Why doesn't Pioneer receivers use a sub eq? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 12:12 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
LowTech1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 44
I don't understand why.. This prevents me from even looking at them..
LowTech1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 01:28 PM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,334
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Probably because equalizing a sub isn't all that important. You've done too much internet reading.
FMW is online now  
post #3 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 01:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,965
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Probably because equalizing a sub isn't all that important. You've done too much internet reading.

Why is equalizing a sub not important?
KidHorn is offline  
post #4 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 01:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jack D Ripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 258

For one thing, human hearing is extremely poor at the extremes.  One of the extremes is deep bass.  Thus, it can be off quite a bit and still not matter if humans are listening to it (as opposed to something with good hearing at deep bass frequencies).  (You might also notice, if you have looked at professional reviews of subwoofers, that it is common to rate them with 10% THD, which would be totally unacceptable in the midrange, but is inaudible to humans at 20 Hz.)  Another is that you are not going to be able to EQ away significant dips in the frequency response in the bass, as it would take 10 times the power to correct a 10dB dip, so if you did try EQing it away, you would end up with overdriving your subwoofer and distortion instead of an improvement in sound.  There may be other reasons as well, but these are the ones that come immediately to mind.

 

Your best option is to find the best placement of the subwoofer in your room.  An EQ on the receiver does not help with that.

oztech likes this.

God willing, we will prevail in peace and freedom from fear and in true health through the purity and essence of our natural fluids. God bless you all.
Jack D Ripper is offline  
post #5 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 02:37 PM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,334
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

Why is equalizing a sub not important?

Because it doesn't change anything enough to make a difference. It's nice for making graphs but it doesn't affect sound enough to be worth doing.
oztech likes this.
FMW is online now  
post #6 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 03:05 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
LowTech1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 44
So basically,Audyssey XT32 does nothing to eq the sub?
LowTech1 is offline  
post #7 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 05:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kevin C Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 3,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Because it doesn't change anything enough to make a difference. It's nice for making graphs but it doesn't affect sound enough to be worth doing.

You're very wrong. smile.gif A long long time ago, I didn't EQ my sub, but I balanced levels as best I could with a Radio Shack meter. (Even using the low freq compensation coefs.)

I had either, a) a boomy low end, or, b) a thin sounding low end. a) I had a nasty peak that was dominating the low frequency range, hence the boominess. Or, b) I turned down the level by ear such that the boominess was gone, but then the rest of the low freq range sounded thin.

I got a BFD and manually fixed the peak that I had, and I was a very happy camper. I realized a much more balanced and full presentation that improved the overall sound quality in my room. Audyssey, ARC, etc, just improve on what I did manually with the sub, except that those auto EQ routines can also deal with low frequency problems in all 7 speakers of my 7.1 system.

*Some* rooms might not need auto EQ, and auto EQ can't fix all the issues that the worst rooms have, but I agree with the OP, that I would never ever consider an AVR or SSP unless this was included.

If it's not worth waiting until the last minute to do, then it's not worth doing.

KevinVision 7.1 ... Something old and something new :-)

Kevin C Brown is offline  
post #8 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 08:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kimeran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 115
I don't know why they don't have it built in but the bass is harder to EQ than higher frequencies. This is why I would much rather have a dedicated EQ system/amp than to worry about what is in an AVR or SSP.

It does affect the sound alot though. It is often room interaction that creates that one note bass.

Trying to enjoy the simple things in life.

 

Steam: madbrayniak

Kimeran is offline  
post #9 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 09:32 PM
 
Goat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Eagan,Mn
Posts: 326
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Most people swear by XT32 or ARC..
Goat1 is offline  
post #10 of 149 Old 02-04-2014, 10:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
M Code's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Joshua Tree, CA
Posts: 9,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goat1 View Post

Most people swear by XT32 or ARC..

Mostly marketing fluff...
Turn it OFF and play a lossless source such as the DTS 2014 Blu-Ray demo disk, music track #7 David Stewart "Every Single Night"...
Listen closely if you have high resolution, quality loudspeakers you will be surprised by its clarity and sonic quality...

We sell and install the major brands, by far the best performing room EQ software we have found is the one implemented in the high-end JBL Synthesis components developed by Dr.Toole's R&D team..

