What's up with low end?

[Edwin Hurwitz]

I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
sound OK.

Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

Just wondering,
Edwin
--
Remove the*obvious to reply

[Scott Dorsey]

Edwin Hurwitz > wrote:
>I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
>a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
>collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
>from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
>ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
>extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
>sound OK.

Some recordings are of music that needs deep low end. Some are of music
that doesn't. Some recordings are intended to be played on club systems,
some are intended to be played on boom boxes, and occasionally you find
a recording that has actually been optimized for wideband speakers.

BUT, I have some suspicion that you have a narrow resonant peak in your
system, which is why you're seeing that much variation. Play back a sweep
tone and see if the level stays constant. If it doesn't, try moving the
sub around until it does.

>Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
>appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
>the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

The lack of flatness will exaggerate differences. If you are mostly getting
one narrow band of bass, the amount that you hear will depend a lot more
on the recording than it should.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Edwin Hurwitz > wrote:
>I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
>a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
>collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
>from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
>ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
>extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
>sound OK.

Some recordings are of music that needs deep low end. Some are of music
that doesn't. Some recordings are intended to be played on club systems,
some are intended to be played on boom boxes, and occasionally you find
a recording that has actually been optimized for wideband speakers.

BUT, I have some suspicion that you have a narrow resonant peak in your
system, which is why you're seeing that much variation. Play back a sweep
tone and see if the level stays constant. If it doesn't, try moving the
sub around until it does.

>Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
>appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
>the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

The lack of flatness will exaggerate differences. If you are mostly getting
one narrow band of bass, the amount that you hear will depend a lot more
on the recording than it should.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

Edwin Hurwitz wrote:

> I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.

> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
> appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

Welcome to the real world where people mix according to what they hear
and what they hear over their monitor systems may or may not
successfully approximate what anyone else hears over a different monitor
system. And this is why getting one's monitors in order, which often
starts with fixing a room, so damned important for consistent results.

I recently saw some tracks on an RTA. These were recorded by another
person in another facility. There is a lot of sub-30 Hz action and none
of that would have shown up on the recordist's monitor system.

--
ha

[hank alrich]

Edwin Hurwitz wrote:

> I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.

> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
> appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

Welcome to the real world where people mix according to what they hear
and what they hear over their monitor systems may or may not
successfully approximate what anyone else hears over a different monitor
system. And this is why getting one's monitors in order, which often
starts with fixing a room, so damned important for consistent results.

I recently saw some tracks on an RTA. These were recorded by another
person in another facility. There is a lot of sub-30 Hz action and none
of that would have shown up on the recordist's monitor system.

--
ha

[Kurt Albershardt]

Edwin Hurwitz wrote:

> I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.
>
> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
> appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

It might well be your room. If one of the resonant peaks in your room corresponds to the resonance of the kick drum or a praticular synth note, kaboom!

[Kurt Albershardt]

Edwin Hurwitz wrote:

> I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.
>
> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
> appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.

It might well be your room. If one of the resonant peaks in your room corresponds to the resonance of the kick drum or a praticular synth note, kaboom!

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 16:04:53 -0400, Edwin Hurwitz wrote
(in article >):

> I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.
>
> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing?

No.

Am I alone in being appalled by this?

probably not.

I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.
>
> Just wondering,
> Edwin

Flatten the system and fix the room. You probably won't be as appalled.

Regards,

Ty Ford





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 16:04:53 -0400, Edwin Hurwitz wrote
(in article >):

> I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.
>
> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing?

No.

Am I alone in being appalled by this?

probably not.

I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.
>
> Just wondering,
> Edwin

Flatten the system and fix the room. You probably won't be as appalled.

Regards,

Ty Ford





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Yuri T.]

You might also notice that recordings that were originally mastered
for vinyl will have very different low end charachteristics.

[Yuri T.]

You might also notice that recordings that were originally mastered
for vinyl will have very different low end charachteristics.

[serious fun]

Until we adopt an industry-wide standard for full-range monitoring, there
will never be low-end consistency from one mix to the next. Current mixing
practice often involves mixing on speakers that were barely appropriate even
in LP days.

Full-range monitoring can be accomplished either with true full-range
speakers or by properly integrating a subwoofer to limited-range speakers.

Let's not even start about average percieved levels delivered on CD...

--
Doug Osborne

my day job: http://www.martinsound.com/

"Edwin Hurwitz" > wrote in message
...
>I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.
>
> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
> appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.
>
> Just wondering,
> Edwin
> --
> Remove the*obvious to reply
>

[serious fun]

Until we adopt an industry-wide standard for full-range monitoring, there
will never be low-end consistency from one mix to the next. Current mixing
practice often involves mixing on speakers that were barely appropriate even
in LP days.

Full-range monitoring can be accomplished either with true full-range
speakers or by properly integrating a subwoofer to limited-range speakers.

Let's not even start about average percieved levels delivered on CD...

--
Doug Osborne

my day job: http://www.martinsound.com/

"Edwin Hurwitz" > wrote in message
...
>I just got a Tannoy TS10 sub to go with my passive reveals (powered with
> a McIntosh 2105) and have been listening to various recordings in my CD
> collection. What is incredibly striking is the huge variation in low end
> from recording to recording. I figured it would be a lot easier to
> ballpark the right setting for the sub, but some recordings seem
> extremely thin and some are just slamming. A few are in the middle and
> sound OK.
>
> Aren't there any standards for this kind of thing? Am I alone in being
> appalled by this? I know my setup is not the least bit flat (let alone
> the room), but I expected a lot more consistency.
>
> Just wondering,
> Edwin
> --
> Remove the*obvious to reply
>