# Mid bass, what are you really wanting to hear?(and how to reproduce it)



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

So I see this is talked about all the time so I decided to start a conversation. Let all evaluate the sounds and figure out what is mid bass, and how you want to reproduce it. Lets not talk numbers(hz, ect), give a name to the sound and how it is produced so we can all make sure we are talking about the same thing.

For example the bass guitar, kick drum, snare, wub-wub machine(lol), ect.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

Without talking about "hz, ect", how are we supposed to answer this in any logical way? Sound is quantified through SPL, frequency response, etc. without bringing those into the topic what are you looking for?

We can give you a bunch of nonsensical audiophile jargon, like "warmth" and "transparency" but those don't really mean anything.

What we want out of a midbass driver is something that can play reletively flat, with good SPL, in the midbass bandwidth, I don't know what else to say without talking about the frequency range that makes up the bandwidth of midbass.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

what most people want to hear is exaggerated thump and bump that is not proportional to the rest of the music. Much like a home theater sound with exaggerated low end response


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

gijoe said:


> Without talking about "hz, ect", how are we supposed to answer this in any logical way? Sound is quantified through SPL, frequency response, etc. without bringing those into the topic what are you looking for?
> 
> We can give you a bunch of nonsensical audiophile jargon, like "warmth" and "transparency" but those don't really mean anything.
> 
> What we want out of a midbass driver is something that can play reletively flat, with good SPL, in the midbass bandwidth, I don't know what else to say without talking about the frequency range that makes up the bandwidth of midbass.


Ok, I see the dilemma here, I was trying to make this easier to folks because not everyone knows what 100hz sound like but they do know what a bass guitar sounds like and what a kick drum sounds like. 

What frequency ranges do you want to hear? What speaker do you use to produce that sound?


----------



## jackies (Jan 14, 2010)

I'm all for scientific approach, because hz and fs and fr are all easy to understand and relate to - for a person with good background in physics and electronics of course. Unfortunately, and it's been increasingly obvious - to me anyway - the good sound is more than can easily be described by some physical terms. Remember the discussion about bl/mms? It was one attempt to figure what makes bass sound "dynamic", it failed of course, because it was another attempt on oversimplification. 
So if we know that no amount of scientific approach can give us a recipee for good sound, what's next? The old "try and see" method, which goes well with "audiophile jargon"... 
So don't discount the audiophile jargon just yet, audiophiles are trying to tell us something, and because their babbling doesn't make any sense it doesn't mean it's devoid of meaning.
Back to the topic: for me, a sign of good midbass is when you can hear bass guitar - or even more so, double bass - string, it's winding, you can hear the bassist's fingers and creaking of wood. Substandard mushy midbass reproduction hides those...


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

jackies said:


> I'm all for scientific approach, because hz and fs and fr are all easy to understand and relate to - for a person with good background in physics and electronics of course. Unfortunately, and it's been increasingly obvious - to me anyway - the good sound is more than can easily be described by some physical terms. Remember the discussion about bl/mms? It was one attempt to figure what makes bass sound "dynamic", it failed of course, because it was another attempt on oversimplification.
> *So if we know that no amount of scientific approach can give us a recipee for good sound, what's next?* The old "try and see" method, which goes well with "audiophile jargon"...
> So don't discount the audiophile jargon just yet, audiophiles are trying to tell us something, and *because their babbling doesn't make any sense it doesn't mean it's devoid of meaning*.
> Back to the topic: for me, a sign of good midbass is when you can hear bass guitar - or even more so, double bass - string, it's winding, you can hear the bassist's fingers and creaking of wood. Substandard *mushy* midbass reproduction hides those...


What?

A scientific approach is almost necessary for at least establishing the foundation for good sound.

If it doesn't make sense, how does it have meaning?

What does "mushy" midbass sound like? This is my point. "Mushy" isn't a word that means anything with regard to sonics. This is the jargon that I'm refering to that doesn't help anything, how can you fix "mushy" midbass? If you measure the midbass (scientifically) you may find very obvious and objective reasons for the sound being bad, which you can then fix. You can't fix a problem when it is described with ambiguous terms with no agreed upon definition.