Just my $0.05.... 👍😉
oztech likes this.
M Code is offline  
post #11 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 12:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Knucklehead90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: State of Confusion - 98823
Posts: 7,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 113
I've had plain old Audyssey - xt - and xt32. The best thing I can say about it is it tamed the house curve with an ED A5-350 that had a bad hump in the 55-70hz area. I've got a Yamaha V3900 and it takes care of that too. Other than that I've never found much use for the room correction stuff. My HK990 is also noticeable in what it does for bass with a 12" DIY sealed sub I use for music. I wouldn't call sub eq'ing useless. I'd like to see more subs with their own correction software built in.

When all else fails - RTFM!

♫♫♫ Two Channel Rules! ♫♫♫

GO SEAHAWKS!!!
Knucklehead90 is offline  
post #12 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 01:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rnatalli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 92
I have to disagree with the pack here as I find being able to EQ the sub important in some rooms which simply can't be tamed otherwise and this difference is audible IMO. To answer the OP, pick up a MiniDSP and the REW software and you can use it as a sub EQ with any receiver.
rnatalli is offline  
post #13 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 04:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,965
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper View Post

For one thing, human hearing is extremely poor at the extremes.  One of the extremes is deep bass.  Thus, it can be off quite a bit and still not matter if humans are listening to it (as opposed to something with good hearing at deep bass frequencies).  (You might also notice, if you have looked at professional reviews of subwoofers, that it is common to rate them with 10% THD, which would be totally unacceptable in the midrange, but is inaudible to humans at 20 Hz.)  Another is that you are not going to be able to EQ away significant dips in the frequency response in the bass, as it would take 10 times the power to correct a 10dB dip, so if you did try EQing it away, you would end up with overdriving your subwoofer and distortion instead of an improvement in sound.  There may be other reasons as well, but these are the ones that come immediately to mind.

Your best option is to find the best placement of the subwoofer in your room.  An EQ on the receiver does not help with that.

THD and eq'ing are 2 different things. When you eq, you want to create unity gain across a range of frequencies. Whether the gain is distorted or not is not the issue.

Nulls can't be eq'd away, but this is typically resolved by using multiple subwoofers. Moving a single sub around can help, but it's almost impossible to eliminate nulls with a single sub. In a room you have lots of nulls at different frequency ranges. At higher frequencies, the nulls tend to be smaller, but they exist. There are fewer of them since there are a lot more speakers playing the higher notes than the lower ones.

Room correction at sub frequencies has made a big difference in the sound quality of some of my setups. YMMV.
KidHorn is offline  
post #14 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 06:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bigbarney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goat1 View Post

Most people swear by XT32 or ARC..
I believe that's nothing but marketing hoo-hah and people falling into it. I have an onkyo (audyssey) and a pioneer (mcacc) and I honestly can't tell the difference in eq vs non eq of the sub.

One does have to wonder though, even if it's marketing hoo-hah, why wouldn't Pioneer want to rack up a few more sales from those who tend to swallow that sort of thing?
bigbarney is offline  
post #15 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 06:08 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbarney View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goat1 View Post

Most people swear by XT32 or ARC..
I believe that's nothing but marketing hoo-hah and people falling into it. I have an onkyo (audyssey) and a pioneer (mcacc) and I honestly can't tell the difference in eq vs non eq of the sub.

One does have to wonder though, even if it's marketing hoo-hah, why wouldn't Pioneer want to rack up a few more sales from those who tend to swallow that sort of thing?

I'm not happy with the lack of reliable evidence about the effectiveness of the various automated system optimization facilities.

For example Audyssey has been very popular for Home Audio and HT, but over in automotive not so much.

It would be fun to run a DBT bake-off, but being on a fixed income I'm not going to run right out and buy three top-of-the line AVRs to help any of the manufacturers sell AVRs on the basis of my hard work just because I'm such a nice guy. ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #16 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 06:21 AM
Advanced Member
 
McStyvie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 884
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Sure you don't need to EQ your subs. But that is like having your timing belt on your car be off by a few milliseconds. It still runs, but is just off...

I have only Mult EQ for now(Denon 2309), but added a Mini DSP when I moved into my new place and added a second sub. The room is just f'd for bass and has lots of peaks. Without EQ, the bass sounded like shat. Now, with it EQ'd with Mini DSP and REW, it is freaking tight and I was able to eliminate most of the peaks.

