Quantcast

To Bass Or Not To Bass?

MartinLogan Owners (MLO)

Help Support MartinLogan Owners (MLO):

K

karma

Guest
HI All,
When I started the thread concerning CLS bass equalization I got the answers I was after. But like a caterpillar turning into a butterfly, this thread changed into another and very interesting subject. Better than my original subject, I think. I thought the new subject deserved its own thread.

Namely, is low bass in a home hi fi system worth the effort? Another question is how much bass is enough? Another; what tradeoffs are in effect to get good (great) bass? Another; how much are we willing to pay? Another, what is the quality of hi fi bass? And, very important, will our rooms support low bass?

This is a classic debate. Early in hi fi history, great bass was the Holy Grail. Witness Klipchorns and other large speakers of the era. Folks without large rooms were out of luck especially with the advent of stereo. Then came the AR-1 and AR-3A systems which, for the first time, offered good (not great) bass that would fit into the average listening room. They were revolutionary.

The next major developments in the great bass debate were the original Quads and mini-monitors. These were designs that forced the consumer to choose between the excellent but specialized talents of these speakers and low bass. You could not get both. Subs were rare to non-existent but this quandary opened the market for the development of subwoofers. Once subwoofers became available, the great bass debate really caught fire.

This history brings us to the early 1970's. Digital audio had not been invented. Vinyl rarely had deep bass. Sure, once in while an exceptional recording came along with some deep bass, especially organ and symphonic material. In truth, there was not enough recorded low bass to overcome the expense of hearing it. But, Sheffield vinyl recordings made it clear that great bass could be recorded and when heard on a bass capable system, the recordings were awesome.

Digital audio and synthesized music made the bass debate interesting. Increasingly, deep bass recordings became available. Musicians love deep bass too. They responded to the technology. Now, the issue that Roberto has brought up became a hot issue. To bass or not to bass, that is the question.

The tradeoffs I mentioned above started to be real considerations for the audio consumer. If you were a "full range" dipole speaker owner, such as CLS's, you were trading off great bass against the extraordinary talents the speaker can demonstrate. It proved very difficult to seamlessly add subs. And costly too. ML realized very early that practical electrostatic panels were never going to produce deep and powerful bass. Thus, they decided to go the hybrid route which is effectively a woofer connected to the panels. They were not true subwoofers except the Statements and Monoliths. With ML's big guns great bass became available but at a VERY high price. The more modest hybrid systems had adequate bass performance but would not challenge a really good sub. Panel/woofer integration was and is a consideration. Separate subs also have the same issues but, if the problems could be solved, offered great bass.

I have definite opinions on this subject but I’d rather discover what you think.

Roberto, I would appreciate your input. You make your case very well and I think the group needs to hear it.

risobet, you are not off the hot seat. I would love to see your well thought out views here too.

So, that's the background. To bass or not to bass?

What do you think? How much bass do you need (want)? How do you view the tradeoffs?

Sparky
 
Last edited:

TomDac

former MLO owner/operator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
3,616
Reaction score
15
Location
Rancho Mirage, California
How much bass do you need??? I thought the whole idea was to get your system to accurately reproduce the music (and/or sound effects in the case of HT) as it was recorded.

In the case of having CLS, it's clear that they cannot accurately reproduce bass at it's lowest registers which is what led CLS owners to match subwoofers to their systems.

MartinLogan also knows this and that is why their upcoming CLX will be tightly integrated with an ML sub.

That's my .02 - I know it probably isn't the answer you're looking for as it seems you want to create more dialog, but in my eyes (or ears in this case) the answer is that simple.

:rolleyes:

Tom.
 
Last edited:

roberto

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
3,163
Reaction score
31
Location
San Jose, Costa Rica
HI All,
When I started the thread concerning CLS bass equalization I got the answers I was after. But like a caterpillar turning into a butterfly, this thread changed into another and very interesting subject. Better than my original subject, I think. I thought the new subject deserved its own thread.

Namely, is low bass in a home hi fi system worth the effort? Another question is how much bass is enough? Another; what tradeoffs are in effect to get good (great) bass? Another; how much are we willing to pay? Another, what is the quality of hi fi bass? And, very important, will our rooms support low bass?

