Bartokfan, any speaker that can fulfill the music demands of the genre you like is full range.
Still, there is something hair raising about 18 - 29 Hz, If the room is accommodating. There is a surprising amount of music that dips way down, like Laurie Anderson's Monkey Paws, or almost anything by Bjork.
Even a grand piano's lowest key vibrates at 27.5 Hz (A0). To reproduce a grand piano's full voice your speakers need to be flat through 27.5 Hz. Also, whatever driver is producing the low octaves needs to be fast, in order to sound realistic.
My Scintillas flat line through 20Hz, way into sub woofer range. I once ran a Stereophile Test CD's frequency sweep on my system. The first clue the CD was running was when CD cases started falling out of their stand onto the floor. The tone moved up the scale seamlessly to out of hearing with nary a waver. |
BTW, my vote for 30hz-20khz as the full range definition is based primarily on the fact that Stereophile uses this range when they rate loudspeakers.
Personally, I'm more apt to purchase loudspeakers that go down to at least 25hz (and I don't place nearly as much weight on the measurement above 20khz). |
I've heard speakers that are rated at +/- whatever from 30-20K that do not *sound* full range to me. They reproduce deep bass but without the *weight* I associate with truly full-range speakers. Perhaps Room Lock and Room Shudder describe that experience of weight. Do those happen automatically if a speaker reaches down to 30Hz? My guess is room interaction is a huge factor in whether or not they do. |
Pbb, my speakers go down to 16hz, so I am familiar with "room shake" and feeling low frequencies in one's body. As far as HF extension, I was just posing the question without any intention of being argumentative. Since several supertweeters are marketed, and since people who buy them like their system's sound better with them than without them, it seems the buyers must sense something positive. The issue is interesting.
Have we decided on the full range frequency definition? I suppose I'd cast my vote for 30hz-20khz. |
Muralman:"all I know is most systems are truly deficient in the 20-20Khz range(meaning problems in qulility of reproduction of the original source)..I don't knwo why anyone would want to perfect what they can't hear, before they (first) get right, what hz's they can actaully hear". Agree, before we run after the 20hz-30hz/20K hz-25Khz, first how does the speaker reproduce the 40-18K hz?
For me its more important taht a speaker offer a seamless image in the meeting of the bass/mids/highs,, that it is to get at the 20-30 and 20Khz+ range. Actually 30hz is my bottom range I'm interested in. I alreday have a speaker in mind that fits the characteristics I'm looking for. |
Pbb has a good point, what is the most reasonable range, which he says is 30hz through say 16Khz. Hoover joins in with agreement and is hapy to see someone actually post this. My speakers go to 40hz and so far have been satisfactory enough. IOW when I play the New Orleans Jazz complitaion and another compliation Blues cd, both very high quality sound recoding, the bbass fills the room. Thats at between 1/4, 1/3 volume on my 40 watt tube amp. But considering I mostly listen to classical, i'm now ready to get at those fq's from the bass, cellos, tubas, timpini's, the 30hz-40hz. IOW I want a new experience from my classical with that added bass. Now the 20-30hz's I'll be missing. But as Pbb mentions just how important are these super low fq's, how much will they be missed? How often in classical are these fq's there? In solo piano there's not much below 40 I'm sure. Yes the piano can go as low as 20, but how often do composers work in that low fq in piano scores and even in orchestral. Rarely.
And the upper range, who knows from human hearing when a tweet rolls off at 20hz, and other tweets at 22Khz? I'd guess on the jazz and blues cds there is more going on in the 20Khz+ range than in my classical. But those tweets that go up to 22Khz+, are they delivering quality superhighs, 22K-25Khz? Are are the highs sort of "fake" sounding, tinsel-y/ metalic, IOW fatigueing? That is do tweets that go as high as 25hz+, is that upper range for real? Also is they are designed to go too high, then how well do they meet the mids of the lower drivers? Which is why my seas' tweet does not sparkle, but instead has a bigger bottom end and meets the midwoofer with seamless resolution. I do not lmsii the 22hz+ that the Seas seem to not deliver on.
So I'd say full range is 30hz - 18Khz as Pbb mentioned.
