Why are subwoofers so polarizing?

Bo1072, if I understand you correctly, your arguments are based on findings that you arrived at using an Onkyo A/V receiver. It is your further position that using a sub at up to 140hz does nothing to hurt the image of the music.

Sorry, but I'd have to experience this for myself. Personally, if I had a speaker/amp combo that needed reinforcing at 140hz by a sub, I'd change my combo.

What sort of mains are you running your tests with?

I mean, I don't own an Onkyo receiver or Monitor Audio sub, but assuming that the sub, when set at 140hz, has an upper roll off of 12db per octave, you're going to have a SUB carrying duties that extend just about into the mid range, which is where most of the sweetness of music resides.

Also, assuming that the lower roll off on the receiver is 12db per octave, we're going to have a bump in the bass from 70hz through 280hz, with both the receiver and the sub working to add to that frequency range. And, you're also saying that the Monitor Audio sub is able to do this musically, without bloat.

I don't know. I'd have to hear it to believe it. Of course, you could be right. Maybe my thinking is completely off.

As for answering the original question, I think that subs became popular because people wanted the room to shake when watching movies like Jurassic Park. I know I did. My first sub was a Paradigm PW15. It was a monster, but I found that when listening to music, it just made things sound bloated and the bass wasn't very tight. I think that many had the same experience that I did. I wound up just not using the sub, when I listened to music.

A year or so ago, I discovered the little REL and I started using a sub for music. I set it up as per instructions and man, it sounds good. It integrated very nicely. Now, I'm thinking that I might try a sealed sub (supposed to be better for music), but that's gonna have to wait until after a new amp.

I do tests just by hearing. The same as the roll of. I can choose between 12, 18, 24, 30 or 36 db per octave. But the speed has to do with the timing in respons. At the show were I was many could not and did not believe that I was using the subwoofer. It was that fast. I said what you hear is 16 hz. I use recordings like Kraftwerk, japanese drumm and Yellow to let people hear how low it goes. Sealed sub's are faster in respons. With Rel sub's we Always had recordings wenn the low freq. were not syngron anymore. I hated this and I did not want it for myself. To be honnest I never thought subwoofers would be fast enough for me to use it in my own system. Audyssey Pro and Monitor Audio made me think differently. In the past we sold most of the time Rel sub's. Also for stereo use, I was not satisfied about the quality it gave. Those times ( 1999-2007 I played with the Nautlilus 802 and Later the Nautilus 800S. In 2001 I bought the Nordost Valhalla loudspeakercables. At that time the best in timing. Always looking for the best sound and timing. The PLW-15 from Monitor Audio with the Audioquest Sub3 ( soon I will go for the new outcomming full silver watchdog also from Audioquest)and Purist Audio 20th Ann with Oyaide F1 connectors and Audyssey pro gives the stealth low freq. were I dreamed of. The possitive thing is; Stealth integration of a sub with speakers is possible these days.

"...a rel sub is fast in your perspective. Compare the respons of a Rel sub to the respons of a Monitor Audio sub."-Bo1972

I don't need to compare anything. The Rel is fast enough to mate with Magnepans. And that is fast, period.

Primarily due to the frequency overlaps between the subwoofer and the non-subwoofer speakers in the system which makes it very difficult to appropriately balance frequency volume. Subwoofers aren't meant for serious music reproduction, they're meant for "sound effects".

The overlap makes the overwhole sound even better. But this is because the timing is that good. Rel is slower in respons compared to Monitor Audio. Ofcourse for some it is fast enough, not for me.