What is the most dramatic way of increasing a speaker's Bass and Low mid?
Hi-
I am wondering what would give the most dramatic increase in bass and low mid projection/Volume, even on account of accuracy ...
My speakers can go down to 28hz but i need to boost it’s level, not frequency extension. They are 2 way with bass reflex port. 6.5" woofer size and a tweeter. Floor standing.
My floor is old hardwood strips.
placement and coupling methods are the first things that come to mind. I do not want to add an equalizer at this point.
Spikes, footers, concrete platform, direct floor flush contact? anything and everything that YOU know works. Speculations on untested methods are not needed as i need real life experience from people.
Finally, a word about cables. Studio use of cables has little relevance to domestic systems and cables.
Beg to differ.
The job of the audio cable is the same in either case: Transmit the signal with as little signal loss and interference/distortion as possible. The same electrical theory applies wherever you are using audio cables.
Though pro applications can become even more critical (due to often longer cable lengths, and other in the field issues). And when it comes to the claims that boutique audiophile cables are required to pass truly high fidelity signals, the facts about the cables actually used to make the recordings are exceptionally relevant: Every time you put in your new Ultra Amazing New Cable and ooh and ah at the clarity, detail, nuance and sonic information, you are in fact hearing the the quality of sound that was passed through good old, standard grade cables pros use. In fact, you are also hearing whatever cables were the weakest link in the chain.
This in of itself should give an audiophile pause when he thinks it requires high end cabling to pass extremely high quality sound. The most expensive systems in the world, producing the best sound in the world, are essentially "using" basic cables to achieve their sound, insofar as they are playing mostly recordings made using basic cables.
I work in post production sound, and have had my work mixed in many fantastic mixing theaters, many of which sound simply amazing. And I know what cables have been generally used in many of them (I even knew the company making the cables to order for the studios, basically versions of Canare, Belden....). The idea that non-boutique cabling is required for amazing sound is just ludicrous on so many examples in the pro world.
An exceptional way to mediocre sound is to ignore aftermarket cables, and or stay with "affordable" cables to avoid comparisons and advancement.
Sorry, but I believe this needs to be called out for what it is: B.S.
I use "affordable" belden speaker cable. A long run of it at that. And a rag tag collection of interconnects (much of it the old Kimber PBJ, which I bought many years ago, though some others as well).
I’m quite familiar with aftermarket cables - have owned them, borrowed, them, have heard my speakers on up to $45,000 and more worth of cabling (Nordost and others). I’ve had a range of Shunyata power cables to try out, etc. (Blind tested against a standard $15 power cable, no discernible difference). Did my speakers sound great with the expensive cabling? Yes! Did they sound great with the not-expensive cabling? Yes!
I have a long thread detailing my most recent "speaker journey" looking to see if I want to add another pair of speakers to my system - heard many of the latest from Magico, Focal, Raidho, Devore and tons of others. Inevitably all were hooked up to expensive aftermarket cables, amps, sources using aftermarket power cables, yadda yadda....
I never heard sound substantially better than what I get at home with my affordable cabling, no revelations of detail, tone, soundstaging, smoothnes, clarity. When I’d get home and spin the same tracks, I heard all those goodies, and preferred my home set up.
I played some vinyl for a friend who is a musician/producer last night, and he was simply astonished by the utter clarity and realism of the system "like I was on the floor where it was recorded, experiencing the real sound." Another friend is a reviewer of high end gear who has had tons of expensive cables, speakers, amps etc through his place, declared after hearing some vocal tracks on my system that it was so realistic it was almost unsettling.How in the world did my system with "mediocre" cabling impress someone so used to listening through ultra high end cabling??? Maybe the influence of cables isn’t quite what it’s cracked up to be, in the hierarchy of relevance.
Now, is this simply to brag about my system? No. Because most of us hear have fantastic sounding systems. I only bring all these details up to rebuff this false idea, repeated too often in posts like yours, that one has to move beyond "affordable" cables or suffer "mediocre" sound.