I'll read the other posts here. Some great comments are being made and we are carrying audio one step further to a PROPER understanding. For too long audio knowledge has been in the dark ages, and audio labs have taken full advantage of our ignorance and pushing its bull on us. |
Tvad, because the low frequencies can be felt through your body as anybody who has contact with a system playing super low frequencies will tell you. Only very few researchers believe that high frequencies are felt through the bone structure of the head. Anything that turns you on is all right as far as I'm concerned, but I still think that defining terms and agreeing on basics is too important a subject to always put forth the exceptions to any given rule or a way-out theory as being what should be given prominence in these discussions. Call me crazy! |
For me above 15.5 Khz I hear nada....so I would agree that linearity in higher frequency response in a system is not very important to me at least above this level.
I respect that some can hear up to 20 KHz and when I was younger I could hear somewhat higher than my limited upper range today... so it is relevant.
Above 20 Khz, however, I have a hard time accepting there is any need for a system to reproduce these...maybe my dog appreciates it.
Low frequencies seem audible somewhere between 15 and 25 Hz to me...not that I don't hear something lower but that I suspect the sub excites vibrations in the walls which may be principally what I am hearing or feeling (some of these excited vibrations undoubtedly include higher harmonics and rattling which are clearly audible and are really added "distortion" but they make for convincing effects in movies). I have not found that higher frequencies (above my hearing ramge) are capable of inducing lower frequency audible harmonics in the room...the sound or test tone just disappears for me.
IMHO, due to the range of my hearing and for the added distortions that ultra LF excites, extended low frequency response is more important than extended high frequency response. |
Maybe it's because I grew up attending a Catholic cathedral on Sundays. The organ play made it all worthwhile. I loved both the huge bass pipes to the ethereal strings.
Away from church, for twisted fun, I tortured the neighbors Shitsuitsu with a dog whistle. It was cruel, but I did learn dogs hear more than we do.
I once read the reason we hear between 20 and 20k, is because that encompasses all that is relevant to our survival. I'm sure that explanation doesn't wash with birds and dogs.
I'm one of those extremes that hears way high and soft. I don't know how many times I hear bright and grainy, when other listeners just hear highs. That leaves me agreeing with the dog, hearing UHF is not all that it's cracked up to be.
All I know is most systems are truly deficient in the 20-20k range, I don't know why anyone would want to perfect what they can't hear before they get what they can hear right.
Maybe it's because most people have trouble hearing above 14Kz they don't hear the deficiencies that their systems scream out between 14Kz and 20Kz. |
Inaudible content on the low end can be detected by the body because it shakes the floor, ceiling, walls, etc.
How would we detect inaudible high frequency content? |
High frequencies do none of this. Their reported presence in an audio system just feeds into psychosomatic twitching of true believer's brains.
Muralman1 (System | Threads | Answers) How do you know this, Vince? Does the absence of a readily discernible physical phenomenon like shaking walls prove the non-effect of high frequencies on human experience? You don't believe that human inner ears or human sinus cavities somehow process high frequencies...even as pressure differences? I believe they do. Perhaps our friends Guidocorona or 84audio might be able to share some insight. |
Ultra-low frequencies have the power to shake the walls, and physically
pressurize the room. It adds to the visceral experience of say, a really big
diameter pipe.
High frequencies do none of this. Their reported presence in an audio system
just feeds into psychosomatic twitching of true believer's brain. |
Goroi- I was referring to speaker systems of any kind, not just single driver systems.
Sogood51- I like your "room lock" and "room shudder" concepts.
Newbee-The passage says "reaches down into the 30s WITH SOME WEIGHT". Is that meaningless? The meaning was clear to me but maybe it didn't translate well.
Pbb- Thanks for taking this where I had hoped it might go. What use is the inaudible? I personally feel that the whole absolute sound model steers us away from a relaxed and pleasant music listening experience and causes us to grip our chairs and squeeze the last note out of our equipment.
Why are so many of us so obsessive? |
If low frequencies that serve to merely shake the wall add to one's experience listening to music, then why is it unreasonable to accept that high, inaudible frequencies add to the experience as well? The fact that humans can not hear frequencies above a certain frequency does not mean humans do not experience these frequencies in other ways. Does it? |
I don't believe there is a formal definition of "full range speaker." As such, it pretty much means whatever the person using it wants it to mean.
