To Sub or not to Sub?

[Mcallister]

Totally respect your opinion. My setup is far simpler, and in the end I'm not personally convinced a sub will add much to music. At least, the music I listen to. I get plenty of bass from my speakers (without a sub), and their Frequency range is pretty good (Frequency response (+/-3 dB, -6 dB): 46 Hz - 30 kHz ).

As I said, I think for movies it's a whole other ball game. Honestly, my room isn't large, so even 2 subs would be overkill, imo. As it is, it was just another component I had turned on. I think it's all about personal taste. I'm pretty conservative when it comes down to it.

yeah man, if you are happy with the result that’s all that matters. I’m one of those guys that is always looking to try different things, I wish I wasn’t ha

 

[mrcond]

I found this guide to be very informative when I was selecting and setting up my sub. Probably geared a little more to the home theater crowd but I believe the principles still apply to the music-first crowd. Covers a wide range of issues and took me a while read and absorb but worth the time, in my opinion.

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/guide-to-subwoofer-calibration-and-bass-preferences.2958528/

 

[Mcallister]

I found this guide to be very informative when I was selecting and setting up my sub. Probably geared a little more to the home theater crowd but I believe the principles still apply to the music-first crowd. Covers a wide range of issues and took me a while read and absorb but worth the time, in my opinion.

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/guide-to-subwoofer-calibration-and-bass-preferences.2958528/

highly recommend reading this, extremely well thought out and informative.

 

[tarkusnj]

That doesn't have anything to do with how the available channels were used for different formats. I've seen DVDA with 2.0, 4.0, 4.1, 5.0, & 5.1 audio. I haven't seen a 6 channel audio format on a DVDA or anywhere else that wasn't the 5.1 format. Have you?

I understand the channel assignment. I purchased Minnetonka discwelder when it first became available. I have burned many DVD-A coasters in the past 15 years or so...forget when it first came out. I burned a few coasters this month already but more good ones.

 

[ssully]

Here's a phrase that I hear a lot that ought to cause a reaction.

"Bass is directionless so you can put a sub anywhere"

Personally I've always found this to be nonsense - I've set up enough live PA systems to know that if you move the sub, you can hear which direction it's coming from.

I guess that's why many of you have more than one sub?

No. Multiple subs placed correctly allow for more even frequency response across a wider area.

Whoever told you that quote above needs to define what they mean by 'bass'. Certainly as you go up in frequency, 'bass' becomes more and more directional.

Subwoofers become 'localizable' when they are outputting appreciable levels of frequencies above ~80 Hz...or when they resonate...or when they cause something near them to resonate.

 

[Guy Robinson]

I have the crossover set to 50hz on my subs and there is definately a difference with most music with and without. Of course I tend towards progressive rock and classical music. Sub makes a big difference with both. The largest driver in all my other speakers in my 7.1 setup is 6.5 inches. It's supposed to go down to 50 hz. The subs are required for decent bass. I would rather have the bass and be able to tune it back than not have the bass.

I think this "Bass is directionless so you can put a sub anywhere" should read "Bass is directionless so when you have your subs set-up correctly you should not be able to tell where the bass is coming from"

 

[LuvMyQuad]

There was no bass management in analogue outputs back in 2000 which was the only way to play DVD-A...DVD-Audio was NOT 5.1. It was 6 discrete channels...period. I don't know where everybody gets the idea that DVD-A was 5.1

And I'm sure all of us on here back then had an outlaw audio ICBM.

From my perspective, the 6 channel DVDA channel assignment was always 5.1, even going back to DTS days. The bass management was done in the digital realm, not analog. And it still is now. And true, not every component offered bass management early on. The same with MCH SACD. But there was always an LFE channel.

The reason for me to use an ICBM was so I could do BM in the analog domain. It was the only way to manage bass on analog sources like turntables without digitizing the signal. If it weren't for that, I wouldn't have needed one.

 

[hobie1dog]

Has 3 pages of replies talked you into a sub?

 

[tarkusnj]

From my perspective, the 6 channel DVDA channel assignment was always 5.1, even going back to DTS days. The bass management was done in the digital realm, not analog. And it still is now. And true, not every component offered bass management early on. The same with MCH SACD. But there was always an LFE channel.