It’s simply false, and I think it’s a disservice to promote this idea to people who may not know better and will enter this hobby having absorbed this idea they have to spend more money on cables than they really need to. It’s one thing to perhaps claim that the properties of an aftermarket cable may be impressive in some respect, and even may alter the sound of a system (and then we’d have to go in to how it is doing that). It’s another to claim that aftermarket boutique audiophile cables are *necessary* for realizing truly high fidelity sound.
Just to add to this: Some Speaker and Amp companies charge thousands more than their designs should cost because the wire harness inside is made with thousands of dollars in wire. That is a selling point and an opportunity to pocket a lot of extra dough. They should offer the same product made with simple wire as an option that costs the same minus the wire price tag. See what people buy when they compare the 2 options...;)
Hoever, for the same money you could buy a much better design, with better "Important" components, handmade point to point, much better sounding that uses standard high quality that costs a fraction of the boutique wire.
Now for the consumer who, during the day, is a doctor or lawyer or accountant, and knows no better than reading forums, he’ll go and spend the top dollar for the lesser design, lesser sounding product because of the "Wire" while he could get the same if not better sound from a simply better designed and made product with less expensive wire.
Ordered the Schiit Loki 4 band EQ. Maybe -1 or -2 db at 2k and +1 or +2 db boost at 400 or 20hz(which actually starts at 300hz) would correct the system to sound more to my liking... Ill report back...
Trying to eq with several $5,000 cables sounds a bit far from my definition of sanity...
If i were you id go read Dawkins for evidence of lack of god therefor...;) but your taking us to a whole different topic here my good man;) beliefe is not something i need to share with anyone and it is as personal as personal can be- non transferable. Its evidence i need when it comes to frequency response...
I want to see an eq curve of several cables done by the same test on the same equipment in the same session done by a third party non affiliated, I do not care for what a manufacturer publishes, as much as i don’t believe Enron...;)
A good speaker cable that may give you a little deeper and more solid bass is the Cerious Technologies Graphene Extreme original. It costs about $640 new. You will probably find used ones at about $400. The newer Matrix is more than twice as expensive if new vs. new but will be more detailed and transparent. The original will sound like you added some bass and made it more articulate also. I have a pair and they did that to my ribbon speakers. Was using an all silver wired cable prior.
dumbeat, You are asking for actual objective evidence rather than anecdote. That is verboten in the realm of cables ;-) Your experience in taking off the footers and leaving your speakers flush on the floor was similar to my own. I tried some Isoacoustics products, and also spikes, under my speakers and they sounded better (IMO), especially in terms of tight bass response, sitting on my rug without any footers.
So you liked the speaker flush on the floor or with spikes at the end or isoacoustics? its not clear; And What was the difference you heard? Flush on floor=more low, Spikes= Tight? not sure what that means... "Less Low mid" tight? Thanks,
I prefer them flush on the floor - no spikes, no rubber footers (e.g. no Isoacoustics). At least in my case, in my room, my Thiel 2.7 speakers just seem to have the most bass grip without being raised on anything.
They sit on a rug, over hard wood floors.
When placed on the isoacoustic products, the sound generally seemed to lose tightness and brilliance, even in the mids, but I noticed it most in the bass range, probably from 70Hz or so and down to 40 or a bit below, where bass guitar etc lost focus and density, and seemed to have a sense of overhang and looseness around the bottom.
The entire sound changed, though, to a darker, lusher, less focused presentation, which I did not prefer.
dgarretson, as usual your eloquent explanation is thorough and insightful. Nice to hear from you again!
Prof, we may be talking past each other on your first rebuttal; I'm not saying cables have little influence literally on the sound in a studio. I am saying that the fantastic resources of the studio to manipulate the sound do not transfer, i.e. presence of mixer, to the home. The environments and tools to contour sound are radically different. In the home environment cables take on a much more important role in shaping the sound.
