Large speakers plus EQ, what have you done?

I just remembered that Vandersteen had some models with built in bass amp and EQ, those definitely count! 

I'd be interested in other's findings as well.

You may think this is another method, in any case, it's relative to the bass.

’Good Enough’, don’t try for Perfection, just adjust what you already like.

Document what you have to start, and results of changes. Patience!!!!

Start with test tones from a CD (not LP, something in your alignment could be slightly off)

CD, tracks 9 to 38 are 29 1/3 octave test tones

Measure at listening position, seated ear level

Sound Pressure Meter, need hole for tripod mount

Chart, copies, write things down, use Pencil. I made enlarged copies of the booklet track listing.

Adjust, how?

My speakers, 15" woofers, you do not adjust the bass, you adjust the midrange horns (2) and horn tweeter relative to the bass, with pair of built-in L-Pads, so more or less mids, then adjust the tweeter horn to the mids,

One side, other side, then both, reduce ? back and forth, take a break, until the best you can do, took me 1-1/2 days last time.

then use your ears: old ears like me, typically boost the highs some but not too much.

Use music you are very familiar with for the final by ear adjustments, i.e. Eurythmics ... Cassandra Wilson, War of the Worlds Richard Burton’s voice, Enough is Enough Streisand/Summers Duet .., Friday Night at San Francisco 3 guitarists last 2 tracks

EQUALIZER, no level controls, why not see what one can do?

31 Band, Dual Channel EQ (DBX Clone, identical)

Adjust the Equalizer using the SPL Meter, when done it has Bypass IN/OUT Switch, so you hear any detriment if any, when IN at zero, when OUT, and hear results of any adjustments. Use the meter, use your ears last.

After messing about with it, I disconnected it. Waiting for friends with younger ears to let me know what they hear.

I had some Klipsch LaScala's that i tried DSP, mainly for time alignment and better control of the bass cabinet. worked well but in the end, I preferred a newer designed passive crossover, it just sounded more naturel to me. Granted you miss out on some of the DSP functions and lose a bit of bass control and integration.

Note at the time i listened to vinyl primarily so that was a consideration, having to digitize the signal seemed to lose something in the musical side even with the benefits of the better driver integration. Potentially a better DPS then the one i used would help here.

lastely i would not use your ear for adjustment ( other then minor) if your going to digitize it anyway may as well use proper messurments and adjust to the room. Thats the biggest advantage of DSP IMO

I do use subs, for the reason being that what and how they do it isn't found in integrated form in a pair of floor-standing main speakers (the subs take up 20 cu. ft. per cab, as a FIY). The main speakers are large (6 ft. 2" in height) as well, and in conjunction with each of their corresponding sub is considered and treated like a single speaker system per channel. The system covers down to 20-25Hz at full tilt. 

If that's an acceptable outset for the criteria set by the OP (again, essentially they're large floor standing speakers divided into two cabs per channel, treated and configured as a single entity), here's the deal: they're "EQ'd" actively over the entire frequency range by the same, quality DSP unit, and as such - combined with placement and acoustic measures - gives you an elaborate way to "morph" the performance at the LP in all aspects of filter settings - on the fly. Normally one isn't granted such a plethora of EQ'ing possibilities, and thus the performance of speakers is mostly rooted in their pre-configured passive filters (and room integration) with any EQ'ing done "on top" of this as an extra measure/layer, either via DSP or some form of analogue equalizer device.

I find having the opportunity of described active EQ'ing capabilities to be indispensable. We near-field measured my main speakers for notch placements, and measurements at the LP indicated PEQ areas in the filter settings. Everything from hereon was done by ear; fine tuning Q's, gain structure, delays, crossover points, slopes, overlapping/not overlapping (asymmetrical) XO points, etc.

