Debunking the "I don't need bass for music" myth

Early B.

Quite recently, I had a 2-channel setup with bookshelf speakers that dug into the low 40's. I wasn't using a subwoofer. I was content with the sound 'cause I figured I was only missing an octave or so, and low bass in the kind of music I like (i.e., jazz) occurred too infrequently for me to be concerned about the need for a sub. I also reasoned that most instruments don't go much deeper than the low 30's, so I felt I wasn't missing much.

I was wrong.

Now that I'm using full range speakers, I realize the amount of bass I was missing was far more than I realized. I'm getting clean bass well into the 20's on jazz music!! When I play Stanley Clarke or music with an upright bass, the whole room vibrates and I can feel it in my gut. More importantly, the sound is far more palpable and realistic when the bass is not being truncated. Bass lays the foundation for the music, and if it ain't there, then the music suffers.

Moral of the story -- always put some bass in your face.

Thanks for listening.

Signed,
Bass Junkie

Frank Z

What myth? Never heard of it.

zombie boy 2000

Good write up EB...

I've been running without a sub for awhile now. And though the Arros only go down to 40Hz, I feel that since they are so quick and articulate in the lower frequencies, they at least give the illusion of producing a substantial amound of bass -- at least relative to their size and single driver design, if that makes sense.

However, you got me thinking again about throwing a sub into the mix. Just to see how things pan out. I just need to find one quick and musical enough to keep up with my speaks, and I really fear that blending a sub into my system will be quite the headache.

But you got me thinking...

amulford

I feel ya. where do you think the signature comes from?
When I listen to music, I like to experience it. For me, part of the experience is tactile. Now that doesn't mean 30 Hz bopm boom, but I think it should touch your ****...

Ricardo

Early B. wrote:

Bass lays the foundation for the music.....

IMO this statement is right on; even at low volumes (i.e. without shaking the house), the small portion of music that's below 35-40 Hz is key. there's so much you miss if you don't reproduce it.

PolkThug

Frank Z wrote:

What myth? Never heard of it.

I think he just came up with a new myth so he can prove himself right.

Frank Z

I'm serious. What myth? There have been numerous posts debating the necessity of a sub with various speakers in a 2-channel system, but I don't recall anyone ever saying that a sub is never needed for any 2-channel system

PolkThug

Frank Z wrote:

I'm serious. What myth? There have been numerous posts debating the necessity of a sub with various speakers in a 2-channel system, but I don't recall anyone ever saying that a sub is never needed for any 2-channel system

There isn't a myth.

Early B.

Frank Z wrote:

I'm serious. What myth? There have been numerous posts debating the necessity of a sub with various speakers in a 2-channel system, but I don't recall anyone ever saying that a sub is never needed for any 2-channel system

Oh, Frank, relax dude. Don't take my words too literally. I just needed a cool title. Besides, I always wanted to use the word, "debunk." Sounds like "da funk" or "junk in the trunk" or "kaplunk" or "hurling chunks" -- all cool things to say.

dkg999

Early B - I kind of liked your myth/debunking thing you had going! I recently experienced the same thing. I've had my Magnepan 1.6's for a little over a year, and I knew I was lacking the bass thump below 40hz, however the Maggies also produce a surprising amount of very quick tight bass that seemed to be just fine. Decided to add a sub, and wow! Just that little bit of good old low end thump has really done the trick!

Jim Shearer

There is at least a myth that some speakers are much better suited for a given type of music than another. I recall years ago having an argument w/ a woman who stated most emphatically that her JBL speakers were the best for rock music. My contention was that there are good speakers & bad speakers. Good ones have coverage over the whole freq. range, are accurate, etc. She was certain that rock music was SO much more demanding. I questioned that & asked her what she thought of having to reproduce an orchestra at realistic levels, or produce the 16 Hz fundamental of a 32' Bourdon organ pipe. I still think that it doesn't matter what type of music you listen to: there are good speakers and bad speakers. Life is too short to short change yourself by listening w/ bad speakers. Bass tones deserve to be heard (and felt) too!

Cheers, Jim

sickicw

I guess the "myth" is the fact that bass frequecies are hard to control in most rooms and so some people (like me) dont use subwoofers when listining to music. I am quite happy with my lsi9s only for most music. I will admit that with some songs adding the sub makes them sound much much better, but on average it makes it sound worse mostly because of standing waves and such. Now if i had a properly set up dedicated room with lots of bass traps, im sure my sub would be on all the time.

Ern Dog

I'm also a Bass junkie. There is something about really low bass that hits the spot for me. My sub is crucial for me when listening to all music. I'm always on the prowl for music with a nice low end, I mean real low end. It's hard to find, but there is some stuff out there that is good.

pearsall001

No sub for me in 2 channel. My monitors pump out plenty of deep, tight, dynamic bass. I wonder why you're hard pressed to find a sub in your higher end shops? Hmmm!

