Bossobass Mini GTG Thread

[Infrasonic]

 

 

Scott, really... I have no idea what you're rambling on about, really I don't.

 

The Behringer amp thing? You were supporting my build with that nonsense? Then it's about your CC? Or it's about your bass management scheme? Your frequency response? Is that really what you few guys do to other's build threads and then call it support? Cool, gotcha. From now on I'll know to be more receptive to that, I promise.

 

 

Jesus, Dave. Did you completely ignore the first half dozen pages worth of compliments towards your Raptor system or this GTG? Are you dense or just trying to be manipulative? I think it's the second part.

 

Didn't mention Behringer in this thread. I brought the CC after you did. I mentioned my bass management after you asked for it. Same as my frequency response.

 

If you weren't trying so hard to defend you're own position on your ideal perfect audio you'd see we're all on the same side, even if you don't want us all to be.

 

I don't know what else to do, Dave. Are we only worthy of being in your presence if we all own your Raptor system or blindly accepting all your definitions as 100% fact?

 

Ugh. I shouldn't be having an exchange with you of all people about these kinds of things. You're better than this.

 

I'll drop it and move on. I'd rather talk about this GTG and your Raptor subs anyway.

[Bossobass Dave]

Jesus, Dave. Did you completely ignore the first half dozen pages worth of compliments towards your Raptor system or this GTG? Are you dense or just trying to be manipulative? I think it's the second part.

 

Didn't mention Behringer in this thread. I brought the CC after you did. I mentioned my bass management after you asked for it. Same as my frequency response.

 

If you weren't trying so hard to defend you're own position on your ideal perfect audio you'd see we're all on the same side, even if you don't want us all to be.

 

I don't know what else to do, Dave. Are we only worthy of being in your presence if we all own your Raptor system or blindly accepting all your definitions as 100% fact?

 

Ugh. I shouldn't be having an exchange with you of all people about these kinds of things. You're better than this.

 

I'll drop it and move on. I'd rather talk about this GTG and your Raptor subs anyway.

 

This ridiculous argument about bandwidth and really loud subwoofers is like playing in a sandbox with toddlers. That's all this 'discussion' with Luke has been about. Extremely loud bass regardless of bandwidth. Luke has been baiting me into this silly debate since before the GTG.

 

You injected yourself into the discussion with this post:

 

 

Infrasonic, on 20 Jun 2015 - 10:33 PM, said:

Heh. You're adorable, Dave. Those cute little speakers of yours will make them wish they were born a woman if they ever met some of ours.

 

If you want to do 'full range' mains (like your CC) then do it like I did with quad 18's per per channel. That's how a man does full range mains. 

 

http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/data/2306745/9/93/93a76930_20131214_1916521.jpeg

 

Really, I don't know what this ^^^ post means. Is it a joke? Is it a personal preference thing? Is it a bragging rights thing? I have zero idea what system you're running and a picture of the front 3 PA speakers didn't help me understand what you were trying to say here. Since I have no idea what system you run or how you run it or anything else about you specifically, I'm lost as to how you took my 'treble pussies' comment to have been directed at you?

 

I asked for a FR to verify the "...full range with quad 18s per channel... how a man does..." comment, because I really wanted to know what you are running and the point you were trying to make, sweeping aside the snarky bullshit in these posts.

 

You said:

 

 

Infrasonic, on 23 Jun 2015 - 1:22 PM, said:

Lolwut? The response is basically flat to 100hz in that pic, Dave. How is a boosted level below 80hz going to muddy my vocals? They sound fine.

 

And compression? Lol, if your 8-16 15's aren't compressing then my 14 18's and 12 15's aren't going to. So no.

 

High Q peak? Umm, where?

 

 

Idk why but I'm having a hard time telling if you're completely sincere or totally busting my balls. I hope it's the latter.

