Bass in music

Is bass important?

  • Don't like too much bass

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • There has to be a balance

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Small standmounts need a sub

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I prefer floorstanders for more bass

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I prefer standmounts for less bass

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I don't care about bass in music

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

PARAGON

Wammer
Wammer
Sep 5, 2005
1,762
1
68
Norn Iron
I think that to enjoy music fully, a system should be capable of providing at least a decent amount of quality bass, or else surely you are missing what the musicians were trying to achieve (?)

 

Biscuit

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 19, 2005
6,475
8
0
Cambs, , United King
I find the upper bass for the most part is the critical bit, as thats where the 'pluck' and tonal character of the bass notes seems to comes from (and ultimately thats why people can get satisfying bass from standmounts that don't output below 44Hz or so).

If you want to be able to easily follow complex bass riffs, your speakers need to be getting into the 20's though.

 

TIU

Artist and daft as a brush
Wammer Plus
Dec 17, 2005
13,656
7,755
208
Birmingham
AKA
Gary
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
It depends on what the musicians are playing. A string quartet or acoustic guitar? Bass shouldn't be there if it wasn't recorded. Old analogue radios have a warm sound which give male voices extra bass that you wouldn't hear in real life. It's that extra bass that makes them appealing and cosy.

 
U

Umberto

Guest
turnitup! wrote:

It depends on what the musicians are playing. A string quartet or acoustic guitar? Bass shouldn't be there if it wasn't recorded. Old analogue radios have a warm sound which give male voices extra bass that you wouldn't hear in real life. It's that extra bass that makes them appealing and cosy.
If bass isn't recorded then it won't be there. THe problem lies in trying to artificially boost the bass output in smaller speakers or in floorstanders with limited bass. This results in bass bloat which can sound impressive at first but quickly becomes weary.

 

Leonard Smalls

Wammer
Wammer
Aug 14, 2005
8,163
90
0
Shropshire Borders,
turnitup! wrote:

Bass shouldn't be there if it wasn't recorded.
Aye, but the problem is knowing what's recorded!

Many's the time I'd take a TV programme that I'd been working on home and discover traffic rumble at about 25Hz that wasn't noted either while recording, or while track laying/dubbing, simply because it was all at or very near that frequency and below the range of the monitors. TV News used to be prime culprits for this until it became policy to record with a large amount of bass cut..

So to answer your question about if you'd hear a bass guitar note below, say, 40Hz on aspeaker with no appreciable output at that frequency, then yes and no! Depends on other aspects of the sound. The attack of a string note is often at a higher frequency, with various harmonics based on the fundamental, soyou'd hear that, which gives a good idea of what the original note was.But if these have been either compressed or filtered out, frinstance if it's a deep dub sort of bass sound, then you wouldn't hear it!

 

notaclue

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
9,583
435
128
Nowhere, West Europe
AKA
Duke of Steepletone
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Bass is rubbish.

I'm a treble freak.

I have my Ford Escort kitted out with 'tasty' tweeters and I blast out 'kicking' high pitched test tones.

Cool.

 
G

Guest

Guest
sometimes i think my system is a little bass light untill a real bass instrument comes in the mix then i think. nope it's perfect. not all recordings have true bass on them.

 

kingsxfan

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
2,786
2
0
Wirral
AKA
Phil
I'm not particulary fussy, I like rich sound but not overly bloated. Something like the musical equivalent to chocolate gateaux :Not Sure:

 

Sine Nomine

Wammer
Wammer
May 4, 2006
123
4
0
Europe
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Sastusbulbas wrote:

Sine Nomine wrote:
Sorry disagree! The goal of commercial CD production should be to create a sound that appears natural in the smaller spaces of the domestic environment. I know it’s not primarily the fault of my hifi (yes, there are unavoidable room colourations and of course equipment can always be improved), because I also have many wonderfully natural sounding CDs – and even more great sounding vinyl. Not a majority, but a significant percentage of CDs though are simply too bright to sound natural in a domestic setting.Also I couldn’t disagree more about volume. As you reduce the volume it’s the bass you loose not the treble! That was the reason for those ghastly ‘loudness’ controls on 80s Japanese amps that boosted the bass as volume was reduced.