As to your second argument, my experience with dozens of brands and many looms of cables is fundamentally different, which leads to my statement about sound quality of a system and cables. Consistently use of lower end, less expensive, etc. cables (and, yes, pro oriented such as Mogami) have been mediocre by a great deal perceptually. I just recently once again had that experience as I was testing out three different sets of Y cables, and the worst was the pro/musician brand, while the best (clearly audible) was the specialty one from Audio Sensibility. It seems we will simply disagree on this topic. I would suggest that your perspective is a disservice to audiophiles if you wish to make it a declaration. I can add the phrase, "... in my experience," and then we are not pretending we have absolute knowledge. We are at this point at an impasse, however I suspect we will continue to be cordial. :)
dumbeat, your prodigious skills and knowledge regarding studio does not all translate directly to home audio - or else you wouldn't be asking for a relatively simple fix for an audiophile in your original post. Many of those with decades of experience in home audio would know how, and successfully obtain the result they wanted.
Note this; home audio is not as much a science as in the studio, but more so an art, due to the difference in equipment available. I get what you declared without substantiation in regard to cables being the last 1%, but take way all the toys of the studio and now what have you to contour sound? The very recommendations in regard to placement, room prep and cables that the experienced audiophiles are recommending.
Bill Dudleston of Legacy Audio does work inside and outside the studio. As an experiment he humored me in a review of his Legacy Whisper speaker; he upgraded the internal wiring and caps at my request in an effort to see what improvement might result. He had doubts, but afterward measured a 2 dB change in the speaker's bass. You know how significant that is. So, one recommendation I could give you is to consider upgrading the speaker's internal wiring and caps. If you don't like the suggestion of changing external wiring, perhaps you will accept the experience of a person who does work in the studio and found that internal wiring and caps made a difference.
As far as arguing with the people here with extensive experience who are trying to help you, go right ahead if you feel you must, but you are rejecting the very means you say you seek in fixing the problem. Please sit down in front of your rig with some different power, IC and speaker cables, and do some critical listening. I have had some well known industry members visit my room and hear comparisons between cables themselves. Like them, you will learn something. Now, if you are unwilling to do that, then cordially I am finished with our discussion. :)
Knowing the speaker helps.
The balance is a touch bright. Try crossing the tweeters in front or behind your head. This will roll off the treble, as will tilting so you listen closer to the woofer axis.
Again though, room acoustics matter. The perceived frequency response of the ear integrates over time, so adding absorption to bring down the unwanted areas can be helpful, or removing absorption in key areas.
Dumbeat, in my experience cabling can make an audible difference which does not show up in the kind if measurements you are asking for.
Since I'm a speaker guy, I tend to give a lot of credit and/or blame to the speakers. I do not look to cabling to fix my speakers, nor do I blame the cabling if my speakers suck.
At a recent audio show we exhibited speakers that have a secondary array of drivers, firing to the rear, which are not very loud relative to the main speakers. Their calculated contribution to the summed SPL is only about two-tenths of a decibel. This secondary array of drivers was connected to the amplifier by a separate speaker cable from the main array. This last detail is important to what I'm going to describe.
During set-up at first we hooked everything up with cabling that we had on hand. Then several hours later the cable company we were sharing the room with arrived (Clarity Cables). We changed cables one-by-one, because we had time, and because we wanted to listen for changes and decide whether the original cabling or the cable company's cabling sounded the best. No one from the cable company was present for this.
I'll only describe what happened when we changed the speaker cables going to that array of rear-firing drivers, the ones contributing only .2 dB.
When we made that change, a harshness that I had been blaming on my speakers disappeared. I had been planning to make a crossover change before the show opened the next day, and with the new speaker cables going to that rear-firing array, it was clear that no crossover change was needed. I was amazed and relieved.
The amplifier designer (Hans Looman of Resonessence) is the one who explained what was going on. His explanation shifted my paradigm about cables. He said that the original cables had been acting like antennas and picking up radio frequency signals, which the amplifier's feedback/error correction circuitry interpreted as distortion. The error correction circuitry was therefore working like mad trying to correct this "distortion", and THAT was the source of the harshness I had been hearing. It was coming from the amps, as they tried to correct for something their error-correction circuitry interpreted as a distortion. The Clarity Cables did not behave as antennas and so the amplifier was no longer trying to correct for the radio-frequency "distortion".
