# how should a sub sound in a true sound quality system?...ADVANCED SQ PEOPLE ONLY!!1



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

so let me start off tell you what i have ....i have a 98 taurus GL...my headunit is a eclipse cd3200...i have a clarion EQS746....a eclipse ea3422 4 channel amp with the front channels running a set of PPi 3 way powerclass components and the rear channels bridged to 1 channel running 140 watts RMS into a single clarion 10 in a 0.7 sealed box. so far my mids and highs are good. imaging and stage is all great. i can adjust my sub so it bangs clean and loud. but what i want to know in a true SQ comp car is the sub really heard at all?...like dose it just fill out the low end? or do you hear the sub banding in the rear at all?


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

In a true SQ comp car you should never hear sub behind you at all. In fact you feel the sub tones more than really hear them. If they blend correct with the mid bass any sound you hear or feel will seem like it is coming from high on the dash.


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

hmm....whats the best way to get that with my setup? any ideas or thoughts?


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

Well TA is the best way running sub out of phase or moving sub box around if you have that option may help. Best things also to try is running your mid bass as low as possible say 40 or 50hz you may not be able to turn system up very loud running that low so you need to adjust sub level down too.


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

ahh i get what you mean. yea oh by the way...the gains on the eclipse amp are marked in volts...with 5 volts being the gains all the way down. witch is where my cains are since i have 7 volts going into the amp. i forgot the mention i do not have rear speakers....there there is 2 ports going into the trunk into the cab. would it be a good idea to have the sub face directly up and fire into one of the openings? or make a baffle of some sort or catch the subs sound and direct it into the to open holes for the rear speakers?


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

Depending on the car you really don't know where sub box is best placed just have to experiment. With TA you can pretty much put sub anywhere and just dial it in


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

hmm very true. thanx for the advice asota. mucho respect


----------



## cyberdraven (Oct 28, 2009)

Just a thought. Before you mess with your TA, dwell with these 3 items which I find more important when it comes to sub:
1. Phase. Play with your sub's polarity and are which blends better to your fronts.
2. Amplitude. The level of loudness of your mids must coincide with the level of your sub to have an illusion that it is coming upfront.
3. Crossover. Play with your crossover. No rule of thumb here and crossing very low for your mids might not be a good solution specially if your playing your mids beyond it's fs.


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

I suggest you to find some midbass that could go down until 45 hz and find the correct sub to blend with them and try to lpf that sub 50Hz and down. Thx


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

my mids are set on highpass at 90 hz. and my subwoofer is on LP at 90 hz. should i take the mids down to lets say...50hz? and the sub down to 50 hz?


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

asawendo i have the precision power "power class" 3 way component set


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

Qken84 said:


> my mids are set on highpass at 90 hz. and my subwoofer is on LP at 90 hz. should i take the mids down to lets say...50hz? and the sub down to 50 hz?


I think your set it too high for your sub. That is why you could listen it and feel it from your back. It supposed to feel rather than heard. And at 90Hz everyone could easily notice where you placed your sub. CMIIW. Thx


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

hmmm i think you might be right about there. on my amp the LP and HP go down to 50hz. and im pretty sure that my 3 way comp set plays down to 50 hz...so should i set my comp set to 50 HZ HP and my sub 50HZ LP?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

He's not right. If you can't get a sub to blend at 90Hz then the fault lies in your tuning abilities, not the crossover point. Learn to tune, don't lower your xo point and strangle your midbass.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

You're looking for good 'integration', when combining the sub with your speakers. The sub should:

1. Not play the frequencies that your mid is supposed to play. It should only play when the sub frequencies (20-70hz max) are there in the recording. 

2. It needs to be balanced wrt the rest of the sound. Too loud and its going to over power the rest of the sound and pull your attention to only part of the sound. You need to see and hear the sound as a whole. That said, even with proper integration, it will still be a few db's higher than the rest of the sound. If the bass images up lower than the rest of the stage, its too hot.

3. Good balance between your sub and mid bass will give you a seamless transition as the music passes from one range to the next. The sub should give the lower end enough presence to make the sound a complete and whole. I'm not looking for chest thumping bass 

The gains on your sub amp and hu, the box size, time alignment, xover point and slopes and an eq will help in the integration.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> He's not right. If you can't get a sub to blend at 90Hz then the fault lies in your tuning abilities, not the crossover point. Learn to tune, don't lower your xo point and strangle your midbass.


Agreed.


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

sqnut said:


> You're looking for good 'integration', when combining the sub with your speakers. The sub should:
> 
> 1. Not play the frequencies that your mid is supposed to play. It should only play when the sub frequencies (20-70hz max) are there in the recording.
> 
> ...


Agreed and let's not forget about cabin gain when you set your xover. CMIIW


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Yes, cabin gain is a given in a car.


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

thanx for the advice everyone. but what i think im going to do is set the HP filter on my comp set at 60HZ since my ppi 3 way set plays 60-20,000hz and set the LP filter at 60HZ and see how that goes. i know some of you might sat set the highpass higher.....but i want the 3 way set to play its full range it was designed to play...60-20,000hz. and my sub will take car of the 60HZ and down...duh! *facepawm*  lol i am using the clarion EQ, so adjusting the sub volume so it wont be to loud or so soft will not be a problem. on my headunit *eclipse cd3200* it has the option for listening position *front both seats* *front left* front right* and rear* i have it on front. but if anyone knows there way around this model eclipse headunits EQ aand sound adjustments ....feel free to shoot me some advice. oh and by the way the headunits subouts are not being used as i have the clarion EQ hooked up....i have a 3 foot rca coming off the headunits front rca outs to the EQ then from the EQ i have a 4 channel RCA coming from the EQs front and sub outputs going to the eclipse 4 channel amp running the comp set and clarion 10


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

Qken84 said:


> thanx for the advice everyone. but what i think im going to do is set the HP filter on my comp set at 60HZ since my ppi 3 way set plays 60-20,000hz and set the LP filter at 60HZ and see how that goes. i know some of you might sat set the highpass higher.....but i want the 3 way set to play its full range it was designed to play...60-20,000hz. and my sub will take car of the 60HZ and down...duh! *facepawm* lol i am using the clarion EQ, so adjusting the sub volume so it wont be to loud or so soft will not be a problem. on my headunit *eclipse cd3200* it has the option for listening position *front both seats* *front left* front right* and rear* i have it on front. but if anyone knows there way around this model eclipse headunits EQ aand sound adjustments ....feel free to shoot me some advice. oh and by the way the headunits subouts are not being used as i have the clarion EQ hooked up....i have a 3 foot rca coming off the headunits front rca outs to the EQ then from the EQ i have a 4 channel RCA coming from the EQs front and sub outputs going to the eclipse 4 channel amp running the comp
> set and clarion 10


I think your PPI component will be ok as long as you hpf the midbass at 60hz 12db (at least) and then set the lpf of your sub at 50 or 60 Hz 12db (at least), don't forget to match the polarity of your subwoofer with your whole component set.

Then try to set the level of your sub carefuly, try not to exaggerate it if you care about sound quality (it should match the level of your midbass like sqnuts already aforementioned).

Good luck Bro!


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Use the steepest slopes you've got, on both mids and sub. A sub crossed at 60hz on a 12db slope will be playing well into the 100hz zone.


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

sqnut said:


> Use the steepest slopes you've got, on both mids and sub. A sub crossed at 60hz on a 12db slope will be playing well into the 100hz zone.


Correct Sqnut

I forgot to mention at least 12 db (my subs lpf at 48db butterworth) and no one notice the bass came from behind. By the way I am using custom diy processor in order to do that and go active set up. Thx


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

asawendo said:


> Correct Sqnut
> 
> I forgot to mention at least 12 db (my subs lpf at 48db butterworth) and no one notice the bass came from behind. By the way I am using custom diy processor in order to do that and go active set up. Thx


yea the crossover on my headunit is 12 db highpass and lowpass. i should use both of them ?


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

my headunits hp is cuts off at 100hz and lowpass cuts off at 80hz you cant adjust it its eather on or off. then i have the PEQ where i can select 60,80,100,120hz and adjust the Q with wide normal or narrow


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

There are also some questions that the OP needs to answer.

1. Is that the correct size box for the sub?

2. Is that enough power to run the sub properly?


----------



## fish (Jun 30, 2007)

You don't have to use the same xover point on sub & mid. Keep your mid @ 80hz, try it @12db & also with your additional deck xover to check for any added benefit. 

It's ok to underlap, so try your sub @ 50 & 60hz with different slopes to see if you like any of those combos. 

If you wanna play your midd lower than 80, like to 60hz, it will be fine depending on your musical preferences & volume levels.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

quality_sound said:


> He's not right. If you can't get a sub to blend at 90Hz then the fault lies in your tuning abilities, not the crossover point. Learn to tune, don't lower your xo point and strangle your midbass.


X2


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Something I learned along time ago and that served me well was to set my crossover no closer than 1.5 octaves from the -3dB point so if your PPI set is -3dB at 60Hz then your HPF should be no lower than 150Hz. I wouldn't go that high, but 100Hz is fine. 

As I said before, learn to tune properly. Don't half-ass your system by crossing the sub/midbass that low. I remember when 80Hz was a very low crossover point. If you HAVE to go lower than that to integrate either the sub is too loud, has a crap-ton of inductance, you have a phase problem or your midbass needs work.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

In short, no. You don't cross low to 'half ass' your system or cause you have 'crappy' equipment. I cross low for the followng reasons.

1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation. 

2. I DON'T want a heavy. thick, midbass. I want my mid bass to be tight and snappy. A heavy mid bass will dull the mid range and kill a lot of the detailing here.

3. I DON'T want the few extra db's of loudness at the cost of what I would lose.

4. I DON'T want localisation issues.

....and please don't throw the tuning bit around to prove your point. The first thing you learn with tuning is to go by what your hear, how it sounds. You don't set xover points based on numbers and empircal formulae, 2x the fs etc.


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

Ultimateherts said:


> There are also some questions that the OP needs to answer.
> 
> 1. Is that the correct size box for the sub?
> 
> 2. Is that enough power to run the sub properly?


The OP still has not answered my questions!


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

sqnut said:


> In short, no. You don't cross low to 'half ass' your system or cause you have 'crappy' equipment. I cross low for the followng reasons.
> 
> 1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation.
> 
> ...


Agree x2


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

Ultimateherts said:


> The OP still has not answered my questions!


im running half the RMS with is 140 watts. i called clarion and talked to a rep and they said thet sub is raited 50-300 RMS and my box is sealed and is .7 witch is the correct size..


----------



## Kpg2713 (Feb 10, 2008)

sqnut said:


> In short, no. You don't cross low to 'half ass' your system or cause you have 'crappy' equipment. I cross low for the followng reasons.
> 
> 1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation.
> 
> ...


1-4, completely agree. But you gotta start somewhere when tuning, and using the numbers is the best way. I go by ear after that to make fune adjustments, but if you don't use the numbers to get in the ball park, how do you get to the ball park?


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

There are all sorts of opinions on this so I'll just post what I do. Take it only as my opinion, I don't compete but I do listen to as many competition cars as I can.

The biggest help for me is to run it with the subs off for a couple days. Then slowly add the subs back in. You'll probably find that you have the sub way too hot right now. For some reason the take a step back approach helps me to realize how it should sound. 

I personally cross my subs at 95hz but they're very capable up there and the MS8 keeps the bass up front no matter what the crossover point. I've tried from 50hz to 250hz. For my particular setup it never sounded bad but 95 sounds more natural. 63hz had the midbass vibrating my jeans and legs which killed the stage and the 15s play the range so effortlessly. It sounds cleaner when you really crank the volume with the higher crossover points.


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> There are all sorts of opinions on this so I'll just post what I do. Take it only as my opinion, I don't compete but I do listen to as many competition cars as I can.
> 
> The biggest help for me is to run it with the subs off for a couple days. Then slowly add the subs back in. You'll probably find that you have the sub way too hot right now. For some reason the take a step back approach helps me to realize how it should sound.
> 
> I personally cross my subs at 95hz but they're very capable up there and the MS8 keeps the bass up front no matter what the crossover point. I've tried from 50hz to 250hz. For my particular setup it never sounded bad but 95 sounds more natural. 63hz had the midbass vibrating my jeans and legs which killed the stage and the 15s play the range so effortlessly. It sounds cleaner when you really crank the volume with the higher crossover points.


well thank you, i just got the sub 3 days ago so....and i like your idea of *take a step back* what im going to do is set the HP for the 3 way comp set to 60hz because they play 60-20k. and im gonna set my lowpass at 60 hz for the sub but leave the sub volume off and slowly fade it in. i was messing with it today and got some bass up front. i dont need no loud bass...just enough to fill out the bottom end. i had my days with spl and SQ is wayy more of a challenge by far. and by the way how is the JBL MS8? have you heard a bit one to compare it too? id like to get one of them so far i hear the ms8 is better


----------



## brianhj (Apr 9, 2009)

sqnut said:


> 1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation.


