Sub for 2 channel music only setup


Hiya,

I've been reading alot about some subwoofers being better suited for music and some better suited for HT. Is there really a difference? If so I was wondering anyones thoughts on a brand of subwoofer to be used in a two channel music only system. I have Polk LSI9's and a Parasound A21/P7 amp/pre. Thanks.
mjm1124
Dlcockrum
Yes I use the hi level input with a custom made connector and the same for the power cord. The only stock cable I do use came with my Shunyata hydra 6 power conditioner. My power cables are either FMS or Shunyata. Do not get me wrong I feel Rel is a very good sub, just for 2 channel I think it is not fast enough and it go's too low. I myself do not like my chair vibrating while I listen to music. For movies that another matter and if my room could support the space for 3 subs in the front I would have kept the other Rel.
Thanks for the reply, Hevac1. During the inital period with my Stadium III, I also noticed a very slight fatness (not sure that I would describe it as slowness exactly). Adding the supplied spikes improved this considerably. It makes me wonder why REL discourages the use of them in the manual. Setting the crossover at the lowest setting (22hz) and increasing the gain setting helped also (my main speakers do 25hz at minus 6db).

I find that the main benefit of the REL in my system is not primarily the bass extension, but the substantial improvement in the dimensionality of images, layering of the soundstage, and bloom of instrumental timbres, especially piano. I think this is a product of the REL "loading the room" with sub-bass frequencies. This would seem to require that it emits frequencies so low they are felt but not heard, which is what seems to bug you about the Stadium III. Does the Aerial SW-12 equal the REL in this respect?
Dlcockrum,
I feel the same as you about the benefits of a sub in the system. There is more overall body and fullness to the music and I think all subs load the room.
The SW-12 is forward firing instaead of downward like the Rel. I think that this helps with the issue of my seat vibration and the quickness I hear from the SW-12. I would think the presure of the downward firing to the floor has to reflect back to to sub and could cause the driver to move longer than it should. This could also be why you like it better with spikes, it sit higher off the floor and also make better contact. When I purchased my SW-12 Rel did not have the new front firing sub as they do now BTW other wise I would have tried one at the fime.
Mjm,

There really is one difference - deepest bass performance. A HT sub must perform well below 20hz to do it's job correctly, while a music only sub doesn't (as a practical matter) require such extension.

I use a pair of Rythmik subs that test great above 35hz but trade away (measured) performance below that frequency. I think this trade-off is worthwhile (others may disagree) since there is so little material in my music collection with any meaningful signal at these very low frequencies.

FWIW, the test results I've seen indicate that most of the REL models are extreme examples of this trade-off with poor measured performance at low to very low frequencies, but excellent results on group delay tests which (arguably) correlate to "speed" in audiophile subwoofer argot.

IMHO, finding the right trade off is a more interesting task for music than HT. Other than this single distinction, I'd agree enthusiastically with each of the points Bob Reynolds makes in his post.

Good Luck

Marty

Marty
Marty,
The Rythmik subs look very interesting. Which model do you have and how do you like them? Also, what do you think is better for 2 channel audio, a sealed unit or vented?