don't like the way a lot of recordings are mastered and you have figured out a way to adjust your system to account for that on a track by track basis. That's fine. But to imply that this is the correct way to get a proper balance between sub and panels is, in my opinion, absolutely false. Again, the correct way to get a proper balance between sub and panels is to set them up so that you obtain a flat frequency response from 20,000 Hz. down to 20Hz. using test tones and a sound level meter.

I don't think you are looking to get an accurate portrayal of the music from your system. You are looking to alter the music in a way that is pleasing to you. Ultimately, we just have different goals for our systems. I don't want to discourage anyone from trying the technique you have described and seeing what the results are. I just challenge the implication that this is the correct way to set sub / panel balance.

 

[karma]

HI Rich,
You and I are now getting into a philosophical arena. My view of hi fi is to consider the entire chain. I consider flat and accurate frequency response to be the best and only STARTING point. That is a difficult goal and probably not obtainable in a home audio setting. If you think it is you are kidding yourself. Still, I don't disagree with the goal. For myself, I have to say that I've been there and done it and I respect it. Early in my hi fi experience I would come close to totally agreeing with you.

Once there, a question must be asked. To wit, am I satisfied with the sonic result? Can I do more? It became clear that the program material was far from perfect and consistent. And my room and audio system added unique colorations that the recorded material can not take into consideration. Yours does too. All listening situations do no matter how hard we try to defeat them. Hell, even the recording venues have flaws that the recording engineers try mightily to overcome. They are only partially successful.

Once this question is asked, it is natural to extend our thinking to include the entire audio chain from beginning to end. This includes the venue, the types of mics, mic placement, the mixing console, the recording mechanism, and finally, the recording engineer. All of these things are artificial and external to the music. Every step along the way offers plenty of opportunity to alter the original sound from flaws in the equipment to intentional equalization. The final recording we buy is a summation of the flaws in the system and we have no control over them. Our only defense is to buy excellent recordings but it's only a partial solution.

So, I seek to gain some control. It's definitely not perfect control. Bass balance is only one aspect but its an important one. I hate equalizers and tone controls and will not let them into my system. But subwoofers, in my system, offers the ability to change something that does not destroy the integrety of the recorded sound. So, I use it.

I will stress that I'm not trying to impose a particular set up on anyone. I'm only saying that gaining control over the bass balance can best be done easily from the listening position whatever that takes. Otherwise, no one will do it except in gross cases. It's just too much trouble. I see it as a system refinement. Call it the next level of performance past flat.

Sparky

 

[nsgarch]

Audio Relativism vs. Audio Purism?

Either way, numero uno is getting the room+system response as flat as possible. Next, you must adjust the main volume control until the reproduced SPL closely (not exactly) matches the actual performance level. Then, and only then, will you really know what's up with a given recording. This is where an Audio Purist will stop. An Audio Relativist may, after evaluating the "pure" response, decide to make any number of adjustments to his/her equipment which results in a more satisfying (to the Audio Relativist) sonic presentation.

Personally, I don't think there is a right path, yet these are decidedly two different approaches. I think many of us might follow either one at different times. But first, can we agree that most recordings, in all formats, usually have the OK and the imprimateur of an individual producer? And that he/she decided how it should sound. You might not agree with him/her/it(?), but still, Score 1 for the Purist ;--)

For my second example I want to include all recordings (starting with Edison, I guess) that were made before modern production techniques were developed, as well as, all those that could have made use of modern production techniques, but didn't! (I jus' call dem'uns BAAAAD records!) This second group may contain recordings that do unpleasant things to your ears once they emerge as sound in the room -- usually due to something (an instrument or a vocal) being over empasized, under emphasized, distorted, or missing altogether.) That's when the Audio Relativist wants to step in and correct the sonic profile so the recording sounds like it was made using the kind of production techniques necessary for a faithful frequency response. Score 1 for the Relativist ;--) Audio Purists would never do that. Their attitude is: I'll take it for what it is, as it is, and if I can't stand to listen to it that way, then I won't listen to it ever again! And that's fine too.

