Is two Subs better than One?

Jimmdavis has good advice, experimenting is key. I've done it both ways. It often really depends on where you set the crossover, the sub's capabilities, and on your room/placement.

The only way to really get proper bass response is to install bass trapping, if you have not done this. I use Realtraps and they are spectacular. Easily one of the best purchases I have ever made. Then all your equipment will sound better, and you may decide that you do not want *any* subwoofers. But at least can make a true decision about the quality of bass.

If I have to go to 70-80 Hz with the sub then I would usually prefer two. For most of my recent setups I only need <35 Hz, so that works better and simpler for me with one sub. And when I do it that way I prefer the overall sound with the single in my rooms.

Also, the sub's performance will matter. Even if the filter is low, if the sub is producing a lot of harmonics then you will be able to localize it, and two can help minimize that effect. Better subs tend to produce less of these extra frequencies.

For music, if you have good mains and room then it really doesn't take much contribution from a subwoofer to balance out the last octave.

Steve

In my case, one better REL or two lesser REL, would only augment my four full range speakers for the last octave for music, and LFE for HT. Thanks for your sharing your thoughts.

How many "general concenses" would you like? There are definite criteria for either choice ;-)

If your mains peter out at 100Hz or higher (or need to be high-passed above 100Hz to avoid distortion) then you definitely need two subs to preserve stereo directionality (which is present down to around 80 - 100 Hz) The cons are that two subs are hard to place so they integrate seamlessly with the mains/room -- the biggest issue being phase matching to the mains at any given location.

If the mains go low enough to require sub-assist only below 80 -100 (or preferably 50 - 65 Hz) then one sub is preferred. It can be placed almost anywhere, but right between the mains is preferred. If you can't do that, then place the sub at your listening position, and walk around the room noting all the spots where the bass sounds best. Use one of those spots to locate the sub ;-)

I have 2 subs and believe that configuration beats one sub.
No offense but it's: "are two subs better than one?

Foster, OK then my answer is "not necessarily". Which way is actually "best" I think depends on the sub's selected low frequency cut-off point.

For filling in low frequencies up to 50Hz, one sub is better. Since the brain can't localize a source below about 80Hz, placement isn't that critical as far as imaging is concerned.

Above 100Hz, two are definitely better than one. Between 50 - 100 Hz it's a tough call, but I'd still start with one. Then, if there's insufficient low-frequency imaging (meaning the bass doesn't seem to come from the mains) then two subs placed somewhere near each main will provide more realism -- but then room acoustics will require more adjustment.
.