----------



## jackies (Jan 14, 2010)

Heh, that's exactly what I said - scientific approach is necessary to establish the foundation for good sound. But if you go a little beyond foundation, you get lost. Nothing left besides jargon. Example: great midwoofers, measured parameters are top notch, sound is mushy. There's nothing in the measurements that may suggest that they would sound mushy. Yet they do. Then you take a set of less expensive midwoofers, that don't necessary have measured characteristics as good as the previous set, and they sound just right. Again, there was nothing in the measurements that would suggest they would sound great, but they do...


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

jackies said:


> Heh, that's exactly what I said - scientific approach is necessary to establish the foundation for good sound. But if you go a little beyond foundation, you get lost. Nothing left besides jargon. Example: great midwoofers, measured parameters are top notch, sound is mushy. There's nothing in the measurements that may suggest that they would sound mushy. Yet they do. Then you take a set of less expensive midwoofers, that don't necessary have measured characteristics as good as the previous set, and they sound just right. Again, there was nothing in the measurements that would suggest they would sound great, but they do...


That's because there are a lot of parameters that are neither good, nor bad. There are parameters that make the speaker more or less usable depending on how it is being used. You're suggesting that the only measurements are done in a lab, free air, nearfield, etc. But, both midwoofers in your example could be placed in the doors of a car and measured to see which ones actually measure better. 

The measurement process doesn't have to stop with the manufactures FR graphs. You can use modeling software to predict the optimal enclosure for the driver, then measure it afterwards. From there you have very objective information that can either help you optimize that woofer, in that situation, or search for a different woofer, with different (not better, different) parameters that would work better in the situation at hand.


----------



## Lycancatt (Apr 11, 2010)

I look for as much output as I can get, knowing I will rarely ever need or use it. but midbass speakers get worked the hardest in almost any install and with almost any music, so keep the distortion low by having more than you need and keeping excursion down if you can.

One of my rules of midbass for both car and especially pro audio, is that the snare in some songs, if its meant to do so, makes me blink. In pro audio anything can do this, cause I usually have 4 15s and 3k rms per side for midbass, but in a car, getting this fast attack with the output to match is way harder, comes down to lighter cones, good amps that can be masters of what they power, and a good tune that takes into account phase and crossover alinement.


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

What speaker do you normally use to reproduce said sounds? I am a fan of having the sub help a lot with this but not any sub can do that.


----------



## GS3 (Feb 19, 2006)

Mic10is said:


> what most people want to hear is exaggerated thump and bump that is not proportional to the rest of the music. Much like a home theater sound with exaggerated low end response


It's true that it's not proportional but almost always a necessity due to the car environment. The tuning of that exaggerated bump and thump will let the listener to be able to hear and feel their system is blending well together.


----------



## seedlings (Jul 6, 2015)

The auto environment itself probably consumes the nuances between drivers that would be clearly discernible in a room install. I'm kind of surprised that mobile audio hasn't gone to replacing door panels and consoles and trim with widband sound absorption as thick as possible. This would go a long way to reduce the standing waves and reflections.

That being said, I want midbass that makes drop tuned guitar palm mutes chug with the same impact and definition as the 4x12 cabinet from which they were recordred.

CHAD


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

CarAudioChris said:


> What speaker do you normally use to reproduce said sounds? I am a fan of having the sub help a lot with this but not any sub can do that.


Now we are getting somewhere. Keep in mind that frequencies (sorry, I have to mention hz) become localizable at a certain point. According to wiki, 80hz is nearly, if not, impossible to localize. Up to 200hz is difficult to localize. If the subwoofer is behind you, you don't want it to sound like it is behind you, you want the music it produces to blend in with the front stage to strengthen the stereo image. Using the subwoofer to reinforce the midbass works great, until you set the LPF too high and the bass sounds like it's coming from behind, instead of in front.

