Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: I am planning to review Regards, FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  11:07, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Largest, loudest, lowest", not sure about this paragraph header, It could be better as something along the lines of "Records".
  • Changed to World record claims. How's that? Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• The Studio reference monitors section is unsourced and not verifiable; Perhaps some online guides or books about how speakers are used (etc.) in the studio may help?!
  •  Fixed Removed section. I, too, could not find any sources to cite. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Please cite sources using Template:Cite web or Template:Cite book templates.

e.g.
...As well, critics have claimed that the bass shaker itself can rattle during loud sound effects, which can distract the listener. ^[1]

the layout in the reflist will be

Installing javascript codes can make this easier.

• •  Fixed References all formatted into templates. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Subs are used to augment the performance of main loudspeakers. Subwoofers are constructed by mounting one or more woofers in a well-braced wood or plastic enclosure. Subwoofers have been designed using a number of speaker enclosure designs, including bass reflex (with a port or tube in the enclosure), infinite baffle, horn-loaded, and bandpass designs, each of which has advantages and disadvantages in efficiency, size, distortion, cost, and power handling.

Could these be merged into one sentence?

• • I have tweaked those sentences, changed them around somewhat, to hopefully satisfy the indicated problem. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Good work, I will have a long look at the article soon to see what I think. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  17:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will be working on the article over the next few days. Sorry for waiting so long to respond! Binksternet (talk) 17:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed, or attempted to address, the specified problems. Ready for another look! Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not to intervene with FM's review... some notes from an old mossback who still remembers the advent of Advent.

• "Subs are used to augment the performance of main loudspeakers" - the definition contradicts modern practice of car audio where there are no true "main boxes" altogether (all drivers are spaced apart and mounted individually). Same concern for cheap home theater setups with flimsy "main" front speakers.
  • I took a shot at making that bit more general, and so more true for all cases. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "With the advent of the compact cassette and the compact disc in the 1980s, the reproduction of deep, loud bass was no longer limited by the ability of a phonograph record stylus to track a groove,[5]" - two points. First, back in '70s we used reel-to-reel decks (and recording studios used them since '50s). Second, good recordings made in '50s and '60s are good in low bass department too. They aren't loud but they are deep (an organ pedal or a tympani on a good vynil rig will shake the house and that's enough :)). The phrase (IMO) must somehow underscore "deep and loud".
  • Some tweaks applied toward that end. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "History" section: Acronym SPL pops up without explanation.
  •  Fixed Wikilinked and spelled out. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "It became possible to add more low frequency content to recordings.[9]" - it became possible, indeed, but actual outcome was quite the opposite: CD reissues of vinyl content were usually quite shy of bass. Loud but not deep. Crappy DACs of most CD players made it worse.
  • I'm not going to touch that at this time. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "The most common subwoofer driver sizes in professional audio" - what is professional audio ? Stage sound, studio monitors, theater sound, demo cars are different applications. Are they all professional?
  • I changed it to a more general term. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• T/S parameters section. It seems that that it needs a discussion of attainable SPL and the tradeoffs between efficiency/bass response/SPL. The part on "though the Abyss subwoofer can go down to 18 Hz" and "maximum displacement (car audio)" barely touches the issue. I'd recommend bringing it together and making it more prominent (max displacement is critical in all applications, not just cars). Throw in health issues, DB scale, etc.
  • I will leave that level of improvement for WP:FAC. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Not naturally weatherproof, Baltic birch" - begs for a question: can't they afford weatherproof, aviation or marine grade plywood? It's not much more expensive.
  • I am just going with the sources. I have yet to see any production line loudspeaker made of unfinished weatherproof plywood. I won't try to guess why. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue - quality of linked refs. Some are dead, others point to self-published sites. I fully understand the real-life value of such sites (and maintain my own) but you know the rules.

• • The dead wood has now been trimmed away or revived. The self-published links are various: some are written and signed by acknowledged industry experts, others are unsigned, written by unknown staff members, still others are written by people not notable for their writing. The main criteria I have tried to hold to is that the text in the article and the text in the link are both true and verifiable according to my decades of industry experience, even if the source reliability is borderline according to WP's rules. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NVO (talk) 11:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]