@dean_palmer said
“That is an opinion that is completely baseless, proven wrong consistently, and only held by insane "2-channel only" types and possibly deaf sheep herders.”
I say….
Thank you making me howl. That is so freakin’ funny!
Your experience of moving to two subs
Hi all, I have a 2.1 system with the sub sounding best in the center between the loudspeakers. My speakers have substantial, deep, and detailed bass for their size and with the SS amp I’ve chosen. Thus, the sub’s optimal crossover setting is only at about 28hz. I have plenty of bass amplitude going on -- don’t need "more" bass.
I’m wondering about soundstage effects of having two subs on the outsides of my speakers, though. Having my sub in the center does result in some apparent compression of the low frequencies towards the low-center area. The L and R channels from my preamp are combined at my sub. I know some people may disagree and think that the source of frequencies below 60hz can’t be located by human hearing, but my experience tells me differently.
Does anyone have an opinion on the benefits of 2 subs vs only 1 when there’s no need for more bass oompf?
@dean_palmer said I say…. Thank you making me howl. That is so freakin’ funny! |
I completely agree that by seamlessly integrating a sub or two (or four?) the listening experience can be taken to a level that is far more difficult to achieve relying on stereo “mains” alone. With subs added, it won’t be 2-channel anymore, by definition, but it will 110% still sound like it, meaning the sub(s) will not be discernible as a source of sound. Coincidentally, my goal has always been for the main speakers to be undetectable also. Having 2, 3, 4 boxes in your room, but the illusion that the sound is not originating from them is central to the illusion for me. Speakerless-ness, I call it. If the illusion of speakerless sound is achieved, designations such as 2-channel, 2.1 or 2.2 are, for me, unimportant labels. Of course the specific qualities of the “speakerless” sound (e.g, tone, dynamics, etc.) one pursues is a matter of personal taste and ever-evolving. |
Update with a few notes on my short journey here: 1) Reconfirmed more thoroughly my claim about aural locatability of my Rythmik F12G sub. Anyone can believe me or not, but when it’s only the sub playing music with a very low crossover setting, I can instantly locate where the sound is coming from in the room while facing any direction and standing almost anywhere in the listening room... except when I’m behind the vertical plane made by the sub’s cone. Then it’s a diff story and it’s not locatable. My ears have to be in front of the driver somewhere. |
Ther seems to be an assumption that bass is omni-directional. It is not. There is a point of origin for the original signal and two subs can resolve that reality. It is like two ears helping locate the direction of a sound or two eyes resolving depth perception. The only instance I can think of that might give false clues as to imaging is if the bass is recorded using a DI [direct in] input to the recording soundboard. In that case, the bass is wherever the recording engineer decides he wants it to be. "Prndlus" seems to be closest to this reality when he discusses soundscape and says, "And we want every directional cue we can get for the best soundscape ". I agree ! |