Bass Response and concrete floors


I was talking to a Dynaudio dealer the other day and asking about the Confidence 5's in comparison to the rest of the Dynaudio line. The 5's are apparently being cancelled with two new models being released in the Confidence line, based on the Evidence technology.

Anyway, he asked what type of flooring the speakers would be on. I said concrete with thick pile carpeting. He said the bass response on a concrete floor, even with carpeting, would be muted, that the Confidence 5's need a floor with give to produce decent bass. He said that the bass would roll off around 50 Hz on a concrete floor.

I've seen so many very positive comments about the 5's, but I suppose that people who are satisfied may well be using them on a main floor built on joists. The dealer indicated that I'd be a lot happier with the 3's on my floor.

Anybody know why this would be? More importantly, is this a common behavior of floor standers on concrete floors? Is it a general "rule" that if you have concrete floors, you'll get better performance from a high quality monitor? Thanks for any info -Kirk

kthomas
The guys are right. Wood floors equal bloated, poorly defined bass. Kinda like using the loudness button. Concrete will seem to yield less bass, but it will be far more accurate and controled. You are lucky to have the concrete. Somebody else said it, but get monitors that will be good to around 40-50Hz and add a sub or subs below that and you'll have the best of both worlds. I've got a concrete floor and use a pair of Titan II subs with Jaguars. My bass measures and sounds flat to under 20Hz. It is so cool and natural. Really beats to the boom effect.
And now for something completely different. In the brochure "31 Secrets to Better Sound" from Anantgarde USA, it says the opposite. They recommend installing a wooden floor over concrete. He describes concrete as "colder less involving sound" vs. wood as "warmer more compelling". He says concrete imparts a "whitish coloration" to the sound.

He's not talking about a bouncy floor, but a well supported wooden floor, nailing down 2x4s on their sides and covering with hardwood or thick subflooring, then carpet. He says "you want to keep the solidity of the concrete surface, only change it's timbre." That seems to make sense. The guys at Michael Green's told me the same thing.

So does that work? I don't know. Hard to conduct that experiment.I have a concrete floor and I think it sounds pretty good, On the other hand I have a wooden ceiling made of 1x6 interlocking bead board. I may try the wooden floor but I'm worried if the basement ever leaks I'll have water trapped under the floor.

It looks like Krell is the only one so far who has actually done it, but I'm confused by the comment "I agree with Mg123 about boomy mid bass in that I have never had such a great sounding room." Do you have boomy mid bass or does the room sound great?
Herman, they are selling you something, and that something is more bass ("warmth"), but you can't have it for free. You are still going to pay for it in loss of transient response and extra resonance. The fact that they want a slightly different kind of floor only means that they want to shift the resonant frequencies to a different spectrum. There is no magic here: wood floors resonate, concrete pads don't. Yes, some resonances are more euphonic than others, but that doesn't change the fact that they are resonances. Still far better to start with a nonresonant room (note that resonance and reverberation are two entirely different things; a room with good reverberation characteristics does not have to have floor/wall/ceiling resonances at all...) and use subs to create real bass. But I'm not surprised that Avantgarde has this approach; their horns resonate like crazy and I'm sure they are used to tuning their speakers for a (more or less) flat response in spite of the response variations the resonances create. But the time domain isn't fooled by this, and neither is the ear.
Perfectly valid point Herman but i'm not sure were talking about the exact same thing.

This is not rocket science or, if it is, it's not all rocket science. Of course covering cement is going to make a difference. If you have raw cement and go to wood covering you will notice a diff and it usually will be perceived as "warmer". If you have carpet and pad over the cement and then to go to wood the diff will be much less. Especially if the rest of your room surfaces are "warm."

Do you play an instrument? Take an acoustic guitar and and play 18" in front of tile, glass, concrete poured walls, plasterboard, your living room sofa and the sound board of another guitar. What do you like? Surprisingly many people like bright resonant sound. That's why we all sing in the shower - but that's another story. Anyway, it's not a perfect example of a room at higher volume but it will give you the general idea.

There is a difference in trying to add a "shade" to the sound created by your system with room treatment (floors or walls) and trying to extend frequency response of your system using the room. The later is almost always disasterious because it cannot be controlled (the frequency response curve would be anything but straight.) I repeat, if you do not want a speaker that rolls off at 50Hz buy a speaker that does not roll off there! Then treat your room in a manner so that it will effect all bass and treble frequencies somewhat equally and too your liking.

I remain,
Herman, I think the issue being referred to is resonant feedback rather than acoustics. I absolutely agree that if you have a concrete floor then you will get a cooler less involving sound if you do not get the equipment and speaker supports right. For example, I have found with a concrete floor that racks sound much better if they are sand-filled, but sound better if empty on a wooden floor. Better still is to decouple the rack from the concrete floor in a similar way to that you have quoted.