I know that a philosophical rationale can be spun for either position, but why would anyone find it necessary to justify their basic inclination, or to explain why a certain result has more value to them? Now stop this ridiculous angel-counting and go listen to some music, however you like it!

 

[karma]

HI nsgarch,
I think you missed the point of my original post. I was attmpting to bring into discussion the sensitive nature of bass balance. That's all.

I agree that each audiophile (or music lover) will take their own road. I don't feel qualified to take a discussion into philosophical areas. I'm not even interested in it. To each his own.

But that's the direction this thread went. Bass balance is interesting to me and I see nothing wrong bringing it up. Are we not here to learn?

Sparky

 

[DTB300]

You and I are now getting into a philosophical arena.

And the initial question you posed, which you answered yourself, will always be a personnal preferece on HOW the recording SHOULD sound.

Either way, numero uno is getting the room+system response as flat as possible.

Nsgarch, very well said. The room affects the sound of the music we listen to more than most realize. That is why Room Acoustics is one of the hottest topics in audio at this time.

I know that a philosophical rationale can be spun for either position, but why would anyone find it necessary to justify their basic inclination, or to explain why a certain result has more value to them? Now stop this ridiculous angel-counting and go listen to some music, however you like it!

Exactly!!!! Bass Nuts will want more bass, others will want less, some will not want to do any adjustments and live with what is presented to them. Which of these is ultimately correct???? All of them.

And, yes sit back and ENJOY the music, let us not micro-manage it to death.

Dan

 

[nsgarch]

Sparky,

HI nsgarch,
I think you missed the point of my original post. I was attmpting to bring into discussion the sensitive nature of bass balance. That's all.

I agree that each audiophile (or music lover) will take their own road. I don't feel qualified to take a discussion into philosophical areas. I'm not even interested in it. To each his own.

But that's the direction this thread went. Bass balance is interesting to me and I see nothing wrong bringing it up. Are we not here to learn?

Sparky

I don't see anything wrong with your bringing up the subject of bass balance. As I said in my previous post, I think most of us are in both of these camps at different times, I know I am. And when I am in the "adjustment" mode it would be very nice indeed to have armchair controls at my disposal. In fact, I have my Depth subwoofer turned 120deg. (use my system link to see what I mean) to bring the control panel towards the front, where I can more easily adjust it when I desire.

BTW, the new Depth i has its controls on top - I guess a lot of people complained.

 

[Rich]

Exactly!!!! Bass Nuts will want more bass, others will want less, some will not want to do any adjustments and live with what is presented to them. Which of these is ultimately correct???? All of them.

And, yes sit back and ENJOY the music, let us not micro-manage it to death.

Dan

I couldn't have said it better.

 

[Rich]

HI nsgarch,
I think you missed the point of my original post. I was attmpting to bring into discussion the sensitive nature of bass balance. That's all.

I agree that each audiophile (or music lover) will take their own road. I don't feel qualified to take a discussion into philosophical areas. I'm not even interested in it. To each his own.

But that's the direction this thread went. Bass balance is interesting to me and I see nothing wrong bringing it up. Are we not here to learn?

Sparky

OK, now I see the point of your original post. I agree. Bass Balance is sensitive. What more is there to discuss?

There is nothing wrong with bringing up a topic to discuss, but when you come at it with the leadup of "I have a lot of years of experience" and "I want to pass this knowledge along" and then say "let me know what you think and we can discuss it," you better believe that people with strong opinions that disagree with what you say will jump in and make those differences known. That's just the way these things work.

 

[twich54]

I couldn't have said it better.

Rich, Don't you just hate it when somebody brings common sense into the equation !! Yes Dan, well said !!!

 

[karma]

HI,
Gee, I hate to bring this up but this is an audio forum. I thought, obviously wrongly, that there would be some interest in audiophile issues and ideas. Instead, I experience, consistently, an aversion to discussing ideas. Not only could you folks use practice at "counting angels", you might just be happy to talk about ideas you clearly have not thought about. You could also practice your reading skills.

Instead, you criticize me for simply bringing an idea to the attention of the forum.

You have a home at Audio Karma where the mere mention of an audiophile subject attracts guns and daggers.

I'm out of here. Permanently. You win!!!

Sparky