You are only missing out if you don't do it to be honest.

Even though I have a mini DSP, the fact that Pioneer doesn't even offer sub EQ at all just turns me off.

When I upgrade to a $1500+ receiver, I don't want to be forced to use my Mini DSP to calibrate my two subs, I want to have the OPTION to tune it and tweak it even more, but also have the freedom to just run a calibration and then enjoy.

9/10 HT enthusiasts probably can't be bothered to mess with REW, so Pioneer is losing a lot of sales just by excluding it, marketing bluff or no. Though my ears and my wife's ears all say that EQ'ing them makes a huge difference if done properly.
McStyvie is offline  
post #17 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 07:29 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,334
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin C Brown View Post

You're very wrong. smile.gif A long long time ago, I didn't EQ my sub, but I balanced levels as best I could with a Radio Shack meter. (Even using the low freq compensation coefs.)

I had either, a) a boomy low end, or, b) a thin sounding low end. a) I had a nasty peak that was dominating the low frequency range, hence the boominess. Or, b) I turned down the level by ear such that the boominess was gone, but then the rest of the low freq range sounded thin.

I got a BFD and manually fixed the peak that I had, and I was a very happy camper. I realized a much more balanced and full presentation that improved the overall sound quality in my room. Audyssey, ARC, etc, just improve on what I did manually with the sub, except that those auto EQ routines can also deal with low frequency problems in all 7 speakers of my 7.1 system.

*Some* rooms might not need auto EQ, and auto EQ can't fix all the issues that the worst rooms have, but I agree with the OP, that I would never ever consider an AVR or SSP unless this was included.

Saying I'm wrong is pretty strange comment based on your one single experience. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that EQ ing the sub worked for me better than it does for you?
FMW is online now  
post #18 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 08:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wine country CA
Posts: 7,339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

Mostly marketing fluff...
Turn it OFF and play a lossless source such as the DTS 2014 Blu-Ray demo disk, music track #7 David Stewart "Every Single Night"...
Listen closely if you have high resolution, quality loudspeakers you will be surprised by its clarity and sonic quality...

We sell and install the major brands, by far the best performing room EQ software we have found is the one implemented in the high-end JBL Synthesis components developed by Dr.Toole's R&D team..

Just my $0.05.... 👍😉

LOL talk about marketing fluff.

sent via Morse code...........

The Hun
thehun is online now  
post #19 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 08:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wine country CA
Posts: 7,339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

THD and eq'ing are 2 different things. When you eq, you want to create unity gain across a range of frequencies. Whether the gain is distorted or not is not the issue.

Nulls can't be eq'd away, but this is typically resolved by using multiple subwoofers. Moving a single sub around can help, but it's almost impossible to eliminate nulls with a single sub. In a room you have lots of nulls at different frequency ranges. At higher frequencies, the nulls tend to be smaller, but they exist. There are fewer of them since there are a lot more speakers playing the higher notes than the lower ones.

Room correction at sub frequencies has made a big difference in the sound quality of some of my setups. YMMV.
+1

sent via Morse code...........

The Hun
thehun is online now  
post #20 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 08:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wine country CA
Posts: 7,339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Saying I'm wrong is pretty strange comment based on your one single experience. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that EQ ing the sub worked for me better than it does for you?
Not to gang up on you but many of us went through the same learning curves like Kevin did and came to the same conclusions. If you had followed the DIY sections the last decade or so, this would be very familiar to you as well.

sent via Morse code...........

The Hun
thehun is online now  
post #21 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 10:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kevin C Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 3,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Saying I'm wrong is pretty strange comment based on your one single experience. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that EQ ing the sub worked for me better than it does for you?

Seems to me there are a lot more people who have gotten benefit from Audyssey/ARC/etc than those who haven't. Just peruse the many threads on Audyssey, ARC, Anthem, Denon, Marantz, Onkyo, etc. threads across AVS. And even some of the posts in this thread.

It's simple physics: you have low frequency sound waves that have wavelengths on the order of the width, height, and length dimensions of your room. Constructive and deconstructive interference will occur. You can mitigate some of that by sub and listener placement, multiple subs, room treatments, etc, but a lot of people are limited by budget or room issues such that room EQ can still help most people in most situations.