 

^^^ Your measurement is into the noise floor. You say "no smoothing" but it's clearly smoothed. The trace clearly indicates a crossover, not full range. There's some lolwut stuff thrown in. You're clearly confused by the whole side discussion that YOU started, or, as I take it, you were just pissing in my face for no apparent reason, or arguing for Luke without saying so.

 

So, again, I had no clue what you were trying to say, and you still haven't posted anything that would make it clear to me.

 

I appreciate the posting up to that point, but they are irrelevant. You can either clearly spell out what CC you run, how you EQ it, how you calibrate it and why you thought I was talking to you, or I'm back to being lost as to why you derailed my side discussion with Luke in the first place???

[BeastAudio]

Yes, I was there, as an observer. Among my observations, I'll say this: Good thing we brought the measurement rig with SpecLab loaded. Once it was set up and running, EVERY time a ULF effect occurred, EVERYONE either ran up front to look at the laptop monitor or just yelled out "What did that hit?", meaning what frequency was the effect centered at. Every time the answer was <20 Hz. If that isn't proof enough that everyone sensed the <20 Hz stuff, then what is? Mass delusion?

 

 

 

Well, I am willing to continue running some more scenes in my space. I started trying to get my settings to where it shows about the same of what you guys are running, but I am having trouble getting some of the settings right. Did I see somewhere that you guys have a file I could upload to mirror settings? 

[3ll3d00d]

Well, I am willing to continue running some more scenes in my space. I started trying to get my settings to where it shows about the same of what you guys are running, but I am having trouble getting some of the settings right. Did I see somewhere that you guys have a file I could upload to mirror settings? 

there is a config file for speclab posted over in the first few posts of http://data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/19-speclab-waterfall-scene-capture-tutorial/

 

I posted a guide on how to create a mic cal file for speclab in http://data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/290-using-speclab-for-measuring-in-room/though this is much easier if you have unix scripting skills, it only takes me a few mins to do this so happy to create one for you if you need one

[Bossobass Dave]

These last few pages really showed your true colors, Dave.  

 

Really, young man, I don't mean anything personal here. Shame on you if you take it that way. Poke me in the eye and yes, you get my true colors. Is that supposed to be a bad thing? You prefer people's fake colors?

 

You seem to need me to justify your personal preference for playback calibration and levels. That's not going to happen. You can accuse me of thinking things I don't actually think, you can put me down by talking down to me, you can judge me from your superior position and you can put words in my mouth. That's all up to you.

 

Your position is that you like bass really, really loud. Above 130dB is deafening by every standard ever written. Your preference for bandwidth is to lop off the first two octaves because they don't impress you for whatever reason. Your method is to employ 100 cubes of dissimilar horns employing filters to, in effect, turn them into bandpass subs to reach your goal of >130dB sustained low end output without horn resonance 'honk' while the satellites are calibrated -20dB below that level.

 

Excellent. Why do you need a seal of approval from me or anyone else?

 

Seven months ago, you baited me into this discussion. You posted peak dBSPL data using some gadgetry I'm not familiar with and I let the assumption that it was properly calibrated pass for the sake of the argument. You also posted a SL cap of EOT.

 

I said:

 

 

Bossobass Dave, on 07 Nov 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

Here's the animation from digital to your mic'd version:

 

 

You can clearly see the harmonic distortion (2HD only, 3HD is masked by the second fundamental of each fundamental tone) from the 20, 25 and 15 Hz hits. It's down around 2% 2HD, which is excellent, but typical of a multi-driver sealed system. Running the Raptor system 3 in my 3500 cubes showed 5.5% 2HD of the 20 Hz fundamental running the scene at +6dB over reference.

 

As Max mentioned in the other thread, the last multi-tone wherein 10 Hz is the fundamental, is the loudest of the 5 tones in the scene. In fact, looking at the waveform graph on the right side, you see that the effect ramps up in level as each next lower fundamental kicks in. So, the obvious intended effect was to ramp up the level as the fundamental decreased.