I've tried DRC FIR-filter in both the time and amplitude domain over my previous, passively configured speakers, but wasn't entirely satisfied with the results as I found there to be a noticeable processing imprinting. As is I prefer the more "manual" by-ear approach aided by measurements, actively - meaning the EQ'ing is applied at the heart of the speaker's intrinsically necessary DSP crossover as the only signal layer.  

Current speakers Paradigm 120H. Powered woofers with room correction from 300h down. Without running the room correction still sound good but with it engaged much tighter more articulate bass. Non corrected sounds much more bloated boomy and loose in comparison. 
 

Hi @erik_squires Nice to see you back! Summarizing, I’ve applied various DSP corrections in Roon to all my speakers in various rooms, large and small, in order to tweak the sound to compensate for room acoustics as well as to my personal preferences.

First I apply room correction using convolution filters I created using REW software.

In most cases after that there are still additional filters I apply to the bass like notch filters to specifically address bass nodes further if needed. Also with full range speakers when driven by beefy enough amp I may apply a low shelf filter to boost bass levels somewhat to personal preference.

With less than full range speakers and/or with a more limited amp, I typically will roll the lowest octave or so bass off similarly in order to allow the amp to drive the speakers more cleanly.

To help determine what adjustments for room acoustics may be needed still after applying the convolution filter, I play white noise and measure the response to identify any areas that look clearly out of whack, but my ears are still the final arbitrator based on what I hear playing a variety of tracks.  

That’s it generally. Details will vary case by case.

Does building a custom room or optimizing the room with treatments count as EQ ing ?

I had some large Usher speakers for my large audio rooms then I moved to a new house with a 16’ audio rooms. I tried using dsp to tame the bass for 3 years. I got it where it was ok sounding but something was missing. I also had the super bass traps, asc corner tube traps, etc..

I ended up buying some new Revel speakers with multiple smaller woofers. Got rid of dsp, all super bass traps, and the pair of other traps, and I have all the bass that I want, as quiet or as loud as I want. I’m putting up all the speakers/traps up for sale. Size your speaker to the room without al the overhead you need to get something to big to sound good in a smaller room.

I use the Emerald Audio BOM (Bass Optimization Module) with my KEF 107 speakers and it works well. 

I don’t know of this qualifies as to your question or if I am off base here, but...I have the Legacy Focus XD’s which produce (to my ears) the best bass I have ever heard. To control it I purchased the Matching Wavelet II outboard crossover/DSP/Preamp and it made a massive improvement in the bass performance. The bass is not boomy, it is deep, defined and well textured-it gives me goosebumps. As I have made improvements to electronics and cabling it just keeps getting better in the bass. The Wavelet can be purchased and programed to mate to non Legacy speakers too. It works!

I have large floorstanders with usable response down to 25Hz, which fits your criteria. These are positioned in a very large room with good symmetry and minimal surface reflections. The crossovers are well designed and free of glaring flaws, yielding fairly even response at my listening position as measured using REW. What I needed was a bump in bass to suit my tastes and minor adjustments along the frequency response curve to smooth and taper.

I originally used DSP but eventually abandoned this in favor of a dbx 2231 dual 31-band graphic EQ, using REW measurements to assess the results. This EQ delivered solid measurements in ASR’s testing, but I was nevertheless concerned that it would increase the noise floor, diminish resolution, or compromise the expansive soundstage I enjoy in a perceptible way. My own testing has demonstrated this not to be the case. I have been completely satisfied with the results.

While this route cannot resolve glaring room issues or flawed speaker/crossover design, it is a demonstrably viable option for those wanting to contour the bass or entire frequency spectrum to suit their preferences. It is most applicable to those using only balanced XLR interconnects (RCA not supported), who require minimal adjustments, and who use REW to verify the results.

Does building a custom room or optimizing the room with treatments count as EQ ing ?

@ronboco

Really not for this discussion. Once we go there the whole thread goes to a general discussion about how to get better bass, which is NOT actually what I want to talk about in this particular thread. I’m asking about this particular approach (2 large speakers + active equalizer) and those with direct experience with it.