Ok...sure

 

[jimfisheye]

@tarkusnj, Obviously most of the DVDAs we have seen have 6 channel program that is 5.1 format. Genuinely ALL of the DVDAs I've seen. Can you come out and give an example of a 6 channel mix from a DVDA that is not 5.1 format? ie. The 6 channels are not L R C Lfe Ls Rs. They're something else non standard.

I have that DiscWelder app too. (I remember when they stopped all development and it became shareware.) I'd have to open it and scroll through the menus... There may have been 6 channel options that were not 5.1 format. Pretty sure not though.

And none of this has anything to do with employing speaker management on your system if your speaker array requires it. ("Bass management" if you prefer.) If you have non 1:1 speaker arrays, you obviously need to speaker manage the incoming channels of audio to your array if you want to hear the program correctly. Redirecting low frequency band from the main channels to the Lfe for 'small top' systems or redirecting the Lfe to front mains for 'big mains with no sub' systems being the common cases. (Redirecting both the C and Lfe to the front mains for the old school quad system folks.)

Either you have some elusive 6 channel audio that is not 5.1 format or this is all miscommunication over terms (or disagreement with some industry terms).

People get weird with speaker management when it isn't understood. The common scenario: Small top mains that require redirecting all bass content from the 5 main channels into the Lfe. The Lfe reproduces the original Lfe channel + all the bass from the 5 main channels. Now you can listen to 5.1 on a small top + sub array and hear everything as mixed. This gets the telephone game treatment. There's an assumption (from not reading the manuals) that 5.1 means mid and treble only in the small mains and then a sub handles all bass from the system. An efficient speaker array but not what's in the incoming channels! Then you refuse to set up speaker management thinking you don't want to alter the music and you're actually altering it by not hearing any of the bass content from the mains channels. Perhaps you think the mix is bass lite?

That's obviously not going on with anyone on this forum! Goes without saying.
I bet some of you have that stubborn friend and have experienced the frustration of trying to explain this though!

I digress as usual.
What 6 channel audio that is not L R C Lfe Ls Rs 5.1 format do you have on a DVDA disc tarkusnj?

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Ok...sure

Exactly what was supposed to be processed in that 6th channel if not the LFE information? Where would the 6th full range channel be placed in the HT sound field?

 

[ssully]

There was no bass management in analogue outputs back in 2000 which was the only way to play DVD-A...DVD-Audio was NOT 5.1. It was 6 discrete channels...period. I don't know where everybody gets the idea that DVD-A was 5.1

It's true that bass management was primitive in the early days of DVDA and SACD. I used the Outlaw device.

The 5.1 format comes from the DVD/home video world of DD/DTS. A 5.1 release -- including DVD-A -- has '6 discrete channels' of content. The ".1" in a "'5.1" recording refers to the discrete LFE ('low frequency effects') channel/content. Subwoofers were a dedicated driver for LFE. In the ideal, a 5.1 recording 'expects' to be played on 5 full range loudspeakers + a subwoofer, i.e., one speaker for each channel of content printed on the disc..

So, technically 5.1 doesn't mean 'bass managed'. A perfectly valid 5.1 home system can involve no bass management at all. The option to 'manage' low bass from various channels (including the LFE) by directing it to other drivers...which can be large front speakers or the .1/subwoofer(s) -- is just that: an option, albeit extremely common.

Note too that all DVD-As have either a DD or DTS 5.1 version of the same content, on the disc along with LPCM. This is mandated by DVD-A spec, for backward compatibility with plain DVD players.

 

[ssully]

Encode your own MLP files...6 separate channels. DVD-Audio was not DD or DTS...let the someone else on here clarify that

5.1 PCM is still..6 separate channels. DD and DTS 5.1 are also...six separate channels. I'm not sure what you are getting at.

 

[ssully]

Totally respect your opinion. My setup is far simpler, and in the end I'm not personally convinced a sub will add much to music. At least, the music I listen to. I get plenty of bass from my speakers (without a sub), and their Frequency range is pretty good (Frequency response (+/-3 dB, -6 dB): 46 Hz - 30 kHz ).

As I said, I think for movies it's a whole other ball game. Honestly, my room isn't large, so even 2 subs would be overkill, imo. As it is, it was just another component I had turned on. I think it's all about personal taste. I'm pretty conservative when it comes down to it.

If you're getting an even frequency response extending down to 50 Hz in your listening position (something you can't really know without measuring, but 'sounds good to me' is enough for most listeners) , congrats, you got lucky. It probably wont hold true for listeners to either side of you, but most of us here, I suspect, usually listen alone, me included.