 

In the presentation from the horns, the effect ramps up to the 20 Hz fundamental and then decreases for the next 2, eliminating the 10 Hz fundamental altogether. It completely alters the intent of the creators of the effect to suit the end user's preference (or pocketbook, or laziness, or craving for higher SPL, etc ) This is the crux of the debate over the years. The difference is that now we have to tools to quantify each of the opposing opinions and this is a good example.

 

And, please everyone... no one is telling anyone else what to like or dislike. If the discussion goes there, the discussion becomes a din of nonsense. And, over the years, this is the straw man used... accusing me of dictating what people should like. I could not care less, honestly and truly, what anyone else, everyone else, the majority of the world's population, etc., likes or dislikes.

 

It's simply accuracy vs other.

 

The tradeoff for efficiency across one octave of bandwidth, which I've always maintained and was the subject of my rant that got this convo going, is box size and, in this case clearly shown by the data, loss of content in playback. My system nails the 10 Hz fundamental with <5% THD at +6dB over reference in 3500 cubes where horn, ported, passive radiator, bandpass, transmission line and any hybrid of the above alignments cannot.

 

From the first view of the YT vid at 136dB I was certain it was not without harmonics generated by the horns. There simply can't be 2-5% THD at 120dB but none at 136dB. This is why I prefer SpecLab over other measurement metrics. It shows everything, whether it's missing or there but shouldn't be there. It explains the total dBSPL number shown on a meter and goes a long way to explaining subjective comments from listeners.

 

I am assuming that this is a peak hold of the entire scene showing the 20 Hz fundamental being the loudest from your horns at the seat:

 

 

Notes: Yes, the 10 Hz fundamental is missing, everything above 30 Hz is below the minimum threshold, but... and this is a big but, this little gadget can accurately measure the total dBSPL of any effect played back in-room to 10 Hz. Pretty freakin' awesome. No more "My sub hit XdB, UNCORRECTED".

 

So, what happens <10 Hz? It picks up nothing? It rolls off? Do you know these details or can you point us to where they may be found? Is the TermLab version better, does it go lower, or what is the difference, if any?

 

 

Please note the bolded text. YOU have done exactly what I begged everyone reading not to do. Accusing me of telling you or anyone what to like, or what is correct, or what is the only way to do it or what the hell ever. Instead of saying the words you're trying to put in my mouth, I said the same thing I've said for over a decade on this subject:

 

 

The tradeoff for efficiency across one octave of bandwidth, which I've always maintained and was the subject of my rant that got this convo going, is box size and, in this case clearly shown by the data, loss of content in playback. My system nails the 10 Hz fundamental with <5% THD at +6dB over reference in 3500 cubes where horn, ported, passive radiator, bandpass, transmission line and any hybrid of the above alignments cannot.

 

IOW, Luke... 2 + 2 = 4.

 

Please also note that I deleted the animation and inserted the SL caps of 1) Your mic'd dual-dissimilar horns system, 2) the digits version and 3) my mic'd sealed system. Dead-accurate proof of what I posted, which is not my opinion, Luke... it's just the simple facts of the matter.

 

Your version is grossly distorted. The 10 Hz fundamental square wave is eliminated altogether. The waveform in the amplitude bar shows the amplitude distortion just by eyeing the 2 versions. Everything > 70 Hz is down -20 to -30dB. That's what you prefer and that's fine with me. That's NOT what I prefer. Your version is non-listenable to me. That's the beginning, middle and end of the discussion.

 

The rest of the argument is a waste of words. If you believe they aren't, please just start a thread about what you think the audio bandwidth should be vs what it actually is and why.

 

I only posted one other time in your thread. I asked if you would similarly measure a transient, specifically the warp scene from ST. You said you would, but never did. I have posted nothing further in that thread, especially any disparaging remarks about your choices for any part of your system. I never have done that, I never will do that.