Given that the secondary array of drivers was only contributing .2 dB, it would be unlikely that any minor changes in their frequency response due to the cabling change would be audible. However if that cabling change made a significant difference in the amplifier's behavior, that difference would also show up in the main speakers, where it could theoretically be audible (and in this case, it was).
I think this is an example of a non-obvious mechanism by which cabling can make a difference. And no I don't have data to prove this, so you'll have to decide whether what I've described passes your "reasonableness" test. Truth precedes observation, and observation precedes data.
Hey Douglas. I appreciate your commentals and I apologize if i sound like i am rejecting ideas that i may have not tried. You are right about that.
That said, eq’ing with wire type is crazy as far as cost and lack of real data. You gotta give me that.
But i hear ya. Yoi may as well be correct, but for me id probably start woth buying the correct components for the sound i seek, ie speakers and amp, than maybe a little eq for correction and only than, if i win the lottery, id bring home 20k worth of wire for a db or two here and there. But thats me and im not saying its the best way. Its my way. Awaiting shipping of the little schiit(duh?) eq. If that dint do it bye bye speakers. Move on.
This past Rocky Mountain Audio Fest, our room was right next to the Schiit room. I was hoping to make a trade, a pair of my speakers for one of their amps. Of course the pivotal question was, are my speakers worth a Schiit??
Seriously, I think going for EQ is an excellent idea.
Yes, a little bit of EQ goes a long way, Im also considering Bi Amping the speakers. If i gain control over the tweeter and the woofer separately I can balance them a little warmer, since these speakers ARE remarkable as far as fidelity and space and air and detail, its just that i need some more chest/belly to feel happy.
My ATC 25ASL Pro at my recording studio have a 7" Woofer with low mid and bass to die for- HUGE... And they are reference speakers- not some Hyped up Cheapos (probably the most proven and used in the industry)... So i must conclude Its the voicing not the size. You may be talking about Subs.. for that you need a bigger driver for sure.
dumbeat, I respect your choice, and I'm happy that we are chatting rather than flaming each other. Much better fun in audio forum participation! :)
Duke and I know each other; he is a respected speaker designer. He does a distributed array of subs that has met with critical acclaim called Swarm, well regarded.
No doubt doing what you plan with biamping would make a sizable difference and very likely allow you to achieve your goal, at least mostly. The question I would ask myself is, would the cost associated with doing bi-amping any given speaker be less productive than seeking a different speaker. Yes, I know, a maddeningly nebulous question without a direct answer. I'm guessing you have asked that, however.
I have Benchmark Audio AHB2 amps in Mono mode right now running a small tower with 6.5" mid/woof. Never enough power... ;)
Hey- Suerly chatting- never flaming. Sometimes there is a "venting" mood, but that's neglectable;) I appreciate your participation.
As far as Bi-Amping, here is the thing- These Merlins are total magic in certain respects that im afraid to lose at this point. To remedy what i consider their weak point(Low Mid and bass fullness) would be ideal for me, so maybe bi amping would do it, Selling and buying speakers until i find the right one might be too costly and cumbersome(shipping speakers!!)... So i think id like to try that little $150 EQ first, then, if that screws up the phase(which EQ's can do) ill try Bi Amping in order to control the woofer and tweeter separately. If that doesnt work either ill consider a different speaker. I think that would be the "sanest" way, as much as this search can be sane from the get go,..;)
There are a lot of tradeoffs in designing a woofer system and some of them may be in play in the differences you hear between the Merlin and the ATC.
For example, the Merlin is 89 dB efficient and the ATC is 85 dB efficient. The higher efficiency of the Merlin comes mainly from its woofer having a more powerful magnet. This more powerful magnet actually tends to reduce the level of the bass (and even lower midrange) region relative to the rest of the spectrum. If the Merlin’s woofer is then placed in a cabinet that is tuned fairly low, there will likely be a "sag" in the response curve above that, and this "sag" can extend up 3 octaves or more above the port tuning frequency.
If this is indeed what’s going on (or at least part of it), imo it’s the sort of thing that EQ can help with.
