Posted April 10 2003 - 06:23 AM
| Playing a 98 db sound for 30 hz and 107 db sound for 55 hz (when it should or could be 107 db for 30hz and 107 db for 55 hz) would not be desirable for me given the amount of money involved. The Ultra errors in an manner where the human hearing is less senstive and having an added bump at 30 hz may be a benefit. If not it should be fairly easy to equalize that hump down. |
My read on the Weatherhead review was always quite different than this. His charts were not "typical" Frequency Response graphs, in the sense they were measured at moderate volumes. Rather, Weatherhead cranked up the volume till he believed he was hearing distortion and then
To quote from the article: "Frequency sweeps were run from 10 Hz to 100 Hz. The volume was raised little by little until the sonic quality started to change."
My understanding of servo-control may be seriously flawed, but I believe that what you're seeing with 10 dB drop-off in the HGS chart is the servo kicking in at extreme volume under 55 hz. That is, if Weatherhead had reduced the master volume by 10 dB, the HGS may have measured flat down to 20 hz.
If this is truly the case, it shows a flaw in Weatherhead's methodology, in that his ears didn't pick up on the severe change in FR as he raised the volume.
If this is NOT the case....if the FR of the HGS would be the same if measured at a lower volume...then the bass extension (i.e., the -3dB point) of an HGS-18 is apparently only around 50 hz. And I somehow doubt this.
Regarding the hump at 30 hz... Pretty much all the subs that Weatherhead measured showed a hump at about 32 hz. I think it's a fair guess that the hump is produced by Weatherhead's room, not the subs.