[Bossobass Dave]

Well, I am willing to continue running some more scenes in my space. I started trying to get my settings to where it shows about the same of what you guys are running, but I am having trouble getting some of the settings right. Did I see somewhere that you guys have a file I could upload to mirror settings? 

 

Paul is getting that list together as I write. Stay tuned, the settings file is on it's way.

[Bossobass Dave]

 

 

I posted a guide on how to create a mic cal file for speclab in http://data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/290-using-speclab-for-measuring-in-room/though this is much easier if you have unix scripting skills, it only takes me a few mins to do this so happy to create one for you if you need one

 

And, Paul is up with you on this for me as well. It will be the first time ever I've had a proper cal file for the roll off of my Edirol UA1000 interface and I'll be forever in your debt for the effort.

[lukeamdman]

Really, young man, I don't mean anything personal here. Shame on you if you take it that way. Poke me in the eye and yes, you get my true colors. Is that supposed to be a bad thing? You prefer people's fake colors?

 

You seem to need me to justify your personal preference for playback calibration and levels. That's not going to happen. You can accuse me of thinking things I don't actually think, you can put me down by talking down to me, you can judge me from your superior position and you can put words in my mouth. That's all up to you.

 

Your position is that you like bass really, really loud. Above 130dB is deafening by every standard ever written. Your preference for bandwidth is to lop off the first two octaves because they don't impress you for whatever reason. Your method is to employ 100 cubes of dissimilar horns employing filters to, in effect, turn them into bandpass subs to reach your goal of >130dB sustained low end output without horn resonance 'honk' while the satellites are calibrated -20dB below that level.

 

Excellent. Why do you need a seal of approval from me or anyone else?

 

Seven months ago, you baited me into this discussion. You posted peak dBSPL data using some gadgetry I'm not familiar with and I let the assumption that it was properly calibrated pass for the sake of the argument. You also posted a SL cap of EOT.

 

I said:

 

 

 

Please note the bolded text. YOU have done exactly what I begged everyone reading not to do. Accusing me of telling you or anyone what to like, or what is correct, or what is the only way to do it or what the hell ever. Instead of saying the words you're trying to put in my mouth, I said the same thing I've said for over a decade on this subject:

 

 

IOW, Luke... 2 + 2 = 4.

 

Please also note that I deleted the animation and inserted the SL caps of 1) Your mic'd dual-dissimilar horns system, 2) the digits version and 3) my mic'd sealed system. Dead-accurate proof of what I posted, which is not my opinion, Luke... it's just the simple facts of the matter.

 

Your version is grossly distorted. The 10 Hz fundamental square wave is eliminated altogether. The waveform in the amplitude bar shows the amplitude distortion just by eyeing the 2 versions. Everything > 70 Hz is down -20 to -30dB. That's what you prefer and that's fine with me. That's NOT what I prefer. Your version is non-listenable to me. That's the beginning, middle and end of the discussion.

 

The rest of the argument is a waste of words. If you believe they aren't, please just start a thread about what you think the audio bandwidth should be vs what it actually is and why.

 

I only posted one other time in your thread. Iasked if you would similarly measure a transient, specifically the warp scene from ST. You said you would, but never did. I have posted nothing further in that thread, especially and disparaging remarks about your choices for any part of your system. I never have done that, I never will do that.

 

Your reputation precedes you, and I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.  However, it's very apparent to me now and I'll drop it.

 

My approach is open minded, as I'm willing to test anything in a room before making a call, and as I've said before, my first preference would be full bandwidth.  I was trying hard to get the slightest hint from you that certain situations, which I admit are rare, might call for something other than full bandwidth to be more subjectively enjoyable to some folks, but it's obviously not open for debate with you.

 

I've never once told you or anyone else what they should like.  I dare you to find a quote.  

 

I'm with Scott, as in I'll leave this discussion on these notes:

 

I had a blast at the GTG, and I'm thankful you were willing to host it.  Even though it was your first GTG, you nailed it.  Your family was generous and gracious, and a complete pleasure to hang out with.  I thought the discussion was meaningful, insightful, and I learned a lot.

