Do you think you need a subwoofer?


Why almost any one needs subwoofers in their audio systems?

I talk with my audio friends about and each one give me different answers, from: I don't need it, to : I love that.

Some of you use subwoofers and many do in the speakers forum and everywhere.

The question is: why we need subwoofers ? or don't?

My experience tell me that this subwoofers subject is a critical point in the music/sound reproduction in home audio systems.

What do you think?
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Dear Mark: +++++ " you have NO idea what the Ascent MK-II is capable of with "today" equipment " +++++

I can imagine because my very old ADS are awesome with " today " equipment and there is no reason to think that the Ascents ( that I know very well ) are not.

+++++ " Sometimes I believe you are way too analytical " +++++

well I think a little different, that's all.

regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Raul,from a "purley listening experience" perspective,and from what "your own ears" told you(not some importer), what problem did you think you encountered with the Ascent's "complex" crossover(btw,it is over 130 parts,whew)?....I'd be interested in how you arrived at "why" the complexity of the crssover is to be considered a "weakness" from a "listening criteria only",since the speaker is as "clear as spring water" to me.Maybe I need to reevaluate my tastes?
This gives me a clue as to how you actually view the hobby....Whether you "hear the problem",or you feel the fact that there are too many component parts employed is the weakness.

Also,could you please let me know what your listening room's floor material is?Wood?Concrete?etc

Just curious,as this gives me some perspective as to your specific tastes.

Thanks.
Dear Sirspeedy: Too many parts where the signal goes through. In those times seems to me that the Avatar was its best performer model, of course that because does not go so deep had lower " problems ".

Floor material?: concrete with a 1" pure wool oriental rug.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Raul I simply cannot let your assumption of audio theory trump a "fact",which greatly affects the listening experience,and "minimizes a designers expertise,and great effort"...of course you may take the comments as my being defensive about your thoughts,and it may be correct,to an extent...BUT you are absolutely clueless about your impression that more parts in the Ascent Mk-II crossover "means" loss of signal transmission or loss of musical information,or just some kind of weakness....I definitely believe your exposure to the speaker was from some demos given by your friend,who was the distributor,and your claims are baseless to me,and owner of the design,and someone who was at it's inception into the audio community.From it's introduction onwards.

Distributors want to "distribute/sell" equipment.They "generally" are not privvy to the minutiae of design,and I don't blame them.

Your claim about the Ascent crossover being a weakness "absolutely" tells me you have no knowledge what-so-ever,as to what has gone into this design.

What we want from a speaker,aside from great sound,is the ability to drive it with a wide variety of amplifiers.Hence,keeping the load/impedence relatively easy for whatever amp one wants to use.

We want a constant impedence,and a sensitive design with good efficiency.The vast majority of "popular" speakers today are poor representations of this.ALL of the newer Avalon Designs are now ported(Re-read my previous posting about the .5 Q factor and transient behavior,as they are FACT,not assumption)and have loads that go down to 3.2 ohms,which are hard on an amp(distortion?).
They also have internal crossovers,which are absolutely not the best place for sensitive parts,but lower production costs.
The AVATAR was the last design Charles Hansen designed for the "original "Avalon!It was designed to a price point(unlike the "cost no object" Ascent MK-II)and was a far cheaper product than the Ascent.Still a very good speaker,but totally outclassed by it's big brother!.

The Ascent MK-II was a clean slate speaker design that was designed with no limit on costs,hence the "two" external crossovers(total of 110 lbs,and 350 lbs for the speakers themselves)and the ABILITY to keep a CONSTANT impedence of 6 ohms across the ENTIRE freq range.It NEVER drops below 5.5 ohms.The crossover's complexity is another reason why "each seperate driver" see's it's own dedicated amplifier,from one amp ONLY,AND the sophisticated damping circuits employeed allow for this HUGE advantage!Far less IMD(a term you like alot).

Your lack of "true knowledge" about this design(having heard it is no substitute for actually knowing every aspect of it design benefits),and the incorrect/negative comments made about the crossover,takes away from the original designer's extreme efforts that went into "that" speaker!!

AND the design efforts were thorough,and EXTREME!!One reason I know this is I had followed the design development(from afar,but greatly interested) and personally knew the original reviewer,who gave credibility and exposure to such a "landmark "product.
It is a "textbook" speaker,for those "understanding" the significant advantages of "constant impedence","easy load","extraordinary transient response","open sound with stunninmg clarity/definition/harmonic truth",and almost non-existant stored energy,not to mention a "still" unequalled ability to soundstage properly!..

Of course you are free to draw any conclusions you want,but as of the here and now,you have exposed yourself as being human,like the rest of us...That is you make assumptions without "all" the facts,let theory affect your thoughts,and are as influenced by industry trends as all of us!

Not a bad thing,really.Just human!

Best.