This is a classic debate. Early in hi fi history, great bass was the Holy Grail. Witness Klipchorns and other large speakers of the era. Folks without large rooms were out of luck especially with the advent of stereo. Then came the AR-1 and AR-3A systems which, for the first time, offered good (not great) bass that would fit into the average listening room. They were revolutionary.

The next major developments in the great bass debate were the original Quads and mini-monitors. These were designs that forced the consumer to choose between the excellent but specialized talents of these speakers and low bass. You could not get both. Subs were rare to non-existent but this quandary opened the market for the development of subwoofers. Once subwoofers became available, the great bass debate really caught fire.

This history brings us to the early 1970's. Digital audio had not been invented. Vinyl rarely had deep bass. Sure, once in while an exceptional recording came along with some deep bass, especially organ and symphonic material. In truth, there was not enough recorded low bass to overcome the expense of hearing it. But, Sheffield vinyl recordings made it clear that great bass could be recorded and when heard on a bass capable system, the recordings were awesome.

Digital audio and synthesized music made the bass debate interesting. Increasingly, deep bass recordings became available. Musicians love deep bass too. They responded to the technology. Now, the issue that Roberto has brought up became a hot issue. To bass or not to bass, that is the question.

The tradeoffs I mentioned above started to be real considerations for the audio consumer. If you were a "fully range" speaker owner, such as CLS's, you are trading off great bass against the extraordinary talents the speaker can demonstrate. It proved very difficult to seamlessly add subs. And costly too. ML realized very early that electrostatic panels were never going to produce deep and powerful bass. Thus, they decided to go the hybrid route which is effectively a woofer connected to the panels. They were not true subwoofers except the Statements and Monoliths. With ML big guns great bass became available but at a VERY high price. The more modest hybrid systems had adequate bass performance but would not challenge a really good sub. Panel/woofer integration was and is a consideration. Separate subs also have the same issues but, if the problems could be solved, offered great bass.

I have definite opinions on this subject but I’d rather discover what you think.

Roberto, I would appreciate your input. You make your case very well and I think the group needs to hear it.

risobet, you are not off the hot seat. I would love to see your well thought out views here too.

So, that's the background. To bass or not to bass?

What do you think? How much bass do you need (want)? How do you view the tradeoffs?

Sparky
Hola Sparky and thanks...I have to say that I do love bass. My ears are very sensitive to room boundaries. My dad had a very nice system with two subs made by Hartley and they were 24" each one, and the box was a whole wall (and still is)...he had reel to reel at 15 ips Teac and Revox tape decks with McIntosh gear...he was a trully audiophile on those days...my problem is that when I have a good bass notes in my room, when I say aaaahhhh, rico rico, and try to understand the stage, it is a mess. Please understand that this happens in my system, and when I have the oportunity to listen other systems, the parameter and the soundstage is complete different than what I get in mine...I just love the stage and the musicians playing right there, with no ping pong notes, and tons of air between them...also I have to say that what I listen most often is combo music, jazz and classical music most camera and solo instruments, why? Because I hate congestion, and with the digital gear, no matter what kind or brand, with heavy orchestra, the strings are a mess...please understand that this happens to me, not necessary to you!. Here is where I do like vinyl better, but still, with heavy orchestra level, my system collaps in certain notes...we have to be demanding and not forgiven...right? Back to what I was saying regarding the bass, then I start to try to get the stage bringing down the sub level at a point when I say "there he is with the other musicians"...then I realize that the sub level is almost down to a point where practically in not working. The cut frecuency that I use is 40 Hz, but the CLSs are full range and only stereo. If you read music, you will find out that the 99% of the notes are above 60 Hz, because the instrument(s) itself also have problems to reproduce this low deep bass (not organ or electronic synt). Some bass musicians today are using for effect bass energy, a sub-harmonic feed back, to bring down and emphasize these low notes...but when they do this, they are not at the stage, they are at the big speakers, amplified notes...not from a double bass at the stage. As Risabet said, a Böserdorfer piano, the last note is 16Hz, but these notes are not in music work...perhaps only in a certain work and they last just a fraction of the time of the whole work. I don´t know if you are understanding my point. I rather have great stage, than a mess with good bass in my room. You can read this site, perhaps to understand more regarding the piano notes...