John K.

Ditto, EB; although it probably doesn't rise to the status of a myth(we have more than enough of those already in audio), there's a considerable number who don't take full advantage of their setups. If a sub doesn't improve the overall result the sub isn't set up right or simply isn't good enough. Likewise, failing to use surround speakers with DPLII or Logic 7 processing on two-channel material to extract natural ambience and reproduce it more realistically from the sides and/or back.

DarqueKnight

Early B. wrote:

Now that I'm using full range speakers, I realize the amount of bass I was missing was far more than I realized. I'm getting clean bass well into the 20's on jazz music!!

Welcome to real life.

beardog03

I use a 8" polk sub with my 2 ch setup..
It`s an older model (psw250), but it keeps up and fills the real low bass in just fine...it`s not turned up past 9 to 10 o`clock, but it does give me what the 9`s are missing..

I found that the 8" polk blends real well with the Rti`s and the Lsi`s...

Dennis Gardner

Most instruments don't go lower than the low 30s the lowest note on a bass is 31hz, but your bookshelf speakers aren't producing the 30hz-40hz range worth a **** and that is what you've been missing.

You do also need to realize that there are more notes from 20 hz to 40 hz than there is from 10,000hz to 16,000hz since frequencies are logarithmic not linear in nature. There is alot below 40 hz that you are missing if your speakers aren't capable.

A chart FYI:

reeltrouble1

28.5=lowest acoustic KB note.

RT1

TroyD

Quality vs. Quantity

All things being equal, sure, more bass is a good thing. Devil is in the details though. I'll take no sub over a poorly integrated one.

BDT

ND13

What's a sub?

Isn't that what that fat dude ate for a couple of years and lost like 800 lbs or something???:p



I was playing around for a few minutes with the LSi9s and decided to run my only super long IC over to the little JBL sub(in the fabulous 2.1 Dolby Virtual rig:D ) and I might just try to find myself one of those SVS tubes.....it'll be a while...I have a sealed 10" Audiosource to use til then, that will surprise a lot of people with it's musicality.

Dennis Gardner

On the other end of the spectrum, I always chuckle when the guys on this forum complain about hearing the 13khz +5db bump in the SL2000 tweeters response in their music..................exactly what instrument was it that showed the terrible bump??? Nothing of an analog nature goes that high and harmonics of the main notes aren't enough to actually be heard over the main tones. I will admit the overall tone of a speaker can be harsh (silver coil compared to silk), but you can't hear something that isn't in the music. Their isn't any 13khz music, and I try not to listen to sine waves as a way of judging a speaker's quality.

Just thinking out loud............

Early B.

Dennis Gardner wrote:

On the other end of the spectrum, I always chuckle when the guys on this forum complain about hearing the 13khz +5db bump in the SL2000 tweeters response in their music..................exactly what instrument was it that showed the terrible bump??? Nothing of an analog nature goes that high and harmonics of the main notes aren't enough to actually be heard over the main tones. I will admit the overall tone of a speaker can be harsh (silver coil compared to silk), but you can't hear something that isn't in the music. Their isn't any 13khz music, and I try not to listen to sine waves as a way of judging a speaker's quality.

Just thinking out loud............

Well, you can't hear music at 15 Hz, but you can definitely feel it. Does the top end work the same way? I dunno, just askin'.

I think that's part of the lure of supertweeters -- you can't hear them, but they are supposed to add more emotion to the music.

Rhombus

YEP...I seem to recall from my music theory class, that even tho' you can't hear the upper register tones, they affect the harmonics and change the timbre of the heard tones.

hearingimpared

Bass is 1/3 rd of music's components. A lot of people think that if the bass is thin or even absent they won't miss it or it won't impact that particular piece of music. That is like saying cut or decrease the decibal level of the melody track and you still have the same piece of music.

Humans can't hear 20 hz. We can't hear 20khz either. BUT WE CAN FEEL BOTH!!!

Here is the thing. I am as my handle shows hearing impared in my right ear. I can't hear the low freqs and the high freqs and the midrange freqs are at a lower db level in my right ear.

One of the things my body has adjusted to over the years because I can't hear the very high freqs and the lower freqs is that I've become more sensitive to FEELING the freqs that I literally can't hear. This is how I am able to enjoy all kinds of music and still be able to do critical listening.

It is amazing how there will be a very high frequency oscillation going on around the house and no-one in my house can hear it, not my wife, my 9 year old, or my brother but I can can "hear" it. My body has turned into like a vibration sensing antenna. Part of hearing for me has evolved into hearing and feeling the sound.

You all have the same thing going but because you don't have to rely on it consciously you don't realize the impact of both hearing and feeling the music but you do. My body has adjusted naturally (God is a genius) to this, so it has become an unconscious part of me and believe me I may be missing the audible part of a piece of music but I am still experiencing it a little bit differently than you are.