Of course, if you tried that and then decided it didn’t work as well as another approach, that’s fine to talk about.

Audiogon is absolutely lousy with discussions that have devolved into general bass improvement threads, that and whether Class D is there yet. I would prefer not to do another one here.

Best,

Erik

My crude method is an API parametric  equalizer.Starting with the Amroc room mode calculator to see where the problem frequencies in the bass are I adjusted the frequencies by ear and left it alone. If I were to someday purchase longer cables I would have it next to me and fiddle with it to fine tune sometimes.But I'm happy enough with the sound now that it's not important.

Have Audio Refinement (YBA) separates and speakers:

• AR Pre 5 analog preamp running in stereo mode only
• AR Multi 5 amp using front 2 channels only (stereo mode)
• ProAc Studio 148, grills off, on Soundocity SEV9 outriggers

Speakers can get a little bass heavy (they easily go down to 25Hz) plus have an upward treble tilt in my room. Added a Schitt Loki Mini+ 4 band equalizer between the preamp and amp. It had the ranges I desired for modification, is very quiet (and runs a little warm), got it used in excellent condition for a great price and is black like the rest of my system.

Overall, I am very happy with the new addition and results. I would recommend getting one.

My AR 9 speakers and Technics SH-8020  eq works for me

Not too long ago in my living room I had a pair of Polk R700's for streaming & stereo TV. I have a decent null at 50hz & a huge boost/peek at 42.

Initially I was using an Arcam SA30 with its Dirac & SVS subs & their PEQ App. The Arcam crapped out on me & then I tried a MiniDsp DDRC-22D. The minidsp is basically a 2 channel dirac box. Multiple digital inputs & digital outputs only..so you can use your favorite dac. I upgraded the power supply & ditched the subs. I had a hard time incorporating the subs & mains with the 2ch dirac minidsp. 

The Minidsp/Dirac worked well for bass. Eventually though I didn't like what it was doing to the mid & high frequency. I wasn't well versed in Dirac & apparently I shouldn't have been trying to correct anything over 2 to 300hz. But I had a peak around 1khz I was trying to tame as well. This was my living room...no acoustic treatment. The DSP device worked well with the bass though. Lots of time measuring & remeasuring. 

After I grew tired with the Minidsp I hooked a RME ADI-2 Dac to the TV/Streamer. I used a Super Farad 3 power supply I had with the dac & hooked the Dac straight to amp (class D Hypex Nilai). I love that little Dac. Great volume control & cool loudness function that adjust with volume. Best thing though is that it has 5 PEQ tabs..and 2 extra but  limited PEQ tabs you can set up for a Bass & Treble tone control. You can also set the PEQ for each channel individually. 

With a Umik & REW software I could measure the room & see my issues. The Dac had just enough PEQ tabs to dial in my bass & any issue in the higher frequency. Plus it sounded more natural than using Dirac to my ears...at least in the upper frequencies. I'm back to bookshelves now in that room but was very happy with how a little PEQ helped my overall bass response. Obvious issues is that it only worked for digital sources. It's also a dac that not everyone will appreciate as much as I did. 

My system is vintage. The bass has been ok, very good with some songs and lacking with others. Have been looking for a vintage EQ, while also thinking about getting the Loki Max. 

After reading stuff all over the web, everyone said recap the crossovers. Did that, and the bass was a magnitude better, deeper, fuller, faster. So was the mid and high end. It really woke up the speakers. 

After living with that for a bit, and still wanting more...

Did a full recap/refresh on my pre-amp. Another order of magnitude better, everywhere! Turned my treble from +4 to 0, and bass from +6 to +3. Everything was so much cleaner, clearer, most of all the lowered noise floor. 

That lasted about 2 weeks...

Did a full recap/referb on my amp, same as above, just less so. But mostly lowered the noise floor, feel like I got another 50w out of the amp. 

Just this week, wanting more low bass, want to feel it in my chair! Decided to move the speakers around the room. Spent about 3 hours measuring, taping, moving listening... 