http://members.shaw.ca/quadibloc/other/musint.htmd

On the other hand, I do envy you, because you had succed with the bass enery in your room. Also, I agreed with the low bass energy that my CLSs produce...but in my room, I don´t need more...when I do, I got a mess with my stage...I wish that I could explain myself better...please forgive my dare of trying to illustrate my idea regarding the bass energy...happy listening,
Roberto.
 

risabet

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
1,317
Reaction score
0
Location
SoCal
I've owned many different speakers and heard many, many more at all price/quality levels. Any speaker save the true minimonitors will generate bass into the middle to lower 40's. NOT GOOD ENOUGH! Every speaker in my experience that can't get to the low 30's sounds thin if it has a realistic level of extension at the top end. The Spica TC-50 which I owned for years gave up at around 50 Hz at the bottom and 15 kHz at the top and were one of the few speakers w/o bass that didn't sound thin. On the other hand they lacked air, sparkle and dynamics at the upper end and of course at the bottom.

IMO you can't get realistic sound if you give up the final octave of bass. I'm lucky in that I have a large room that supports good deep bass but even in smaller rooms the deep bass is doable. It does require some room treatments or now some digital corrections, but this is the way to go.

IMO the CLS simply doesn't cut it w/o woofers. Neither do the Quads, the smaller Maggies or most other reasonably sized panel type speakers. However, the newer woofers with servo control are more than fast enough to blend nearly seamlessly with fast panel type speakers. ML has proven this as has Velodyne, REL, and others. Integrating them requires the effort to tweak them positionally and level/x-over wise to very tight levels of accuracy

From time to time I'll remove the woofer from the system just to hear the difference. I would LOVE to get rid of the woofer. It takes up space that I could use more effectively but unfortunately the woofer is required. In fact I fine myself considering adding a second woofer.

One of the things that I get from extended LF is a better sense of the hall acoustic that the music is played in, if in fact it is in a hall. Go stand in any large space and listen to the "sound" of the acoustic. It is a sort of low frequency field that exists on its own. The presence of musicians/sound doesn't change the acoustic so much as activate it. I've yet to hear this reproduced without the low bass present. This holds for club recordings, but not so much studio recordings. 40% of my LP collection is classical, 30% jazz and 30% popular/rock. CD's are mostly pop/rock with a smattering of classical. The power of the orchestra requires the bottom octave, correct reproduction of hall ambience requires the bottom octave.

Generally I need bass that is down smoothly to about the upper/mid 20's. I'd like greater output down low with extension to 20 Hz. In my room these are doable deeds but require expenditures of money and wifely understanding (I'm buying jewelry towards that end).
 

risabet

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
1,317
Reaction score
0
Location
SoCal
and with the digital gear, no matter what kind or brand, with heavy orchestra, the strings are a mess...please understand that this happens to me, not necessary to you!. Here is where I do like vinyl better, but still, with heavy orchestra level, my system collaps in certain notes...we have to be demanding and not forgiven...right? Back to what I was saying regarding the bass, then I start to try to get the stage bringing down the sub level at a point when I say "there he is with the other musicians"...then I realize that the sub level is almost down to a point where practically in not working. The cut frecuency that I use is 40 Hz, but the CLSs are full range and only stereo. If you read music, you will find out that the 99% of the notes are above 60 Hz, because the instrument(s) itself also have problems to reproduce this low deep bass (not organ or electronic synt). Some bass musicians today are using for effect bass energy, a sub-harmonic feed back, to bring down and emphasize these low notes...but when they do this, they are not at the stage, they are at the big speakers, amplified notes...not from a double bass at the stage. As Risabet said, a Böserdorfer piano, the last note is 16Hz, but these notes are not in music work...perhaps only in a certain work and they last just a fraction of the time of the whole work. I don´t know if you are understanding my point. I rather have great stage, than a mess with good bass in my room. You can read this site, perhaps to understand more regarding the piano notes...
Roberto,

I agree with the digital statements which is why I prefer vinyl, among other reasons. I understand your problem with the sub affecting your stage but IME this is completely correctable. Are you running line inputs or speaker level inputs to the woofer. I run line ins but speaker level are easier to integrate. Continue to run the speakers full range from the amps. If you haven't tried these ideas then here you go.