Generally speaking, pushing a subwoofer much past 100Hz is going to cause localization. At that point you need a midwoofer (in front of you) to take over. From here you need to determine how many speakers you need to reproduce the rest of the audible frequency range sufficiently. Adding more speakers allows you to split the frequencies among purpose build mid bass, midrange, and tweeters, but more speaker comes with other problems. 

In a car, the speakers are almost never on axis, so beaming limits the upper level response of a speaker. If you use an 8", purpose built midbass, you can easily cross it low enough to prevent subwoofer localization (50hz isn't usually a problem), but an 8" woofer will begin to beam at around 1,600hz, too low for just about any tweeter to play with authority. If you use a 6.5" midbass, it may not go as low (but should still do 80hz without trouble), but it won't beam until after 2kHz, much more reasonable for a tweeter to pair up with.

I hope this helps.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

GS3 said:


> It's true that it's not proportional but almost always a necessity due to the car environment. The tuning of that exaggerated bump and thump will let the listener to be able to hear and feel their system is blending well together.


actually in the majority of systems the reason people feel the need to exaggerate the midbass response is bc its being masked by too much 300-800hz.
flattening the response in that area, will result in a much smoother sound without the exaggerated and bloated midbass sound that is typical in many cars


and on a snare drum--the snap of a snare, that makes you want to blink or flinch is actually much higher up in frequency, well out of midbass region. the initial snap is around 9khz


----------



## therapture (Jan 31, 2013)

Mic10is said:


> actually in the majority of systems the reason people feel the need to exaggerate the midbass response is bc its* being masked by too much 300-800hz.*
> flattening the response in that area, will result in a much smoother sound without the exaggerated and bloated midbass sound that is typical in many cars


It took me a few months to finally understand and implement this.


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

gijoe said:


> Now we are getting somewhere. Keep in mind that frequencies (sorry, I have to mention hz) become localizable at a certain point. According to wiki, 80hz is nearly, if not, impossible to localize. Up to 200hz is difficult to localize. If the subwoofer is behind you, you don't want it to sound like it is behind you, you want the music it produces to blend in with the front stage to strengthen the stereo image. Using the subwoofer to reinforce the midbass works great, until you set the LPF too high and the bass sounds like it's coming from behind, instead of in front.
> 
> Generally speaking, pushing a subwoofer much past 100Hz is going to cause localization. At that point you need a midwoofer (in front of you) to take over. From here you need to determine how many speakers you need to reproduce the rest of the audible frequency range sufficiently. Adding more speakers allows you to split the frequencies among purpose build mid bass, midrange, and tweeters, but more speaker comes with other problems.
> 
> ...


I agree with using the sub to get up in that 100+ range and localization can happen but I always had luck with a good time alignment and some tuning on the speakers. My last setup was a 12" JBL GTI MkII ported at around 38-40 and the crossover set at 200hz @ 24dB

Now could a Sundown woofer do that... no but to each his own.

I had phenomenal mid bass and the sound was right over the dash. Also just as seedlings said below it sounded like a had a 4x12 bass cabinet in from of me with the perfect amount of punch.

I did a similar setup with an older 15" Diamond Audio D6 in a ported box too. 185 @ 24dB crossover point, same effect.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

If localization isn't a big concern (for many people it is, but some people just don't care) there are plenty of subwoofers that will play clean pretty high, well beyond 200hz. 

If localization is a concern, there are 3 things that need to be considered.

The first is the LPF, playing too high will draw attention backwards, you can help with this by lowering the LPF. 

The second is harmonic distortion. Even with a LPF of 100hz, the subwoofer will play harmonics at 200hz, 300hz, 400hz, etc. Even if those frequencies are filtered out at the crossover, they are a natural product of the speaker itself, so the speaker will produce high frequency harmonics. How loud those frequencies are played will depend on the speaker and it's distortion profile. There are some very low distortion drivers out there, but many people prefer the fuller sound of a hearty dose of distortion from their subwoofers.

I forgot time alignment, if the fundamental frequencies are out of phase (time) with the harmonics, that will also cause problems. Getting the fundamental and harmonics perfectly timed will help a lot, since the harmonics will be played by the mids and tweets, which are up front. 