Wow, that is a very valid point that had never even crossed my mind. Why has no one ever mentioned this when talking about the common "where to LP my subs at" question?

Do all headunits output a stereo signal on the subwoofer preouts? I guess one could have stereo subs using two mono amps.

Or, like sqnut said, use a low LP for the sub.



I can't believe this has never occurred to me. 12db slope at 100hz will let the sub play into 200hz mono... isn't that, in general, in ANY install, extremely important to consider?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

technically, a sub *shouldn't* have a 'sound'. 

but, your preference will ultimately tell you what you like.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> In short, no. You don't cross low to 'half ass' your system or cause you have 'crappy' equipment. I cross low for the followng reasons.
> 
> 1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation.
> 
> ...


Im not throwing it around to prove anything. I've been doing this since the very early 90s and I have none of the issues you describe. NONE. So as I said, learn to tune and choose equipment accordingly. 

1) Nothing under about 250Hz is localizable anyway so who cares if it's coming from the sub or midbass? I wouldn't call anything under 80Hz midbass. Crossing over at 50Hz just stresses your midbasses unnecessarily. 

2) That all tuning and equipment selection. Low inductance drivers and knowing the target eq curve you're after is key. Too much inductance and you get "slow" midbass, regardless of your crossover point. 

3) If using a 80Hz-100Hz xo point loses you anything then again, it's tuning and equipment selection. 

4) Again, tuning and equipment selection. 

If you think you DON'T set your xo points using empirical data then you have a TON of reading and learning to do. Nothing says these are hard and fast rules, but crossing over a 6" or 7" midbass at 60Hz because that's the lowest it'll play is beyond stupid. I promise you that doing that will cause the problems you're trying to avoid. You'll be sending the driver all kinds of information it can't handle and that would be better handled by the sub. 

Believe me or not, I don't much care, but telling other people to use xo points that low because YOU don't know what you're doing and won't have to replace their destroyed equipment is irresponsible at best.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

And for the record, I never said anything about "crappy" equipment. I said poor equipment selection, huge difference. There is plenty of very good equipment that's inexpensive and plenty of "high-end" gear that sucks all kinds of ass. 

Poor equipment selection is poor equipment selection, regardless of price point or "class".


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> If you think you DON'T set your xo points using empirical data then you have a TON of reading and learning to do. Nothing says these are hard and fast rules, but crossing over a 6" or 7" midbass at 60Hz because that's the lowest it'll play is beyond stupid. I promise you that doing that will cause the problems you're trying to avoid. You'll be sending the driver all kinds of information it can't handle and that would be better handled by the sub.
> 
> Believe me or not, I don't much care, but telling other people to use xo points that low because YOU don't know what you're doing and won't have to replace their destroyed equipment is irresponsible at best.


What about high passing midbass on 50Hz using 48db LR?
Same for lowpass sub?

Anyway, does 2 kit component system have high pass crossover for their midbass?
If not... well then.. having midbass highpassed at 50Hz is better


----------



## brianhj (Apr 9, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> 1) Nothing under about 250Hz is localizable anyway so who cares if it's coming from the sub or midbass? I wouldn't call anything under 80Hz midbass. Crossing over at 50Hz just stresses your midbasses unnecessarily.


He was talking about the sub playing midbass frequencies in mono instead of stereo. Wouldn't that be of concern? That the sub is playing some midbass in mono?


----------



## narvarr (Jan 20, 2009)

brianhj said:


> He was talking about the sub playing midbass frequencies in mono instead of stereo. Wouldn't that be of concern? That the sub is playing some midbass in mono?


It should still be heard as a stereo image because the imaging cues are higher up in the registry around 1k or higher.


----------



## brianhj (Apr 9, 2009)

narvarr said:


> It should still be heard as a stereo image because the imaging cues are higher up in the registry around 1k or higher.


Ahhhh. I see. Thank you


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

masswork said:


> What about high passing midbass on 50Hz using 48db LR?
> Same for lowpass sub?
> 
> Anyway, does 2 kit component system have high pass crossover for their midbass?
> If not... well then.. having midbass highpassed at 50Hz is better


You can cross it at 50Hz/24dB but it's STILL too low. You guys are missing the point. Why stress your midbasses needlessly? A sub is FAR better at playing 50Hz than ANY midbass driver.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

brianhj said:


> He was talking about the sub playing midbass frequencies in mono instead of stereo. Wouldn't that be of concern? That the sub is playing some midbass in mono?



I know what he meant. Reread what I wrote. Under 250Hz isn't localizable. If you can't tell where it's coming from, does it matter what side of the car plays it? 

I had the midbasses in my GTI in the OEM locations in the BACK from the front doors running 80Hz-250Hz. Ask anyone that listened to my car where the midbass sounded like it was coming from. By the argument here, doing what I did would have pulled all my bass to the rear and yet, it wasn't. Hell, I was even running a pair of 13TW5s and it STILL didn't pull to the rear.


----------



## ZAKOH (Nov 26, 2010)

I am a little confused on the issue of transparency. Either its a non-issue or I understand it wrong. My current understanding is that a transparent subwoofer is the one that produces bass whose source can't be localized. If that's the definition, then it seems like this is not hard to accomplish. I only own cheap subs none of which are on DIYMA boner sub list, yet I never felt that their transparency is an issue. One is RE SRX, which is best crossed as low as possible, and other is Infinity Kappa 120.9w. There are 2 or 3 music tracks I have that have non-transparent sections no matter what (some kind of electronic, unnatural drums). Otherwise, for normal music content, you can obtain a transparent effect with a right combination of crossover, eq, etc and with good sound proofing of the trunk.

I do feel like a good SQ subwoofer should be able to play with a decent authority and little distortion into midbass frequencies for better blending, at least for an average guy with average 6.5 mids.. A lot of midbasses, no matter how loud play mid-bass frequencies, they can sound a little thin and forced, not smooth, while doing it. I feel like the best effect is achieved when sub adds some 15 to 25% of midbass sound level and when the subwoofer can do it without noticeable distortion, etc. For an average guy, this is much easier than trying to cross subwoofer at 50Hz and then trying to figure out how to make the front stage play good, effortless and perfect mid bass. Trying to do the later can often result in a little thin and one dimensional sound. And then is of course, the issue of door rattling, etc. Right now, I feel like 80Hz is a good crossover point for my mids and Kappa sub, even though mids could be crossed a little lower.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> You can cross it at 50Hz/24dB but it's STILL too low. You guys are missing the point. Why stress your midbasses needlessly? A sub is FAR better at playing 50Hz than ANY midbass driver.


pressure zone?


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

quality_sound said:


> I know what he meant. Reread what I wrote. Under 250Hz isn't localizable. If you can't tell where it's coming from, does it matter what side of the car plays it?
> 
> I had the midbasses in my GTI in the OEM locations in the BACK from the front doors running 80Hz-250Hz. Ask anyone that listened to my car where the midbass sounded like it was coming from. By the argument here, doing what I did would have pulled all my bass to the rear and yet, it wasn't. Hell, I was even running a pair of 13TW5s and it STILL didn't pull to the rear.


German judges must score different than US judges can you post some of your score sheets it would be cool to see how they score in different parts of the world.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

asota said:


> German judges must score different than US judges can you post some of your score sheets it would be cool to see how they score in different parts of the world.


Dunno..
Interesting point.. "under 250Hz isn't localizable" hmmmmmmmmm


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

masswork said:


> pressure zone?


 I have NO idea what you're asking.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

asota said:


> German judges must score different than US judges can you post some of your score sheets it would be cool to see how they score in different parts of the world.


I only live here. I'm not German. 

I haven't competed or judged since before I enlisted. Sometime around 1994 or 1995 was the last time I bothered with competitions. I'll probably look at MECA when I get back stateside. The EMMA scoresheets are available online though.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

masswork said:


> Dunno..
> Interesting point.. "under 250Hz isn't localizable" hmmmmmmmmm


I know, it's hard to believe. I didn't either, until people MUCH smarter than I am broke it down. If you want to try something fun, play around with the sub LPF is a good home setup. I have mine set at 140Hz when I feel like being obnoxious and it still isn't localizable. Normally I'm at 120Hz.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> I have NO idea what you're asking.


I see 

Let me do the search for you.
Here you go:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...dvanced/74088-midbass-arrays-revisited-8.html


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Ahhh, yes. It WAS one of lycan's threads I was referring to. I don't remember if it was that thread specifically, but yes. Before he went offline for a while he had some VERY good threads here.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> I know, it's hard to believe. I didn't either, until people MUCH smarter than I am broke it down. If you want to try something fun, play around with the sub LPF is a good home setup. I have mine set at 140Hz when I feel like being obnoxious and it still isn't localizable. Normally I'm at 120Hz.


Nice to see someone else who likes it a little higher than most.


----------



## madmaxz (Feb 11, 2009)

My arc black 12 sounds awesome low passed at 80-100-125hz. Still blends extremely well with the jbl 608gti mids high passed at 80hz. Totally different from the Idq12v3's I had that HAD to be crossed at 63 or less


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

narvarr said:


> It should still be heard as a stereo image because the imaging cues are higher up in the registry around 1k or higher.


Imaging cues and the ability to localise source of sound are two different things. Plus no you would not hear the 50-150hz as stereo cause you're hearing this range from a mono output (the sub preout). You could connect two subs and it would still be mono. Splitting a mono signal between two drivers does not make it stereo.

With a 100hz crossover point, yes your mids would be playing 100-150 but your sub would be louder. 



brianhj said:


> He was talking about the sub playing midbass frequencies in mono instead of stereo. Wouldn't that be of concern? That the sub is playing some midbass in mono?


Yes it would.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Im not throwing it around to prove anything. I've been doing this since the very early 90s and I have none of the issues you describe. NONE. So as I said, learn to tune and choose equipment accordingly.
> 
> 1) Nothing under about 250Hz is localizable anyway so who cares if it's coming from the sub or midbass? I wouldn't call anything under 80Hz midbass. Crossing over at 50Hz just stresses your midbasses unnecessarily.
> 
> ...


You know what? There are two ways I can do this, correct all the 'facts' you believe, that are wrong or just explain the way it is. 

As long as I'm cutting my mid above the fs I'm fine. It does not have to be 1.5 octave higher. If it does then the mid sucks or the manufacturer gave false information. The fs on my mid around 35hz iirc, so 50hz is fine. If you're above the fs, you're in the drivers +/_2-3 db band. Not sure how you would be choking/straining the mids as you claim.

I don't care if you've been tuning since Noah sailed his Arc. Tuning is only 50% of the story. You can tune for an eternity but if you can't tell the 'difference', then you're wasting your time. Everyone can *train* the ears to hear a difference. Tuning and training your ears are two different things. They have to work together.

IF your tuning is right, then you should hear a night and day difference when flipping back and forth between 50 and 63hz, leave alone at 100hz. You can't localize sound below 250hz? Who told you that? The average person can locate sound source around 70hz........on a lateral plane. Left, right, front back. Vertical /height cues are 1.25khz and higher. So if you can't locate the sub at 100hz somethings wrong.

Here's a simple exercise. Lower your xover point to about 50-60hz. Run like this for 3-4 days. You may think the sound is crap, bear with it. Spend some time and listen to material you're familiar with. Do you notice any differences? 

After about 3-4 days go back to your 100hz xover, sure your first response will will ahh! better low end. Listen carefully to those same tracks. What have you lost from 50? Do you see any issues now?


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> I know, it's hard to believe. I didn't either, until people MUCH smarter than I am broke it down. If you want to try something fun, play around with the sub LPF is a good home setup. I have mine set at 140Hz when I feel like being obnoxious and it still isn't localizable. Normally I'm at 120Hz.


What works in a home setup MOSTLY does not work in a car. Two totally different environments. Although 120hz is way to high even at home.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> In short, no. You don't cross low to 'half ass' your system or cause you have 'crappy' equipment. I cross low for the followng reasons.
> 
> 1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation.
> Just FYI, 99% of recordings have stereo informations down to 90Hz - heck even live performances have it processed that way. Read a thread about it but can't find it...
> ...


Regarding you last statement, I'm sorry to say that _quality_sound_ has a point... 
2 years ago when I went to Image Dynamics headquarter, I got the chance to listen to Sean Adler's car. Tuning was done by Matt and Eric Stevens. 
Equipment consisted of Ultra horns, X69 and 2 x IDmax 12" sealed in the back (AC Epic 160 was used too) - in a Scion hatchback. 
The Xover point used for the sub was 80Hz while the HP for the X69 was, I think, 100Hz... All 24dB/oct slope... 
Let me tell you, there was no localization issue, going from Jazz CDs to Bass Mechanic ones without touching anything in the EQ settings or subwoofer loudness control... 
Ohh yes, each IDmax 12" had it's own ID Q1200.1 @ 1 ohm. 
And to achive that with so much brute force, you need to kill rattles (the car was heavily deadened) which brings back to the thread I started about the illusion... 