 

As I mentioned before, I couldn't find any shortcoming whatsoever with your Raptors.  The extended to depths I've rarely heard, if ever, and had SPL levels that can satisfy 99% of the craziest bass heads out there.  I think your subs combined with your room are a match made in heaven, and if my HT space were similar to yours, I have sealed as well.  No question.

[BeastAudio]

there is a config file for speclab posted over in the first few posts of http://data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/19-speclab-waterfall-scene-capture-tutorial/

 

I posted a guide on how to create a mic cal file for speclab in http://data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/290-using-speclab-for-measuring-in-room/though this is much easier if you have unix scripting skills, it only takes me a few mins to do this so happy to create one for you if you need one

 

 

Paul is getting that list together as I write. Stay tuned, the settings file is on it's way.

 

 

You guys are the bomb-diggity I won't get a chance to mic anything this week as I am about 300 miles away, but I am going to mess around with it while I have some free time  

[lukeamdman]

I ordered this, so I really hope it's the right thing!

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Spies-Music-of-Espionage-New-Music-/331471589306?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4d2d3f0fba

 

 

Yep, that's the one. 

 

Tons of great stuff on this disk!  

 

Track #6 is a new favorite of mine, and I actually just used it tonight as a "SQ" demo for an AVS member.  

[Shredhead]

Sup y'all,

for anyone who needs to get Spectrum Lab up and running I'll post some easy to load settings files for Bosso's new blue color scheme.  You can see it here if you don't know what I'm talking about: http://data-bass.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/432-jupiter-ascending-discussion-poll/?p=8642

 

I'm going to attach a few settings files in a zip folder.  Pick the one that coincides with your microphone's Windows input settings.  Here is what to look for in Windows OS to find out what settings file you need.

 

 

 

Pick the appropriate settings file for your Windows sound settings.  Here is how to load them:

 

 

Spectrum Lab V2.80 b2 has a bug where if you're running 24bit, you have to use the 16bit file or it gets crazy and messed up looking.  I'm not sure about versions after it.  You can check your version of SL by looking at the top left of it's main screen.  I've included the newest version of SL (in the zip folder) so use it if your version gets screwy. 

 

Here is how to adjust your mic's input sensitivity:

Adjust this until the waveform looks strong yet unclipped. 

 

It took me a little while to get used to the new color scheme but I am liking it much better so far.  I think it shows more resolution of the sound design. 

 

Old vs. New:

 

 

Speclab Settings Files.zip

[Bossobass Dave]

Thanks Luke. Sorry to disappoint anyone but this is not the first time and probably not the last.

 

Years back, I sent quite a few e-mails to Siegfried Linkwitz... lots of neophyte dumb questions. He was gracious enough a guy to have always answered my e-mails, but one in particular impressed me. I had asked this long wordy question about ported subs that included questions about why the roll off is 4th order if the driver is moving farther than a sealed sub below tune, etc.  His answer was "I don't use resonant systems." That was the entire response.

 

I stick to the facts and leave other options for other posters.

 

One aspect of the system that was used at the GTG that I didn't go into because of typical GTG time constraints is the SEQSS. It's a key to why I prefer the sealed approach. Once you have the ideal native frequency response, you add multiples until you satisfy the playback level + headroom requirement. Once that's accomplished, you insert the SEQSS.

 

Nick's HST-15s loaded into the Raptor enclosure yields this frequency response:

 

 

Using the signal shaper the process of transformation happens:

 

The sub now has a new native response:

 

The SEQSS adds 8 more signal-shaped curves:

 

Through many years of study, I've settled on native curves that best mate with boundary gain profiles and SPL requirements vs the requirements for reference playback of various source material. Especially important is the low Q F6 bandwidth of the curves. But, there's nothing to stop anyone from commissioning a custom version with curves that emulate just about every subwoofer alignment ever built.

