Are REL the most Musical Subs?

Yes you are correct not just booming bass.But lower range and yes 3 D effect. But I feel one sub will give me what I'm looking for.I'm retired and at 72 ,there's no need for another sub woofer. I like moving  stereo equipment around around ,especially all the different speaker systems I  have aviable to me.,I own so much equipment now ,changing from solid state amps to tube amps ,pre amps etc..I have plenty of equipment. I really don't intend to upgrade.I like looking for cheap cds finding ones that sold for or are still spending for alot of bucks  for.When I find them for a buck ,Bingo. I love the albums I have 1400 of them and the 40 to 50 for new ones doesn't cut it for me. Even though I have bought Mofi 45 rpm albums.

I have owned or listened carefully to subs from SVS, Polk, Klipsch, REL.  I currently have subs from B&W and Monitor Audio.  For two channel listening I prefer high level input over line level, so take that for what it’s worth.

I prefer the sound of the REL subs I’ve listened to (S/812 and T/5x) which I would characterize as being “musical” with “organic” but “fast” sounding bass over the SVS (SB-1000 and SB-4000) which sounded “clean” and slightly “sterile” to me.

I looked carefully at Rythmik subs when I was shopping, and nearly bought one because I like sealed cabinets, need high level and line level inputs, and they have a solid reputation, but I ended up going in a different direction for aesthetic reasons.  I am sure that would be a solid choice.

No matter what direction you go, good bass is expensive, and I have no problem spending as much or more on the subwoofer as on a pair of speakers.  If you elect to buy two subwoofers as many have suggested here, that won’t be hard.

Had three different REL models over the past two decades for my two channel system. Single sub set up only. Definitely a fan. Surprising no one has mentioned the substantial increase in tonal density, imaging and dimensionality with a properly integrated sub creating a far more engaging lisening experience.

For me, that was the "magic" as opposed to additional "punch" and "rattling" low frequency output. Perhaps that explains why REL is considered "musical" and often preferred by those folks who are serious two channel hobbyists.

substantial increase in tonal density, imaging and dimensionality with a properly integrated sub creating a far more engaging lisening experience.

For me, that was the "magic" as opposed to additional "punch" and "rattling" low frequency output. Perhaps that explains why REL is considered "musical" and often preferred by those folks who are serious two channel hobbyists.
 

Recently purchased a REL Classic 98, which sounds more similar to my previous Rythmik F12G. Both added the tonal density and dimensionality that you mention, but somewhat lack that additional “punch” that perhaps SVS and similar subs offer. In light of this, I’ve found that you can have the most impressive sub on the market, but if it doesn’t integrate well into you 2-channel system, it becomes too noticeable over time. I think it also depends on how much that mid bass is desired. Cohesiveness through integration, as well as the convenience of REL’s SpeakOn connector helped with my preference of REL over previous subs. Perception is that the REL is more of an extension of my main speakers than a separate speaker.

I found that the impact of a well integrated REL added density and body to the entire frequency spectrum. Assume / speculate that's hopefully the case with other competent subs