I have forever been converted to higher LP use for subwoofer... Managed to do a good job with my system @ 80Hz 18dB/oct slope but I got some help from a low distorsion driver (Mag v.4). 


To the OP, I know a lot of people are gonna disagree, but starting with a low distorsion subwoofer helps to integrate more easily... 
Good quote from Andy Wehmeyer: CARSOUND.COM Forum - View Single Post - RC - Soundstaging with Rear Mounted Midbass

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

BuickGN said:


> There are all sorts of opinions on this so I'll just post what I do. Take it only as my opinion, I don't compete but I do listen to as many competition cars as I can.
> 
> The biggest help for me is to run it with the subs off for a couple days. Then slowly add the subs back in. You'll probably find that you have the sub way too hot right now. For some reason the take a step back approach helps me to realize how it should sound.
> 
> I personally cross my subs at 95hz but they're very capable up there and the MS8 keeps the bass up front no matter what the crossover point. I've tried from 50hz to 250hz. For my particular setup it never sounded bad but 95 sounds more natural. *63hz had the midbass vibrating my jeans and legs which killed the stage* and the 15s play the range so effortlessly. It sounds cleaner when you really crank the volume with the higher crossover points.


That is an important point, not for the illusion of upfront bass but for the perception of your soundstage... 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

ZAKOH said:


> I am a little confused on the issue of transparency. Either its a non-issue or I understand it wrong. My current understanding is that a transparent subwoofer is the one that produces bass whose source can't be localized. If that's the definition, then it seems like this is not hard to accomplish. I only own cheap subs none of which are on DIYMA boner sub list, yet I never felt that their transparency is an issue. One is RE SRX, which is best crossed as low as possible, and other is Infinity Kappa 120.9w. There are 2 or 3 music tracks I have that have non-transparent sections no matter what (some kind of electronic, unnatural drums). Otherwise, for normal music content, you can obtain a transparent effect with a right combination of crossover, eq, etc and with good sound proofing of the trunk.
> 
> *I do feel like a good SQ subwoofer should be able to play with a decent authority and little distortion into midbass frequencies for better blending*, at least for an average guy with average 6.5 mids.. A lot of midbasses, no matter how loud play mid-bass frequencies, they can sound a little thin and forced, not smooth, while doing it. I feel like the best effect is achieved when sub adds some 15 to 25% of midbass sound level and when the subwoofer can do it without noticeable distortion, etc. For an average guy, this is much easier than trying to cross subwoofer at 50Hz and then trying to figure out how to make the front stage play good, effortless and perfect mid bass. Trying to do the later can often result in a little thin and one dimensional sound. And then is of course, the issue of door rattling, etc. Right now, I feel like 80Hz is a good crossover point for my mids and Kappa sub, even though mids could be crossed a little lower.


It also helps to have a low inductance subwoofer in order to have it play better into the midbass freqs...

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> Imaging cues and the ability to localise source of sound are two different things. Plus no you would not hear the 50-150hz as stereo cause you're hearing this range from a mono output (the sub preout). You could connect two subs and it would still be mono. Splitting a mono signal between two drivers does not make it stereo.
> The thread posted by _masswork_ is really interesting and explain our ability to localize source of sound... If you go back to that thread, you'll see that putting midbasses in the back as reinforcement can be pulled off and does work... http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-sq-forum-technical-advanced/74088-midbass-arrays-revisited-8.html
> It is much simpler to use a subwoofer in the back for midbass reinforcement than midbass in the back...
> 
> ...


Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> You know what? There are two ways I can do this, correct all the 'facts' you believe, that are wrong or just explain the way it is.
> 
> As long as I'm cutting my mid above the fs I'm fine. It does not have to be 1.5 octave higher. If it does then the mid sucks or the manufacturer gave false information. The fs on my mid around 35hz iirc, so 50hz is fine. If you're above the fs, you're in the drivers +/_2-3 db band. Not sure how you would be choking/straining the mids as you claim.
> 
> ...


I'm not arguing with you... Don't worry  Just wanted to add my point of view  

It's easy to hear the difference when going from a 50Hz to 63Hz LP Xover point... That is probably due to having more cone area compressing the surrounding air. 

To the OP, in order to achive a higher Xover point, you need to know how your cabin gain works for you. 
If you have a too small of a box, achieving integration with your midbass will be a bit difficult coz the higher you go, the louder your high sub freqs (50Hz+) will be compared to 50Hz and down... Therefore, you won't be too happy coz in order to integrate well, your sub level shouldn't be too high. 
You'll have no lows either... 

To big of a box is easier (at least to me) to integrate coz I can use my EQ to shape the sound in order to integrate better using a higher Xover point. 
I also like having too much low end coz it's easier to kill it than to boost it. 

Kelvin


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

Kelvin, I'm not going to get into a verbal with you cause you're a nice guy.

But, if I have to turn the sub gains down, why not just cross lower? I've read lycans thread, but I'll stand by what I said. You will localize above 80hz if your listen closely enough. 250hz as claimed is just off the wall. 

Plus if you go back to one of my earlier posts, I mentioned that running the sub too high will kill some of the detailing in your mid range. That's just too high a price to pay for a few extra db's.

Trust me if you have the right integration at 50hz your mid bass driver does not need any help from the sub. Assuming that you have a driver with a low enough fs.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> Kelvin, I'm not going to get into a verbal with you cause you're a nice guy.
> 
> But, if I have to turn the sub gains down, why not just cross lower? I've read lycans thread, but I'll stand by what I said. *You will localize above 80hz if your listen closely enough*. 250hz as claimed is just off the wall.
> 
> ...


I have a small challenge for you... Kill every driver in your system but the subwoofer... 
Kill your volume knob and your Xover. 
Put a 80Hz test tone and now slightly increase the volume so that you can slightly hear your subwoofer. Where is the sound coming from? You shouldn't be able to localize it...
Now increase again and listen. 
There's gonna be a point (level) where you'll be hearing it come from the back - that's not gonna be from your subwoofer but from either rattles or your panels resonating... Panel resonating will create high freqs harmonics which can lead to localization. 
If it does come from your subwoofer, then you need a lower distorsion driver than your Polks 

If my challenge doesn't prove my point, you have damn fine ears compared to mine... 

Kelvin


----------



## narvarr (Jan 20, 2009)

I run a 3 way front stage with my midbass from 50-200 hz at 36db slope. When doing my T/A with only the midbass playing, I have to turn off the lowpass filter to be able to pinpoint my center image. 

Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

subwoofery said:


> I have a small challenge for you... Kill every driver in your system but the subwoofer...
> Kill your volume knob and your Xover.
> Put a 80Hz test tone and now slightly increase the volume so that you can slightly hear your subwoofer. Where is the sound coming from? You shouldn't be able to localize it...
> Now increase again and listen.
> ...


I just went out and tried this and absolutely the sound is coming from behind me when playing music with all speakers there is never any sound or vibration felt behind me .


----------



## asota (Feb 7, 2011)

By the way my x-over point is 50hz 18db


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> You know what? There are two ways I can do this, correct all the 'facts' you believe, that are wrong or just explain the way it is.
> 
> As long as I'm cutting my mid above the fs I'm fine. It does not have to be 1.5 octave higher. If it does then the mid sucks or the manufacturer gave false information. The fs on my mid around 35hz iirc, so 50hz is fine. If you're above the fs, you're in the drivers +/_2-3 db band. Not sure how you would be choking/straining the mids as you claim.


I didn't say you HAVE to set your xo point there, I said it's something I've been doing that works and is a good starting point. Also, if you set the xo at Fs then you're going to be sending that driver a significant amount of information OUTSIDE it's +\- 2-3dB band. Which will stress the driver more than is necessary because you're making it move more to get the same output that you'd get if you simply raised the xo point and let the sub do it's job. 



> I don't care if you've been tuning since Noah sailed his Arc. Tuning is only 50% of the story. You can tune for an eternity but if you can't tell the 'difference', then you're wasting your time. Everyone can *train* the ears to hear a difference. Tuning and training your ears are two different things. They have to work together.


Even if you can't hear a difference and it sounds exactly the same in both configurations, which would you rather have? The system that's overdriving the piss out of the midbasses or the one thats not? That's the ENTIRE point of this discussion. 



> IF your tuning is right, then you should hear a night and day difference when flipping back and forth between 50 and 63hz, leave alone at 100hz. You can't localize sound below 250hz? Who told you that? The average person can locate sound source around 70hz........on a lateral plane. Left, right, front back. Vertical /height cues are 1.25khz and higher. So if you can't locate the sub at 100hz somethings wrong.


It's a fact. Localization cues from _direct sound_ are not localizable in a car under roughly 250Hz. If you're localizing true midbass in a car it's almost always driver distortion or panel resonance. 

If you can't localize 100Hz something is actually very _right_ 

[quote\]Here's a simple exercise. Lower your xover point to about 50-60hz. Run like this for 3-4 days. You may think the sound is crap, bear with it. Spend some time and listen to material you're familiar with. Do you notice any differences? 

After about 3-4 days go back to your 100hz xover, sure your first response will will ahh! better low end. Listen carefully to those same tracks. What have you lost from 50? Do you see any issues now?[/QUOTE]

I've done it in every car I've worked on. Once you eq the responses back to the same curve the car with the higher xo ALWAYS has better dynamics and more clean volume capability.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

asota said:


> I just went out and tried this and absolutely the sound is coming from behind me when playing music with all speakers there is never any sound or vibration felt behind me .


There is absolutely no way you're localizing 50Hz, in a car, without SOMETHING resonating or the driver distorting or you have the best set of ears on the planet.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> There is absolutely no way you're localizing 50Hz, in a car, without SOMETHING resonating or the driver distorting or you have the best set of ears on the planet.


Right. 
According to that pressure zone math, 50Hz shouldn't be localizable in a car, but 100Hz should be pretty easy since the wavelength is shorther than car dimension.

Play 100Hz tone and set the balance to full left/right, and we should be able to tell where the left/right midbass is.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Once you eq the responses back to the same curve the car with the higher xo ALWAYS has better dynamics and more clean volume capability.


Totally agree on this.

Using high crossover is easy.
Low midbass crossover point requires very good treatment. Capable driver, no resonating panel, etc etc. 

But once done right, i think you'll love it 

Btw i'm using 50Hz, 48db LR right now, and really enjoy the sound.
Midbass Fs is 45Hz (if i'm not mistaken), located in door (IB). 
As for tuning part, i'm using 36 band L/R independent full parametric EQ 
Up to 12 bands available for sub, and up to 12 bands available for midbass.
The rest is for midrange and tweeter.


----------



## FG79 (Jun 30, 2008)

quality_sound said:


> He's not right. If you can't get a sub to blend at 90Hz then the fault lies in your tuning abilities, not the crossover point. Learn to tune, don't lower your xo point and strangle your midbass.


If a midbass can't play down to 60 hz crossover point (at 12 dB mind you), then there's something wrong with the amp, speaker install, etc. This can be done by the way with a 6.5 driver. 

If you can drop the midbass down to the 60 (or lower) crossover point, it makes things worlds easier. 

"Strangling the midbass" is not always true based on what is being said here. These very same drivers play full range quite well in home audio enclosures not significantly larger than a car door in many cases. 

For the record I can't say I've heard a car sound good with an 80+ crossover point. Good as in "full sounding", rich, that sorta thing. It might be possible, but I've yet to hear it and I'm very, very picky in this regard. 

Sub you can run up to 80 hz, not a problem. To have to low pass a sub at 40-50 hz is unnecessary and not always ideal.


----------



## FG79 (Jun 30, 2008)

subwoofery said:


> I have a small challenge for you... Kill every driver in your system but the subwoofer...
> Kill your volume knob and your Xover.
> Put a 80Hz test tone and now slightly increase the volume so that you can slightly hear your subwoofer. Where is the sound coming from? You shouldn't be able to localize it...
> Now increase again and listen.
> ...


This.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

FG79 said:


> If a midbass can't play down to 60 hz crossover point (at 12 dB mind you), then there's something wrong with the amp, speaker install, etc. This can be done by the way with a 6.5 driver.
> 
> If you can drop the midbass down to the 60 (or lower) crossover point, it makes things worlds easier.
> 
> ...


Lower IS easier, but not necessarily better. That's my point. People have gotten lazy and lost the ability to tune. Talk to ANY of the guys that have been doing this since the late-80's and ask them about this very subject. 

Yes, a lot of midbasses CAN play down to 50Hz but why try to accurately play it through 6-8" drivers in a poorly sealed, poorly dampened, noisy "enclosure" through a displacement-limited (size and Xmax) driver when there's a FAR superior driver already in the system, already in a better enclosure? Think about it for a minute before typing out a pissy response (not you in particular, anyone reading this). How many threads have you seen about trying to deaden a door with a hundred pounds of whatever to stop rattles and buzzes? How about threads about midbass distortion? Clean volume limits? The list goes on and on. There are a TON of benefits to using a higher xo points and the ONLY drawback is that you will be forced to learn - oh noes! Every singly "reason" that has been presented for using a lower xo point is rubbish. They can ALL be taken care of with proper tuning. 

