# Subs in the Studio



## schatzus (Aug 26, 2009)

I am curious on how many have a sub woofer in the studio. I have heard different opinions about whether or not it is a good thing. 
For myself, I have been contemplating the purchase as the sub-frequencies in my mixes tend to be a source of constant back-and-forth between different audio systems to get a true read of what those frequencies sound like. (Beyond what the meters say...) It seems like it would be easier to have a better representation of the subharmonics during the composition phase rather than during the mixdown or mastering phase.
Any suggestions or ideas would be most welcome...
Thanks.


----------



## Niah (Aug 26, 2009)

I think it's certainly important to have a sub on your studio, and they are are increasing in people's homes. So most people are already listened to music with subs.

Having said that the room is extremely important, if you don't have a treated room a sub can really give you a false impression of the mix. A sub in a bad room is probably worse than having none at all.


----------



## germancomponist (Aug 26, 2009)

Well said, Niah!


----------



## ComposerDude (Aug 26, 2009)

While the standard placement uses a single sub, subs aren't always sub-frequencies-only, and some have attentuation curves extending into localizable frequencies.

I tried the customary sub setup but could hear the sound "coming from under the desk".

Am now using TWO subs, one placed to the outside of each stereo speaker position at roughly the same height as the speakers (on a very large desktop NOT on the floor). Each sub gets a filtered version of its left or right channel. Imaging is superb.

Good luck with your setup.


----------



## schatzus (Aug 26, 2009)

Thanks for the input. Tune room... install sub...tune room again...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 26, 2009)

The sub is part of my main speaker system - Blue Sky System One. While it's really well integrated and you don't hear it as a separate source, my take is different from Niah's. My experience is that small speakers plus sub(s) are the best reference overall because of the detail and imaging you get from their positioning, but they don't give you a real feeling for the bass even though you can hear the frequencies; there's simply no substitute for big speakers that you hear from some distance.

And I also have to say - nothing to do with Niah, just in general - it's starting to get really annoying reading the same thing about treating your room every time the subject of speakers comes up. No, I'm not normally this irritable, but it's simply not true that a sub in a bad room is worse than no sub, and I don't know why people keep perpetuating these myths about the room being more important that the monitor system (although I don't know whether Niah is going that far). How are you going to hear vocal pops without a sub? Or piano hammer thuds? Or anything below 60Hz at best, and that's optimistic for a lot of speakers.

Get a sub, put some bass trapping in your room if it needs it, but get a good monitoring system first!


----------



## jeffc (Aug 26, 2009)

I was anti-sub until I got one. Now it really helps me hear the bass much better. I find that I can let more good bass out the door in mixes, where before I would filter out a lot of stuff just to be safe.

I got an Adam sub - with ironically, a smaller speaker than my Dynaudio BM15A's, but it works great and gives you a much clearer picture of rumbles and things that you will never hear on small speakers. I think it takes a bit of time to kind of hear the whole system as one, as opposed to the nearfields and the low stuff under the desk, but after a while I forgot about it, to the point that I sometimes climb under to make sure the sub is still on!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 26, 2009)

The reason you were anti-sub is, I'm guessing, is that you experienced the same thing Peter is talking about. That doesn't happen - there's no adjustment period - if it's integrated well.

But obviously you don't want to turn it up too far or you'll hear way too much rumble (because everything below about 80Hz is pretty much rumble).

Edit: ...which is not to say that rumble isn't important!


----------



## schatzus (Aug 26, 2009)

Well. I gotta tell you...
My take was that since a sub produces frequencies which are independent of placement, any room should benefit. If your room sounds good and you have a decent set of monitors, the sub's purpose of recreating most frequencies below 60Hz should be a plus.
Correct?


----------



## synthetic (Aug 26, 2009)

Need the sub for film music, I think. It's not inaccurate if the room is set up properly. 

However, it's also important to listen to your mix on small speakers. You might have a mix that works on your sub, but on small monitors the bass disappears completely.


----------



## MacQ (Aug 26, 2009)

I just got a Mackie HRS150 to go with my Genelec 8050 near-fields. 960W of bass into a downward firing 15" driver with 2 passive 12" transducers either side of the sealed cabinet.

Needless to say, I'm in low-frequency heaven. Deep, accurate bass, with plenty of volume to spare. I can get it as loud as a club system in here. It's awesome. 

Make sure not to skimp on a sub, if you do buy one. Lots of subs make claims about their frequency response and power handling, but I've been doing tests for months before I got this one. Even expensive systems like the big ADAM subs don't perform like they should.

Best of luck!

~Stu


----------



## Hannes_F (Aug 26, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Aug 26 said:


> The sub is part of my main speaker system - Blue Sky System One. While it's really well integrated and you don't hear it as a separate source, my take is different from Niah's. My experience is that small speakers plus sub(s) are the best reference overall because of the detail and imaging you get from their positioning, but they don't give you a real feeling for the bass even though you can hear the frequencies; there's simply no substitute for big speakers that you hear from some distance.



Hmm ... so what would be your recommendation, Nick?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 26, 2009)

Just do what I say, Hannes. Don't ask questions. 

