40hz ratings/speaker response

Clueless, pipes are already made with a S0 of zero. Drivers are on the way, but not here yet. Everything is ready to just plug in the drivers. Apparently, Brines is really hot on the Mathcad program, but not too interested in using the right drivers for the Voigt pipes. He used everything but the Lowther, and these were designed to use the Lowther. So he takes these pipes, and plugs a much smaller driver into them and complains about the results. Now, I don't doubt for a minute that I will have issues with dips at the resonant points. But, whether the problems will be as bad as he says remains to be seen. If they are, then I'll try a few things, and may even shorten the pipe to open up the S0(narrow tip)area. But, I have read alot of testimonials that this pipe design sounds good. So we will have to just try it out and see.

Being a latecomer, I have the benefit of the earlier postings.
Sdcampbell, Gboren are right to the point with reading the specs and the importance of interpreting +/- 2 or 3dB. I understand that genuine spec ratings are recorded with some sort of standard reference equipment, sensor mounted 1m on axis infront of the speaker driven with some standard frequency sweep signals, in an anechoic chamber. So there is some standard measurement in the speaker manufacturing industry.
Red I love the climax of your soprano story! The room size resonance effect in our real listening area does distort the overall sound that we perceive, and resonance must be controlled with every practical means possible.
My own experience is that there is vast difference in bass reproduction between my M.Logan Aerius (45Hz +/-3dB) and my later acquired Dynaudio A72 (28 +/-3dB) despite what some of the above posts opined. With the exact same gear I had been using, the Dyns came out with so much ooomph(body)and deep sound staging, a big step closer to like "being there" feeling compared to the Aerius. All along I thought Aerius'45Hz is low enough for reproducing whatever in the CD; I was wrong!
I believe that when our ear response starts to roll off at some point, the guts (feeling) takes over down to even lower frequencies.

In a DARPA project during the 70s and 80s, a guy by the name of Patrick Flanagan was researching alternative communications techniques. He discovered and later patented a device called the "Flanagan Neurophone". The D.O.D. kept him from marketing it for 20 years. It is a device worn around the neck, kind of like a fat necklace. It receives sound and transduces it into the bone structure of the clavicles. It can make totally deaf people hear. Apparently, the bone structure can be vibrated in such a way as to simulate the activity of the ear, and is interpreted by the brain as sound. This leads me to agree with others that the "feel" of music in the body is important to the experience as well as hearing through the ears. I once tried headphones for primary listening, and found that the lack of "feel" was unsatisfactory for me. I gave up the headphones.

Twl, as the father of a deaf child I can't help wonder why the DOD would need to conspire to prevent deaf people from hearing? National Security? At any rate, a lot of deafness is neurological damage, not bone structure so your theory just doesn't fly. "Feelings" are often a 'Perceptual", and totally subjective state, however they are a "physical" reality, I am tempted to discuss the ancient "mind/body" dichotomy theories, but they probably don't need rehashing here.. There are theories that (more appropriately?) speak to the influences of "feelings" or better put, how we develop a capacity for a range of emotions. Suffice it to say that, one's life experiences have a lot to do with the range and depth of our emotions; hence different musical tastes. I am tempted to dive into a discussion of the reasons a person is attracted to "thrash" or say, ted (guts and glory, I AM America) Nugent, as opposed to say, Crosby Stills Nash and Young. but....
Joeb

Joeb, it is not my theory. Just reporting the facts. From what I've heard about the Flanagan Neurophone, it doesn't rely on the ear at all, or the ear's neurology, but instead creates an entirely different path for the brain to interpret the sound. You may be able to find something about this on the web. The product is no longer squelched by the D.O.D. The man's name is Dr. Patrick Flanagan. I don't know if he is still alive or not. I heard the information on a radio show with Dr. Nick Begich, who was a friend and associate of Dr. Flanagan. Perhaps Dr. Begich has some info on how this device operates and how to get one.