People need to stop being so god damned stubborn and go out and try some of this and learn how to do it properly. I'm not talking about spending 15 minutes farting around with it before declaring it doesn't work either.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Also, if you set the xo at Fs then you're going to be sending that driver a significant amount of information OUTSIDE it's +\- 2-3dB band. Which will stress the driver more than is necessary because you're making it move more to get the same output that you'd get if you simply raised the xo point and let the sub do it's job. Even if you can't hear a difference and it sounds exactly the same in both configurations, which would you rather have? The system that's overdriving the piss out of the midbasses or the one thats not? That's the ENTIRE point of this discussion.


You'd be partially right if I set the xo at fs. But at 50hz, I'm x'ing *above* the fs. On a 24 db slope (and yes I'd like 48db/oct, that would really tighten up the lower end). 30 hz would be straining the driver, yes. But with a steep slope it would be down about 20db and factor in the natural roll off of the driver and you're about 30db down at 30hz. This while your sub is pounding away at 30. For the last time I am not straining my mids at 50hz. 

'Overdriving the piss' out of the mid basses is only one of the points, not the entire point. There are other more relevant issues like:

1. Stereo seperation, in mid bass if I have 70-150 in mono, trust me the mid bass sucks. I can localise the sub at 80hz, I have tried this many different ways. 63hz muddies the sound. I lose the snap in my mid bass with a high xo. Tuning won't fix that. If I go by your theory that localising the sub at 60-80hz is due to resonance, then your solution of x'ing at 100 is just masking that resonance. X'ing lower will eliminate it.

2. A high xo will make the mid bass heavier. That will impact your midrange. So you tweak up the mids and now the highs are too bright. So you cut the highs and now you're lower end has more presence and you're back to square one.

The discussion started cause you made a sweeping statement about only a high xo being the 'right' way. It's one of the ways sure, but the overall sound it will yield is totally different from what is generally accepted as SQ both in the lanes and when comparing against realistic lifelike sound.





quality_sound said:


> There is absolutely no way you're localizing 50Hz, in a car, without SOMETHING resonating or the driver distorting or you have the best set of ears on the planet.


Agreed. No issues here.



masswork said:


> Totally agree on this.
> 
> Using high crossover is easy.
> Low midbass crossover point requires very good treatment. Capable driver, no resonating panel, etc etc.
> ...


Which processor are you running?



subwoofery said:


> If it does come from your subwoofer, then you need a lower distorsion driver than your Polks
> 
> If my challenge doesn't prove my point, you have damn fine ears compared to mine...
> 
> Kelvin


The fun part about tweaking is that over a period of time you wind up trying a lot of stuff. I have tried the experiment you suggested and 80hz seems to be the threshold for localisation. The Le is relevant IF you're planning to run the sub high. It's pretty irrelevant if thats NOT what you want in the first place. I will eventually upgrade my sub, but I'd rather get a processor first. I'd never change the sr6.5. For now the Polks are fine


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

My last post in this thread.......I xo low cause it allows me to dial in better sound. It sounds better. I'm done.


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

hmm looks to me this thread went in the wrong direction witch i intended it too...lol but im learning so keep going people. i like hearing all of your diffrent ways of the midbass tuning


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

masswork said:


> Totally agree on this.
> 
> *Using high crossover is easy.*
> Low midbass crossover point requires very good treatment. Capable driver, no resonating panel, etc etc.
> ...


Kelvin


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

sqnut said:


> Which processor are you running?


Build my own custom processor here


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Qken84 said:


> hmm looks to me this thread went in the wrong direction witch i intended it too...lol but im learning so keep going people. i like hearing all of your diffrent ways of the midbass tuning


Looks like so 

Anyway, 
i set my sub around +6db louder than midbass at 200Hz. Gentle slope. I can post my 1/24 or 1/48 FR if you want to see it?
The sound is like deep and punchy.

And yes, using 50Hz crossover point between sub and midbass, even people sitting in the back can't tell if the sub is 30cm behind them 
All sounds come from the front. Hit and hard.


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

an sq system should be able to play acoustic music, female vocals and heavy rock/rap/metal, 

equally well.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

sqnut said:


> You'd be partially right if I set the xo at fs. But at 50hz, I'm x'ing *above* the fs. On a 24 db slope (and yes I'd like 48db/oct, that would really tighten up the lower end). 30 hz would be straining the driver, yes. But with a steep slope it would be down about 20db and factor in the natural roll off of the driver and you're about 30db down at 30hz. This while your sub is pounding away at 30. For the last time I am not straining my mids at 50hz.


Yep.

Need to look at the crossover.

Here it goes:

1. 12dB butterworth highpass at 80Hz.
Result 
at 40Hz: -12dB
at 20Hz: -24dB

2. 24db butterworth highpass at 50Hz
Result 
At 40Hz: -8dB
At 20Hz: -30db

3. 48db linkwitz riley highpass at 50Hz
Result
At 40Hz: -17dB
At 20Hz: even smaller than -30dB.
Actually at 33Hz it's already -30dB.

So, which one is cleaner for midbass? 
Need to pay attention at the crossover type and order.


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

masswork said:


> Looks like so
> 
> Anyway,
> i set my sub around +6db louder than midbass at 200Hz. Gentle slope. I can post my 1/24 or 1/48 FR if you want to see it?
> ...


sure! post em up! i have my midbass hp crossed at 60hz and my sub lp crossed at 70hz for some weird reason when i crossed my sub at 60hz i can tell it was behind me but when i uped it to 70hz it sounded like it was coming from in front of me. i dont understand why its doing that but it sounds dam good! cant even tell i have a sub in the back at all


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

quality_sound said:


> Lower IS easier, but not necessarily better. That's my point. People have gotten lazy and lost the ability to tune. Talk to ANY of the guys that have been doing this since the late-80's and ask them about this very subject.
> 
> Yes, a lot of midbasses CAN play down to 50Hz but why try to accurately play it through 6-8" drivers in a poorly sealed, poorly dampened, noisy "enclosure" through a displacement-limited (size and Xmax) driver when there's a FAR superior driver already in the system, already in a better enclosure? Think about it for a minute before typing out a pissy response (not you in particular, anyone reading this). How many threads have you seen about trying to deaden a door with a hundred pounds of whatever to stop rattles and buzzes? How about threads about midbass distortion? Clean volume limits? The list goes on and on. There are a TON of benefits to using a higher xo points and the ONLY drawback is that you will be forced to learn - oh noes! Every singly "reason" that has been presented for using a lower xo point is rubbish. They can ALL be taken care of with proper tuning.
> 
> People need to stop being so god damned stubborn and go out and try some of this and learn how to do it properly. I'm not talking about spending 15 minutes farting around with it before declaring it doesn't work either.


I have my Sub Crossed at 80Hz 12db Slope and my Bass is up front and not muddy ( I hate muddy ). 

I agree you need to learn how to tune it's very time consuming and difficult, but worth it in the end.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

Here is a cool thing to do...

If you have any high end esoteric home audio shops in your area. Go to them with CD's in hand and nicely let them know you are not buying anything. But, ask the question that you asked here and see if they will demo a reference system setup with one of their top subs.

Also, if there is a recording studio in the area that has at least a mid playback system w/ sub installed. Ask, if they are willing to donate 15 minutes of their time to demo some tracks.

Further, attend a live concert in a small venue with good acoustics. Take notes on the low end instruments. If you have never heard an orchestra or Big Band in a room with great acoustics....do so! Go see a live show or musical....the music in shows like "The Phantom of The Opera" and the "Lion King" gave me chills hearing them live. The percussion in the "Lion King" for example was awesome! It would take a pretty capable system to play somethine like that back with realism.

Finally, attend a local SQ comp or show....or save up and attend one out of town. Then listen to as many SQ cars as possible.

Now, you will have a good start on defining what midbass and bass should sound like.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Qken84 said:


> sure! post em up! i have my midbass hp crossed at 60hz and my sub lp crossed at 70hz for some weird reason when i crossed my sub at 60hz i can tell it was behind me but when i uped it to 70hz it sounded like it was coming from in front of me. i dont understand why its doing that but it sounds dam good! cant even tell i have a sub in the back at all


Here's my FR when i set my sub/midbass +10dB.

1/3 octave:










Detailed at 1/48 octave:









I think both low end (and top end) is personal preference.
Some judges like 0-6dB louder than the rest,
while some like up to 10dB louder.

One thing for sure: nobody like bass sounding from the back


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

masswork said:


> Here's my FR when i set my sub/midbass +10dB.
> 
> 1/3 octave:
> 
> ...


Very true!


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> You'd be partially right if I set the xo at fs. But at 50hz, I'm x'ing *above* the fs. On a 24 db slope (and yes I'd like 48db/oct, that would really tighten up the lower end). 30 hz would be straining the driver, yes. But with a steep slope it would be down about 20db and factor in the natural roll off of the driver and you're about 30db down at 30hz. This while your sub is pounding away at 30. For the last time I am not straining my mids at 50hz.
> 
> 'Overdriving the piss' out of the mid basses is only one of the points, not the entire point. There are other more relevant issues like:
> 
> 1. Stereo seperation, in mid bass if I have 70-150 in mono, trust me the mid bass sucks. I can localise the sub at 80hz, I have tried this many different ways. 63hz muddies the sound. I lose the snap in my mid bass with a high xo. Tuning won't fix that. If I go by your theory that localising the sub at 60-80hz is due to resonance, then your solution of x'ing at 100 is just masking that resonance. X'ing lower will eliminate it.


If all you do is change the xo point then yes, it will sound muddy. You also have to adjust levels. And you didn't get what I wrote or I was unclear when I put "midbass" in that sentence. I was talking about midbasses being localized due to resonances in the door. If you're referring to my last post, how will changing the xo point mask resonance? If it's there it's there regardless of the driver and it's placement. I've judged cars with subs under the dash that sounded like they were in the trunk because of resonances in the rear deck. 



> 2. A high xo will make the mid bass heavier. That will impact your midrange. So you tweak up the mids and now the highs are too bright. So you cut the highs and now you're lower end has more presence and you're back to square one.


You're all over the place here. Yes, bringing the sub up to 80-100Hz will thicken that range a bit. Remember what I said about tuning? You DO have a processor, right? EQ it back to how you like it to sound. Why is everyone missing this? 

Why would your mids and highs be too bright now? Even if you ignored the first rule of EQ work (cut before boosting) you could simply bring everything else up to the level of the midbass and you're back to your target EQ curve, just with higher noise floor. But again, the best option would be to EQ any offending peaks down. 



> The discussion started cause you made a sweeping statement about only a high xo being the 'right' way. It's one of the ways sure, but the overall sound it will yield is totally different from what is generally accepted as SQ both in the lanes and when comparing against realistic lifelike sound.


Totally different my ass. Again, going back to tuning, if you do it right it'll sound the same both ways (I know, I've done it both ways for a VERY long time). 

What is your reference for SQ? Go find me a good home setup where the sub is crossed in the at 50Hz or lower. I dare you. If you're crossing your sub over at 50Hz or lower it's not a sub, it's LFE and you're listening to a HT setup. With music every good home setup I've ever heard had a HPF on the sub between 20Hz and 30Hz. 

When was the last time you heard a live, un-amplified band? The midbass IS thick. The highs ARE bright. IME, 90% of the people that think they have an SQ system have a system so far from real music it's not even funny. SQ is about the accurate reproduction of music, right? Well, REAL music is not nearly as flat as a lot of people think it is. 

And for the last friggin time, the whole point was that because you CAN get higher xo setups to sound the same as low xo setups, higher xo setups have the added benefit of more clean volume, particularly in the midbass, and added driver protection. 



sqnut said:


> My last post in this thread.......I xo low cause it allows me to dial in better sound. It sounds better. I'm done.


Awwww, don't take your ball and go home. You're the only one that's been ANY fun so far. 

I find it mildly interesting that no one said **** to Andy or Manville when they've sad the EXACT SAME THING I have here. Hell, Andy has said ti REPEATEDLY in the MS-8 thread. Hmmmmm......


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> If all you do is change the xo point then yes, it will sound muddy. You also have to adjust levels. And you didn't get what I wrote or I was unclear when I put "midbass" in that sentence. I was talking about midbasses being localized due to resonances in the door. If you're referring to my last post, how will changing the xo point mask resonance? If it's there it's there regardless of the driver and it's placement. I've judged cars with subs under the dash that sounded like they were in the trunk because of resonances in the rear deck.


