I can't stand full range drivers, the tonal colorations (you invariably get breakup modes right where it hurts (1-5kHz) range. You might like that better than headphones, I think it's just the change of flavor that is attracting you and it will sooner or later get old.
Quote from: DS-21 on March 07, 2013, 04:05:05 PMAny home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones.I was with you right up until that - which is a big pile of horseshit. Stereo subs are almost universally better than a single one, but even two subs can often introduce as many problems as they solve when it comes to integration and timing.
Any home audio system that does not employ multiple subwoofers and suitable EQ based on in-situ measurements is a low-fidelity system. Period. Doesn't matter if the speakers are some cheap full-range deal or TAD Model Ones.
You can get extremely even, extremely balanced bass response without subwoofers or active EQ, you just need to use targeted bass traps like GIK's Scopus Tuned models instead of broadband absorbers.
Now you are tempting me with three or more subs. It's good to know of someone who has done it successfully. (I've only read papers, and these were from 10 years ago.) I do find the "endless tedious measure-adjust something measure loops" much more fun than agonizing over which new headphone or portable DAC/amp combination to upgrade or sidegrade to.
I don't know if it's kosher to post links to other sources here after my blog thing, but you can find more information by searching under the terms "modest multisub system" for an AVS thread about decent result in a temporary apartment setup using three small subs, and also searching for some of Dr. Earl Geddes' stuff on multisubs.
Also, "Bass traps" are usually too small to do much. A real bass trap is a whole lossy wall, with constrained layer damping. I don't care what brand they are, mind. I care what they do. A good rule of thumb for "bass traps" is that if you can buy them and fairly easily transport them, they're going to be minimally effective in the modal region and below. As your own measurements above show, with a modal region (say, 50-200Hz, though the upper and lower bounds vary with room volume) FR swing of about 13-15dB more than I'd consider "high fidelity."
Also, as an unmarried grad student at the time I had extraordinarily wide latitude as to subwoofer placement.
Saying "your system sounds like crap unless it's stuffed full of subs and uses active EQ" is just as much bullshit as the title of this thread.
SThe first measurements were done in a mostly empty, untreated space, and the last ones were done without any targeted bass trapping like the Scopus or Vicoustic's Varibass. In my experience, by far the most problematic frequencies in rooms are in the 50-70Hz region, which is exactly what Varibass goes after.
Below that, the Scopus T40 has a center target frequency of 40Hz,
Obviously when you get below 35Hz waves become exponentially longer and harder to control, although for what I listen to, the need to be perfectly flat from 25Hz-35Hz and the big pile of subwoofers and EQ that would be necessary to achieve that response is questionable at best.
Plenty of people are happy with monitors where output much below 45Hz is basically non existent. I'm not going to tell them that they are listening to a "low fidelity" system.
Links are fine... especially when they are for the benefit of the muggles.