There was a very interesting piece in Hi-Fi Choice last November by David Chesky owner of Chesky Records. As I’m sure you know a very well known and respected recording industry figure, having made some of the best audiophile recordings. Chesky forcibly said that many recordings sound artificial because they were made unnaturally bright to sound ‘more hifi’. That Chesky does not do this is one of the key reasons their recordings sound better.
I dont think those loudness buttons were just for CD (did they not appear before CD), and I dont think the Chesky subject of many recordings means all recordings were like that.

Plenty of CD's, LP's and even cassettes sound superb, but there are a lot of poor bright sounding CD players out there, and systems which lack any real sense of weight or scale.

Most of these brightness problems would probably be cured with a decent size bass driver within a fuller range speaker system.( IE larger full range speakers and amps with a bit of grunt and ampage)
Oh dear sorry to appear a Grumpy Old Man but I didn’t say that the Loudness control only applied only to CD. Of course it applied to all inputs - bass falls-off at low volumes regardless of source. I also didn’t say that this problem applies to all recordings, just a significant percentage – say 20% or so. But it is endemic – it’s a mind-set problem for recording engineers as Chesky points out, and an issue of the limitations of CD technology as SACD (which does not exhibit this problem) makes clear.

I think by anyone’s standards my kit would be considered fairly high-end. It’s certainly capable of conveying significant bass weight when called for. Yes, cheapo kit can sound shrill and nasty, but that’s a separate issue. I think it’s generally accepted that as the resolution of equipment improves (through upgrading, tweaking, etc) so good recordings sound better and better, but bad recordings are more clearly exposed for what they are. Not all bad recordings are too bright, but I would suggest that it’s a fairly common component. End of rant.

 

JamPal

Content Provider
Wammer
Jul 19, 2005
29,607
590
173
Sussex, West Side
AKA
James
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Sine Nomine wrote:

Sastusbulbas wrote:
Sine Nomine wrote:
Sorry disagree! The goal of commercial CD production should be to create a sound that appears natural in the smaller spaces of the domestic environment. I know it’s not primarily the fault of my hifi (yes, there are unavoidable room colourations and of course equipment can always be improved), because I also have many wonderfully natural sounding CDs – and even more great sounding vinyl. Not a majority, but a significant percentage of CDs though are simply too bright to sound natural in a domestic setting.Also I couldn’t disagree more about volume. As you reduce the volume it’s the bass you loose not the treble! That was the reason for those ghastly ‘loudness’ controls on 80s Japanese amps that boosted the bass as volume was reduced.

There was a very interesting piece in Hi-Fi Choice last November by David Chesky owner of Chesky Records. As I’m sure you know a very well known and respected recording industry figure, having made some of the best audiophile recordings. Chesky forcibly said that many recordings sound artificial because they were made unnaturally bright to sound ‘more hifi’. That Chesky does not do this is one of the key reasons their recordings sound better.
I dont think those loudness buttons were just for CD (did they not appear before CD), and I dont think the Chesky subject of many recordings means all recordings were like that.

Plenty of CD's, LP's and even cassettes sound superb, but there are a lot of poor bright sounding CD players out there, and systems which lack any real sense of weight or scale.

Most of these brightness problems would probably be cured with a decent size bass driver within a fuller range speaker system.( IE larger full range speakers and amps with a bit of grunt and ampage)
Oh dear sorry to appear a Grumpy Old Man but I didn’t say that the Loudness control only applied only to CD. Of course it applied to all inputs - bass falls-off at low volumes regardless of source. I also didn’t say that this problem applies to all recordings, just a significant percentage – say 20% or so. But it is endemic – it’s a mind-set problem for recording engineers as Chesky points out, and an issue of the limitations of CD technology as SACD (which does not exhibit this problem) makes clear.