It's implicit that if you change xo points, you will have to tweak the eq, maybe even the TA a bit. You're splitting hairs and clutching at straws. 60hz still sounds different from 50hz. Different enough for it to be apparent *after* tuning. If your midbass is rattling the door panels at 50hz, fix your install. At 50hz, in my door, I have zero resonance, rattles etc. 



quality_sound said:


> You're all over the place here. Yes, bringing the sub up to 80-100Hz will thicken that range a bit. Remember what I said about tuning? You DO have a processor, right? EQ it back to how you like it to sound. Why is everyone missing this? Why would your mids and highs be too bright now? Even if you ignored the first rule of EQ work (cut before boosting) you could simply bring everything else up to the level of the midbass and you're back to your target EQ curve, just with higher noise floor. But again, the best option would be to EQ any offending peaks down.


Good sound is about great balance. As a simple example, if I was to break up the sound spectrum into 4 sections, sub bass, mid bass, midrange and highs, good balance will mean that each range is balanced in weight/mass/tonality etc with all the others. The way to achive this is to keep each range slightly lighter than it sould be and then integrate it all and correct whats too hot and maybe booost a bit where its thin. All the while you're listening to the range you're working on and its impact over the others. 

A word here about boosting and cutting. You have to cut before you boost, absolutely. But boosting does not mean going from 0 to +2. Going from -4 to -3 is also akin to boosting that frequency. Boosting or cutting anything will have an impact on that frequency, those around it and in some cases upto an octave above and below. You've got to be able to hear all that.

You do not start this integration by having any one range hotter than the others. If anything it's got to be a touch lighter. Then when you integrate the ranges you will get a pop at the xo range and a bit at different points across the spectrum. Of course it still won't be balanced so you'll have to tweak a bit again. You will never get the required integration with one range hotter than it should be, even if you tuned till the cows came home. Tuning means nothing if you can't understand the above. It means nothing if you can't hear the difference.





quality_sound said:


> Totally different my ass. Again, going back to tuning, if you do it right it'll sound the same both ways (I know, I've done it both ways for a VERY long time). What is your reference for SQ? Go find me a good home setup where the sub is crossed in the at 50Hz or lower. I dare you. If you're crossing your sub over at 50Hz or lower it's not a sub, it's LFE and you're listening to a HT setup. With music every good home setup I've ever heard had a HPF on the sub between 20Hz and 30Hz.


A setup crossed at 50-60hz and one crossed at 100hz will *absolutely yes, *sound different. No matter how much tuning you throw at it. Did I say I cross my sub at home at 50hz? Did I even recommend that? READ my post. All I said was that 120hz as a sub cut off in a home is on the high side. I would do it around 80hz. It's becoming crystal clear that your 'opinons' and 'mindset', are preventing you from learning. Why? Cause if you can read this:



> What works in a home setup MOSTLY does not work in a car. Two totally different environments. Although 120hz is way to high even at home.


......as me saying 'you must cross the subs at home at 50hz', then for sure you're not 'hearing the difference', in a car. Next.



quality_sound said:


> When was the last time you heard a live, un-amplified band? The midbass IS thick. The highs ARE bright.


Live music can have dynamics of +/- 45db. I thick you're confusing dynamics with brightness. The best recorded cd's will be around +/- 12-15db. You will never recreate live sound in a car. NEVER. The deal is to get close to the recorded sound. My bench mark for the car is my home 2ch set up. 

Of course I'm never going to have a 14' wide stage in my car, so the stage needs to be scaled down but the over all impact and experience in terms of width, height, depth, tonality, imaging with fixed locations of the instruments and vocals etc etc. The overall impact and experience, should be in the same ball park and thats where it is. My home setup is still way ahead in clarity of image, depth, etc. But I'm watching the same game in the car. 



quality_sound said:


> IME, 90% of the people that think they have an SQ system have a system so far from real music it's not even funny.


True, more so those who cannot tell the difference. 



quality_sound said:


> And for the last friggin time, the whole point was that because you CAN get higher xo setups to sound the same as low xo setups, higher xo setups have the added benefit of more clean volume, particularly in the midbass, and added driver protection.






quality_sound said:


> Awwww, don't take your ball and go home. You're the only one that's been ANY fun so far.


Arrogance and ignorance must be one hell of a cocktail. I decided to walk not because I'm intimidated by your 'superior' knowledge or attitude. I walked cause I finally realised, that with your midset, you were never going to accept that there could be another way that would work better. Oh wait, you've tried it and it doesn't sound different. 

So maybe YOU need to go to some of the EMMA competitions and listen to the cars there. Maybe then you will finally learn to hear the difference, maybe not. It's a waste of time discussing anything with a person whos stuck in a rut. You want to claim the high ground and victory here? It's yours. I wasn't discussing to win in any case. I'm done here. Oh and here, catch. Have fun.  



quality_sound said:


> I find it mildly interesting that no one said **** to Andy or Manville when they've sad the EXACT SAME THING I have here. Hell, Andy has said ti REPEATEDLY in the MS-8 thread. Hmmmmm......


Want a cookie?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> It's implicit that if you change xo points, you will have to tweak the eq, maybe even the TA a bit. You're splitting hairs and clutching at straws. 60hz still sounds different from 50hz. Different enough for it to be apparent *after* tuning. If your midbass is rattling the door panels at 50hz, fix your install. At 50hz, in my door, I have zero resonance, rattles etc.


And at 50Hz at high volumes you're driving the hell out of them as well. Changing the XO point should not require a T/A change since T/A is aligning the DRIVERS.



> Good sound is about great balance. As a simple example, if I was to break up the sound spectrum into 4 sections, sub bass, mid bass, midrange and highs, good balance will mean that each range is balanced in weight/mass/tonality etc with all the others. The way to achive this is to keep each range slightly lighter than it sould be and then integrate it all and correct whats too hot and maybe booost a bit where its thin. All the while you're listening to the range you're working on and its impact over the others.


Sound quality is about being ACCURATE. How exactly do you keep each range "slightly lighter than it should be?" The differences in the ranges are all relative. If everything is down then all you've done it turn the volume down...



> A word here about boosting and cutting. You have to cut before you boost, absolutely. But boosting does not mean going from 0 to +2. Going from -4 to -3 is also akin to boosting that frequency. Boosting or cutting anything will have an impact on that frequency, those around it and in some cases upto an octave above and below. You've got to be able to hear all that.


I'm not sure what your point is. Going from 0 to +2dB is, in fact, a boost. Yes, eq will affect the freq. around the centerpoint (how much will vary depending on the type of eq) but all of that is easily predicted and manipulated. 



> You do not start this integration by having any one range hotter than the others. If anything it's got to be a touch lighter. Then when you integrate the ranges you will get a pop at the xo range and a bit at different points across the spectrum. Of course it still won't be balanced so you'll have to tweak a bit again. You will never get the required integration with one range hotter than it should be, even if you tuned till the cows came home. Tuning means nothing if you can't understand the above. It means nothing if you can't hear the difference.


So you're saying every car you've done started with a flat summed signal and you went from there? ALL cars start with some ranges hotter than others. Some drivers hotter than others. You aren't making any sense here. Human ears are FAR more sensitive to boosts than cuts. This isn't even debatable. This is also why it's ALWAYS been recommended to cut before boosting. Starting with one range lighter means you're going to do a **** ton of cutting, which wastes power and loses volume, or you're going to be boosting that lighter range, which usually makes it sound peaky. 



> A setup crossed at 50-60hz and one crossed at 100hz will *absolutely yes, *sound different. No matter how much tuning you throw at it. Did I say I cross my sub at home at 50hz? Did I even recommend that? READ my post. All I said was that 120hz as a sub cut off in a home is on the high side. I would do it around 80hz. It's becoming crystal clear that your 'opinons' and 'mindset', are preventing you from learning. Why? Cause if you can read this:
> 
> 
> 
> ......as me saying 'you must cross the subs at home at 50hz', then for sure you're not 'hearing the difference', in a car. Next.



I brought up the HT scenario because like most, your reference IS your HT setup. If your sub gets muddy at 63Hz then you need a better sub. 

edit: looking at the sub you have listed in your sig I can see why you can't integrate it any higher than 50Hz. 



> Live music can have dynamics of +/- 45db. I thick you're confusing dynamics with brightness. The best recorded cd's will be around +/- 12-15db. You will never recreate live sound in a car. NEVER. The deal is to get close to the recorded sound. My bench mark for the car is my home 2ch set up.


And this is why you're not understanding anything I'm saying. Recorded music is not now, nor has it EVER been, the benchmark. Recording engineers screw with all kinds of stuff. You'll NEVER know what they were trying to do so setting that as your benchmark is like hitting a moving target. REAL music is live. It is bright. It has a ton of midbass. 

And it ABSOLUTELY is possibly to get those dynamics in a car. It's not easy or inexpensive but it IS possible. The SW/Clarck GN was the best example. Tonally it wasn't superb but dynamically it is unmatched. 



> Of course I'm never going to have a 14' wide stage in my car, so the stage needs to be scaled down but the over all impact and experience in terms of width, height, depth, tonality, imaging with fixed locations of the instruments and vocals etc etc. The overall impact and experience, should be in the same ball park and thats where it is. My home setup is still way ahead in clarity of image, depth, etc. But I'm watching the same game in the car.


And conceding your point that your midbasses _might_ not be overstressed, think for a minute about the improvement in the dynamics of the midbass if the more capable driver was handling it? As I said, if you can't use anything higher than 50Hz there is something terribly wrong with your sub, the sub selection, or it's enclosure. Fix that stuff, and you'll be amazed at what more dynamic midbass does for your overall sound. 



> Arrogance and ignorance must be one hell of a cocktail. I decided to walk not because I'm intimidated by your 'superior' knowledge. I walked cause I finally realised, that with your midset, you were never going to accept that there could be another way that would work better. Oh wait, you've tried it and it doesn't sound different.


Hi Pot! 



> So maybe YOU need to go to some of the EMMA competitions and listen to the cars there. Maybe then you will finally learn to hear the difference, maybe not. It's a waste of time discussing anything with a person whos stuck in a rut. You want to claim the high ground and victory here? It's yours. I wasn't discussing to win in any case. I'm done here. Oh and here, catch. Have fun.


Why would I do that? EMMA cars have a VERY different sound than US cars, one that I don't particularly care for, and for the second time, I'M NOT GERMAN. I'm stationed here, nothing more. It has nothing to do with being right. I know I said that the other way was "wrong" and I should have said "easier". Would that make you happy? Easier in this case also means half-assed in my book. You also STILL haven't been able to give me a single reason NOT to use a higher xo point. There are reasons YOU don't/can't but that doesn't mean that it's a bad option or that it doesn't have many benefits. Easier is almost never better, just easier. 



> Want a cookie?


Just pointing out the OBVIOUS bias when the same message is presented by different people without knowing the background or experience of all of the messengers. If I had hacked either of their accounts and replied as I did no one would have questions anything I said, including you. You'd also have been a LOT less hostile about it. High road may ass. 



edit: looking at the sub you have listed in your sig I can see why you can't integrate it any higher than 50Hz. Try something with a LOT less inductance and a flatter impedance curve and see what you can do. An SI Mag or BM, Dyn 1200 or Ultimo would be invisible in your car, even crossed higher.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> edit: looking at the sub you have listed in your sig I can see why you can't integrate it any higher than 50Hz. Try something with a LOT less inductance and a flatter impedance curve and see what you can do. An SI Mag or BM, Dyn 1200 or Ultimo would be invisible in your car, even crossed higher.


FOR THE LAST TIME: 

I am NOT crossing low to prevent localisation. I'm crossing low for a whole list of reasons, that I have repeated over and over. Stuff that seems to be beyond your comprehension, cause you 'cant hear the difference'. The fact that a low xo point ALSO helps with preventing localisation is just an added benefit. IT IS NOT THE PRIMARY REASON I cross low.

IF I wanted to play my sub to 150hz, yes I would buy a sub with a lower Le, *BUT I DON'T *want to run my sub to 150hz. Jeez how many times do I have to say the same thing for it to finally sink in. 

This is begining to feel like groundhog day!!!


----------



## tornaido_3927 (Nov 23, 2009)

So these are your reasons, yes?



sqnut said:


> In short, no. You don't cross low to 'half ass' your system or cause you have 'crappy' equipment. I cross low for the followng reasons.
> 
> 1. I DON'T want to hear my mid bass in mono from my sub. The ears can tell L/R from about 70hz up. With a xover of 100hz the subs impact will be heard well into 200hz, with little or no audible seperation.
> 
> ...


1. You won't hear the midbass from the sub in mono, that's the point of the crossover that you are using.

2. Heavy, muddy midbass doesn't come from a high sub crossover point, if anything that'd just make it boomy and overpower everything else.

