> From: "Greg Weddig" <>
>
> >
> > I have one of these that we demo'd for a project at work they are
very
> > cool but in my opinion, not very good in a monitoring situation.
Then Walter Knapp wrote:
> Is this because of the sound quality, or just because infrasound is
not
> something commonly found in music?
>
> I'm not interested in toys. I'm looking at a neglected area of
natural
> sound, and want as good as I can get.
Walt it's mostly because in most of my recording I'm trying to get rid
of the low frequency information, most of the audio production is not
traditional music so at this point anyway I don't have a real need for
a subwoofer. Though it works great in a planetarium seat (which is
what I have the demo unit for).
The specs on the bass shaker I have imply a 10hz>80hz range, pretty
typical for a subwoofer. The problem with the bass shacker as I see
it is that it doesn't really work well unless you mount it to
something, and then it picks up the resonant frequency of whatever
you've mounted it to. Doesn't provide a flat frequency response that
one tries to attain in loudspeakers. In my opinion it's much more
effective at providing a boom than reproducing the subtleties of
infrasound.
Of course I would recommend getting a pair and finding out for
yourself, check ebay for bass shaker. They are pretty affordable if
you have a spare amp. And they are pretty fun to play with on
different materials.
--greg
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|