Found the sweet spot, might have been almost sitting in the null. Now I have powerful bass that I can feel, soundstage is much better, channel separation is better, tone controls are almost no longer in use. Bass is 0 - +3 depending on source and volume. 

Will see how long this last, but still thinking about adding a sub, and/or a EQ. If something pops up used that looks like fun it will be added. But in the end of all this, my entire systems sounds 100% better, total cost was not much, but a ton of sweat equity. 

I have magnepan 3.7 speakers in a smallish room. Have tried dirac several times but always get dissatisfied with the sound.  I can make the bass sound very controlled but it also takes the “life” out of the music.  So far I prefer no EQ.

You can address peaks but not EQ your way out of modal nulls.

("Positional EQ" maybe, i.e., move seat and buttocks out of null)

Back in the late 80's/early 90's i started learning the effect the room had on sound and, going to the library (how quaint?) did research on sound and room effects.  What got me going on that track was an article in [i believe] Stereo Review in which the author talked about EQ and sound curves in various concert hall "best seat" locations and how measured response at those positions was never "flat"--As i recall from the article it seems the best seats had a slightly boosted bass and gradually began rolling off after 10KHz to around 6dB down at 18KHz. (Approximation from admittedly defective memory)--Anyway,  at that time I owned Cizek Model 1 speakers that supposedly reproduced usable bass down to 25Hz, although i never really tested that spec with organ music or the like. What i did know was that in the room i had my system i was not happy with the sound which was extremely constrained by WAF  so i began exploring whether i could EQ my way out of it--i purchased an ADC Sound Shaper SS-525X which billed itself as an "Automatic Computerized Equalizer/Analyzer"--it had a pink noise generator with an interesting feature:  you could press a button labeled "set flat" and it would generate pink noise and automatically adjust the sound at your listening position (where you positioned the included calibrated mic) to perfectly flat frequency response. From there you could adjust the EQ sliders to design the frequency curve you desired--which BTW did not match slider position but rather a complicated summing of adjacent sliders--took some practice.  I first listened without adjusting the flat response and found that sound very unpleasant--tipped up at the high frequencies and the bass was "lifeless"; however, when i adjusted to one of the published best seat curves the sound improved considerably and i was happy-- so the use of EQ really helped a situation where i couldn't treat the room or move the speakers from the corners.  Now i have a dedicated music room, albeit small so i listen nearfield, and i don't find that i need the equalizer--my components and speakers are considerably better and the sound is so good that i don't want to mess with it--i've handled room modes by room treatment and speaker positioning--but i may one day put the ADC back in the loop and experiment just to see what happens--it can be bypassed for easy A/B comparison but i've been reluctant to put it in the signal chain even in bypassed mode simply b/c i believe in minimizing equipment in the path.

Just for the record, flat measurements are only meant for anechoic and quasi anechoic situations. Harman and many others have a lot of writing available on how speakers should perform at the listening location.

Actually flat at your chair sounds horribly bright.

Among others, check the B&K speaker curves or the standard Dirac curves.

@erik_squires "Horribly Bright" was certainly my experience when i adjusted to flat at the listening position--that plus lifeless bass.  Curious why you're collecting other experiences?  Just for fun or ?

@wyoboy because I’d like to know how well this combination works out in general. This will help all of us learn but also help me understand what methods work for others and not just myself. This helps me make better recommendations.

Like, if it was 90% negative, even if it worked for me, I’d know to avoid suggesting it.

Also, I have an upcoming fully active speaker system I’m building. Knowing any pitfalls from users would be useful even if I think I know what to expect, but if I mention I’m doing that I’d have many people jump in and try to help me design them. I already know the parameters really, so didn’t want to invite that kind of suggestions until after they’re built. At the same time, my major home appliances all reached college age so this project may be later in 2025 than I had hoped for.

