Mjm,
There really is one difference - deepest bass performance. A HT sub must perform well below 20hz to do it's job correctly, while a music only sub doesn't (as a practical matter) require such extension.
I use a pair of Rythmik subs that test great above 35hz but trade away (measured) performance below that frequency. I think this trade-off is worthwhile (others may disagree) since there is so little material in my music collection with any meaningful signal at these very low frequencies.
FWIW, the test results I've seen indicate that most of the REL models are extreme examples of this trade-off with poor measured performance at low to very low frequencies, but excellent results on group delay tests which (arguably) correlate to "speed" in audiophile subwoofer argot.
IMHO, finding the right trade off is a more interesting task for music than HT. Other than this single distinction, I'd agree enthusiastically with each of the points Bob Reynolds makes in his post.
Good Luck
Marty
Marty
There really is one difference - deepest bass performance. A HT sub must perform well below 20hz to do it's job correctly, while a music only sub doesn't (as a practical matter) require such extension.
I use a pair of Rythmik subs that test great above 35hz but trade away (measured) performance below that frequency. I think this trade-off is worthwhile (others may disagree) since there is so little material in my music collection with any meaningful signal at these very low frequencies.
FWIW, the test results I've seen indicate that most of the REL models are extreme examples of this trade-off with poor measured performance at low to very low frequencies, but excellent results on group delay tests which (arguably) correlate to "speed" in audiophile subwoofer argot.
IMHO, finding the right trade off is a more interesting task for music than HT. Other than this single distinction, I'd agree enthusiastically with each of the points Bob Reynolds makes in his post.
Good Luck
Marty
Marty