Originally Posted by JonasHansen
I think we have established, that it is not a walk in the park to split the LF band into two and that it would be preferred to use drivers for the whole LF area.BUT
, I'm still curious to Bosso's statement that "60hz is 60hz". I have not saved the measurements I made when comparing my JBL's with the SVS but I definately heard a difference when comparing them on music material (and both were roughly the same target curve, except for <25hz, but the music did not have content that low).
I will repeat my unanswered question from a previous posts:
An on-topic question I would like your input to: Some of you are saying, that 60hz sounds like 60hz, given the driver is not being driven into distortion. What about 500hz? Or 800hz? Are there any differences between sound quality at these frequencies when comparing drivers? If yes, what makes this different than the lower frequencies?
EDIT: I read this thread: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1335139/2011-kansas-city-subwoofer-meet-results
The response between the Seaton and JTR looks very close, but still people thought it sounded different with music? What would be the explanation for the perceived difference?
"Very close", "similar", etc., does not mean "same":
Of course, an 'averaged' response is irrelevant to the unique responses that prompted the subjective comments. I never understood "averaged across all seats". It's useless data regarding what each seated listener hears.
But, this is enough data to make the simple point that these are not same FRs. Anyone who can't hear a 7dB difference in loudness at a bass guitars fundamental open string and its 2nd harmonic (which is typically just as loud as the fundamental, assuming the knob jockey didn't bump one or the other) should disqualify himself from offering subjective comments.
Regarding other slices of the recordings bandwidth (500 Hz, 800 Hz, etc), the same thing goes, but even more so. When folks have G2Gs and 'evaluate' mains speakers, the speakers vary wildly in size, shape and placement. Many times the placement is simultaneous, which means the speakers are placed in different spots and almost never is the FR compared.
Also, as is typical of these events, the FRs posted from that particular event require the listening to be at average 85dB, which we all know didn't happen.
Why do mixing engineers use EQ and level sliders? Do they need to use EQ with 15dB cuts and/or bumps at specific frequencies to affect a different sonic signature on the recording? No, their tweaks are far more subtle. If you've ever sat behind a desk and watched the process (and particularly if it's your bass lines being tweaked), you know what slight bumps and cuts (differences affected on the FR of the bass guitar, or whatever instrument) do to the sonic signature of the instrument being tweaked and the overall recording as well.
Pro sound "subs" sound "faster, tighter, quicker, yadda, yadda" because they have a completely different FR, especially at the playback levels the subjective comments evoke. For every comment cited, there needs to be an accurate FR comparison at the seat the comment came from, otherwise, it's just a circle jerk, very much like this pressure vessel gain vs progressive constructive interferences debate. One side has reams of data, the other side just have bizarre and unrelated illustrations.Edited by bossobass - 8/10/12 at 8:19am