3. Why not? A few extra db's can be a good thing for sure..

4. You need to deaden your car more if you really can localize as low as you say you can.


My midbasses (and sub) are behind me in my car, and my midbasses play up to 250hz. At the moment, they are even playing in MONO THEMSELVES (due to an amp vs finances battle) and only at the top end of their passband can they be localized. And that's probably because I like to saturate my bass/midbass a little sometimes


----------



## tornaido_3927 (Nov 23, 2009)

Also, even in my work van which has 4" components in the dash and a Tang Band 6.5" sub in a ported enclosure a metre and a half below my ear height and behind me, between the seats, images perfectly.

ALL of my bass sounds like it is exploding right out of the left and right of the dash exactly where the speakers are. Without time alignment.. I don't even know how it ended up that good, but still, it plays to I think 120hz and you wouldn't even know where it's hidden if you didn't know better.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

tornaido_3927 said:


> So these are your reasons, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> ...





tornaido_3927 said:


> Also, even in my work van which has 4" components in the dash and a Tang Band 6.5" sub in a ported enclosure a metre and a half below my ear height and behind me, between the seats, images perfectly.
> 
> ALL of my bass sounds like it is exploding right out of the left and right of the dash exactly where the speakers are. Without time alignment.. I don't even know how it ended up that good, but still, it plays to I think 120hz and you wouldn't even know where it's hidden if you didn't know better.


WOW!!!! You really nailed the SQ in your car, what with


> bass sounds like it is exploding right out of the left and right of the dash exactly where the speakers are.


. What a great 2 seat setup. Independent L/R bass explosions .


----------



## tornaido_3927 (Nov 23, 2009)

Yeah ok, don't worry about the subject matter of what's actually being said. Let's just act like a child instead, gets people to listen to you way more..


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Wow...
Slow down guys. There's more than one way to skin a cat


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> I brought up the HT scenario because like most, your reference IS your HT setup. If your sub gets muddy at 63Hz then you need a better sub.


Talking about HT.

Here's my HT configuration.
Denon receiver with Audyssey auto calibration give me this:










40Hz 
Speaker is Wharfedale diamond bookshelf with 6.5" midbass.
Sounds good.


----------



## remeolb (Nov 6, 2009)

masswork said:


> Talking about HT.
> 
> Here's my HT configuration.
> Denon receiver with Audyssey auto calibration give me this:
> ...


This is a whole different can of worms. Remember, Audyssey can only hear frequency response; and through a very low quality microphone at that. Just because your speakers are capable of producing a frequency does not mean they are good at it. Try changing those crossovers to 80Hz, live with your system for a week or so and then go back. I think you will be surprised.

If your sub(hopefully subs) is(are) setup properly then you are likely robbing yourself of some very good bass performance by letting the speakers play below 80Hz. The position of your subs relative to your room and seating position is very crucial. Nail that and I bet you'll prefer letting your subs handle the low frequencies.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

sqnut said:


> I am NOT crossing low to prevent localisation. I'm crossing low for a whole list of reasons, that I have repeated over and over.


Yes, I mentioned it a few times and then let myself get caught up with this whole cross low to prevent localisation debate. 

Assume that a good recording, has a bass guitar at left stage and an acoustic guitar at right, that is how they should locate in my image and that's how I should hear them. 

Now assume they both play an 80hz note. You should hear, see and therefore place them separately. Also 80hz from the two will sound very different and hearing it from separate sources, combined with the right tuning, will give you this experience. The stereo recording is giving you the separation and your tuning is setting up arrival times and tonality in the reproduction. 

With your sub running to 100hz, these notes would be played by it. Except they would now be summed into one 80hz note. So its neither an electric nor an acoustic note. You would lose the separation and tonality. No amount of tuning can solve this.

Try this on your home 2ch and then in your car, if you're running a high xo. Eagles - Hell Freezes Over, has a few such recordings.


----------



## theothermike (Dec 20, 2006)

i've always underlapped my crossover to properly blend my midbass and subwoofer, as many have stated here, playing the sub too high @ a steep slope takes away from the midbass presence and playing to low strains your midbass.

I have always fiddled with my midbass in the 70-75hz department with a 18db - 24db slope. sometimes 80 - [email protected] 12db. but the big difference from me has come from me crossing my subwoofers around 55 - 60hz or so without a 24db slope. but a 18db slope. this gives an overlapping of the roll off of both drivers.

Following this, i make sure to eq out the differences in volume after gain matching the volume level of the two when comparing the flat response of the sub to the flat response of the midbass. Phase is your friend, along with t/a when setting up your subs to your front stage. Take your time and be patient.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

remeolb said:


> This is a whole different can of worms. Remember, Audyssey can only hear frequency response; and through a very low quality microphone at that. Just because your speakers are capable of producing a frequency does not mean they are good at it. Try changing those crossovers to 80Hz, live with your system for a week or so and then go back. I think you will be surprised.
> 
> If your sub(hopefully subs) is(are) setup properly then you are likely robbing yourself of some very good bass performance by letting the speakers play below 80Hz. The position of your subs relative to your room and seating position is very crucial. Nail that and I bet you'll prefer letting your subs handle the low frequencies.


I would have to agree with that... For an HT setup for music, as said earlier, a lot HP their big heavy towers @ 20Hz to 30Hz - no sub 
For the HT movie guyz, they usually end up in the 100Hz-160Hz - letting the cone area slap you in the back and kidney  

Kelvin


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> Yes, I mentioned it a few times and then let myself get caught up with this whole cross low to prevent localisation debate.
> 
> Assume that a good recording, has a bass guitar at left stage and an acoustic guitar at right, that is how they should locate in my image and that's how I should hear them.
> 
> ...


You're forgetting or ignoring the fact that localization cues come from MUCH higher in the frequency range.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> You're forgetting or ignoring the fact that localization cues come from MUCH higher in the frequency range.


If that is the case then on a home 2ch setup with your speakers in phase, both instruments should image up centre stage. Try it.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> FOR THE LAST TIME:
> 
> I am NOT crossing low to prevent localisation. I'm crossing low for a whole list of reasons, that I have repeated over and over. Stuff that seems to be beyond your comprehension, cause you 'cant hear the difference'. The fact that a low xo point ALSO helps with preventing localisation is just an added benefit. IT IS NOT THE PRIMARY REASON I cross low.
> 
> ...


You keep missing MY point. I CAN hear the change. Only difference is I can tune that change back out so I get the sound I want and all of the benefits I keep mentioning. 

The other issues you keep saying you use the lower xo point to "fix" would not be there in the first place if you chose your gear with a little more thought. 

How many times do I have to say THAT before YOU understand ME?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

remeolb said:


> This is a whole different can of worms. Remember, Audyssey can only hear frequency response; and through a very low quality microphone at that. Just because your speakers are capable of producing a frequency does not mean they are good at it. Try changing those crossovers to 80Hz, live with your system for a week or so and then go back. I think you will be surprised.
> 
> If your sub(hopefully subs) is(are) setup properly then you are likely robbing yourself of some very good bass performance by letting the speakers play below 80Hz. The position of your subs relative to your room and seating position is very crucial. Nail that and I bet you'll prefer letting your subs handle the low frequencies.


Agreed. My towers will "play" to 20Hz, and pretty damned well but cutting them at 150Hz and running the subs to match actually centers the bass better. It's weird but I'm not complaining. As noted, it's QUITE a bit thicker and that needs to be tamed. Level adjustments usually take of it though. 

Agreed about Audyssey. I have it but ice never been terribly evaluate with it.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> Yes, I mentioned it a few times and then let myself get caught up with this whole cross low to prevent localisation debate.
> 
> Assume that a good recording, has a bass guitar at left stage and an acoustic guitar at right, that is how they should locate in my image and that's how I should hear them.
> 
> ...


Ok... Leaving the rear localization aside... 

You are really scared of of a mono presentation by Xing your subwoofer higher? IME, that's only a tuning problem... 
If you read the midbass array thread carefully, you'll see that a well implemented setup will have the rear midbass freqs drawned to the front midrange and front stage... Why do you think it would be different for a substage? 
Even if the subwoofer hits 80Hz, so does the midbass... So if the CD has hard left low freqs, it's gonna appear hard left in your soundstage presentation... What it really comes down to is the subbass to midbass transition while keeping the transition smooth through the midrange. 
If your 80Hz note sounds like it's coming from the middle of the dash, then your right midbass is also playing the same note as your left one... 

Also, I forgot, simple physics: 
The interior cabin size doesn't allow us to recognize low frequencies in the lateral plane due to these long wavelength. I could try to explain it but someone else made a pretty good explanation about it: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/942034-post4.html


lycan said:


> *HOW HUMANS LOCALIZE SOUND SOURCES*
> 
> *1. Lateral plane*
> 
> ...


Meaning, lateral localization of low informations is phase (ITD) dominated. If the phase and transition is good between the L midbass and the subwoofer, hard L informations will still sound like it's coming from your L midbass. 
Lycan likes to call midbass freqs between 80Hz & 320Hz - Wavelengths approximately longer than the distance between our ears, but approximately less than interior dimensions of a vehicle. 

Real L & R informations cues comes from your midrange and not midbass - sure you can hear hard L and hard R informations when turning off your midranges but it's really coming from your midrange. 

Wavelengths below 100Hz (343 meters or 11.25 feet) are longer than the majority of vehicles cabin interior (even the Escallade's cabin is shorter @ around 10.16 feet). If phase or ITD (not IID) matters for midbass freqs in order to recognize L & R informations, it is also true for subbass freqs... 

As Patrick Bateman once said: "This is the reason why turning the balance knob on a radio doesn't change your perception of where the midbass is located"

Kelvin 

PS: Hope I didn't mess that one up  That's my understanding anyway


----------



## Viggen (May 2, 2011)

Good thing I am not considered "ADVANCED SQ PEOPLE ONLY" otherwise I would have to chime in


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Viggen said:


> Good thing I am not considered "ADVANCED SQ PEOPLE ONLY" otherwise I would have to chime in


lol 

Kelvin


----------



## remeolb (Nov 6, 2009)

Viggen said:


> Good thing I am not considered "ADVANCED SQ PEOPLE ONLY" otherwise I would have to chime in


HA! I was thinking the same thing. I like to think I'm at least "INTERMEDIATE SQ PEOPLE."


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

remeolb said:


> HA! I was thinking the same thing. I like to think I'm at least "INTERMEDIATE SQ PEOPLE."


I also feel I'm intermediate seeing what people like Andy Wehmeyer, Lycan or Patrick Bateman can produce in terms of theory and practive... 

Regarding the reproduction of music, I feel that I'm superior to anyone *BUT* regarding audio (which is a science) I'm just about average 
Still learning... 

Kelvin


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)




----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

remeolb said:


> This is a whole different can of worms. Remember, Audyssey can only hear frequency response; and through a very low quality microphone at that. Just because your speakers are capable of producing a frequency does not mean they are good at it. Try changing those crossovers to 80Hz, live with your system for a week or so and then go back. I think you will be surprised.
> 
> If your sub(hopefully subs) is(are) setup properly then you are likely robbing yourself of some very good bass performance by letting the speakers play below 80Hz. The position of your subs relative to your room and seating position is very crucial. Nail that and I bet you'll prefer letting your subs handle the low frequencies.


When i put the speakers without stand, audyssey set it to 80, because it was vibrating a lot.

I've been crossing over at 80Hz with the same speaker and older Denon without audyssey for 3 years before too.
I think i like it at 40Hz. 

Anyway, 
I think it really depends on speaker capability.
Sure 80hz is easy, almost acceptable with a lot of 6.5 speakers (except very cheap one). But there are some better 6.5 speakers too out there.

Well of course, if we create a fool proof mass product audio processor that should've work with lots of configuration, automatically tune to 80Hz or even higher is the way to do.
If the processor automatically try to crossover lower than that, and the speaker is not capable, ratlle all over the place, the processor will get blamed


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Ok... Leaving the rear localization aside...
> 
> You are really scared of of a mono presentation by Xing your subwoofer higher? IME, that's only a tuning problem...
> If you read the midbass array thread carefully, you'll see that a well implemented setup will have the rear midbass freqs drawned to the front midrange and front stage... Why do you think it would be different for a substage?
> ...


The difference between midbass array and subwoofer is an array 
More than one speaker producing sound at the same time.
While the sub is one source.

It's like stereo... when two speakers are producing sound, the image will be somewhere between the speaker. But when only one speaker is producing sound, we can pinpoint the speaker easily (at least at high freq).

We don't need full wavelength to localize sound.

Lycan state that one quarter is enough.



lycan said:


> at 1100 ft/sec, 100 hz has a wavelength of 11 feet.
> 
> one quarter wavelength of 100 Hz is 2.75 ft.
> 
> ...


That's from midbass array thread...

Try this.. play 100Hz with balance full left or right, so only one speaker is producing sound. 
Can we pinpoint the source? Yes we can.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> I also feel I'm intermediate seeing what people like Andy Wehmeyer, Lycan or Patrick Bateman can produce in terms of theory and practive...
> 
> Regarding the reproduction of music, I feel that I'm superior to anyone *BUT* regarding audio (which is a science) I'm just about average
> Still learning...
> ...


