Does using a subwoofer change speaker design?

[@jeffreypicciolo7706]

Great answer. Interesting how sensitivity, box size, and low frequency extension are intertwined.

[@wymotome]

"Hoffman's Iron Law" is essentially what he is referring to (leaving out a few details, however).

[@Capitan_Cavernicola_1]

Great info but please improve the audio of your videos.

[@cbrunhaver]

Absolutely. I recorded a bunch of these at once and future videos will have this corrected. Thank you,

[@Jupiter1423]

The irony

[@kevinmcgrath3591]

credibility nose dive with audio like that bud

[@woohunter1]

I like running subs, modern speakers, even good towers can’t dig as deep, they are relatively cheap for the addition they make, and they are a lot of fun. If you do it right, your bass will sound like it’s coming from your towers, even if it’s not.

[@googoo-gjoob]

*Chris* , best yet! keep up the great work. youre seeming more comfortable. remember...... _YOU_ are the only one who knows we arent wearing pants!

[@ThinkingBetter]

This is an excellent point. The most (trying to be) audiophile stereo speakers are rarely optimized for subwoofer use and that’s a bummer.

[@ThinkingBetter]

@Fat Rat Yes, it depends on the music and how "over-tuned" your stereo speakers are in trying to make sub-bass. The effect, from my experience, is mostly observed with very pure sub bass and that's not all that common in real music.

[@StewartMarkley]

@Fat Rat So I'm getting that you can play the system louder with the filters because of reduced distortion from the woofers, which is why it's smart to use a highpass filter when using a sub. I'm also getting that you are not sure about any detrimental effects from having the filters in line. As expected, the more subtle effects are difficult to discern and if you are happy with the sound with the filters in line, then you should keep them installed. If however you want to be more convinced that the filters don't make an objectionable effect, then you ought to try my Markley method of making subjective comparisons as I mentioned to you previously. Just put one filter in one channel and leave the other side alone. You may well need to compensate for a level difference due to the filter insertion loss which should be level matched as closely as possible with a wideband noise source and SPL meter. The signals on both sides should be identical (mono) and if you don't have a mono switch available, then a Y adapter can be used to split one stereo channel in two and sent to both channels. Then the last detail is to put the speakers side by side to reduce the effect of varying room acoustics. Then switching back and forth from the left to right channels while listening to a wide variety of music at a wide variety of listening level over time will let you decide if there is any difference with the filter or not. Or just be happy with the system as is. Later mate.

[@StewartMarkley]

@Fat Rat Well I would say that your probably going to be just fine with the filters to get rid of some distortion you hear sometimes without any detrimental effects. If that is all you're looking to do, then great. But if you are trying to also reveal if there are any audible influences with the filters that may be noticeable to some people with some systems, then the Markley method is the way to proceed.

[@StewartMarkley]

@Fat Rat I guess you are more of a spectator on these forums than truly interested in the science behind HiFi. That's cool. I've always been interested in the science of electronics and sound and now that I'm retired I have the time to dig into it much more deeply than I have in the past. Dig those tunes!

[@StewartMarkley]

@Fat Rat I would guess that you are much more like the typical guy on here but with a lot of practical experience in the different components, more like a Steve Gutenberg. I'm really into the science of sound. What started me on this path is when I put my two speakers with open backs that were part of a cheapo stereo system I got as a kid, I put the speakers in the doors of my bedroom closet which of course dramatically improved the bass, and I had to understand why that happened. So after my submarine stint in the Navy I got into the pro sound business working in recording studios and ultimately landed in the CBS Technology Center working on all sorts of audio and video research projects. At the end of my career I worked for a guitar pedal manufacturer designing pedals. So I naturally am into the details of audio and now have a lot of time on my hands to work on it. Always a pleasure to chat with you.

[@trevorvantiel453]

Corbin Dallas. ... The Fifth Element. Thats classic Chris, just classic. Keep em coming!