I think by anyone’s standards my kit would be considered fairly high-end. It’s certainly capable of conveying significant bass weight when called for. Yes, cheapo kit can sound shrill and nasty, but that’s a separate issue. I think it’s generally accepted that as the resolution of equipment improves (through upgrading, tweaking, etc) so good recordings sound better and better, but bad recordings are more clearly exposed for what they are. Not all bad recordings are too bright, but I would suggest that it’s a fairly common component. End of rant.
I think you make a lot of sense there mate.
thumbs_up.gif.3c8ee62eda0e86146178ab30b9facd86.gif


 

mosfet

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
6,153
19
0
Surrey
AKA
Richard
As you reduce the volume it’s the bass you loose not the treble! That was the reason for those ghastly ‘loudness’ controls on 80s Japanese amps that boosted the bass as volume was reduced.
As volume (or sound pressure level) reduces its frequencies below 1kHz and above 5kHz that become subjectively quieter relative to frequencies within the 1kHz to 5kHz band. This is because of the non-linear response of hearing; between 1kHz and 5kHz human hearing is most acute.

A correctly implemented loudness control boosts both below 1kHz and above 5kHz to compensate for this when listening at low volume.

Of course it applied to all inputs - bass falls-off at low volumes regardless of source. I also didn’t say that this problem applies to all recordings, just a significant percentage – say 20% or so.
Applies to everything you hear.

 

Sastusbulbas

Wammer
Wammer
Jan 19, 2006
2,114
3
68
Edinburgh, , United
AKA
Steve
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Sine Nomine wrote:

Sastusbulbas wrote:
Sine Nomine wrote:
Sorry disagree! The goal of commercial CD production should be to create a sound that appears natural in the smaller spaces of the domestic environment. I know it’s not primarily the fault of my hifi (yes, there are unavoidable room colourations and of course equipment can always be improved), because I also have many wonderfully natural sounding CDs – and even more great sounding vinyl. Not a majority, but a significant percentage of CDs though are simply too bright to sound natural in a domestic setting.Also I couldn’t disagree more about volume. As you reduce the volume it’s the bass you loose not the treble! That was the reason for those ghastly ‘loudness’ controls on 80s Japanese amps that boosted the bass as volume was reduced.

There was a very interesting piece in Hi-Fi Choice last November by David Chesky owner of Chesky Records. As I’m sure you know a very well known and respected recording industry figure, having made some of the best audiophile recordings. Chesky forcibly said that many recordings sound artificial because they were made unnaturally bright to sound ‘more hifi’. That Chesky does not do this is one of the key reasons their recordings sound better.
I dont think those loudness buttons were just for CD (did they not appear before CD), and I dont think the Chesky subject of many recordings means all recordings were like that.

Plenty of CD's, LP's and even cassettes sound superb, but there are a lot of poor bright sounding CD players out there, and systems which lack any real sense of weight or scale.

Most of these brightness problems would probably be cured with a decent size bass driver within a fuller range speaker system.( IE larger full range speakers and amps with a bit of grunt and ampage)
Oh dear sorry to appear a Grumpy Old Man but I didn’t say that the Loudness control only applied only to CD. Of course it applied to all inputs - bass falls-off at low volumes regardless of source. I also didn’t say that this problem applies to all recordings, just a significant percentage – say 20% or so. But it is endemic – it’s a mind-set problem for recording engineers as Chesky points out, and an issue of the limitations of CD technology as SACD (which does not exhibit this problem) makes clear.

I think by anyone’s standards my kit would be considered fairly high-end. It’s certainly capable of conveying significant bass weight when called for. Yes, cheapo kit can sound shrill and nasty, but that’s a separate issue. I think it’s generally accepted that as the resolution of equipment improves (through upgrading, tweaking, etc) so good recordings sound better and better, but bad recordings are more clearly exposed for what they are. Not all bad recordings are too bright, but I would suggest that it’s a fairly common component. End of rant.
I am not quite sure what you mean by an issue of the limitations of CD technology ?

When it come to bass performance and recording, CD is a lot more problem free than vinyl.(as demonstrated with albums like Massive Attacks 100th window, and Nicolai and Ikedia's Cyclo)

SACD has not been as succesfull as hoped either, wether this is due to some engineers thinking a DAT is suitable for remaster material , or due to the inherent lack of knowledge where new technology and technics are required, or that there is so much variation between people's view's , and quality recordings or that some manufacturers and retailers have turned their back on SACD I dont know?

I do think that there is a reason manufacturers are bringing out more High end red book CD players though. SACD has show that the limitations of CD dont go away when you increase resolution, it has suffered a number of its own problems has it not ?

Out of interest what is your system ?