I assume you redirect LFE on 5.1 music releases , and movies, to the fronts?

 

[ssully]

NB you can stick anything you want into the LFE track of a .1 release...including full range content....which bizarrely, does happen (hello Steven Wilson?)...but even that content is intended to be put through a low pass filter. Not played back as an additional full range channel ('6.0')

 

[markshan]

Initially we didn't have a centre speaker, just a quad set up where the Denon split the centre between the fronts - this was fine but we bought a another pair of S35's and used one for the centre. The difference is great - much more separation with the fronts doing less work.

I'm not finding that we're missing any bass without a sub

You didn't think you were missing anything without a center.

 

[markshan]

"Bass is directionless so you can put a sub anywhere"

Personally I've always found this to be nonsense - I've set up enough live PA systems to know that if you move the sub, you can hear which direction it's coming from.

Not nonsense, just incomplete. It should say, the lower the frequency, the less directional. In a live sound setting I doubt your subs are crossed at 40Hz (for example).

 

[M-D-Z]

As I read all these posts about LFE and 6-ch vs 5.1-ch, and center vs non-center ch, and how to implement speaker management while navigating through all these format peculiarities where low frequency content is either bundled and or separated in different ways to accommodate different formats, depending upon whether it’s multi-ch home theater or multi-ch home high-fi setups, it all makes me wonder if it is that much improved, sound -quality-wise, over an old school four corner bi-amped setup.
If you give me two or four channels, I want them all delivered at line level (analog) in their unaltered full freq range as LF/RF in 2-ch ... (or) ... LF/RF + LR/RR in ‘quad’ arrangements.
Then these two or four channels can be delivered to their own room speaker location individually.

Where the topic of whether or not to use a sub becomes relevant in this scenario is very basic. There can and should be a simple answer to a simple question, do the full range speakers chosen get the job done without dedicated low frequency drivers (subwoofers)?

I believe that filling a room with a credible representation of live drums (in a musical context of course) there are few, if any, affordable full range speakers that can get the job done as well, and as affordably as using two or four dedicated subwoofers in a properly set up bi-amplified sound system.

 

[M-D-Z]

Not nonsense, just incomplete. It should say, the lower the frequency, the less directional. In a live sound setting I doubt your subs are crossed at 40Hz (for example).

I agree, my four 18”s are crossed over at around 90Hz, even tho the 4 full range mid and high range speakers can go down to around 40Hz or so.

And regarding low frequency sound (subwoofers) directionality is well described in this way, as the higher the Hz, the less efficiently it’s clarity of content can ‘bend’ off axis around corners, where low frequencies spread throughout a space, or through walls, far better.

 

[jimfisheye]

As I read all these posts about LFE and 6-ch vs 5.1-ch, and center vs non-center ch, and how to implement speaker management while navigating through all these format peculiarities where low frequency content is either bundled and or separated in different ways to accommodate different formats, depending upon whether it’s multi-ch home theater or multi-ch home high-fi setups, it all makes me wonder if it is that much improved, sound -quality-wise, over an old school four corner bi-amped setup.
If you give me two or four channels, I want them all delivered at line level (analog) in their unaltered full freq range as LF/RF in 2-ch ... (or) ... LF/RF + LR/RR in ‘quad’ arrangements.
Then these two or four channels can be delivered to their own room speaker location individually.

Where the topic of whether or not to use a sub becomes relevant in this scenario is very basic. There can and should be a simple answer to a simple question, do the full range speakers chosen get the job done without dedicated low frequency drivers (subwoofers)?

I believe that filling a room with a credible representation of live drums (in a musical context of course) there are few, if any, affordable full range speakers that can get the job done as well, and as affordably as using two or four dedicated subwoofers in a properly set up bi-amplified sound system.

The bottom line is that both the "small top" array (speaker manage the bass content from all 5 mains into the Lfe channel) and the "big mains" array (speaker manage the Lfe channel into the front L/R) are both capable of reproducing 5.1 mixes accurately as the mix engineer intended.

If that leads to headroom issues with the low end, well that's that and this reduced efficient array is not for you! Within the headroom of the system, it's a legitimate speaker array and the speaker management required does not alter the mix.

Speaker managing a center channel into the front mains in a quad array starts to alter the listening experience. Relying on a phantom center.