At the least demanding end of the spectrum it could simply refer to any speaker system that is designed to be used by itself (i.e., not specifically made to be used with a subwoofer, etc.) Such a definition would include speakers with limited bass below 50 or 60 Hz.
At the far end, one can insist that a "full range" system needs to solidly go down to 30 Hz or below.
A similar argument can be made at the high end. As such, I consider the term fairly meaningless. |
Pbb said: "In the treble range what is mind-boggling is that many believe that the response should go way over 20 kHz when most adults can barely hear beyond twelve/fourteen kHz." You're the first person I've EVER heard mention this online, even though I've silently wondered about it for years. I remember from the old days when "high bias" cassette tapes listed a frequency response extending up to about 16,000 hertz, and an audiogram I had a few years ago showed a slight rolloff at 12,000 hertz. They normally only tested to 8,000 hertz, but had the capability to test up to 12,000, which I requested and they did. Twelve thousand hertz is REALLY a high frequency, yet we audiophiles classically consider 20-20,000 to be "full range," and then sometimes go even further by purchasing super tweeters (out to 50,000 maybe?) and subwoofers (some going down to under 10 hertz). I can say unequivocally that the Rel Storm 3 makes a big positive difference in my system. I cannot comment on supertweeters, other than to speculate that they may be useful in repelling insects and rodents, both of which have higher frequency hearing capabilities than do humans, even audiophile humans. So.....I agree with the generally accepted 20-20,000 as defining "full range," but like Pbb I wonder if it's overkill on the high end. |
You probably mean a "speaker system", judging by how a number here are responding in a way that seems to equate "speaker" with "driver". In audiophile circles it is always good to deny whatever has been sound thinking for many years in favour of arguments that are tenuous at best, and pure folly at worst. I think that the most often agreed upon idea is that a full-range speaker system should ideally cover 20 Hz to 20 kHz, but that if it falls short on the low end by ten or twelve Hz it can still be considered as such. On the bottom end I don't think anyone should fret if it doesn't go down all the way to that point as anything around 30 is plenty of bass. The absolute bottom is more felt than heard and integration into the room is not always obvious. In the treble range what is mind-boggling is that many believe that the response should go way over 20 kHz when most adults can barely hear beyond twelve/fourteen kHz. All this will never stop subjective audiophiles from arguing all manner of things until they are blue in the face. |
Stereophile ranks (in thier component recommendtions) speakers as full range if they are relatively flat from 20hz to 20khz. They have a second category for those that do not which includes speakers which have a 30hz to 20hz response. At least they did when I subscribed some years ago.
However I agree with Sogood51, a speaker which is spec'd out as flat to 30 hz produces a lot of bass and you may not miss that last part of an octave much.
A speaker which "reaches down into the 30's" is sort of a meaningless description. What is important is the rate of fall off when it hits its lowest 'flat' output. For example - flat to 60hz could still have some minimal output in the 30's but it would have little impact on the sound, whereas a speaker which is flat to 45hz might well have, depending on the speaker/cabinet design, a -3db frequency response of 35hz +/- which could be quite respectible, depending on the size and dimensions of your room. |
"Full range" gets abused because it sounds nice but here is a reasonable practical check: Whenever a company feels the need to employ two or more driver to reproduce music, then none of them was not full range. |
The Apogee Scintilla does 20Hz to 20Khz. There must be others. |
A speaker that has strong output at 30hz may not be truly fullrange but is plenty of low bass for most music.
Room lock and room shudder are a couple of terms I like to use...room lock sets in around 30hz (or so) as you feel the bass grip the room, we've all felt it I think...feels good.
Room shudder sets in a bit below room lock and can cause the whole room to literally shudder depending on how strong the output is...mostly movies and some New age music come to mind.
Dave |
No single transducer can handle a full 20 to 20khz frequenc. In the olden days, acceptable single driver to wideband drivers, typically covers from above 50's to near 16 khz signal, something that specs out like 80-16khz, or 70-15khz, enough to have a crossoverless mid; and no associated phasing problems than typical designs that employ crossover. Some people attest too that these driver units are better off partnered with tubed electronics. System integration? most likely. |