 

Sine Nomine

Wammer
Wammer
May 4, 2006
123
4
0
Europe
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
mosfet wrote:

As you reduce the volume it’s the bass you loose not the treble! That was the reason for those ghastly ‘loudness’ controls on 80s Japanese amps that boosted the bass as volume was reduced.
As volume (or sound pressure level) reduces its frequencies below 1kHz and above 5kHz that become subjectively quieter relative to frequencies within the 1kHz to 5kHz band. This is because of the non-linear response of hearing; between 1kHz and 5kHz human hearing is most acute.

A correctly implemented loudness control boosts both below 1kHz and above 5kHz to compensate for this when listening at low volume.

Of course it applied to all inputs - bass falls-off at low volumes regardless of source. I also didn’t say that this problem applies to all recordings, just a significant percentage – say 20% or so.
Applies to everything you hear.
Hi Mosfet,

Yes I agree, strictly it’s true that there is also a perceived fall-off in extreme treble as volume falls. But the bass fall-off is steeper and greater and the lack of fullness or body in the sound is more immediately noticeable. In fact some of those 80’s amps had a thing called a Loudness Contour Control, or something like that. A friend of mine had a Nickmichi (I think it was) amp that had it. If you switched it in it progressively boosted the bass, and also to a lesser extent the extreme treble, as you reduced the volume. Or rather it reduced the mid range more relative to bass and extreme treble – if you see what I mean. I guess it worked to some extent, but was never really convincing.

But in addition to the well known sensitivity curve of the human ear, I’ve a feeling that loudspeakers are also less efficient at producing bass at low volumes. I say this because low powered amps seem to exhibit the ‘bass loss at low volume’ problem more than high powered ones. I had a demo of one of those bloody great Musical Fidelity kW behemoths recently – you need a substation in your garden and a cavalier attitude to global warming. But hey it’s multi-purpose – you can use it for arc welding too! To be honest though, it sounded rather good. But most interesting to me was its performance at low volume. Even at almost background volume levels there was real substance and weight to the sound. So counter intuitively, those who live in flats or those with recalcitrant neighbours might do best with high powered amps.

Your second quote is my typo, sorry. I meant to type ‘the problem of excessive brightness does not apply to all recordings…’ not the Loudness thingy which of course does indeed apply to life, the universe and everything.

Hi Sastusbulbus,

I would have thought the limitations of CD were pretty well rehearsed by now – there have been interminable splenetic utterances in the hi-fi press. I guess it comes down to 16bits at 44.1Hz simply being inadequate to record all the musical and ambient information. And where is this limitation most manifest? - in high frequencies, hence CDs exacerbation of the brightness problem. I agree though that CD tends to have advantages over vinyl specifically in the area of low bass. But recordings vary considerably. I’m afraid I’m not acquainted with ‘Massive Attacks 100th window’ – but it sure as hell sounds as if it’s pretty darn bassy...

It’s a great shame, though perhaps understandable, that SACD has not been a commercial success so far. OK it’s not perfect, but it is better than CD. If it gets dumped it will be a real tragedy – it’s only now starting to get into its stride. It’s a learning curve for engineers (both on the recording and equipment design side) and record companies. If SACD disappears we’ll be stuck with inadequate 70s technology for gawld knows how long. AAAAAAGH!! I can’t stand it, I’ll shove my kit on eBay and take up Seal Bashing in the Arctic before all the ice melts…

 

mosfet

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 20, 2005
6,153
19
0
Surrey
AKA
Richard
If SACD disappears we’ll be stuck with inadequate 70s technology for gawld knows how long. AAAAAAGH!! I can’t stand it, I’ll shove my kit on eBay and take up Seal Bashing in the Arctic before all the ice melts…
“Technology†that pre-dates one of these by several years. Sort of puts it into perspective.

sinclair_zx81_1s.jpg


 

Sastusbulbas

Wammer
Wammer
Jan 19, 2006
2,114
3
68
Edinburgh, , United
AKA
Steve
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Sine Nomine wrote:

mosfet wrote:
As you reduce the volume it’s the bass you loose not the treble! That was the reason for those ghastly ‘loudness’ controls on 80s Japanese amps that boosted the bass as volume was reduced.
As volume (or sound pressure level) reduces its frequencies below 1kHz and above 5kHz that become subjectively quieter relative to frequencies within the 1kHz to 5kHz band. This is because of the non-linear response of hearing; between 1kHz and 5kHz human hearing is most acute.