Awesome information Duke! Thanks. It does sound also like Bi Amping can maintain the nature of the speakers somewhat but alter the relationship between tweeter and woofer. Would you say that is a better way to go than EQ'?
Actually, one way to embellish and raise output of the Scanspeak 8545 mid/woofer relative to the Esotar tweeter is to add a Scanspeak bucking magnet. This doubles the 8545's magnet structure and raises output by several db-- as suggested by Tony Gee of Humble HiFi, who did this with 8545s in some project speakers. I followed him with this mod in my VSMs. Another improvement is to power the BBAM with a higher quality +/- 12V LPS than the batteries or AC supply in the stock unit.
By the way, as far as amps go, which would give more "Warm" "Full" sound (100hz-400hz) and a bit more forgiving, mellower high mids (2khz-4khz)?
SET? OTL? Push pull? Out of those any particular one to match well with the merlins? they do not need a lot of power. I can get by with 30wpc easily at my listening enviournment, and the Impedance is not suppose to fall bellow 7ohm if im correct.
Rough sand off the lacquer coating the perimeter of the steel plate that covers the stock magnet. Rough sand the mating surface of the donut shaped bucking magnet. Place the driver face down on a level surface. Thinly coat both surfaces with 5 minute strong epoxy. Apply the bucking magnet in the correct direction. (It will be repelled as it approaches the stock magnet and attracted when in close proximity.) Make minor adjustments to align the magnet as the epoxy stiffens to ensure that the two magnets are concentric with each other and thus the voice coil.
...These Merlins are total magic in certain respects that im afraid to lose at this point. To remedy what i consider their weak point(Low Mid and bass fullness) would be ideal for me, so maybe bi amping would do it,
I also have a pair of speakers that are famous for "total magic in certain aspects" with a weak point in "Low Mid and bass fullness" They are Magneplanar 1.7 panel speakers. Their "total magic" is reproduction of acoustic instruments and voices that is spooky real. They create the illusion of a full-size concert grand piano like I’ve (otherwise) never heard in my house in the 46 years I’ve pursued this hobby. Piano sounds so real it often elicits an involuntary response of turning my headd quickly to see where the piano is.
On their own the panels start to roll off around 50 Hz and are MIA by 40 Hz, or they were until I added a pair of subwoofers. In my situation I got a pair of small, fast subs whose transient response blends with the panels and increases the bass extension to a totally functional 36 Hz. This makes string bass and bass guitar credible and also achieves the fundamental frequency of a 22"-24" dia. bass drum.
Blending is relatively easy because it has continuous 0-180 deg. phase controls, volume controls, and also continuous crossover frequencies.
If I wanted to go all out, I would get a pair of JL Audio E110 subs, which would increase bass extension for more instruments and overall dynamics for large orchestral and big band recordings.
In my opinion EQ is much more likely to help than is bi-amping. In your situation you need to be able to make finer adjustments than simply changing the relative levels of woofer and tweeter. That would help, but I think you’d still have weak upper bass/lower mids relative to the top-end of the woofer’s response.
Regarding SET or OTL amps, I looked at the frequency response and impedance curves in Stereophile’s review of the VSM. Relative to a solid state amp, a high-output-impedance (low-damping-factor) tube amp will put out more power into an impedance peak, and less power into an impedance dip.
So in this case the result would be more output south of 100 Hz; a bit less output between 100 Hz and 800 Hz; and a bit more output north of 800 Hz. Imo ONLY the increased output below 100 Hz is likely to be beneficial. North of 100 Hz, I think the net effect on frequency response would be counter-productive.
While I am a big fan of these kinds of specialty amps (I’m an Atma-Sphere dealer and design my speakers specifically to work well with them), I don’t think this is the solution in your situation. I’ve heard Merlins driven by a low-damping-factor tube amp and to my ears the combination still had the characteristics you have described.
Regarding adding a bucking magnet, I assume that "raises the output by several dB" comes from increasing the motor strength. I do not think that is the solution either, for reasons described in my previous post.