[@finscreenname]

Do the IRS V's have a left and right speaker? Why are the tweeters on the inside the way you all have them set up? Just for looks?

[@jamesplotkin4674]

If you're sitting in front of these behemoths, the set on your right is generally considered the right. The left is treated the same way.

[@finscreenname]

@@jamesplotkin4674 A little more then that please.

[@finscreenname]

@Fat Rat "Tweeter array is on the "inside" because that's how the loudspeakers were designed to function...properly." That's what I was asking. Why do they work better on the inside then the outside. Is there really a difference? Also why are they mounted to such a large box. They are both ribbon speakers so they really dont even need a box and could be mounted on a flat plank. Why do they have speakers in the back inside a half moon? So many questions.

[@jamesplotkin4674]

@Fat Rat It's like the new guy in the office who has to share all his funny thermal faxes with his co-workers, only to find out his jokes are weak... last week?

[@jamesplotkin4674]

@@finscreenname I believe it's so the mid-bass is closer to center, able to couple and the highs are outside of that, enhancing the sound stage and image.

[@sudd3660]

it is a important topic, because most small speakers are designed to go low at the expense of sound quality(bassreflex and slave), and then people amte it to subs. always best to buy speakers made for sound quality and those work better with subwoofers. example sealed box design. I have not gotten into high pass filter yet, i seen some great passive application of that does it on the balanced wired going into the poweramp.

[@jimshaw899]

I wish more manufacturers (other than the HT guys), especially those who wisely offer subwoofer line outputs, would offer adjustable bass rolloff on the L-R channels. My present main system has a decent sub (JBL), but the amp (Emotiva) still sends all that low frequency energy to the Klipsch 600M's, and it is wasted or causes some IM distortion - not to mention moving the little speakers' cones unnecessarily.

[@gtric1466]

Chris, What happened? Did Paul lock you in MR2 for the weekend? i cant think of too many rooms i would rather get locked into.

[@dandonna852]

I have small space and don't have space for 2 subwoofer looking at integrated subwoofer like GOLDENEAR or DEFINITIVE TECHNOLOGY any thoughts??

[@davep2945]

Hey Dan, well Goldenear and Definitive models with the built in subs do produce a ton of low end but I haven't ever listened to a model from either company that I liked. Now, to be fair, they are usually set up in show rooms to showcase the bass but I finally did get a chance to listen to a pair of Triton Two's in a home setting where the gentleman using them had them set up correctly and they were a lot better but nowhere near worth all the praise that's heaped on them. But I should add that I'm a music lover, not an audiophile in the modern snob sense. Yep, I hear everything the audiosnob hears but I'm not impressed unless the speaker first makes me forget about the minutiae and allows the music to draw me in. When Definitive was all the rage years ago I bought Paradigm Studio 60's in a head to head comparison. I've listened to Goldenears four times in stores and once in a home. They're not for me. Like yourself, I have a small space as I live in an apartment so last year after hearing them at Rocky Mountain Audiofest I took a chance on a pair of Wharfdale Lintons and they're fantastic. Not what the average audiophile would lavish with praise but they draw me in and let me enjoy the music. The GE's did not. If I had double the dough I probably would have bought the Tekton Double Impacts instead but I wouldn't have been able to use them to full effect in an apartment anyway.

[@dandonna852]

@@davep2945 thank you

[@dandonna852]

@@davep2945 Other speakers I'm looking at Aria 936 Focal OPTICON 6 DALI Motion 60XTI Martin Logan SVS Ultra Tower SVS

[@davep2945]

