Subwoofer Decision


I have narrowed my search to two choices though I am sure I will get comments steering me away from these.
Contrast Rythmik Audio 12G with Vandersteen 2Wq. I would like to get only one though I know a pair are best choice. Could maybe afford 2 Rythmik, but only 1 Vandersteen for now. The subwoofer would support Dali Helicons (4 ohms) biwired and driven by 2 mono McIntosh MC 252's at 500 watts each into 4 ohms. Living room size aprox. 24'x16'x8' placement not centered on 16' wall due to furniture (wife) constraints must stay put. Subwoofer placement needs also to stay there as well, I know this limits possible best choice for placement, my bad. There is room behind, next to, and between speakers. Any help help is appreciated.
128x128lowfreqguy
Agree that the room is your biggest issue when trying to reproduce very low frequencies, but having a system that at least has the capacity t do that is also needed.

I have usually had speakers in my main system with pretty good low frequency reproduction. My Vandersteen 4As were the predecessors to the 5s with integral subs - the difference being that the 4s needed separate amps and external crossovers I have also use Vandersteen 2W subs and liked them.

I currently have main speakers that are 3 dB down at 20 hz, which covers just about everything and the replicate realistic 'slam' of a live performance quite well.  I run a pair of Hsu VTF-15 Mk. 2, their current top model, exclusively for bass reinforcement in home theatre use. I don't use them for music, but once did leave them in the loop to do some listening. Run the way I run them, they are 3 dB down at 16 hz.  Is that important? Normally not, but I was listening to digital recordings of European organs with material down to 16 hz (it is important to note that IMHO, you do not hear material that low, rather you feel it).

For the special purpose indicated, the very low bass reinforcement was effective and seamless - I think these particular subs have a very good chance of mating with decent but slightly bass challenged main speakers, and they have considerable adjustability
I certainly agree with wsphon's comments above. But I would also add that with my main speakers, well out into the room, that the Hsu subs have done a great job of recreating deep and tight bass found in many of the recordings (classical and other large scale works) beyond just my organ recordings.  That's what I like about subs in part.  You can optimize your mains for sound stage and the subs for deep bass.  Part of the success of these subs is the huge custom bass trap I made (see my system pics) which really helps bass quality. No bloat.  Just tight and deep with great impact.
I've had many different subs through the years----damn I've spent a LOT of money of them too. All I can SVS SB-4000. I run two of them and really could not be happier. Check them out, you won't be sorry you did.

The Salk subs aolmrd1241 mentioned are really nice. Jim Salk designed and builds incredible enclosures into which he installs a Rythmik 12" or 15" woofer and servo-feedback plate amp. Go to the Salk site just to see what a really well-braced sub enclosure looks like. He then covers the enclosure with rear wood veneers, just beautiful.

Salk also builds the enclosures to Rythmik’s suggested internal volume, which is greater than those used by Rythmik itself. Rythmik uses a 3 cu.ft. enclosure for it’s sealed 15" model (F15), Salk 4 cu.ft. The added cubic foot affords slightly greater efficiency and output. Brian Ding went with 3 cu.ft to keep the enclosure to a size more affordable to ship. The bracing in the Salk enclosures is absolutely insane, the best I’ve ever seen. Check it out!