1. Don't center the woofer between the speakers. Place it to one side or the other.
2. Aim the driver to the side if possible.
3. Measure the distance from the speakers to the listening seat to within a cm. The woofer needs to be exactly this distance from the listening seat also.
4. With you listening have someone else turn up the woofer slowly. You should hear a point when the bass is supported but the soundstage doesn't
collapse. Have them stop turning it up.
5. Try using a rear wall to add 3dB of bass reinforcement.
 

Chuck Lee

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
To Bass or not to bass

Let me start by saying I love Stats. For me every cone speaker with multiple drivers and crossovers,gets tiring after awhile.My first pair was the second generation (no tube amp)Acoustat 3. It was fine but the bass didn't fill the room the way my friends original Acoustat 3 panel servo tube amps did(first gen Acoustat).So I tried the Janus sub system. Yes sir, there was more bass, but after awhile I gave up,It was always a disjointed sound,less bass without the sub was less bass but better over-all sound.After some cone systems I went for a pair of Quad 63 with the audiophile approved Arcici stands to solve the bass problems, but they didn't ,so back to looking for a sub. The Velodynes were the hot ticket then and the 12" version should be the best match,smaller woofer and faster,I bought 2, one for each channel.More bass yes sir, but...
Sold them tried the ML Sequel, now here I thought was the ticket, surely ML had the answer in hybrid build. Didn't like the Sequels,something just not right with the sound,it's coming at me from the panel and the woofers, and not the same.Left stats again, later heard a stacked pair of Quad 57 at an audio show in Montreal.No lack of bass here and the sound was uniform top to bottom.I bought a single pair used. No bass, found another pair, stacked them and had the improvement that I was looking for. I had at the same time given up on my CLS in my main listening system,I just couldn't get a sub even the Depth that I bought to work well so the CLS stayed in my HT set up with another pair of CLS as rear channels.Here the sub did what it was supposed to. It added low frequency extension to movies.Then I saw the coverage of the RMAF of the Soundlab /Kimber set up and said to myself"why not do what they are doing" as I had always, in the back of my mind wondered if stacked CLS would be the improvement a stacked pair of Quads were.Well I don't have the ceiling height to stack, but I do have the width . Now back to the thread.The addition of subs in my experience to any stat is not a given to better bass. It is deeper,lower bass,but it is not more of the same bass. The bass is not omni directional as implied at least not to my ears.The sound coming from a stat/sub system sounds exactly what it is a system composed of a sub and a stat., not music coiming from a single source.The extra radiating area of the 2 extra panels when doubled,increases the sound of the bass but it doesn't increase the bass if you follow. A sub will increase the sound of the bass and it's bass output can be altered, but you are altering the sub.There is a seemless, coherent sound and increased bass output from doubling up the CLS, (the coherent factor being the strongest point to be made)that adding a sub woofer or two just can't match.
 

JonFo

Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
4,148
Reaction score
50
Location
Big Canoe, GA
How much bass is enough?

Well, enough to maintain the same power curve as the rest of the frequency spectrum, that’s how much.

This is a vastly misunderstood aspect of audio. Power curves, just like time alignment are critical to maintaining the illusion of reality.

If the speaker is accurately reproducing middle C (440Hz) but compressing the reproduction of frequencies below 60hz. Then it will never be able to realistically reproduce a grand piano.

Now we all know our ML’s can do awesome on piano, but can they all keep up in the bass?

The answer is no. None really can. Even the Monoliths with their 12” woofers can’t do it accurately. I know I’ve measured and EQ’d mine to death ;)

It really takes some serious displacement to do bass well. And by well I mean clean, low distortion reproduction at high SPL (>100 DB).

It’s not until you use a well integrated sub that this is really achieved IMHO.

