Ruining music with a cheap sub

I dunno, try a Bose sub and a Vandersteen and tell us what you think.
Sloppy loose bass from a cheap sub is worse than no sub at all IMO.

I don't think a cheap sub can ruin a good system as long as it is left off, maybe OK for movies. For music you will need to look for a sub that is both tight & tuneful maybe like Velodyne or Polk Audio which are not extremely expensive.

You are correct about bass being non directional as my neigbor & I spoke some time ago & he is still looking for that jerk who is playing the bass too loud. I just didn't have the heart to tell him that it was me. But I did tell him I would keep an eye/ear out.

There are huge differences between bad/cheap subs and good/expensive subs. It's called distortion. And no, low bass is not *just* felt. Besides, a sub that's reproducing the bottom octave is rolling off in the second (and maybe into the third) octave, so it's going to affect your perception of a lot more than just that bottom octave.

I don't know of any good $100 subs, but there are some good $500 subs out there. And I'd say the point of diminishing returns hits well below $5000. YMMV.

"Sloppy loose bass from a cheap sub is worse than no sub at all IMO."
Chadnliz

In my opinion too.

With respect to subwoofer directionality, there's a wonderfully funny thread where some of the participants get into a SPIRITED debate about that very topic. It also seems to have some pretty good info. Here's the link:

Stereo versus monaural subwoofers debated right here on Audiogon

03-11-06: Mdhoover

"Sloppy loose bass from a cheap sub is worse than no sub at all IMO."
Chadnliz
In my opinion too.

With respect to subwoofer directionality, there's a wonderfully funny thread where some of the participants get into a SPIRITED debate about that very topic. It also seems to have some pretty good info. Here's the link:

Stereo versus monaural subwoofers debated right here on Audiogon

Md, thanks for the link.

I totally agree and believe me, I know how a bad woofer sounds like. Perhaps I used the wrong word, maybe decent but relatively low cost(below $200 used?) would be the right phrase. Isn't it true that distortion is proportional to volume? If I am not looking for something to knock the stucco off my house, and as long as I watch the distortion threshold, then I shouldn't have to go break the bank to get a highend sub. I just don't quite understand why someone would spend thousands on a sub. Wouldn't it make more sense to spend that extra money to get better speakers?

I remember someone once told me that two subs are no better, if not worse, than a single sub(in a stereo setup) because one might cancel the other one out. Is that true?