So the moral to my story is get full range speakers because if you don't you are missing the "feeling" part of the music.

Rant complete.:D

cfrizz

So I guess that is why when my sub is blending perfectly with my speakers so that I don't "notice" it, I can feel the vibrations on the floor?!

Early B.

hearingimpared wrote:

Bass is 1/3 rd of music's components. A lot of people think that if the bass is thin or even absent they won't miss it or it won't impact that particular piece of music. That is like saying cut or decrease the decibal level of the melody track and you still have the same piece of music.

Humans can't hear 20 hz. We can't hear 20khz either. BUT WE CAN FEEL BOTH!!!

Here is the thing. I am as my handle shows hearing impared in my right ear. I can't hear the low freqs and the high freqs and the midrange freqs are at a lower db level in my right ear.

One of the things my body has adjusted to over the years because I can't hear the very high freqs and the lower freqs is that I've become more sensitive to FEELING the freqs that I literally can't hear. This is how I am able to enjoy all kinds of music and still be able to do critical listening.

It is amazing how there will be a very high frequency oscillation going on around the house and no-one in my house can hear it, not my wife, my 9 year old, or my brother but I can can "hear" it. My body has turned into like a vibration sensing antenna. Part of hearing for me has evolved into hearing and feeling the sound.

You all have the same thing going but because you don't have to rely on it consciously you don't realize the impact of both hearing and feeling the music but you do. My body has adjusted naturally (God is a genius) to this, so it has become an unconscious part of me and believe me I may be missing the audible part of a piece of music but I am still experiencing it a little bit differently than you are.

So the moral to my story is get full range speakers because if you don't you are missing the "feeling" part of the music.

Rant complete.:D

Whoa.

That's deep. Thanks for sharing that.

DarqueKnight

Dennis Gardner wrote:

On the other end of the spectrum, I always chuckle when the guys on this forum complain about hearing the 13khz +5db bump in the SL2000 tweeters response in their music..................exactly what instrument was it that showed the terrible bump???

Three instruments come to mind: the female singing voice, the alto saxophone when playing in the extended "altissimo" register, and the piano.

Any time you significantly change the harmonic structure of a complex audio signal, such as music, it will be noticeable. Assume a full range music signal is being played through a high quality equalizer. If you set that equalizer to only add a 5 dB boost to 13 kHz, most people would hear a difference. Some would find it objectionable and some would like the added brightness.

Dennis Gardner wrote:

Nothing of an analog nature goes that high and harmonics of the main notes aren't enough to actually be heard over the main tones.

Harmonics can't be heard over the main notes (unless you have a very high harmonic distortion situation), but they do add "color" the fundamental frequencies, even if they have much less amplitude than the fundamental frequency.

Under normal conditions most musical instruments have rapidly descending energy levels in the "near" harmonics (2nd, 3rd, 4th). However this is not always true of human (particularly female) singing voices and this can be verified by Fast Fourier Transform Analysis (FFT).

When I was considering switching the stock SL3000 tweeters in my SDA SRS 1.2TL's to the silk dome RD0198 tweeters, I replaced all four SL3000's in the right speaker, set my preamp to mono, then moved the balance control between left and right to note any differences in sound. When playing instrumental music, I could tell no difference whatsoever between the SL3000's and the RD0198's. When I played music with a female singer, and particularly a female singing in the upper registers, I could hear a "graininess" with the SL3000 that was not present with the RD0198.

Dennis Gardner wrote:

Their isn't any 13khz music, and I try not to listen to sine waves as a way of judging a speaker's quality.

True, there aren't any musical instruments or human voices that can produce fundamental frequencies at or anywhere near 13 kHz. Some instruments and people do produce fundamental frequencies that have significant harmonics (overtones) near 13 kHz. The music frequency chart you provided in post #18 states:
"The harmonic frequencies generated by instruments and voices extend off the right side of the chart, though at volume levels far below those of the fundamental frequencies shown."

The highest note on the piano is C8, which corresponds to 4,186 Hz. The clearly audible third harmonic of this note is 12.558 kHz, which is fairly close to the 13 kHz resonance in the SL2000's response.

Some female singers' (e.g. Mariah Carey, Minnie Ripperton) vocal range spans five octaves. Riperton was notable for being able to sustain fundamental notes in the sixth and seventh octaves (1046 Hz to 3951 Hz).

The normal range of the alto saxophone is 2.5 octaves. However, there is a higher register (altissimo) that extends to 4 (or more) octaves. Some players (e.g. David Sanborn, Junior Walker) played extensively in the altissimo range, the highest notes of which correspond to the seventh octave on the piano.

hearingimpared

Raife,

You always astound me with your simple explainations of a complicated topic. You are like the sensitivity of Superman with the knowledge of Batman's computer.:D