The final problem comes from the materials resonating behind you. If your subwoofer hits 40hz and that causes a panel to resonate, the panel will likely resonate at a much higher frequency. So, every time the subwoofer vibrates something, that sound will be much higher, and draw your attention backwards. All of the buzzes and rattles will make the bass localizable, and if they are behind you, the stage will be pulled back.

All of these things occur in varying degrees, so you need to determine how much localization is too much and address it via the 3 options above.


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

gijoe said:


> If localization isn't a big concern (for many people it is, but some people just don't care) there are plenty of subwoofers that will play clean pretty high, well beyond 200hz.
> 
> If localization is a concern, there are 3 things that need to be considered.
> 
> ...


Agreed, the big issue is the panels but in my case I had all panels deadened so this issue didn't present itself. 

Now time alignment can fix you localization issue as I said above so don't forget to add that in there. Lowering the LPF isn't the only way ;-).

Now as for the resonant frequency this is so true and really why I stressed that not all woofers can do it. I loved my GTI woofer and because it did so well it is why I say to this day it is still one of the best woofers ever made... but hey thats just my opinion lol


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

I'm with lycancat on this one....as much as you can get, then ease it back a bit. This is how I ended up with shallow 10s in my doors....lol. It's better to have more than you need, than to not have enuff.....


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

I don't understand the point of this thread.

Are we hashing out psycho-acoustics again?


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

I800C0LLECT said:


> I don't understand the point of this thread.
> 
> Are we hashing out psycho-acoustics again?


To be completely up front I have been talking with a lot of people on different social media pages. We get a lot of people asking for help at both Q Logic Enclosures and Hooker Audio and the recurrent theme of questions people ask about is about more midbass. 

I have my opinions on things but it seems to go against the "majority" of the people asking's opinion. Having a subwoofer and not using it to help in midbass doesn't seem right to me. The majority of what people are saying is that a woofer needs to play from 20-50 and let the door speakers do the rest and so I thought I would come here and ask others to see what they think without mudding up the conversation with my opinion first


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

CarAudioChris said:


> Agreed, the big issue is the panels but in my case I had all panels deadened so this issue didn't present itself.
> 
> Now time alignment can fix you localization issue as I said above so don't forget to add that in there. Lowering the LPF isn't the only way ;-).
> 
> Now as for the resonant frequency this is so true and really why I stressed that not all woofers can do it. I loved my GTI woofer and because it did so well it is why I say to this day it is still one of the best woofers ever made... but hey thats just my opinion lol


You must have quoted me before I edited my post to include time alignment. I like to use the subwoofer to reinforce the midbass, but even with time alignment set well, and panels deadened, 200hz is just too high. I do not like the bass to sound like it is behind me, and at 200hz, even with everything addressed, it will sound like it's behind you.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

My trick to getting the midbass I want is by not forcing the midbass to play any lower than it wants to in a really well prepped door. Take for example, my Discovery 7's have a crapload of power on them and can get brutally loud crossed at 75hz and stay clean doing it. They're perfectly happy crossed at 60hz at lower volume and really sound good down there but why do it when you have a sub to cover the lower 1.5-2 octaves? If I were to go subless I'd get a second pair of Discovery 7's and bandpass them from 50-80 and run the fronts from 50 to wherever. For what it's worth the 8 ohm version of my midbass models about 3db higher at 80hz than the 4 ohm version IB with the 8 ohm having a higher qts. I also do as Mic stated and cut the 250-800 range. My truck needs the bottom dropped out of 250hz with fairly wide q. And have 80hz boosted a hair for a little extra kick and fun factor.


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

Aside from fixing the usual problem area as stated before by Mic, a favorite solution for me is the use of 4-way. In my experiences (ymmv) the use of a small mid to aid in fundamentals and alleviate some of the upper response bloat from the midwoofer has served me well.


----------



## seafish (Aug 1, 2012)

Bayboy said:


> Aside from fixing the usual problem area as stated before by Mic, a favorite solution for me is the use of 4-way. In my experiences (ymmv) the use of a small mid to aid in fundamentals and alleviate some of the upper response bloat from the midwoofer has served me well.


