In Reply to: While I don't agree with some of Welti's conclusions... posted by Duke on March 5, 2007 at 10:08:59:
Welti explains his priorities up front.Most readers don't get his message.
His priorities only make sense for surround sound in a small auditorium or in a very large home theater.
His top priority is reducing bass frequency response variations from seat to seat among 16 seats in the middle of a small theater, or in a very large home theater.
The data do not address the bass frequency response at ONE two-channel sweet spot seating position and the subjective integration of subwoofer(s) and two main speakers (our top priorities and/or only priorities for two-channel audio).
This article has nothing to do with the sweet spot in two-channel audio.
I regret that the article fooled you into that assumption -- it fools most readers because it is poorly written.
In my opinion it is the worst article ever written about subwoofers because the author appears to be articulate, but he is incompetent as a writer because so many readers are fooled into believing his conclusions apply to two-channel audio. They do not.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Welti averages 16 seating positions -- this is worthless for two-channel audio -- many are confused by his priorities - Richard BassNut Greene 11:19:13 03/06/07 (22)
- Re: Welti comments - twelti 15:48:53 03/11/07 (1)
- Duke caused the commotion by quoting your paper at a primarily two-channel audio website - Richard BassNut Greene 14:33:25 03/13/07 (0)
- The acoustics does not change in the bass region. - Duke 11:42:36 03/06/07 (19)
- If you think computer simulations in one virtual room results in conclusions for ALL rooms, you're a lost audiophile! - Richard BassNut Greene 10:07:21 03/07/07 (18)
- Acoustic principles don't change from room to room - only the specific application of those principles changes - Duke 10:32:08 03/07/07 (17)
- Did it ever occur to you that every so-called "expert" you cite has a DIFFERENT sub location recommendation !!!!!!!!!! - Richard BassNut Greene 08:38:46 03/08/07 (16)
- It is the data I am most interested in; I draw my own conclusions. (nt) - Duke 09:22:19 03/08/07 (15)
- It's the sound quality in a real room that I'm interested in -- not computer simulations never tested by real ears! - Richard BassNut Greene 09:52:24 03/08/07 (14)
- So... if I tell you that I've tried both and my way works best, will that convince you? - Duke 11:36:37 03/08/07 (13)
- Adding a third or fourth subwoofer may improve bass at your seat in your room ... or maybe make it worse! - Richard BassNut Greene 08:26:52 03/09/07 (12)
- Adding additional subs almost always results in smoothing. - Duke 09:29:21 03/09/07 (11)
- $10,000 says my one subwoofer + parametric EQ will be smoother than your three or four subwoofers in 9 out of 10 rooms - Richard BassNut Greene 13:40:32 03/09/07 (10)
- Depends on parameters of the contest - Duke 14:13:09 03/09/07 (9)
- Three or four "scattered subwoofers" all located on the floor = sonic disaster - Richard BassNut Greene 09:23:41 03/10/07 (8)
- not true - Duke 13:58:37 03/10/07 (7)
- Re: some comments - twelti 15:54:39 03/11/07 (6)
- Your paper applies to surround sound but many readers assume 4 subs are best for two-channel - Richard BassNut Greene 08:31:20 03/12/07 (2)
- Re: Your paper applies to surround sound but many readers assume 4 subs are best for two-channel - twelti 21:45:37 03/12/07 (1)
- My mind is open on a third or fourth subwoofer for two channel audio. You seem to have only conclusions. - Richard BassNut Greene 08:53:53 03/13/07 (0)
- Re: some comments - Duke 16:22:24 03/11/07 (2)
- Re: some comments - twelti 19:12:15 03/11/07 (1)
- "Heated exchange"??? - Richard BassNut Greene 09:12:33 03/12/07 (0)