Yep,
that's why i love DIYMA so much 
Tons of good information here. 

My family has 2 studio, so i think i know how the original instrument sounds like  
But audio is a science... very interesting.


----------



## dkh (Apr 2, 2008)

:laugh: You should only cut n paste what supports your argument, isn't that right those who cross around the 100hz.

OK, now you've got this straightened out, whose now going to try and cross the sub to midbass around 50-60hz and admit that they've been tuning and setting up incorrectly?

I didn't think so... science :laugh:



masswork said:


> The difference between midbass array and subwoofer is an array
> More than one speaker producing sound at the same time.
> While the sub is one source.
> 
> ...


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

dkh said:


> :laugh: You should only cut n paste what supports your argument, isn't that right those who cross around the 100hz.
> 
> OK, now you've got this straightened out, whose now going to try and cross the sub to midbass around 50-60hz and admit that they've been tuning and setting up incorrectly?
> 
> I didn't think so... science :laugh:


I'm crossing low to minimize localization issue.
And as posted earlier, if dynamic is what we want then yes, high crossover point helps.
I've shared my system FR too with 1/48 octave detail, not just 1/3 octave.. that's easy and not enough for low frequency.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

I would love to see FR and waterfall plot in 1/24 octave at least.
I think we can really learn something from there.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

masswork said:


> I would love to see FR and waterfall plot in 1/24 octave at least.
> I think we can really learn something from there.


Don't think we're gonna learn much... Waterfall plot are pretty useless below 250Hz. 
I'd rather see the distorsion profile of those people using their midbass crossed low (around 50Hz)... 
Something like: 








FYI, this is the Exodus Anarchy... A driver that has 12.5mm of calculated throw (Klippel shows around 8.5mm) 
I'm sure the vast majority of drivers used as midbass shouldn't be crossed @ 50Hz or lower... distorsion would be so high so close to max Xmax. 
Hearing it would be a different story though... 

Kelvin


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Simple answer: we tolerate and even prefer some level of distortion.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Don't think we're gonna learn much... Waterfall plot are pretty useless below 250Hz.
> I'd rather see the distorsion profile of those people using their midbass crossed low (around 50Hz)...
> Something like:
> 
> ...


Ah,
what i like to compare is the ringing.

Will there be any difference in ringing when the sub plays 120Hz compared to midbass playing at 120Hz.. in general..

Or will the room effecting more than the speaker.

Just curious.

Btw that's from Zaph?


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> Simple answer: we tolerate and even prefer some level of distortion.


That's what I was told when I complained that the Tempest X was "colder" than the W6 it replaced. Never verified it was actually distortion that gave the W6 it's sound but if that's distortion I liked it.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

masswork said:


> Ah,
> what i like to compare is the ringing.
> 
> Will there be any difference in ringing when the sub plays 120Hz compared to midbass playing at 120Hz.. in general..
> ...


This is on the edge of my knowledge level so take it with a grain of salt... I think ringing has more to do with the overall Q of the system. Maybe someone can clarify. What I can say is with my 15s crossed at 150hz, there are no issues but they're exceptional for a subwoofer low-passed that high.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

BuickGN said:


> This is on the edge of my knowledge level so take it with a grain of salt... I think ringing has more to do with the overall Q of the system. Maybe someone can clarify. What I can say is with my 15s crossed at 150hz, there are no issues but they're exceptional for a subwoofer low-passed that high.


Beat me to it  

Kelvin


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

I'd say about 80% of music is art not science. From its creation to its appreciation. It's a right brained activity that we force our left brain to quantify and understand. You're not going to measure or calculate your way to good sound in a car. You have to hear your way there.



> You are really scared of of a mono presentation by Xing your subwoofer higher? IME, that's only a tuning problem...
> If you read the midbass array thread carefully, you'll see that a well implemented setup will have the rear midbass freqs drawned to the front midrange and front stage... Why do you think it would be different for a substage?
> Even if the subwoofer hits 80Hz, so does the midbass


Not a big fan of rears anything. But to answer your point above the difference would be that with rear mids it would be a stereo signal with the sub it would be a summed mono signal. Big difference in how everything in the 60-100hz range would 'sound'....No amt of tuning can convert a summed mono signal to a stereo signal. Trust me you will hear that difference.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> I'd say about 80% of music is art not science. From its creation to its appreciation. It's a right brained activity that we force our left brain to quantify and understand. You're not going to measure or calculate your way to good sound in a car. You have to hear your way there.
> Actually, music is 100% art, what I said though is that *AUDIO* is a science...
> 
> Not a big fan of rears anything. But to answer your point above the difference would be that with rear mids it would be a stereo signal with the sub it would be a summed mono signal. Big difference in how everything in the 60-100hz range would 'sound'....No amt of tuning can convert a summed mono signal to a stereo signal. Trust me you will hear that difference.
> ...


We're not going anywhere... 

Another question: 
*2***Tell me which song has hard L subbass information and hard R subbass information... I'll try to find a program that can check what info comes from the L and R channels... I'll then listen to those songs in my system in order to check what my ears are telling me. 

Kelvin 

PS: am really interested in the answer to the 1st question


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

sqnut said:


> Not a big fan of rears anything. But to answer your point above the difference would be that with rear mids it would be a stereo signal with the sub it would be a summed mono signal. Big difference in how everything in the 60-100hz range would 'sound'....No amt of tuning can convert a summed mono signal to a stereo signal. Trust me you will hear that difference.


Depends on the crossover too...
If that 60-100Hz is still playable on the midbass due to low order crossover or overlapped one, then we can still hear it as stereo 

And given the midbass is located closer to us (hopefully), and between midbass and sub is not time aligned - we may still hear it coming from the front left or right.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> *2***Tell me which song has hard L subbass information and hard R subbass information... I'll try to find a program that can check what info comes from the L and R channels... I'll then listen to those songs in my system in order to check what my ears are telling me.


Before someone try to find that song, i think it's very rare - if any at all.

Historically, this starts from vinyl limitation.
Nowadays still difficult to hard pan subbass to full left or right. Guess it will take a lot of compression and EQ while mastering.
Slightly off to one side can be done, but full pan.. hmmm.

From recording point of view.. that kind of recording may not sell well. Because many PA (mall, clubs, etc) are mono. Imagine when we hear no bass in the club cause it's hard panned to the other channel.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

It STILL wouldn't matter since the localization cues are not in the 60-100Hz range.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Try this.
It's 60Hz sinewave panned for 10 seconds.

Download panned_60.mp3 for free on Filesonic.com

Quiz: who's able to tell where the sound move to. I bet many can.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

masswork said:


> Depends on the crossover too...
> If that 60-100Hz is still playable on the midbass due to low order crossover or overlapped one, then we can still hear it as stereo
> 
> And given the midbass is located closer to us (hopefully), and between midbass and sub is not time aligned - we may still hear it coming from the front left or right.


Please go back to post 101 where I set up this example. I need to hear two seperate 80hz notes the one from the bass guitar on the left and the acoustic guitar on the right. Left or right won't cut it. 

Plus equally important, the two 80hz notes will have very different tonal and timbre qualities. A mono signal that sums these two will have a third type of tonal and timbre quality. One that is neither a bass nor an acoustic note. You can't extract the two different note from the summed note.

You will lose on imaging and tonality no matter what you do.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

> Could you please answer a question for me...
> 1**If you have a subwoofer and midbass crossed over @ 80Hz and the transition is smooth, phase is perfect and transition is smooth from subbass to midbass through midrange - a drum is playing HARD LEFT INFORMATIONS, where are the bass lines supposed to sound in your soundstage? Hard left? Center since the sub is crossed high and is a mono info? Between the L and C stage? In the back?


Normally basslines e.g. drums, bass guitars, etc are recorded close to centre stage. Something to do with recording issues. To answer your question above, just because the drums are recorded at the middle of the left stage, it does not mean that the bass guitar nots should also be placed there. 

The bass guitar notes should image up where the bassist is playing on the stage. So while recording, if the drums are left of centre stage and the bassist is right of centre stage, that is how you should hear and see it. So if the the drummer, bassist and the guy playing the acoustic guitar hit say an 80hz at the same time, its one frequency yes but you should hear three seperate notes cause 80 hz from the three different instruments will have different tonal and timbre qualities. Each note should focus up where that instrument is on the stage.



subwoofery said:


> We're not going anywhere...


Agreed and this is why.


> It's a right brained activity that we force our left brain to quantify and understand. You're not going to measure or calculate your way to good sound in a car. You have to hear your way there.


. What I'm saying here is that 85% of us are left brained and hence everything needs to be proved. If it's true there must be a formula or number or graph to prove its true. Sound doesn't work that way. 

Simple example, the guys here who compete in SQL, from the hobbyist to someone like Mic or Kirk who are top guns, they all accept the basic principle that the car is going to be judged by a dude who does not use anything except the two appendages at the side of the head. The ears and his experience ofcourse. So if the judge rates one car at 85 and the other at 86, the competitors don't start pulling out FR curves and formulae/equations to prove otherwise. Try doing this with the average left brained Joe here. The car that scored 86, overall was better than the one that scored 85 (maybe stage width was better in one but tonality was much better in the other etc there are marks for every aspect). Both competitors would hear that difference if they heard each others car and that's that. 

So if the only tool used for grading are the ears, then it stands to reason that thats pretty much all you would need to tune and set things up. If your ears tell you its better it is (assuming trained ears) if you still want to prove it, test it in the lanes. You're not going to breakout numbers or science to check if it's better. Over a period of time your ears will be able to tell you a lot. NO left brained person is going to accept this. That's why we are not getting anywhere. 

I'm sorry but I'm hopelessly right brained and I see little point in mulling over the science of sound. "If it measures wrong but sounds right, its right. If it measures right but sounds wrong, its wrong". 





subwoofery said:


> *2***Tell me which song has hard L subbass information and hard R subbass information... I'll try to find a program that can check what info comes from the L and R channels... I'll then listen to those songs in my system in order to check what my ears are telling me.
> 
> Kelvin


I mentioned the album I was refering to Eagles - Hell Freezes Over.

Arun.


----------



## narvarr (Jan 20, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> It STILL wouldn't matter since the localization cues are not in the 60-100Hz range.


This is what I mentioned earlier.



> Please go back to post 101 where I set up this example. I need to hear two seperate 80hz notes the one from the bass guitar on the left and the acoustic guitar on the right. Left or right won't cut it.
> 
> Plus equally important, the two 80hz notes will have very different tonal and timbre qualities. A mono signal that sums these two will have a third type of tonal and timbre quality. One that is neither a bass nor an acoustic note. You can't extract the two different note from the summed note.
> 
> You will lose on imaging and tonality no matter what you do.


What you are referring to here are overtones. Overtones are what gives each instrument their distinct sound and timber. Overtones are based on the harmonics of the fundamental note and harmonics are based on octaves. That being said, the frequencies above the 80Hz note is what will distinguish the two from each other in their octave range, even though the fundamental notes are similar.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> Normally basslines e.g. drums, bass guitars, etc are recorded close to centre stage. Something to do with recording issues. To answer your question above, just because the drums are recorded at the middle of the left stage, it does not mean that the bass guitar nots should also be placed there.
> 
> The bass guitar notes should image up where the bassist is playing on the stage. So while recording, if the drums are left of centre stage and the bassist is right of centre stage, that is how you should hear and see it. So if the the drummer, bassist and the guy playing the acoustic guitar hit say an 80hz at the same time, its one frequency yes but you should hear three seperate notes cause 80 hz from the three different instruments will have different tonal and timbre qualities. Each note should focus up where that instrument is on the stage.
> 
> ...


Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

masswork said:


> The difference between midbass array and subwoofer is an array
> More than one speaker producing sound at the same time.
> While the sub is one source.
> 
> ...


Wanted to try first first before replying to this post... 

I turned the volume down on the HU first then upped the volume up to where I could localize the sound. 
100Hz tone? I can but very slightly. I have maybe 55% coming from the back and 45% coming from the front... 
I can play 80Hz as loud as I want without having localization issues... 

That may be due to me having a hatchback... or a low distorsion subwoofer (SI Mag v.4)... or a low Le subwoofer (ability to play higher)... or a heavily deadened trunk and roof... Who knows... But as said earlier, I can't pinpoint 80Hz and only slightly 100Hz... 

Therefore, I get all the benefit in Xing my subwoofer @ 80Hz 18dB and my midbass @ 100Hz 12dB... Lower excursion from my midbass = lower distorsion + better power handling + more dynamic low end. 

Kelvin


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I've heard more than one car with subs in front that sounded like they were behind you at times.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Wanted to try first first before replying to this post...
> 
> I turned the volume down on the HU first then upped the volume up to where I could localize the sound.
> 100Hz tone? I can but very slightly. I have maybe 55% coming from the back and 45% coming from the front...
> ...


Wow, at 100Hz is louder in the back than the front???