Please define 4 way , i.e. 3 way with sub (3.1) or…?? Also what are your xo points. Thanks.


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

gijoe said:


> You must have quoted me before I edited my post to include time alignment. I like to use the subwoofer to reinforce the midbass, but even with time alignment set well, and panels deadened, 200hz is just too high. I do not like the bass to sound like it is behind me, and at 200hz, even with everything addressed, it will sound like it's behind you.


I respect your opinion but in my case it didn't. I am just expressing my experience though. I know that it isn't the same in every car.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

CarAudioChris said:


> I respect your opinion but in my case it didn't. I am just expressing my experience though. I know that it isn't the same in every car.


I think the difference of opinion is similar to people who like rear fill. Although it technically hurts the front stage and stereo image, it adds an encompassing feel to the music. While not accurate, some people find it enjoyable. 

Not everyone cares about a perfect, up front, stereo image and stage. Other people car somewhat but would rather pull the stage back slightly to gain the benefits of a large woofer taking the strain off of a small 6.5". There is a certain amount of personal preference involved.

I spend a lot more time critically listening to music with headphones, or on my home stereo. I like the staging and imaging that I get in these situations and tune my car to offer a similar illusion. For me, playing the subs to 200hz is just too high, it's noticeable because of how I normally listen to music, and it's unpleasant. For others it may not even be noticeable, or it may be pleasant.


----------



## CarAudioChris (Dec 19, 2014)

gijoe said:


> I think the difference of opinion is similar to people who like rear fill. Although it technically hurts the front stage and stereo image, it adds an encompassing feel to the music. While not accurate, some people find it enjoyable.
> 
> Not everyone cares about a perfect, up front, stereo image and stage. Other people car somewhat but would rather pull the stage back slightly to gain the benefits of a large woofer taking the strain off of a small 6.5". There is a certain amount of personal preference involved.
> 
> I spend a lot more time critically listening to music with headphones, or on my home stereo. I like the staging and imaging that I get in these situations and tune my car to offer a similar illusion. For me, playing the subs to 200hz is just too high, it's noticeable because of how I normally listen to music, and it's unpleasant. For others it may not even be noticeable, or it may be pleasant.


I have to commend you, and must say you are the first person I have had a conversation in the car audio community that did not get "mad" because I didn't agree with them lol. It is nice to be able to have a conversation over a subject without someone getting heated.

Thank you very much sir!


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

gijoe said:


> I think the difference of opinion is similar to people who like rear fill. Although it technically hurts the front stage and stereo image, it adds an encompassing feel to the music. While not accurate, some people find it enjoyable.
> 
> Not everyone cares about a perfect, up front, stereo image and stage. Other people car somewhat but would rather pull the stage back slightly to gain the benefits of a large woofer taking the strain off of a small 6.5". There is a certain amount of personal preference involved.
> 
> I spend a lot more time critically listening to music with headphones, or on my home stereo. I like the staging and imaging that I get in these situations and tune my car to offer a similar illusion. For me, playing the subs to 200hz is just too high, it's noticeable because of how I normally listen to music, and it's unpleasant. For others it may not even be noticeable, or it may be pleasant.




WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!!

I'm offended with your liberal use of the term "rear fill". Rear stereo and rear fill are two separate things ;P

Otherwise...I don't feel like this thread has any real purpose. For those who know how to achieve what they perceive as good bass response, cheers. For those who fall back on "it worked in my car"...cheers to you as well...but there's no way to duplicate "well it worked in my car".


----------



## Bayboy (Dec 29, 2010)

seafish said:


> Please define 4 way , i.e. 3 way with sub (3.1) or…?? Also what are your xo points. Thanks.


It's just what it is in the correct sense, tweets, midrange, upper bass, sub. My reasoning for the use has always been in a vehicle where the stock locations for the midwoofer are low in the doors. Having a small mid higher up tends to help out. I have had vehicles with the main location is higher up on the door and was satisfied with a 3-way in the setup. 