A correctly implemented loudness control boosts both below 1kHz and above 5kHz to compensate for this when listening at low volume.

Of course it applied to all inputs - bass falls-off at low volumes regardless of source. I also didn’t say that this problem applies to all recordings, just a significant percentage – say 20% or so.
Applies to everything you hear.
Hi Mosfet,

Yes I agree, strictly it’s true that there is also a perceived fall-off in extreme treble as volume falls. But the bass fall-off is steeper and greater and the lack of fullness or body in the sound is more immediately noticeable. In fact some of those 80’s amps had a thing called a Loudness Contour Control, or something like that. A friend of mine had a Nickmichi (I think it was) amp that had it. If you switched it in it progressively boosted the bass, and also to a lesser extent the extreme treble, as you reduced the volume. Or rather it reduced the mid range more relative to bass and extreme treble – if you see what I mean. I guess it worked to some extent, but was never really convincing.

But in addition to the well known sensitivity curve of the human ear, I’ve a feeling that loudspeakers are also less efficient at producing bass at low volumes. I say this because low powered amps seem to exhibit the ‘bass loss at low volume’ problem more than high powered ones. I had a demo of one of those bloody great Musical Fidelity kW behemoths recently – you need a substation in your garden and a cavalier attitude to global warming. But hey it’s multi-purpose – you can use it for arc welding too! To be honest though, it sounded rather good. But most interesting to me was its performance at low volume. Even at almost background volume levels there was real substance and weight to the sound. So counter intuitively, those who live in flats or those with recalcitrant neighbours might do best with high powered amps.

Your second quote is my typo, sorry. I meant to type ‘the problem of excessive brightness does not apply to all recordings…’ not the Loudness thingy which of course does indeed apply to life, the universe and everything.

Hi Sastusbulbus,

I would have thought the limitations of CD were pretty well rehearsed by now – there have been interminable splenetic utterances in the hi-fi press. I guess it comes down to 16bits at 44.1Hz simply being inadequate to record all the musical and ambient information. And where is this limitation most manifest? - in high frequencies, hence CDs exacerbation of the brightness problem. I agree though that CD tends to have advantages over vinyl specifically in the area of low bass. But recordings vary considerably. I’m afraid I’m not acquainted with ‘Massive Attacks 100th window’ – but it sure as hell sounds as if it’s pretty darn bassy...

It’s a great shame, though perhaps understandable, that SACD has not been a commercial success so far. OK it’s not perfect, but it is better than CD. If it gets dumped it will be a real tragedy – it’s only now starting to get into its stride. It’s a learning curve for engineers (both on the recording and equipment design side) and record companies. If SACD disappears we’ll be stuck with inadequate 70s technology for gawld knows how long. AAAAAAGH!! I can’t stand it, I’ll shove my kit on eBay and take up Seal Bashing in the Arctic before all the ice melts…
I feel CD can sound quite good, and of course SACD and DVD audio were promising , but as a lot of the material being released on these "super" formats was re-mastered from low quality masters without the claimed resolution, all most were buying was a remastered and tweaked version of what had already been released on CD.(a repeated example was Roxy music, whos master tapes were in such poor condition that the SACD stuff was remastered from DAT tape at CD resolution. A common occurence)

The same problem has happened with vinyl , a lot of newer stuff is from digital masters and cut on digital laiths, still sounds fine but not really much more resolution than CD or the SACD mixes of the same.(and not that many masters were made with SACD resolution in mind, nor was the digital resolution available in all studios, a lot of which were still using digital decoding designed for the CD era.(and HDCD wasnt too bad)

In my opinion, if you have an album from the 70's the only way you are going to get it in its best resolution is on vinyl.

So out of interest, what equipment are you using Sine Nomine ?

 
E

Effem

Guest
mosfet wrote:

If SACD disappears we’ll be stuck with inadequate 70s technology for gawld knows how long. AAAAAAGH!! I can’t stand it, I’ll shove my kit on eBay and take up Seal Bashing in the Arctic before all the ice melts…
“Technology†that pre-dates one of these by several years. Sort of puts it into perspective.

sinclair_zx81_1s.jpg
goodpost.gif.00822561e807cf35c79b3503f2e609d0.gif


That's quite a chilling thought when looked at that way :Not Sure:

 

Sine Nomine

Wammer
Wammer
May 4, 2006
123
4
0
Europe
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
If CD is the ZX81 of audio, what is the C5? My vote would be Philips’ Digital Audio Cassette.