It took going to a full infinite baffle sub (able to do >110DB at 40Hz and 105DB at 20Hz) before I had enough bass to keep up with the Monoliths abilities.

It also took using sophisticated speaker processors to accurately integrate them. People way underestimate the importance of time alignment, crossover settings and EQ in the prospects of correctly adapting a sub into a system.
Passive crossover need not apply. They are a crap shoot. Sorry, but been there and tried that. It don’t work.

Also, using a decent measuring rig is a requirement. You can’t adjust delay’s or EQ by ear. It also doesn’t work. Final tweaks are indeed by taste, but the basic profile is done using the scientific method.

Bottom line for me: Have enough power in the LF to keep up or acknowledge it’s a compromise.

When listening to highly complex music, like IQ and Lisa Gerrard or other heavy orchestral classics, having the SPL in the bass, coupled with the overall low distorting of the electostats, listening is a real pleasure. Even at high volumes, the balance of power across the spectrum makes the difference.

PS: if you wonder about distortion of subs vs ML’s, my IB sub + ML’s (albeit my center design with a Line array of mid-bass) measures 0.6% at 90DB SPL. Not bad.
 

roberto

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
3,163
Reaction score
31
Location
San Jose, Costa Rica
Roberto,

I agree with the digital statements which is why I prefer vinyl, among other reasons. I understand your problem with the sub affecting your stage but IME this is completely correctable. Are you running line inputs or speaker level inputs to the woofer. I run line ins but speaker level are easier to integrate. Continue to run the speakers full range from the amps. If you haven't tried these ideas then here you go.

1. Don't center the woofer between the speakers. Place it to one side or the other.
2. Aim the driver to the side if possible.
3. Measure the distance from the speakers to the listening seat to within a cm. The woofer needs to be exactly this distance from the listening seat also.
4. With you listening have someone else turn up the woofer slowly. You should hear a point when the bass is supported but the soundstage doesn't
collapse. Have them stop turning it up.
5. Try using a rear wall to add 3dB of bass reinforcement.
thanks Risabet...and that`s the way I have my HT...thank you so much for your advise!...:cheers: :rocker:
Roberto.
 
K

karma

Guest
HI All,
I guess I don't understand the stacking method. It seems to me that by running two pairs you reduce the work each must do. I can see how this would increase the dynamic range. This is good. But I don't see how the bass frequency response is changed at all. Maybe, in side by side arrangement, the cancellation effect is reduced because one side of each speaker is isolated from the rear. It is not clear that the resulting bass will be properly flat. The built-in bass equalization assumes only one speaker with a predictable amount of cancellation.

I would like to hear such a system. However, my listening situation does not allow stacking. So it is not an option for me.

With side by side stacking do you still retain pin point imaging? Trying to imagine what is going on leads me to think the image must become horizontally smeared. Also, how do you handle the amp hookup? Are they connected in series or parallel?

Sparky
 
Last edited:

DTB300

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
2,146
Reaction score
0
Location
Fallout 3 Land
HI All,
I guess I don't understand the stacking method. It seems to me that by running two pairs you reduce the work each must do. I can see how this would increase the dynamic range. This is good. But I don't see how the bass frequency response is changed at all. Maybe, in side by side arrangement, the cancellation effect is reduced because one side of each speaker is isolated from the rear. It is not clear that the resulting bass will be properly flat. The built-in bass equalization assumes only one speaker with a predictable amount of cancellation.

I would like to hear such a system. However, my listening situation does not allow stacking. So it is not an option for me.
A bunch of folks over at AVS are using the SVS subs stacked on top of one another. From what I remember, the dual subs only helped increase the output levels by 6dB (if I remember correctly), but not sure if I ever remember anyone stating an increase in dynamic range. I agree with you that dynamic range would/should not be affected. I also cannot remember if anyone ever did a graphing of the response differences when one or two stubs are used when stacked.