 

The latest sub I've designed is for 18" and larger drivers for larger listening spaces and lunacy-level playback capability. Of course, the aesthetic shape and accoutrements are not relevant and my personal preference.

 

 

Load a pair of these with HST-24 drivers, making the size of each around 20 cubes, include proper amplification and commission the SEQSS to shape the signal so that the system emulates any ported sub tune, horn tune, bandpass tune, sealed F3/Qtc ever modeled, built or imagined, with any order roll off. SPL capability over 140dB in just about any room.

 

You now have 6 or 8 or 12 or however many subwoofers you prefer to have, all in one system. Experimentation of what floats your boat can be accomplished in a single day without the expense and time consumed locating commercial subs, or parts for subs and building subs, and moving systems in and out including setup and tweak time.

 

Dom has recently introduced the idea that some alignments of the same FR will exhibit different tactile response. That is the evolution of progress and is inevitable, and props to him for the pioneering effort and quality discussion. That may be the only variable here and I remain open-minded but unconvinced at this point. Otherwise, all else is identical; native response, group delay response, phase response, etc. Of course, some people will miss things like the occasional under ported puff of air hitting them in the face. Although that would be the dead giveaway that the system is a ported one, the phenomenon has nothing to do with audio reproduction.

 

Truthfully, when someone has said in years past that 'x' subwoofer is the cat's meow, I would just look up it's native response and emulate that in a few minutes time with the Marchand Bassis and/or external PEQ to explore the differences with my full bandwidth system. It's a simple matter to compare in-room response and presentation with favorite discs to know pretty much what to expect if I had the actual sub. It can be and has been argued that the alignments have some as-yet unidentified nuance differences. I don't agree.

 

So, when people say 'yeah but...' regarding other alignments, in-room response preferences, playback calibration and level preferences, etc., I respond with what I know and leave tangents of that to others.

[dominguez1]

^^^Your designs are killer Dave...

[coolrda]

Tons of great stuff on this disk!  

 

Track #6 is a new favorite of mine, and I actually just used it tonight as a "SQ" demo for an AVS member.  

Talk about a trip down memory lane. I've owned this album since release week but its been years. Got it pulled out for playback next week. If I remember correctly a few tracks are on the dry side but with huge dynamics and good selection of music. Telarc was the go to label for eighties and nineties as far as demo's go. Only the DTS 5.1 music CD's and movies from the mid to late nineties surpassed these.  

[Electrodynamic]

I edited my post on page 15 to show the new capture of that one scene Bosso:

 

 

And my favorite scene where the ship goes gently into the side of the larger ship:

 

[BeastAudio]

The white background is definitely throwing me for a loop to say the least  

[Shredhead]

There's a dark version too, hit me up if you want it.  I'm starting to like the white more lately. 

[Infrasonic]

^^^^^^

 

Wow. What's that from? More JA?

[Shredhead]

From the intro of a song I did recently.  I can send it to you if you PM me but I'm not liable for equipment damages.

[Infrasonic]

Equipment? No. Structural? Always possible.

[BeastAudio]

Structural could definitely happen with that track, I had some issues:

 

 

[lukeamdman]

Structural could definitely happen with that track, I had some issues:

 

 

 

Reminds me of standing in your kitchen for the EOT sweep.  

 

Where did you get this track?

[Electrodynamic]

From the intro of a song I did recently.  I can send it to you if you PM me but I'm not liable for equipment damages.

 

Care to send it my way as well? I think I can rebuild my drivers if I ruin them, haha.   The drivers will handle it just fine. 

[Shredhead]

It's the intro to Dark Horse that you heard.  I have to re-mix the intro so that it has more impact at 20 and below.  I'll eventually get to posting it on youtube but in the meanwhile I'll send the 24bit/96k file to anyone who PM's me their email. 

[Madaeel]

Send me that breh. ASAP.