Also, it seems, since so many discussions about improving bass usually end up being battle royals about the various ways to apply subwoofers I wanted to see how well users who did not use subwoofers at all do, without having the other, tired arguments about subs.

I wanted to approach the question of getting excellent bass with a fresh approach, making for an interesting thread I hope.

I've been very pleased with the DSP that is integrated into my Weiss DAC.  That plus REW gives me all the control I need - for now anyway.  :)

@hk_fan - Kind of why I like Roon, which has become my only real music source. It has a very flexible and capable digital EQ section.

Erik - agreed!  I think it's very tough to beat a well executed DSP!

I’ve had awesome results with my new Danville dspNexus with newly released SHARC processor playing 8 channels with 12 biquads per channel. I have 20.1 Magnepan speakers running full range (no passive crossovers except the internal tweeter) and four subwoofers, two towers up front with five 10” Seas subwoofers in each, wired parallel with sealed enclosures, and two 16” SVS SB-16 Ultras in the room. The biquads are IIR filters to reduce processing stress, they round to 10 decimal places so they are extremely accurate. 

I measure each speaker independently at the listening position with an Earthworks 30Hz-30KHz with Room EQ Wizard and put the results into Multi Sub Optimizer. I let all speakers play full range. I then hook up my fast computer and let it chug for a few hours to make the best room correction adjusting for time alignment, phase, and amplitude. I then take those results and plug the numbers into my DSP. The sound is the best I’ve heard. I listen to music and movies at loud volumes and the neighbors have never complained because the sound is so well controlled through the DSP and multiple subwoofers.

I think this is the best way to get accurate sound but I know that the barrier into technology could be intimidating. One has to be careful with active amplification not to cross wire speakers and blow them out. I recently tweaked the dB levels between the front and rear subs by 3dB to add a little more low end oomph and love the results.

I think this is a great topic! Thanks for putting it out there. I wish it was present when I started trying to learn about active amplification and DSP.

I get very good bass out of my Revel Salon 2s. But when I want more, I use the parametric EQ function in JRiver to boost bass by a couple of dB at 100 and 500 Hz bands. Does the trick pretty well.

An additional non-software tweak that really helped bring the low-end oomph was putting the Revels on Star Sound Apprentice XL stands - but that involved hardware, so probably outside of your area of inquiry.

@p59teitel  - Good to hear, sounds as if you had very few room issues to deal with. Lucky you!

Actually I think most audiophiles would find the large amount of glass in the sunroom quite troublesome to dial in the typical “you are there” sound (it does help to have a cathedral ceiling with the sound able to disperse adequately and not just ricochet). My approach is “they are here” and between Revel and the Symphonic Line source and amplification gear, it works for me.

You can "eq" the speakers through component selection in the crossover (even if unintentionally) and this is probably why some people prefer passive crossovers to active crossovers.

Case in point. All the values in the crossover have an "ideal" combination, but the combination can be tweaked to produce a hump or a dip in an area of the band that is pleasing to the listener.

The 5.8 mH choke with an 8 ohm load would actually like to "see" a 44 mfd cap to ground. A larger cap (e.g., 47 mfd) will create a greater roll-off, but it will also create a hump just below the crossover frequency. The larger the change from "ideal", the larger/broader the hump. So if you set the crossover to the "right" frequency and you "over-capacitor" it, you can add a "hump of bass" just below this frequency (which I have at 310 Hz).

Similarly, the combination of C2, C3, and C4 if "over-capacitored" will increase the roll-off, but create a hump below the crossover frequency, which puts it at ~1kHz where the ear is most sensitive.  This takes a bit of the high end hash out of the 2251 while giving voices a warmer, more pleasant tone. 

