Subwoofer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AumStudioBrian
  • Start date Start date
A

AumStudioBrian

New member
Which Subwoofers are good for monitoring and mixing/mastering? I'm looking into the new Event Sub, mostly because I use Event 20/20's. But are there others out there and how do they stand for accurate mixing?
 
Brian,

> I'm looking into the new Event Sub, mostly because I use Event 20/20's <

Those are good down to 50 Hz, right? Do you have any room treatment and especially bass traps? If not, I'd look into treating your room before getting a subwoofer. Bass traps will do far more to improve low end accuracy than any sub.

--Ethan
 
Thanks. I'm currently in the process of installing an Auralex Pro Plus acoustic treatment kit, so I'll look forward to that before I look into a sub. If you guys have anything else to say, or which subs are nice, feel free for future refrence. Thanks--
 
boycott subwoofers

Do us and yourself a favor - boycott the subwoofer mentality.

Why do you think they were unheard of prior to 1982? Because musicians used to be intelligent and professional.

Subwoofers, by definition, are BELOW the audio hearing range of the human ear... and hence, are worthless for listening to. In fact, they only distort and ruin any music in the audible hearing range.

Subwoofers, I suppose, are for vibration/feeling.... but again, the ultra low frequencies require mega doses of energy output to move them, just shake the hell out of everything and cause people to HATE the intrusion by amatuers who think that that is something cool.

Can you just imagine Herbie Hancock or Oscar Peterson (Jazz), or Seely Dan's Fagen or Becker (Pop Rock), or Aretha Franklin, Whitney Houston, or Celine Dion (singers d' excellence), or even Rock heavyweights such as VH, Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, or Boston, or any other defacto standard of musical art... having a noise making subwoofer in their mix? never.
 
Toddskins said:
Subwoofers, by definition, are BELOW the audio hearing range of the human ear...
Click to expand...

This is simply wrong. If you only put on the sub, you can hear it. So what you are saying here is utter non-sense. I do like the idea of having a "blow up the bass part" speaker, since most home studio monitors do not translate very well in the bass region.

Guhlenn
 
What Toddskins has said is completely untrue. In fact, there isn't a grain of truth in it. Subwoofers have been around at least since the 60's, they produce sound in the audible spectrum, and many, many, top recording studios have used them for decades.-Richie
 
Toddskins said:
Do us and yourself a favor - boycott the subwoofer mentality.

Why do you think they were unheard of prior to 1982? Because musicians used to be intelligent and professional.

Subwoofers, by definition, are BELOW the audio hearing range of the human ear... and hence, are worthless for listening to. In fact, they only distort and ruin any music in the audible hearing range.

Subwoofers, I suppose, are for vibration/feeling.... but again, the ultra low frequencies require mega doses of energy output to move them, just shake the hell out of everything and cause people to HATE the intrusion by amatuers who think that that is something cool.

Can you just imagine Herbie Hancock or Oscar Peterson (Jazz), or Seely Dan's Fagen or Becker (Pop Rock), or Aretha Franklin, Whitney Houston, or Celine Dion (singers d' excellence), or even Rock heavyweights such as VH, Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, or Boston, or any other defacto standard of musical art... having a noise making subwoofer in their mix? never.
Click to expand...
What a load of absolute horseshit......... do you even have any clue what you're talking about??? I suggest you read more and post less..........

:rolleyes:
 
Toddskins, let me just agree with the others here and say that I have no idea what you are talking about.

Just as one small example of how wrong you are... In 1973 Ken Kreisel sold the first M&K Subwoofer to Walter Becker and Donald Fagen for the mixdown of Steely Dan's Pretzel Logic album...

Also, subwoofers do operate predominately in the audible hearing range of the human ear. You may want to read this link for more information about how our systems are designed www.abluesky.com/fullrange

Lastly, my company has sold thousands of professional monitoring systems, for a wide array of applications (including Jazz, Pop Rock etc), and they ALL use a subwoofer as an integral part of the monitoring system.

Cheers!
 
A properly integrated sub makes it possible to have much better sound reproduction at lower prices than it is with only L+R speakers. Remember the '70's? Everybody had HUGE living room speakers so they could hear some bass -- and this was before the current fad of thumpbass. I mean, back then bass was supposed to part of the musical experience, not a sort of pseudo-tribal accompaniment to the ritual drives through McDonalds'.

In fact, subs get a bad name because any idiot can hook up an 18" sub, crank it up, and ruin what passes for music...and every idiot does. (There never seems to be shortage of idiots that there is of heroes, but that's another story.)

PROPERLY INTEGRATED, I said, if you can remember back to my first sentence, which means using test tones and an SPL meter to set the sub, rather than your ears ("WOW, now the bass is SLAMMIN'! That must be set about right). A good sub allows you to circumvent the laws of physics and use small speakers that are optimized for midrange and high end with a sub adding in the bottom. Me, I think it was a terrific invention. Now if we could keep 'em out of the hands of 20-year-olds with '79 Monte Carlos....
 
Proper integration is a complex issue, however as was mentioned above, calibration is an important part of the equation. We offer calibration test tones on our website, along with simple instructions. www.abluesky.com/calibration
 
For what it was worth

players, spectators and .....

It was certainly an opinionated remark, couched mostly in subjective, but true sentiment... surprised though I may be about the Pretzel Logic bit with Fagen, it remains that subwoofer mentality did not make the mainstream until the 80's, and we would all be better off without it. And Steely Dan did not use Subwoofers the way they are used today. Which track, by the way, are you going to claim that there's a subwoofer recorded on? Regardless, it is not the obnoxious noise that "everyone" understands subwoofer mentality to be today. That, is the point.