If you haven't heard the benefit of room EQ in your room, I'm sorry about that. But that's not the case for most people who have properly used the better systems.

If it's not worth waiting until the last minute to do, then it's not worth doing.

KevinVision 7.1 ... Something old and something new :-)

Kevin C Brown is offline  
post #22 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 11:18 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,334
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehun View Post

Not to gang up on you but many of us went through the same learning curves like Kevin did and came to the same conclusions. If you had followed the DIY sections the last decade or so, this would be very familiar to you as well.

I expected the pile up. I've read the posts. I just think sub eq is a minor issue, not a major one. For a mere $100 I can add a mini dsp to eq my sub but I have no motivation to do it because I like the sound of the system. My 1/2 century of audio experience tells me all is well with my system. I might be lucky with an acoustically better than average room situation. I don't know. I do know that there aren't any serious flaws in the sound presentation.
FMW is online now  
post #23 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 11:19 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,334
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin C Brown View Post

Seems to me there are a lot more people who have gotten benefit from Audyssey/ARC/etc than those who haven't. Just peruse the many threads on Audyssey, ARC, Anthem, Denon, Marantz, Onkyo, etc. threads across AVS. And even some of the posts in this thread.

It's simple physics: you have low frequency sound waves that have wavelengths on the order of the width, height, and length dimensions of your room. Constructive and deconstructive interference will occur. You can mitigate some of that by sub and listener placement, multiple subs, room treatments, etc, but a lot of people are limited by budget or room issues such that room EQ can still help most people in most situations.

If you haven't heard the benefit of room EQ in your room, I'm sorry about that. But that's not the case for most people who have properly used the better systems.

No need to worry, I'm used to being on the unpopular side of audio issues.
FMW is online now  
post #24 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jack D Ripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbarney View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goat1 View Post

Most people swear by XT32 or ARC..
I believe that's nothing but marketing hoo-hah and people falling into it. I have an onkyo (audyssey) and a pioneer (mcacc) and I honestly can't tell the difference in eq vs non eq of the sub.

One does have to wonder though, even if it's marketing hoo-hah, why wouldn't Pioneer want to rack up a few more sales from those who tend to swallow that sort of thing?

I'm not happy with the lack of reliable evidence about the effectiveness of the various automated system optimization facilities.

For example Audyssey has been very popular for Home Audio and HT, but over in automotive not so much.

It would be fun to run a DBT bake-off, but being on a fixed income I'm not going to run right out and buy three top-of-the line AVRs to help any of the manufacturers sell AVRs on the basis of my hard work just because I'm such a nice guy. ;-)

 

Indeed.  A lot of people have opinions, but there is very little in the way of reliable evidence.  Given some of the nonsense some people believe, just having an opinion is not very convincing.  Given the limitations of human hearing at very low frequencies, it would seem likely that there would have to be a dramatic difference for it to be audibly different, and many of the problems that people have with bass are not likely to be solved with an EQ (e.g., deep dips in the frequency response created by placement and room acoustics).  But it would be good to see a proper test done of the various automatic EQ systems that are available.


God willing, we will prevail in peace and freedom from fear and in true health through the purity and essence of our natural fluids. God bless you all.
Jack D Ripper is offline  
post #25 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 11:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
McStyvie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 884
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 78
There is evidence a plenty, graphs which show flatter lines vs rugged peaks do not prove it for you? That is not subjective.

Sure you can't hear bass below roughly 20hz,but most xover at 80Hz. You don't think it worthy then to try to flatten the response of that very important 60Hz of sound?

Of course you can't solve nulls with EQ, only multiple subs and better placement do that, but once you solve the nulls, you just accept the peaks? Makes little sense to me
kbarnes701 likes this.
McStyvie is offline  
post #26 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 12:12 PM
RUR
Innocent Bystander
 
RUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California Republic
Posts: 2,384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper View Post