I've had a pair of Altec 604-8G in smaller than optimal cabinets, about 5 cu ft.    Spent a bit of time with REW and placement in a fairly large room, ~ 500 sq ft, and found the best overall support for the bass was, you guessed it, close to the side walls.  My Cardas speaker placement guide was laughing at me.  But the bass was strong down to 40 Hz with no EQ, and the nulls due to placement weren't noticeable.  But the horns seemed a bit peaky in the 1-3k range with certain vocals and brass.  Given the age of the stock crossovers, I made some using J. Markwart's simple crossover, listened to them for a while, but never quite liked the sound.  Went back to the stock crossovers and added some very steep notch filters at two of the frequencies that tamed most of the peaks.  Still short of perfection, but they're very pleasant to listen to for hours, and quite forgiving of less than ideal recordings.  To summarize, placement did the most good for bass, and getting control of the mid band peaks was the second step.  Have pondered DSP, convolution files in JRiver, etc.  It's all about the journey.....

Hi @toddalin - Every passive crossover is an EQ, but that’s really not what I wanted to discuss especially as most hobbyists aren’t going to mod anything about their passive crossovers.

While we can, generally, adjust the speaker to the room to match output with room gain what we can't really do efficiently is deal with narrow room modes.  I mean, it's possible, but then you end up with a very custom speaker that only works in one place with probably a large extra outlay in parts. 

pickindoug, these eq units are what you need, but they are probably "one-offs" made especially for my "one-off" tri-amped Super Big Reds with their "one-off" electronic crossover. I bought these from a recording studio that went under.

Yamaha NS-5000. 12 inch woofers. 26 hz. Very satisfied

I also have the NS-5000 with a CODA #16 amp and is a really great coherent sound. I do not want to eq anything on this system or add any subs. I have used convolution filters with other systems that were in smaller rooms with different speakers,

I will be buying an open baffle speaker in 2026 that uses multiple 16-inch woofers, and the bass on that speaker is setup using some sort of analog eq. I think there will be 5 Eq settings on the bass. That speaker sounded so good that I am going to get it and flip back and forth with the NS5000. 

Another way I have eq'ed bass is using the services of Mitch Barnett of Accurate Sound CA. His solution works with digital streaming servers such as ROON. I used that with my old Thiel CS3.7 which were in a too small room. I got some genius level convolution filters made by Mitch for that room, speakers, and listening position.

I just purchased a White Instruments Model 4856 graphic equalizer. I only set it up Wednesday so I can't say much about my satisfaction with it. I'll be playing with it for a few days. 

I can tell you it's extremely quiet. I tried a Schiit Lokius and found it produced both hiss and hum, so I returned it. The White added no detectable noise. 

White Instruments was in high end studios for decades. I think they are still in business. 

@erik_squires 

A little follow-up. A few months ago I tried using a HPF and sub to deal with my low end issues. That was pretty successful below 80hz, but I still had other things I wasn't satisfied with. I bought the White EQ to work on those. But I eventually realized I could take a different approach and use the EQ to deal with all the frequency issues. Today I worked on that and essentially eliminated the need for the sub, although I'm still working on integrating it below 40hz. 

My speakers are stand mounted but do have a pair of 12" woofers that put out plenty of bass. I resisted using an equalizer because of potential phase issues so went with the HPF and EQ on just the low end. But the White Instruments unit has excellent phase coherence and I'm not hearing any smearing or imaging issues. I'll continue to tweak, cause that's what I do, but I'm pretty happy with what I'm hearing. 

@mashif - Thanks for  the follow up.  Just because I focused on large speakers with EQ doesn't mean I wanted to discourage anyone from also using room treatments.

Effectively dampening the mid-treble energy in a room can bring out the bass.

@erik_squires 

I have 13 bass traps and several diffusion panels in a 10x13 room. Using EQ is a last resort for me. I've been working on my room acoustics for 2 years, trying all manner of controlling low end, but there's not much I can do below 100hz. The HPF and sub was one approach, the EQ another. 

But there were some modes that really hurt the vocal sound and the eq fixed that. I don't consider it a permanent solution but it gives me a reference to compare other speakers. Before this, other speakers sounded so dramatically different, there was no realistic comparison.