As far as crosspoints, it's sort of irrelevant since it heavily depends on the drivers being used, vehicle acoustics, and SPL level attained from such. It will vary enough to not note it.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

I800C0LLECT said:


> WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!!
> 
> I'm offended with your liberal use of the term "rear fill". Rear stereo and rear fill are two separate things ;P
> 
> Otherwise...I don't feel like this thread has any real purpose. For those who know how to achieve what they perceive as good bass response, cheers. For those who fall back on "it worked in my car"...cheers to you as well...but there's no way to duplicate "well it worked in my car".


Haha, I see your point, but I'm not certain that rear fill automatically means proper L-R, attenuated, filtered, and delayed. This is sort of the jargon that I argue against all the time.

What is "rear fill?" Is it stereo behind you, or is the term "rear fill" strictly used for a proper processed setup? The term is too ambiguous to really mean anything definite, I doubt we can all agree on an absolute definition of the phrase. I regret using it, haha.


----------



## Mic10is (Aug 20, 2007)

since this went off topic. rear fill when done properly is not detectable. It creates ambiance. Rear fill isnt the same thing as surround sound. 
when attenuated, band limited and delayed enough, rear fill works really well and the only time you ever "notice" it is when it isnt there


----------



## cajunner (Apr 13, 2007)

rear fill can be useful for various things, such as the ability to solidify the left side stage when the right speaker is relatively on-axis, or lift the stage when low-mounted front speakers are your best aesthetic.

of course, it's useful in any capacity if ambiance is something you want in your playback, but that can vary depending on music selection as well as taste, some people don't like the way any rear information sounds, that isn't a derivative of front-mounted speakers' reflections.

I used to really like 4 corner sound, based on how I wanted the vehicle to sound more like the club than the concert, then I got out more and enjoyed the concert sound, and the coffee shop circuit sound, with a pair of amps and a couple of cool cats on stools, acoustic stuff...


you wouldn't really need much ambiance in replay for those, but some concerts available on DVD and 5.1 Dolby Digital, really do sound superb when played back on an AC-3 capable system.

of course, 99% of the music I listen to is 2-channel, no fancy encoding in the work, so predicting which composition is enhanced by something like Logic7 and which is better as a front only proposition, is not always perfect as a rule...

but if this is about mid bass, I say it's better to run several than one, and 2 is better than none. If that helps...


----------



## gstokes (Apr 20, 2014)

CarAudioChris said:


> So I see this is talked about all the time so I decided to start a conversation. Let all evaluate the sounds and figure out what is mid bass, and how you want to reproduce it. Lets not talk numbers(hz, ect), give a name to the sound and how it is produced so we can all make sure we are talking about the same thing.
> 
> For example the bass guitar, kick drum, snare, wub-wub machine(lol), ect.


It's much easier just to divide the 20Hz - 20kHz spectrum into portions and allot each portion to the appropriate speaker, my preferred settings are 1500Hz - 20khz for the tweeters, 80Hz - 1500Hz for the mids and 20Hz - 80Hz for the subs, using musical instruments to represent these figures would just lead to confusion, instruments like the pipe organ can produce frequencies from 20Hz - 7.5kHz so you can see how this could present a problem when selecting a speaker for such an instrument 

Remember Music Ideas: EQ Frequency Chart for Instruments & Electronic Sounds


----------



## gstokes (Apr 20, 2014)

An instrument like the kick drum, snare or bass can encompass frequencies that require more than one speaker to reproduce. A subwoofer and midbass/woofer would have to work as team to cover the frequencies..


----------



## chithead (Mar 19, 2008)

cajunner said:


> rear fill can be useful for various things, such as the ability to solidify the left side stage when the right speaker is relatively on-axis, or lift the stage when low-mounted front speakers are your best aesthetic.
> 
> of course, it's useful in any capacity if ambiance is something you want in your playback, but that can vary depending on music selection as well as taste, some people don't like the way any rear information sounds, that isn't a derivative of front-mounted speakers' reflections.
> 
> ...


Two in the same location? What about one in each door, if using a four door vehicle?


----------

