Subwoofer with 2 channel stereo setup

For my purposes I selected an REL sub. The reasons for this are the unique high level (music) and low level (LFE) connections and set-up. The REL subs a traditional rca interconnect for the LFE channel. However it also uses a second proprietary connection from the main speaker (L&R) outputs to the sub. There is a separate level control for each connection that provides for fine tune matching of levels for music or movies.

I am very pleased with this arrangement and believe it to be the best solution for integrating a sub into a primarily music system.

Mwheelerk this may work in some systems. But you have to wonder, how much signal degradation is going on running your mains signal through two sets of crossovers.

One pair of crossovers does enough damage. Two pair cannot be good for the integrity of the music. This is why I use the RCA inputs allowing my speakers to run full range with a natural smooth roll off above 50 hz.The sub then picks up around 55 or 60 hz and goes flat to 30 hz. The other way and maybe the best way,is to run a digital crossover before the signal goes to either your mains or the sub bypassing the passive crossovers in both.

I have a sub with my Totem Forests. I bought it before I started using the DK Designs VS1 MkII. Now that I have the VS1, I generally keep the sub off or the level way down. The only time I use it is when I have the volume low with music that I know has a lot of good base or when I want some louder base and want to make the house shake a bit more (this doesn't add to the music quality - just to aesthetic of base). I have a largish room that has a lot of glass and wood which tends to be a bit bright. I had been using a less powerful amp, and previously the base was not very tight, especially a louder levels, hence the powered sub made sense. I do not have this issue now. With my current amp, I would not have purchased a sub! BTW, I'm using an Arcam Cd23, Dk interconnects, and a Totem Thunder sub. It's a musical sub, and I generally like it's quality, but...at this point, I wish I had put the extra $2k+ into speakers.

I think the question that you need to ask yourself is...do you like the music your system puts out in the room that it is in? If yes, then a sub is an expensive addition for (possibly)little gain. If no, a sub might or might not fix your problem.

John

I've just purchased Martin Logan Grotto sub($960) in local Magnolia HIFI.
So my system now consists of Oracle Delphi MK-1 turntable with Denon moving coil cartridge. The signal then goes to Music Reference tube phono pre-preamp. And then to DK Design MK 1 amp wich has phone stage built in. Martin Logan 'Aerius i' with brand new panels (membranes) with new Grotto sub generate the sound.
I have to admit that the sound is beautiful. But I still wish for better one. The affect of "LIVE MUSICIANS STANDING AND PLAYING IN MY ROOM" wasn't achieved. As I understand I'm now approaching the point where the "real" jorney for a "perfect" sound begins. It is probably a time to stop buying and start listening music instead a stereo equipment.

Donbellphd: I can see how this approach would help a speaker where the woofer covered much more than just the last few octaves i.e. was more of a mid-woofer than a woofer. Woofers really shouldn't go up much above 200 Hz or so, otherwise, they tend to run into problems like those that the addition of the REL solved for you.

Sputniks: With what you have, speaker placement ( mains ) will be the make-it or break-it factor. Once you get that as good as it gets, getting the sub to blend in would be the next step. Don't introduce more variables into the equation until you are certain that the bare essentials are covered as well as possible. Sean
>