Anyway... 
Highpassing on 100Hz 12dB BW (electronic) actually sends more content below 41 Hz comparing to 50hz 48dB LW to the midbass.
At 41Hz, both are the same at -16dB.

Agree, on that configuration 80Hz tone is playable by midbass and subwoofer at almost same rate (-3 sub and -5 dB midbass).


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

thehatedguy said:


> I've heard more than one car with subs in front that sounded like they were behind you at times.


Tuning (phase) problem or vehicle acoustics? 

I'm gonna try a front mounted subwoofer in my girlfriend's car and hope I won't have too much problem blending it in... 

Kelvin


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Tuning (phase) problem or vehicle acoustics?
> 
> Kelvin


Or something is rattling back there...


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> 100Hz tone? I can but very slightly. I have maybe 55% coming from the back and 45% coming from the front...


Am very curious why 100Hz sounds louder from the back than the front.
Given your crossover configuration, it should be front all the way.

Or maybe it's because the 2nd or 3rd harmonic distortion from the sub is high and audible... hmmm.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

No nothing was rattling.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

masswork said:


> Am very curious why 100Hz sounds louder from the back than the front.
> Given your crossover configuration, it should be front all the way.
> 
> Or maybe it's because the 2nd or 3rd harmonic distortion from the sub is high and audible... hmmm.


Subwoofer was the only driver playing...  :laugh: 

I can LP my sub @ 100Hz without too much issues... except for EQ power

Kelvin


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Just to clarify about the whole crossing your midbasses 2x above Fs thing. It's easy. When you are around/above 2x of the Fs of the driver, the enclosure's Q has no effect on the Q of the system at that point. The closer you get to Fs with your XO points, the more and more the enclosure will have an effect on the shape/performance of the lowend.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

masswork said:


> Anyway...
> Highpassing on 100Hz 12dB BW (electronic) actually sends more content below 41 Hz comparing to 50hz 48dB LW to the midbass.
> At 41Hz, both are the same at -16dB.
> 
> Agree, on that configuration 80Hz tone is playable by midbass and subwoofer at almost same rate (-3 sub and -5 dB midbass).


That's how I managed to have a smooth transition between the midbass and the sub with a higher LP Xover point. Works great for me... 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

thehatedguy said:


> Just to clarify about the whole crossing your midbasses 2x above Fs thing. It's easy. When you are around/above 2x of the Fs of the driver, the enclosure's Q has no effect on the Q of the system at that point. The closer you get to Fs with your XO points, the more and more the enclosure will have an effect on the shape/performance of the lowend.


Agreed... 

Kelvin


----------



## vitvit (May 3, 2011)

sqnut said:


> Plus equally important, the two 80hz notes will have very different tonal and timbre qualities. A mono signal that sums these two will have a third type of tonal and timbre quality.


Care to elaborate where this third type came from?



> You will lose on imaging and tonality no matter what you do.


You might lose on imaging (questionable) but not tonality.
(Imagine your listening room with the door right in the middle on the wall opposed your speakers. Stand "in" it. Listen. Turn your head 90 degrees. Any new sounds? Timbres? And you just switched from stereo to mono)


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

> I did not talk about recording and mastering... My question was about reproduction...


So was I. How it images up should reflect placement on the actual stage while recording.



> As stated just above my post (narvarr beat me to it ), what makes a note played by instruments are fundamentals, harmonics, overtones and for some overblow & air...


Will an instrument sound right if the fundamental is wrong but the harmonics are right?



> The 3 musicians playing the same note (80Hz in the example above) will be spread accross the soundstage like you mentioned (L C R) with a distinct caracteristic to their instruments even with a subwoofer crossed high and playing mono @ 80Hz. You h
> have to remember that the sub is playing the 80Hz fundamentals but so is the midbass...


For the sake of simplicity, lets assume the sub and mids are playing at the same level at 80hz. So now 50% of the fundamental of the three instruments that you hear are summed and in mono and the balance 50% are the correct fundamentals. You're telling me you wont be able to distinguish between this sound and hearing all thre fundamentals as they should be? 



> So IMO, my question hasn't been answered correctly:
> 1**If you have a subwoofer and midbass crossed over @ 80Hz and the transition is smooth, phase is perfect and transition is smooth from subbass to midbass through midrange - a drum is playing HARD LEFT INFORMATIONS, where are the bass lines supposed to sound in your soundstage?
> 1--Hard left? This is where they should focus up with a low xo assuming everything else is set correctly. The higher you cross, this image will creep towards the centre. Your perception of stage width will reduce the higher you cross. Ready to get flamed on this





> Since I'm a lefty, that means I'm a right brained person then?


As a lefty you have great potential to be right brain dominant tweaker . 




vitvit said:


> Care to elaborate where this third type came from?


I added that to stress my point. But if you listen to the cd I mentioned there are actually four guitars playing at times. 




vitvit said:


> You might lose on imaging (questionable) but not tonality.
> (Imagine your listening room with the door right in the middle on the wall opposed your speakers. Stand "in" it. Listen. Turn your head 90 degrees. Any new sounds? Timbres? And you just switched from stereo to mono)


Umm no. You're still hearing a stereo output. You're just way out of phase. Hearing a mono output and hearing a stereo output out of phase are two different things.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Subwoofer was the only driver playing...  :laugh:
> 
> I can LP my sub @ 100Hz without too much issues... except for EQ power
> 
> Kelvin


Aaahhhh i see.
Thought you played all the system


----------



## vitvit (May 3, 2011)

sqnut said:


> Umm no. You're still hearing a stereo output. You're just way out of phase.


Agreed, my bad example. Let's discard it. But I still believe there will be no new sounds and/or colors after switching record to mono. Just image.

As for 80Hz - don't forget that sub will play it different ("better", less THD) in most cases. That might bring us to "coloring" issue.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> So was I. How it images up should reflect placement on the actual stage while recording.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the debate. I like when everything stays civilized :thumbsup: 

I'm also learning from you but right now I don't have problems with my soundstage (especially my horn system ). Maybe one day I will have to X my sub lower due to who knows the vehicle acoustics. 

Kelvin


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

sqnut said:


> For the sake of simplicity, lets assume the sub and mids are playing at the same level at 80hz. So now 50% of the fundamental of the three instruments that you hear are summed and in mono and the balance 50% are the correct fundamentals. You're telling me you wont be able to distinguish between this sound and hearing all thre fundamentals as they should be?


At some point the fact that the imaging cues don't come from frequencies this low is going to sink in and this will all make sense to you. You're making up problems that don't exist and then trying to fix these imaginary issues in a GIANT case of what-ifs.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Sigh.

This thread can be a good informational thread.
But the debate makes me sick.

See,
for people who have good midbass and good treatment and able to cross low - it's VERY easy for them to cross high too. But not the other way around.

So, if you have capable system, try it. 
I know it will have less dynamic, but in terms of sound quality, personally i think it's better. 

If you don't have capable system, then all you will get is an awful sound.

It's like comparing bass coming from a bookshelf vs a floor stander.
Bookshelf + sub vs Floorstander + sub.

Every speaker is different. 
And both method can work.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Thanks for the debate. I like when everything stays civilized :thumbsup:
> 
> I'm also learning from you but right now I don't have problems with my soundstage (especially my horn system ). Maybe one day I will have to X my sub lower due to who knows the vehicle acoustics.
> 
> Kelvin


So a high xo with horns...........The Eagles cd is great for testing your width. If you watch the video it's a real wide stage, with all the guys lined up together. Little or no depth but great width. Watch the video on your laptop While playing the cd in the car. Check if the instruments line up exactly as in the video and the width you get in the car. Have fun!!

Yeah things got rough for a while in this thread



masswork said:


> Sigh.
> 
> This thread can be a good informational thread.
> But the debate makes me sick.
> ...


You will get a better focused image and better tonality with a lower xover point this will come at some loss of dynamics and decibles. 

I can cross the sub at 80hz on a 36db slope, with the mid on a 24db slope. It will get louder, but the image will lose some clarity and sharpness and I will lose some tonal accuracy. It will still sound damn good, just not what I want and its not for the lack of tuning skills. Crossed high and low are just two different sounds. 

This is a crazy hobby. You're constantly making choices. With each choice you will gain something and lose something else. Always and without fail.


----------



## masswork (Feb 23, 2009)

Right.

Anyway, it's a pity that this question moved to "no dumb", because the original question is really not dumb.

Infact i think Sean has a reasearch on this. Whether the preference of sub's sound (or anything in general) is cultural based, or maybe just random.

What a pity...
Just because someone can't do it, there goes a very good question...


----------



## Qken84 (Aug 25, 2011)

masswork said:


> Right.
> 
> Anyway, it's a pity that this question moved to "no dumb", because the original question is really not dumb.
> 
> ...


i guess some people just got to confuzed and got made and "clicked the button" lol


----------



## asawendo (Nov 22, 2009)

Car audio is all about compromise, so I prefer to hpf my midbass (dynaudio esotec) at 60 Hz 48 db and lpf my sub (B&W) at 50 Hz 48 db. And I like the way it sound. Full of authority bass with clear definition between instrument from timphany to kick drum with snappy midbass in front of me. So it depend also on your preferences. CMIIW

Best regards

Wendo


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

masswork said:


> What about high passing midbass on 50Hz using 48db LR?
> Same for lowpass sub?
> 
> Anyway, does 2 kit component system have high pass crossover for their midbass?
> If not... well then.. having midbass highpassed at 50Hz is better





masswork said:


> Wow, at 100Hz is louder in the back than the front???
> 
> 
> Anyway...
> ...




What's your midbass driver and how much power are you sending? Just wanna show you something... 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

sqnut said:


> You know what? There are two ways I can do this, correct all the 'facts' you believe, that are wrong or just explain the way it is.
> 
> As long as I'm cutting my mid above the fs I'm fine. It does not have to be 1.5 octave higher. If it does then the mid sucks or the manufacturer gave false information. The fs on my mid around 35hz iirc, so 50hz is fine. If you're above the fs, you're in the drivers +/_2-3 db band. Not sure how you would be choking/straining the mids as you claim.
> 
> ...


I'm reading the thread one more time coz I wanted to learn more stuffs  

For your info, the FS of your mid is not 35Hz but 60Hz... 
Fs(Hz)....................60
Re (Ohms).............3.5
QES.......................0.69
Qms.......................10.3
Qts.........................0.65 
Mms (g).................15.6
vc (mH)..................0.39
Amax (mm)............6.5 (Xmax peak-peak)
Sd (cm2)...............135 
Vas (I)...................11
BL.........................5.6


I'm not gonna quote your post and reply to it coz we've been there already  

Kelvin


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

OH NO!!!! Not this thread again .

Yes, I checked a while back and realised that the Fs is indeed 60hz, but by then the thread was dead and burried. BUT I still stand behind everything I've said here (except the Fs on the SR 6500). 

Here are some FR readings that I took with pink noise, playing only the mids and then mids and sub. These readings are with a sub mid xover of 50hz mids on a 24db slope and sub on a 36db slope. Both readings taken at the same volume.

Only Mids:
50hz - 63db
63hz - 74db
80hz - 84db
100hz - 86db

Mids and Sub:
50hz - 96db
63hz - 94db
80hz - 88db
100hz - 88db

So while there is a 20db roll off between 80hz to 50hz when playing the mids only, when you add the sub in the mix, the sub is carrying the load at 50-63hz. That works out fine. 

FWIW, Aaron Thomas ran these MB drivers 4 years running 2006-09 and crossed the mids and sub @ 40hz and placed second to KP everytime. One of the years it was by 0.2 points or something like that. You can run your mid below the Fs and not hurt the overall sound, no matter what the distortion charts tell you. IN fact at the lower end a bit of 'distortion' may actually sound better, I think Erin mentioned this somewhere in this thread. This is a classic case of something that doesn't measure right but sounds right.

Now that you have exorcised this thread, I'm ready for another round of discussion .


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Only Kelvin would revive a 3-month old thread like it was bumped yesterday. 

IMO, using competitions as any kind of measuring stick is flawed simply because the volume levels in a competition aren't high enough to sway the decision to cross high or low one way or the other. That's not to say they aren't useful, but at the end of the day, I would much prefer to have a system that sounds "real" vs. one that would win a trophy. 

When I finally get all my gear in and get my install done I'm going to measure the car using both high and low crossover points and include the EQ for each setup as well as my thoughs on how each sounds. 

I really wish I had the gear to do more advanced measuring.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

FWIW, Paul, all my local competitors have SPL levels that would make some SPL competitors think twice. Im not even exaggerating. Hell, one used to be an SPL record holder. The days where a competition tune can't get loud are pretty much dead and gone.


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

quality_sound said:


> Only Kelvin would revive a 3-month old thread like it was bumped yesterday.


......and you just bumped a 2 month old thread. 




quality_sound said:


> I really wish I had the gear to do more advanced measuring.


Oh, but you do. Those two thingys at the side of your head can be trained to be great measuring instruments.


----------