I think EQ is probably your best bet for getting the tonal balance you want from those speakers.
Thanks again! So amp wise, just to get closer to my destination, what would you recommend? Im ready to upgrade from my VAC Avatar integrated Push Pull.
My suggestion would be to first see where you end up with the Schiit Loki in the signal chain. If it solves the tonal balance issue with your current amp, then it will also solve that issue with an SET or OTL amp (unless the knobs are already max’d out). And from there, you can probably guess which 30-watt amp I’d suggest.
I'm friends with an experienced technician (who does warranty service for several brands) and he is very complimentary of the parts quality in VAC amps.
You will regret replacing the Avatar as I once did. I am not sure why it doesn't give you what you want, but in my own experience I sure missed everything it did well, and it did a lot well, when it was gone. Coincidentally I used the Avatar with Audiokiesis speakers. I also had a friend who was quite respected on these forums who powered his Merlin's with either Atma-Sphere M-60s or Music Reference RM-10 or RM-9SE amps. The latter two will give you low output impedance and fairly high damping, although not nearly as high as a solid state amp. All told though all 3 of those amps are quite transparent.
Im aware of the virtues of the Avatar so not in a hurry to part with it, however im speculating about my ability to tailor my sound mote precisely with separates. Especially a pre amp for tone. But gotta start looking at the correct power amp for the job first.
What tonal balance was your friend after? as evident from my post here im looking to trade transparency for weight warmth and body. So im not sure how the OTLs mentioned behave realy in that respect. How does the high damping translate to the Merlins?
My friend and I preferred equipment that gave us a sound that was true to the source. So if you a looking for warmth, or what some might refer to as classic tube sounding, older Cary and Conrad Johnson amps/preamps would be worth seeking out. I once owned a Cary V12 amp and SLP-98 preamp and the sound was quite warm. It sounded good for a while but grew tiresome as the coloration hid detail. For me the Avatar most certainly had weight and body, and with Mullard EL-34s a nice touch of warmth. When I wanted transparency I would swap in Siemens EL-34s.
The Merlin's are easy speakers to drive. A properly designed and damped tube amp (say a factor of 10 to 20 which translates to about 1/2 to 1 ohm output impedance) will drive the speakers more effortlessly and exhibit lower distortion. Their smooth impedance curve does make them OTL friendly as well and Bobby used to show them with Joule Electra OTL amps.
After years of merry-go-rounding with electronics for a fuller bodied presentation without resorting to equalization I dug out my DIY JBL two way horns and bingo. Unfortunately the delicacy of imaging and sound staging suffered greatly.
My solution was quite simple and has adapted with all my subsequent speakers.
After re-reading your response your, "talking about the speakers themselves." Other than looking at the Stereophile Measurements response curve dipping in that region then quickly dropping off, I've got nothing. Good luck with that.
Why not download REW (it’s free) and drop 100$ on a USB mic with a calibration file. Next, measure your system. Perhaps moving your speakers around may help, perhaps not. I suspect that your 6.5” drivers are just too small but you really need to measure. Look at nearfield response first which will show pretty much what the speaker is capable of, then measure the response at the sweet spot which will add the room response. After that you won’t be guessing anymore.
Or less radical moving speakers closer to walls and corners pretty much always helps boost the bass, but often at teh expense of 3-d sound stage and imaging so a dilemma there..
Equalizers....much easier, more adjustable and to the point! If you need one you need one.
I was an early adopter of the Loki EQ...don't use it much as I like to keep signals as clean as possible, but when I do use the thing it's great. The adjustment sweep is sort of "front loaded" meaning they do their thing with larger effect initially, but sensibly designed...mine stays in the preamp to amp line, on but out of the circuit...so it's ready! I've noticed it's amazing electronic transparency, and tested that by removing it from the rig and returning it with no audible difference...even with obviously longer cable runs to make it fit. Get one, try it, send it back if you can't make it work for you. Done.
No. but I'm going to order one soon. I want to see if I can improve on the overall sound of a FM tuner I just purchased. Will try it on other sources also. It just seems to hard to resist for the money along with the return policy.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
