Reproducing an elusive low F#

[Dood]

The all embracing community of BassChat opens it's arms wide to welcome those from all walks of life, cultures and countries truly accepting of our worldly differences.

[Dad3353]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1453335953' post='2958639']
They couldn't....why do Americans use this phrase? - it means the opposite of what they want to say.
[/quote]

Some light here, maybe..?

[url="http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm"]'I could care less' ...[/url]

[xgsjx]

My comments are purely in jest & not to offend. I could just as easily have banter with the Perth dialect where "Doss" means something good, as in "that's totally doss", to which I usually reply "it is, ya doss" (which is me using doss as its intended derogatory term).
I think highly of Bill & his wisdom & knowledge are a great help to many in the BC community (which he is a part of).

Anyway, I'm off to peel some potatoes.

[alexclaber]

Low F# as a note isn't a problem for lots of bass rigs, though they generally need to be big or have lots of volume displacement so they can reproduce the first and second overtones (second and third harmonics) with enough sonic weight. The low F# fundamental frequency is extremely difficult to reproduce at rock loudness - you can do it with a sensible specialist rig at lower levels but to manage it at high SPL requires spending a lot of money on some very serious kit.

And even if you can build a bass rig that does low F# fundamental well, the PA system won't manage it, so either your rig has to be able to fill the whole venue or you're going to be much louder in the mix onstage on your lowest notes but those notes will be quiet out front. You might have noticed a similar problem with balancing your pickup heights on a 5/6/7+ string bass if you're using much bass boost on your rig. Having excessive very deep content can also throw off the string to string or up and down the neck sonic balance between more controlled SPL and full on rocking out, as the human ear gets better at hearing low frequencies when everything is much louder.

[stevie]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1453369455' post='2958751']
Spelling's a different matter....using a phrase in such a way that it means the exact opposite of what you want to say is just idiocy....unless of course you're trying to use sarcasm...but you weren't. I don't think i've met an American who can.
[/quote]

I think you mean irony, don't you?

[Dan Dare]

Alex, you're being too sensible.

[Dood]

[quote name='Dan Dare' timestamp='1453407437' post='2959319']
Alex, you're being too sensible.
[/quote]

Wibble Wibble!

[ChunkyMunky]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1453325279' post='2958543']
The TV show didn't examine it in depth. Women are genetically pre-disposed to not like low bass effects. In the wild low frequency vibrations tended to be harbingers of nastiness, like earthquakes and stampedes. Men are the opposite, as said stampedes were a sign of lunch approaching on the hoof. This to a great extent explains male fascination with big subwoofers, explosive effects and loud cars and motorcycles, whereas women could care less. What explains the female infatuation with shoes is anyone's guess.
[/quote]

This is signature worthy content right here.