@@dandonna852 Hey Dan, unfortunately I haven't heard the exact speakers you listed. I've heard the bookshelf version of the SVS Ultras and they sounded a bit harsh to me. Like they were being pushed too hard even when the volume wasn't insanely high. The Ultra towers double up the mids and uses the 8" woofers to relieve some strain on the mids so maybe they are different but I haven't heard them. Focals always sounded like slightly less clinical versions of B&W speakers to me. But it's been ten years since I've heard a pair of Focals so it wouldn't be fair to assume they are the same now. I have heard the Martin Logan ESL-X and liked them quite a bit. There is very good integration between the woofer and the panel and having a dynamic driver certainly gives a panel speaker some of the pop most are missing. However, if I were going panels I'd go with a Magnepan 1.7 and a pair or two pair of really tight subs. That defeats our purpose here though. However, The ESL-X is certainly in your price range but being a panel it needs to be out in the room a bit and in a small space that could be an issue. But it's all I know in the ML line. I wish I could find a pair of Dali's to listen to. Even at Rocky Mountain last year if there was a room featuring them I must have missed it. A definite possibility given how big the show was. My guess is that any of the four speakers you mentioned will produce more than enough bass for most music but it's doubtful they are going to do what the Definitive's or Golden Ear speakers do when you drop below 40 hertz. Those speakers are purpose built to produce deep bass and they do. Not quite like dedicated subs do but more than good enough for most. Unfortunately, for my tastes, bass is their best feature and I wanted more. Don't know where you live but if you're in the U.S. and you want to try something with the knowledge that you can return it if you don't like it then try Crutchfield. Never had a bad experience with them and they sell the Focal, Martin Logan and SVS speakers you mentioned. In person audition is always best but given the current situation that may be even less a possibility than it often is anyway. Last I knew stores within a hundred miles of me were open and I have access to good PPE but many don't. Now, as for what I have heard in the last three years that would fit in a smaller space had great bass as well as enough of everything I like to put them in my home. The list goes like this. Tekton Double Impacts. Paradigm Prestige 85's. (95's would offer more but they weren't in stock) Monitor Audio Silver 300's. The Martin Logan ESL-X. They were really good I just liked the Maggie 1.7's better but the 1.7's need a sub. The Wharfdale Lintons I mentioned currently owning (tad too warm) though they won't be my last stop on the speaker train. And the Legacy Audio Signature SE. The best all around were the Legacy's. The Tekton's are right there in general performance and both have killer bass. They both equal anything the GE's or Definitives can do but you have to have the power for them as they are purely passive speakers. Then I'd probably go with the Paradigms. Just so holographic but they were perfectly setup. But then that is required for any speaker to image well. Great bass, also. Then the Martin's and the Monitor's. I heard others along the way I loved but none of them would be great choices in either a smaller space or without subs. I know none of these were the speakers you mentioned but I figured I would throw this out that way you if you've heard some of these you could see if our tastes jive. If so you might want to check them out. If not then you know not to listen to me! Lol.

[@Kirisutekarl]

Wasn't gonna watch, but a fellow Corbin asked a question, therefore I must learn. There are far and few in between people named Corbin. Who's also in Texas.

[@rickc661]

I'D guess with no evidence the KEF ls 50, as a good speaker, was designed to go with a sub or 2.

[@RoaroftheTiger]

If Not, WE can blame the BBC - LS3/5a. ;-)

[@johnsweda2999]

@@RoaroftheTiger they were designed to be used with a subs biggest speakers built into the walls they are desk mounted speakers monitors near-field

[@sudd3660]

@@johnsweda2999 ls50 is flawed, it can not be used without as subwoofer, and it is has port making it have sound qualety compromised to fake some extra bass. the speaker is just a mess.

[@RoaroftheTiger]

@@johnsweda2999 - John, They were First designed for Monitoring Location Broadcasts; with a haphazard placement in a Van. Though, I would favor Your Description , as Ideal.

[@johnsweda2999]

@@RoaroftheTiger yes they were used everywhere near field listening and for vocal balance not just music

[@dl6519]

Great analysis by Chris. Imo one possible potential benefit (for two-channel) of knowing that subwoofers will be used is this: The designer could theoretically optimize for not needing a protective highpass filter, thereby rendering a potentially problematic filter in the main speakers' signal path optional.