And to try and split hairs about the subwoofer being in the audible spectrum is silly. Of course we hear SOMETHING. It's called noise.

To pump as much wattage through a subwoofer to cause it to "work", produces drownout of such magnitude that, like Clint Eastwood did in one of the Dirty Harry movies, makes you want to take out your 44 magnum and shoot the speakers out of the back of the offender's car. (heheh I loved that scene in that movie!!!)

Human hearing is rated to be 20 to 20,000 Hz.
The lowest frequency on the Grand Piano is 30 Hz., and if not used intelligently and sparingly, will doubtless be something people do not wish to listen to. Try playing the melody of "New York State of Mind," 4 octaves lower than it's written and see if you enjoy it, hmmm?

Woofers have always generally reached lows around 50 to 60 Hz. Subwoofers go lower still. I'm looking at the spec sheet now on my EV keyboard cabinets with the low at 62 Hz. Bassists would use Cabinets that would go as low as 32 Htz, the average being 40 to 50. Being musicians, they would play their Bass through an amp into a Bass cabinet (so it could be enjoyed, understood, and pleasing to the ear), not through a Sub Woofer where the audience looks up with its forehead crinkled with disdain and wonders "What am I being subjected to?" Just stands to reason.

Geeeee, I wonder if Stanley Clark plays his Bass guitar through a subwoofer. Checking the albums I have of his... no surprise.... no mention of subwoofers.. just lots of huge basses.

I know that most of the current generation totally disagrees. This is not a surprise, nor an acknowledgement that it's in the know. It certainly is not.

I'm a bit tickled that I got a rise so quickly from a few of you.

NO offense intended

But Subwoofers still reek.

ciao
 
How old are you there, Sparky? :rolleyes:

You clearly have no experience with audio engineering or calibration of audio monitoring systems........... like I said earlier - read more, post less....

:rolleyes:
 
Toddskins

You speak with little knowledge and much opinion, this is always a dangerous combination.

Here are a couple comments -

1 The subwoofer used during the mix of Pretzel Logic, was used to create the entire mix. The subwoofer is not "RECORDED", it is part of the monitoring systems - maybe you are confusing the issue.

2 It is important to have a full-range monitoring system, especially in a recording studio, so that you can hear EVERYTHING that is being recorded. By everything I mean even things that may not be musical, such as people kicking microphone stands, rumble etc. Additionally, depending on what is being recorded there can be much harmonic information outside the main resonant note, which is important to conveying the reality that is the musical experience. Add to this that most nearfields are nowhere near "full-range" and you see why their is a need for subwoofers.

Feel free to dislike subwoofers, but please try to avoid making comments that are obviously not factual and are pure uninformed opinion.
 
Mr Sijen, I am aware that "proper integration" will be taken differently by a speaker designer from the general sense that I intended it. I meant simply a subwoofer that doesn't dominate the room or misrepresent the music being played. I actually own 3 subs: one in the living room, one in a CD-playback system in my studio, and another in the studio playback system for the musicians to hear what is being recorded. My monitors do not currently have a sub because I ordinarily record acoustic groups with very little bass content (usually a guitar is the lowest-pitched instrument). But I play electric bass myself and there are times when I want those low notes to have some weight and nothing beats a sub for allowing the lower extension to be heard.

My personal favorite in the integration of the various components of the frequency spectrum, by the way, is Down By The River on Neil Young's Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere: every instrument is clear and present, none are being masked or being strident. It's a pleasure to listen to.
 
Toddskins said:
Bassists would use Cabinets that would go as low as 32 Htz, the average being 40 to 50. Being musicians, they would play their Bass through an amp into a Bass cabinet (so it could be enjoyed, understood, and pleasing to the ear), not through a Sub Woofer where the audience looks up with its forehead crinkled with disdain and wonders "What am I being subjected to?" Just stands to reason.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could explain to me, a bass player for the last 18 years, the difference between my old 15" bass cab with a 130W amp (biamped with a 2x12" 130W cabinet, so it was a true subwoofer), and my 10" studio monitor subwoofer with a 75W amp. Which do you think produces higher SPLs at sub-100Hz frequencies?
 
OK THIS GUY IS A ABSOLUTE IDIOT DO THIS RECORD A BASS LINE AND THEN CUT FROM 20 - 50 HRZ SEE IF YOU HEAR THE DIFFRENCE SAME WITH A KICK HELL SAME WITH A GRAND PIANO WHEN THE LOWER KEYS ARE PLAYED COMPLETE IDIOT IT WOULD MAKE AN AUDIABLE DIFFRENCE ON A 2 INCH SPEAKER IDIOT IDIOT IDIOT im better now :)
 
doulos said:
OK THIS GUY IS A ABSOLUTE IDIOT DO THIS RECORD A BASS LINE AND THEN CUT FROM 20 - 50 HRZ SEE IF YOU HEAR THE DIFFRENCE SAME WITH A KICK HELL SAME WITH A GRAND PIANO WHEN THE LOWER KEYS ARE PLAYED COMPLETE IDIOT IT WOULD MAKE AN AUDIABLE DIFFRENCE ON A 2 INCH SPEAKER IDIOT IDIOT IDIOT im better now :)
Click to expand...


. ' , ; " ? ! -

Directly above are some punctuation marks. Please feel free to use them as needed.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top