Seriously, I have and love both: NFMs with sub (my main reference) and big speakers. The big speakers give you a kick in the chest that you can't get from small speakers. I went to Mike Greene's studio and heard and liked his UREI 813s, and then I picked up a pair of the smaller 809As on ebay. While they're certainly not as good as the best speakers out today, there's nothing within a few thousand dollars of the $600 I paid that can touch them. I already had a good amp (Hafler 9505).

We've been through this before - which is why I was so irritable earlier - but I'm certainly in favor of treating problems in the room.

By the way, what Jeff says about the opposite is equally true - listening without the sub is also important.


----------



## RiffWraith (Aug 26, 2009)

Personally, I prefer one of these:







Whether or not you need a sub, depends on what you are doing. For ex., if you were to walk in to a re-recording studio in a post house, you would find a sub. 

Cheers.


----------



## bryla (Aug 27, 2009)

schatzus @ Wed Aug 26 said:


> Well. I gotta tell you...
> My take was that since a sub produces frequencies which are independent of placement, any room should benefit. If your room sounds good and you have a decent set of monitors, the sub's purpose of recreating most frequencies below 60Hz should be a plus.
> Correct?


Well it's generally in the sub frequency area that most project studios have their acoustical problems - peaks and dips. Every time I trap my room I do feel an improvement in the bass region and have to adjust my sub. It's fulfilling


----------



## Niah (Aug 27, 2009)

Nick has much more experience than me on this matter.

so I was only speaking from my experience.

I used to be in an untreated room and I couldn't even play trilogy with the sub on or just listening to some more bassy music like dnb or portishead, so most of the times I had to leave in off.

anyway subs are important


----------



## poseur (Aug 28, 2009)

hmmm.

as for as my stereo-mixes are concerned:
to date, my experiences/abilities w/subs haven't been so great.

but, while my expectations are very much in-line with what nick b is apparently actually getting,
i remain unsatisfied w/my own stereo-mixes on 2.1 systems.
i suppose i should try the blue sky system, and some others.

neither of my 2 different rooms is really "treated", other than by my own, irregular,
somewhat "organic methodologies".
?!?
true, though.

the old room has no sub.
it uses genelec 1040's in the NF,
& 2nd generation tetra 605's w/an edge amp as the mains.
i do know this room quite well, and the quality of my mixes, there, seems to continuously increase & "evolve".
fwiw, i've mixed 1 grammy-winning track and 1 grammy-nominated cd there;
as well, i edited & mastered my own first "head-credit" studio-score in that old room, which also was a grammy nominee.

the new room uses genelec 8030A's + 7050B sub in the NF, & (new to me) m-audio dsm3's as the mains.
this is the 2nd room in which i've installed the little genelec system,
and i've really not been able to produce satisfyingly "balanced" mixes on them in either of the rooms,
regardless of the system's tuning.
they're "ok" for isolating clicks, pops, ticks & rumble, but not great for me..... 
& they remain difficult for me for anything else, impossible for full mixes.
meanwhile, i seem to be doing well 
--- again, for stereo mixes ---
on the new m-audio pair: kinda surprisingly to me, they've been very, very satisfying.

otoh:
for 5.1 mixes, the smaller scores have been mixed (by someone else) on a JBL LSR6328P system
in their own room; they sound quite good to me, i "get" them,
but still prefer the balance of the stereo mixes to be done in my old room.

this has been a bit of a ramble, thinking out loud in public; ruminating on the rooms.

i'd really like to find a 2.1 (or, 3.1) system that i can feel confident in using as my primary references
in this new room, since i spend a lotta time in it.....
since i really dig (and, "get") these dsm-3's, maybe i'll find a sub with which
they might balance nicely,
maybe try a blue sky system, etc.....

so,
nick:
which blue sky system is it that you're using?

thanks,
d


----------



## schatzus (Aug 28, 2009)

> which blue sky system is it that you're using?



+1

I looked at the Blue Sky systems and I am curious as to which one you are using...

I will be ordering a sub this week... I don't expect to have the inclusion of a sub magically clear up any room issues, but I do think that I will get a better perspective.


----------



## poseur (Aug 28, 2009)

*Ot*


curt,
fwiw: the link to your track, "autumn rush", seems broken.
d


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 28, 2009)

I have the older Sky System One:

http://www.abluesky.com/asp/catalogue/catalogue.asp?linkid=16 (http://www.abluesky.com/asp/catalogue/c ... ?linkid=16)

And what Bryla says is absolutely true: bass trapping is your friend.


----------



## poseur (Aug 28, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Aug 28 said:


> I have the older Sky System One:
> 
> http://www.abluesky.com/asp/catalogue/catalogue.asp?linkid=16 (http://www.abluesky.com/asp/catalogue/c ... ?linkid=16)
> 
> And what Bryla says is absolutely true: bass trapping is your friend.


thanks, nick.
and, yeah: bass-traps.

i suspect the system could accommodate a LCR.1 kinda setup;
i'm gonna check it out.

meanwhile, i gotta get out of pasadena for the day..... or, the weekend, maybe.
the fire's about 4 miles from here, 
the center of the smoke-plumes are scary, right in front of my house,
and the air is becoming unbreathable.....
damn!

d


----------