Dan
 

Chuck Lee

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
to bass or not to bass

A double CLS is double of what a single cls is.It is quite that simple.
Wherever you place your first pair put the second pair side by side so the wood panels are almost touching.Now to wire them, you wire in series.This is also very simple. Take the single positve speaker wire from the left amp and wire to the positve terminal of the first left cls, then run an identical wire from the negative of the first cls to the positive terminal on the second cls. Wire the negative terminal of the second cls to the negative terminal of the amp. Repeat for the right side. What you need are 3 single runs of wire per side.What you hear is still a defined left side and right side and sound in the middle. Nothing changes ;all is at it was-except you now have more of that sound. There are no side effects,no cancellations,no boogey man, or whatever sonic ills the mind might conjure up.Nada.It is the sound of the CLS gloriously expanded,with the added benefit of increased bass output .Double the bass panel, double the output. I guess this is so elimentary a solution that it is bound to raise suspicion.Let me state that a sub will never mate with a stat ,they are two different beasts. Cones verses panels, complicated crossovers(passive or active all are audible )additional interconnect and cabling. The sonic mismatch of sub amp and main amp. The tiresome ritual of finding the spot where the sub disappears,the sometimes visual impact of two different looking systems(double CLS side by side in the same stain look like one large speaker)are but a few of the pit falls of going the sub/stat route.I know I have been there before.Even when a friend of mine owned the Prodigy, you still felt like it wasn't a coherent system,that old woofer coming in when the panel left off disjointedness.If you really value all the CLS does and find it lacking,the double cls is a very easy fix.That is the second greatest thing about double cls, it is so easy to impliment(room size caveat).The first great thing is that you gain more of every thing you like about the cls, while adding more bass response(twice as much as before)with no draw backs to imaging ,etc. All gain ,no pain.It has taken me 30 years to finally say that I now have a speaker system that I really don't find any faults with.
 
K

karma

Guest
HI Chuck,
First, I'm asking out of curiosity not because I have problems. I'm very happy with my single CLS system. Good thing because I don't have room for doubles. Your claims are so sweeping that they beg comment. First, I'm very happy you are happy. That's the goal.

There are good subs that are capable of stupendous output and still disappear sonically. Perhaps you have not heard them. A handy example is my Kinnergetics SW-800 dual subwoofers. The Kinnergetics Company was so impressed with the CLS's that they designed a sub specifically aimed at the CLS's. They are matched sonically, physically, and esthetically to the CLS's. I know I can't say anything that will convince you of this fact but it's true. CLS’s doubled or not, will never even come close to the bass performance provided by the SW-800's. At the same time, they work together seamlessly. Pretty neat.

It's true that integrating normal subs to the CLS's is an exercise in frustration. I would not have subs if the integration is not excellent. The SW-800's are special. It’s too bad that Kinnergetics is no longer in business.

I'm not inexperienced at this game. I have had panel speakers and biamped dual subwoofers paired since 1975. I've learned a little about the difficulties. And I have come up with some novel solutions that work for me. It's too much to go into here. Maybe somehow I can figure out a way to write about what I have come with in a forum format. At the minimum, I think some will find it an intersting read.

Sparky
 

enilsen

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
102
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Sweden
The perfect bass

There is some form of purity in the bass that comes from the full-range CLS. I can even remember the days when I had Quads and realized no matter what or how much I tried to mate those speakers with a sub it never really sat well with me.

The same applies to the CLS when I have tried several different subs and found they all don't quite mate up properly. My personal conclusion is that the extra sub itself focuses too much sound in a single point of the room which makes placement incredibly difficult. Room size clearly dictates to me whether or not a sub is needed to complement the speakers. Hence why I believe the doubling up of CLS panels address the issues with out compromising when the room is relatively large.

If you was to experiment with the CLS in a smaller room I suspect the CLS would be more than accommodating with bass and the need to supplement would be over kill in that area. It's all about accepting what you have on hand and trying to make it work the way it was designed to. I just listen and enjoy what would appear to be a very pure and solid bass. Not muffled and not boomy.
 

JonFo

Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
4,148
Reaction score
50
Location
Big Canoe, GA
... Now we all know our ML’s can do awesome on piano, but can they all keep up in the bass?

The answer is no. None really can. Even the Monoliths with their 12” woofers can’t do it accurately. I know I’ve measured and EQ’d mine to death ;)

It really takes some serious displacement to do bass well. And by well I mean clean, low distortion reproduction at high SPL (>100 DB).

