Are big subwoofers viable for 2 channel music?

Hello phusis,

     Wow, I was a bit surprised that this thread is still continuing.
     I don't have any disagreements with anything stated in the linked article but think it may be a bit technical for some consumers to completely comprehend and apply the information usefully to their own buying and system building decisions.  I believe most consumers seeking better bass in their rooms/systems would prefer to purchase subs or bass systems that have intelligently incorporated the best and most relevant bass reproduction knowledge and technology into their products.
     My main point being that some consumers have taken the time and have the interest in knowing the details of how to attain very good bass performance in their domestic rooms and many, most?, don't and just want a simple and affordable solution.
     You, some others on this thread and I understand that getting good bass performance is more complex than just plopping down a sub in a convenient room location.  I think it's best if we keep things as simple as possible for this thread to be beneficial to the largest number of readers.
    For example, I think we agree that multiple subs will typically provide much better bass performance than a single sub in virtually any room and that 3 to 4 subs will generally provide even better bass performance.  A pair of well positioned, good quality subs is usually sufficient for achieving good bass performance at a single designated listening position and 3-4 subs are usually sufficient for achieving good bass performance throughout the entire room, which is important for HT setups with multiple listening positions.
     If consumers want very good bass performance throughout their entire room,  the Audio Kinesis Swarm or Debra 4-sub distributed bass array complete kits for about $3K are a simple, relatively affordable and very high quality solution.  Here's an Absolute Sound review of the Swarm:

https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audiokinesis-swarm-subwoofer-system/

Tim

@noble100 --

Thanks for your follow-up.

I think we must careful not to make ourselves the judges on the level of ambition and complexity to dictate in this matter, but rather to relevantly pursue the subject of this thread to the fullest extend possible. At its core linked article by the OP simply tries to debunk a general assumption within audiophilia that larger drivers are slower sounding than smaller dittos, and indeed some perspective is given into this by Mr. Ricci. The general "math" behind it, as presented by him, isn’t that hairy, and in any case there’s the choice of going ground-up by yourself, or implement shared, existing knowledge in the form of actual, specific DIY designs. Or, you could simply buy pre-assembled, large subs and be done with it easily (not to take lightly proper integration/implementation) - they’re out there the likes of JTR, PSA, Deep Sea Sound, Funk Audio, Danley Sound Labs and others.

What is your reply other than to essentially advocate, or indeed advertise for a multi-sub set-up with smaller drivers? We know it works excellently, yes, but sorry - it’s not the primary relevance of this thread. The OP asked whether BIG subs are viable for 2-channel music, and they most certainly are while bringing to the table possible advantages few get to experience, because large size isn’t desirable or otherwise allowed for. Nothing holds anyone from going the DBA-route with big subs - now that would be awesome, and with proper designs it’s a win-win.

And yet, I’d go on to maintain the following: personally I’d rather have two symmetrically placed, very big and efficient subs vs. 4 small-ish lower efficiency subs in a Distributed Array. It’s what I have (2 BIG subs), and have very deliberately chosen. Would I want two more of them? Hell yes, if space and economy allowed, which unfortunately it doesn’t at the moment. As is though it’s a treat, and it would take something like 2x ported dual 18"-loaded subs to equate a pair of 15"-loaded tapped horn subs that I use. It’s not bragging; it’s underlining the importance of headroom and sheer air displacement capacity, and what it does to the bass presentation and how it integrates with the mains.

Phusis ya I am thinking quad 18s spread around the room or maybe go insane with quad TV42 ipal or  PSA S72Ipal LOL.

To boil it down, properly designed larger subs are just as fast as smaller ones. You can see thi is their frequency response curves. The larger driver will have less distortion because it does not have to move as far to produce the same volume. Unfortunately the larger driver will require a larger enclosure and their is the trade off. Distortion vs Size. My approach has always been to take the smallest driver that will take you down where you want to go and use them in multiples to lower the distortion. With DSP and powerful amplifiers sealed enclosures are King. If you have DSP and can match the subs to the satellites in phase and time the absolute best place to put the subs for Hi Fi use is in the corners. If you want a really unified wavefront and fewer room interactions connect the subwoofers with more subwoofers every five feet. In my case with a 16 foot wall that would be 4 total. Since I cross over high at 125 Hz the subs are connected to their appropriate channels. If the drivers are closer together than 1/2 the wavelength of the highest frequency they are to reproduce they will act acoustically like one driver. So, since most bass is mixed mono I have a 16 foot subwoofer. Rock and Roll:)  

No crawling required.