Speaker Asylum General speaker questions for audio and home theater.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Speaker Asylum ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

EQ and subs - preliminary results

Posted by bartc (A) on January 2, 2009 at 07:30:57

Let me first credit Richard Bass Nut Greene as the primary inspiration for this exploration. I'm clear now that he's at least half right (haven't tested the second half) when he states repeatedly that: You can often get better results with EQ with a cheap sub than with an expensive sub without EQ (paraphrasing here, so forgive me, Richard!) I've now proven to my satisfaction that the first half of that sentence is clearly true.

Quick background: I've loved my low reaching VR1 monitors, but always found that extra depth I get from even my cheap KLH sub was needed and appreciated. However, it never sounded clean or "tight" by comparison to the monitors alone. So I did quite a bit of querying and Web exploring - with thanks to all the inmates who helped. I also did my best with finding the best placement and phase and X-over and volume settings I could within the limitations of my room and WAF. So the issue was: invest in a better sub (beyond my budgetary constraints) or build one, or remain somewhat dissatisfied.

Decided that I had nothing serious to lose by following RBNG's advice to get a RS SPL meter and a cheap Behringer Feedback Destroyer 1124P for EQ before investing in expensive subs. $50 for the SPL meter, $60 for a used BFD, = $110 vs. $500-1000 for a new and supposedly "better" sub. Hell, I could always return or resell the gadgets if they didn't work out!

The BFD isn't the world's most intuitive device to operate; it does take some head scratching even with "simplified" instructions from HomeTheaterShack.com and others. But once you get it, it's a matter of experimentation and then it gets dialed in. I don't believe for a minute that I'm done dialing in the EQ filters, but even at this crude level the difference is at least a substantial part of what I was hoping for (and didn't believe I was going to get from EQ).

As RBNG posited, there were at least 3-4 serious peaks in my sub's house curve that were interfering with good sonics, and his suggested ranges were surprisingly close to my own. Since I have the EQ only in the sub circuit, deliberately as nobody recommends this BFD unit for above that, I don't use it to smooth out the peaks due primarily to the mains, but smoothing the sub's region and the sub/mains overlap from 20-95Hz does quite a bit of good. Also, as recommended I have not tried it to boost a serious dip at 110Hz yet.

What I don't completely get yet (and that may be a matter of more experimentation, rather than real limitations) is the tightness my monitors can deliver when the sub is trying to reproduce very rapidly changing notes (think Grapelli on violin or Hendrix on guitar) of an acoustic double bass. It's much much better, but you can still detect some misalignment or hanging over of the notes. It's still a very good impression, just not "perfect". And I have to wonder if a better sub driver/amp combo might do the trick, but until I've exhaused the BFD, I'm not going there quite yet.

So in summary, EQing subs works as predicted IME. And those better sub amps with single range EQ alone would not have worked as well for my setup (nor the average if RBNG is correct).

What I get now is much tighter bass, more realistic sound from bass instruments without any boominess. That's a good deal for so little investment. I'd recommend to others that they try this route.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Analog Engineering Associates

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---