[@justinparkman3585]

Definitely and to my ears they make quality well designed speakers sound worst buy a speaker designed for the rooms size and your never need a sub to kill the balance of the speaker to how its ment to sound the designer has spent hours designing a speaker not to be ruined by a sub .

[@ubza1234]

Have you changed your mic? To my ears there is a lot more sibilance. Love love love your videos! Thank you so so much!

[@johnsweda2999]

I'm surprising you say 80 Hz cut-off crossover why is that at 6 DB slope ? 105Hz would be better 24db , you were just saying a minute ago better to have it it at a higher frequency the bass drivers can handle it as long as you can get down to 27 Hz plus less smearing in the mid to High frequencies what was the logic of 80 Hz?

[@davep2945]

What he's describing is really a 4 way system as he stated it was a three way monitor on top of a powered sub and if you look into the specs of other high end 4 way systems you'll find they frequently cross over their mid-basses to their woofers/subwoofers in the 80 to 200 hertz range. It really depends on the type and size of mid-bass that's used as well as the ultimate low end extension the sub driver is intended to have as to why a certain crossover point is chosen. There is no one size fits all solution.

[@johnsweda2999]

@@davep2945 yes I know that! I think the low mid-range driver is 5.5" well it was only if he's changed it? what would seem a bit low to cross over at 80 Hz and what is the point as he stated have your three-way crossing over at a higher frequency, male vocals go down to 110 Hz so slightly below that would be more optimal so the crossovers not in the vocal range.

[@davep2945]

@@johnsweda2999 If he's talking about the AN3 then the version they showed at Axpona last year had an 8" midbass and then the supposed final prototype version they showed at Rocky Mountain Audiofest had switched to dual midbass drivers in the 6" to 7" range. Either way that's more than enough surface area to play down to their 80 hertz crossover point cleanly without the excess excursion that can sometimes lead to smearing, among other things.

[@wa2368]

Subwoofers have taken away the need for getting $$$$ full range speakers that can be an enormous pain in the neck to drive (lousy impedance curves, low sensitivity, etc). You still need a speaker that has significant output down to 50-60 hz and your sub should be crossed over to no higher than 50-60 hz for seamless integration. Subs become localizable at crossover frequencies higher than 50-60 hz (A lack of experience would make one think that he can get away with 80 to 100 hz). In essence, a pair of subwoofers are a god send for those who want to save loads of cash on speakers/amplifiers and still have the ultimate audiophile experience.

[@zackpetrovic3029]

Leeloo Dallas Multi Pass

[@paullazarro531]

Who wants ''milk with their toast''?

[@IKnewMickey]

Humans are the only species on mass that drink another species milk.

[@wymotome]

I dislike subwoofers in a 2 channel system. Why? Not easy to blend, all amps don't have a pre/sub out and mostly...it gives a speaker manufacturer an easy out in terms of making a proper full-range speaker. A tower or bookshelf that plays music down to 42hz isn't all that difficult to achieve (true 42hz, not -6db at 42hz either), but there aren't a lot of them on the market as most manufactures call it "good enough" around 55hz or so. Enough to give some bass extension without a sub, but not enough to hear all the music either. In a few ways, we've went backwards since the golden era in the late 70's and speaker design seems to be one of them.

[@erickbollmann1757]

woowww KORBEN DALLAS!!

[@birgerolofsson2347]

A speaker-design should NEVER change just because a user CAN use a sub. A sub is just something you use to help with the lowest Hz. Just look at big Wilson-speakers, they are very capable to produce low Hz but they still have Thor to help with the absolute lowest frequencies a recording could have.

[@ThePAF23]

If you continue to record so badly and annoyingly your voice: i am not going to see any of your videos again!Check-out this and your previous video!Really annoying sound!And you give advises for audiophiles???....