It’s not until you use a well integrated sub that this is really achieved IMHO.
...

Need to correct myself; there is indeed a ML that can keep up. And it has some serious displacement in the bass and mid-bass. The Statement e2 has a consistent power curve out to beyond 105DB SPL.

If they could have accomplished the same level of bass and mid-bass reproduction using ESL's, you'd think that would have been their first choice.

Now, I’d point out that even an e2 needs to be very carefully positioned or to use a processor to set per-channel delays and EQ to get the max out of them
 

JonFo

Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
4,148
Reaction score
50
Location
Big Canoe, GA
HI Chuck,
First, I'm asking out of curiosity not because I have problems. I'm very happy with my single CLS system. Good thing because I don't have room for doubles. Your claims are so sweeping that they beg comment. First, I'm very happy you are happy. That's the goal.

There are good subs that are capable of stupendous output and still disappear sonically. Perhaps you have not heard them. A handy example is my Kinnergetics SW-800 dual subwoofers. The Kinnergetics Company was so impressed with the CLS's that they designed a sub specifically aimed at the CLS's. They are matched sonically, physically, and esthetically to the CLS's. I know I can't say anything that will convince you of this fact but it's true. CLS’s doubled or not, will never even come close to the bass performance provided by the SW-800's. At the same time, they work together seamlessly. Pretty neat.

It's true that integrating normal subs to the CLS's is an exercise in frustration. I would not have subs if the integration is not excellent. The SW-800's are special. It’s too bad that Kinnergetics is no longer in business.

I'm not inexperienced at this game. I have had panel speakers and biamped dual subwoofers paired since 1975. I've learned a little about the difficulties. And I have come up with some novel solutions that work for me. It's too much to go into here. Maybe somehow I can figure out a way to write about what I have come with in a forum format. At the minimum, I think some will find it an intersting read.

Sparky

Sparky,

Agreed that many see the SW-800 as a really good match for the CLS. I've heard that repeatedly over the years.

I'd be very interested to read more of what you have to say about sub integration.
This is an area that most people don't spend enough time on, either researching models, or more importantly, doing the work once they get a unit.

Positioning is just the beginning, as ensuring the unit is not energizing the wrong room modes is critical. Secondly, EQ is a must. I know a lot people see it as evil, but if you could see the measurements of your room before and after a well done correction, and then listen carefully, no one would go back to an uncorrected sub.
Thirdly, time alignment (as well as phase integration, which is related) is also critical. If two transducers are not fully time aligned, then they will blur the sound at their juncture ppoints.

That last point is actually one of the main reasons to run a CLS without anything else, as by definition, a single panel will not have any time alignment issues ;)

But, if you can adjust the time delays and phase for all transducers, then you can get very good integration.

Here is nice little write up on phase, delay and distortions:

http://sound.westhost.com/ptd.htm

Recommended reading for anyone keen on integrating more than one driver, whether in the same box or the same room.
 

Chuck Lee

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
To bass or not to bass

When I hear remarks like"listen to that bass, listen to the extension"that you hear from people who have mated subs with their CLs or other stats,I have to wonder what is it that they are listenening to that has drawn so much attention to it's self?Surely a seemless blend would not draw any attention to the bass at all.I have heard the statements albeit at a show and under poor conditions,but I did not feel that there was a successful blend of woofer and stat there as well.I guess maybe I am picky, but it was still dis-jointed.The bass always drew far too much attention to itself.This is what I feel and Enilson also feels about the CLS. With a single CLS there may be a lack of bass energy in the room compared to a sub woofed CLS, but the CLS bass is in sync with the rest of the frequencies.When the panels are doubled, the bass energy doubles, in sync with the rest of the music.
It is like going from a single 8 inch woofer to two 8 inch woofers. More of the music gets out.There is more body, slam whatever you want to call it.There is not more bass as in a sub system where it is very easy to hear more bass.There is just more weight or meat on the bone if you will kind of bass.It is bass that doesn't draw any more than it's share of the action. It is not forced or exaggerated bass.The CLS stays a CLS.
 

Latest posts

Top