A lot of people have opinions, but there is very little in the way of reliable evidence.
Well, in 2009 Harman demonstrated that at least some products produce results (smoother response, downward tilt) which are preferred to no EQ. http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/11/subjective-and-objective-evaluation-of.html and https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B97zTRsdcJTfY2U4ODhiZmUtNDEyNC00ZDcyLWEzZTAtMGJiODQ1ZTUxMGQ4/edit?hl=en&pli=1

and the state of the art continues to improve, not only for those 2009 products (e.g. Audyssey), but with newer products, like Dirac Live and Trinnov.
Quote:
Given the limitations of human hearing at very low frequencies, it would seem likely that there would have to be a dramatic difference for it to be audibly different, and many of the problems that people have with bass are not likely to be solved with an EQ (e.g., deep dips in the frequency response created by placement and room acoustics).
Look around. Users with large, easily audible peaks of 15dB and more in the LF may be found everywhere in these fora. It would be nice if all of them had the option of using plenty of bass absorption and/or ideally placed multiple subs, but many/most have setups in living rooms, which must be shared with other activities and which are subject to WAF and other limitations. For these folks, RC or even a few PEQ filters to pull down those peaks provide substantial, and audible, improvement.
kbarnes701 likes this.
RUR is offline  
post #27 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 12:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rnatalli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 92
I've seen peaks of 9db at 50-60hz in some systems. Believe me, you can hear a difference when EQ is applied and don't need DBT.
Knucklehead90 likes this.
rnatalli is offline  
post #28 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 01:02 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Foxbat121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: VA
Posts: 10,053
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Never mind
Foxbat121 is online now  
post #29 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 02:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jack D Ripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by McStyvie View Post

There is evidence a plenty, graphs which show flatter lines vs rugged peaks do not prove it for you? That is not subjective.

Sure you can't hear bass below roughly 20hz,but most xover at 80Hz. You don't think it worthy then to try to flatten the response of that very important 60Hz of sound?

Of course you can't solve nulls with EQ, only multiple subs and better placement do that, but once you solve the nulls, you just accept the peaks? Makes little sense to me

 

That one can get a measurement that is different is not the issue.  The issue is how audible EQing of deep bass will be for humans.  (For others who need it, EQing other frequencies is not the topic of this thread; only frequencies going to the subwoofer are relevant to the discussion.)  Although humans can hear at 20 Hz, their hearing is vastly inferior at that frequency than in the midrange, and consequently differences there matter far less than differences in midrange.  For example, it is common to see in professional reviews of subwoofers, measurements involving 10% THD.  The reason being, humans cannot hear that at very low frequencies.  However, that amount of distortion would be totally unacceptable in midrange frequencies.  Humans are better able to make distinctions in midrange than in bass (or treble, though that is a topic for another thread).

 

So, no one is disputing that a flatter response can be achieved and measured.  The question is, how much does this matter for humans listening to it?  For that to be answered, either properly conducted double blind tests should be done, or reference should be made to some previously done test on the relevant frequencies.

 

It is also worth pointing out that FMW did not state that it would make no difference at all; only that it "isn't all that important."  So, for those who say that he is wrong, first they need to demonstrate that the differences are generally audible.  Then that the differences are judged significant, and that a preference is present for the EQed version rather than for the subwoofer as is.  Now, it is fair enough to point out that he has not proven his claim correct, but people have gone beyond that and claimed that he is wrong.  So far, no one has produced the evidence to back up that claim.


God willing, we will prevail in peace and freedom from fear and in true health through the purity and essence of our natural fluids. God bless you all.
Jack D Ripper is offline  
post #30 of 149 Old 02-05-2014, 03:38 PM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,334
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 471 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Thanks, Jack. I don't really want to set up a challenge. I understand the mainstream "common knowledge" of most audio issues including those relating to subwoofer EQ. For me it isn't a big deal. If I thought it was a big deal I would simply EQ mine. I know how to do it and I can afford the gear with which to do it. I simply don't have the motivation because, when I hear a bass guitar playing a progression that descends in frequency, I don't hear any holes or rises in the volume. If I did, I would get right on it because, like everyone else on the forum, I'm fussy about sound. I'm a big believer in measurements but I also understand that not everything measurable is audible nor are performance comparisons always audible. I think I have enough experience to know when the sound is good and when it cries for improvement. My DIY sub sounds good. It cries for nothing that bothers me. That is all I meant. I'm not against EQ'ing subs. I would just say that most systems would gain more by having attention aimed toward other parts of the system, assuming a good performing sub in the first place.

I can get the group moving on my next statement. Gadzooks! I have my main speakers set to large!!!!
FMW is online now  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off