I agree that issuing a lot of ‘re-mastered’ stuff on SACD initially was really stupid. Especially when you consider how much capital was sunk in the SACD launch. There should have been more carrot - all recordings being state of the art - and stick. What do I mean by ‘stick’? Well look at the compulsion there is to change from analogue TV to digital – draconian and disruptive, but people have accepted it. SACD is backwards compatible with CD. The record companies should have simply announced that all CD production will cease in three years time or something like that. Job done.

Yeah, HDCD was better that vanilla CD. But what annoyed me about that was that when their chip recognised that the disk was an HDCD, it surreptitiously upped the output a notch or two so that the disk played a little louder. We all know from deming one DC player against another, that the one with the higher output can have an unfair advantage.

Equipment wise, I’m into valves in big way. Well if we’re stuck with 70s CD and 50s vinyl you may as well complete the retro ensemble and go for 50s valves.

Analogue front end: Linn LP12/Helius/Koetsu

Digital: Tube Technologies Fulcrum TX4000 Transport and Fulcrum DAC 64

Amp: Prima Luna Prologue 3 pre, plus Prologue 7 monoblocks re-tubed with NOS valves

Speakers: Vienna Acoustics Beethoven

Dynavector SuperStereo adapter driving a Eastern Electric M520 valve amp with Sonus Faber Concertos as sub speakers

Cables: VdH The First and The Second interconnects, Towshend Isolda speaker cables

 

Sastusbulbas

Wammer
Wammer
Jan 19, 2006
2,114
3
68
Edinburgh, , United
AKA
Steve
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Sine Nomine wrote:

If CD is the ZX81 of audio, what is the C5? My vote would be Philips’ Digital Audio Cassette.I agree that issuing a lot of ‘re-mastered’ stuff on SACD initially was really stupid. Especially when you consider how much capital was sunk in the SACD launch. There should have been more carrot - all recordings being state of the art - and stick. What do I mean by ‘stick’? Well look at the compulsion there is to change from analogue TV to digital – draconian and disruptive, but people have accepted it. SACD is backwards compatible with CD. The record companies should have simply announced that all CD production will cease in three years time or something like that. Job done.

Yeah, HDCD was better that vanilla CD. But what annoyed me about that was that when their chip recognised that the disk was an HDCD, it surreptitiously upped the output a notch or two so that the disk played a little louder. We all know from deming one DC player against another, that the one with the higher output can have an unfair advantage.

Equipment wise, I’m into valves in big way. Well if we’re stuck with 70s CD and 50s vinyl you may as well complete the retro ensemble and go for 50s valves.

Analogue front end: Linn LP12/Helius/Koetsu

Digital: Tube Technologies Fulcrum TX4000 Transport and Fulcrum DAC 64

Amp: Prima Luna Prologue 3 pre, plus Prologue 7 monoblocks re-tubed with NOS valves

Speakers: Vienna Acoustics Beethoven

Dynavector SuperStereo adapter driving a Eastern Electric M520 valve amp with Sonus Faber Concertos as sub speakers

Cables: VdH The First and The Second interconnects, Towshend Isolda speaker cables
What model of Viena Acoustics Beethoven are you using ?

And what size of room are you using ?

What do you mean by Concertos as sub, dont you mean surround/ambient speakers?

 

Sine Nomine

Wammer
Wammer
May 4, 2006
123
4
0
Europe
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
'Beethoven' is the model name. They've just had a rave review from Stereophile in the US.

OK, I see the confusion - I don't mean sub as in subwoofer. It's a Dynavector term. They are in fact surround/ambient speakers, except that they are placed forward of the listening position and face towards the front speakers. Sounds a bit wacky I know, but by God it works. I wouldn't be without it.

 

Lucifer

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 25, 2005
885
0
0
, ,
In my humble opinion it is important to have a sub - it not only provides bass (low) but also "atmosphere" of the recording and where it took place.

 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles