Need advice on adding subs


I’m looking for advice on adding subs to my system.

I listen primarily to small combo jazz and classical but I’m disappointed by the classical symphonic reproduction. I can only enjoy symphonic music on my headphones. Perhaps, I could improve symphonic on my main system by adding subs.

I don’t listen at high volume nor am I a bass fanatic. I just want the better sound. This is strictly 2 channel system. I have no interest in HT. I live in an apartment.

My system:

Balanced Power Technology BP-1 Conditioner
Toshiba lap top with JRiver feeding via crossover Ethernet to
Sonore Rendu
Wyred4Sound Dac-2
Warpspeed Optical Attenuator
First Watt J2 Output power 8 ohms30 watts 4 ohms15 watts

Reference DeCapo MM 2-way Monitors

The speakers are a simple 1st order high pass passive 3kHz x-over to the tweeter. I believe the woofer is designed to rolloff naturally at both ends of its band width.

I’m open to any ideas. Lets say up to $2000 budget.


128x128cjk5933
Hi BDP24
Wow. That's spooky.  I was looking at the Rythmik web site and the email notification with your post poped up on my screen.

You buy the DIY kit from GR Research or Rythmik Audio, the co-designers of the sub. It contains four 12" woofers (a pair for each of two subs) optimized for Open Baffle
Ok.  Open baffle? Is this a speaker with out a box?  Because that sounds like the opposite of everything I've read about subwoofers.  That is, that a closed box provides the best bass sound quality.  Ported boxes compromise sound quality to improve volume.
Cjk,

Unfortunately, this was some years ago and I'm not 100% certain of my timeline.  Over the last decade plus, I've used both Velodyne SPL subs and (the far superior, IMO) Rythmik 12" subs extensively (among others, less extensively) with many different speakers.  I still own both sets of subs, tho the SPLs have been relegated to non-critical uses.  I may have well tried both with the deCapo, but I can't swear to it.

In any case, I don't think it was the choice of subwoofer that did in the combo.  IMO, subwoofers work best with neutral to somewhat bright monitors.  I'd call the deCapo neutral to somewhat warm in voicing.

YMMV, but I eventually concluded that the deCapo works better as a stand-alone.  IMO there are numerous monitors out there that work better with subs .... probably because they weren't as skillfully voiced to stand alone.  Just MHO.
cjk: I think the take away re paper v aluminum is that the paper will sound more natural if you are solely using it for music and/or want to x over higher. I bought one that was delivered Friday as part of an experiment- a paper coned 12 in the ebony gloss finish using the xlr’d version amp.
The takeaway, as far as I’m concerned--others may have different views- is that multiple woofers even out the room response.
I have experimented with subwoofers for decades in my two channel audio and was never happy- trying to match them with Quad electrostats. Not only have the subwoofers improved, i think in part due to home theatre and car audio (JL anybody?), but it seems there is renewed interest in and thinking about high quality sub-woof’ing for two channel audio. A lot of what Duke wrote in that thread made sense to me in terms of "apparent" speed- sensitivity to frequency and volume, rather than just timing (if I’m remembering it right, it wasn’t leading edge timing that’s the issue, but ’stopping,’ among other things).
I’m also experimenting with DSP and a bigger old woofer- I have a bunch of Velodynes from the old days- an 18" (size of a coffin) and a 15"- both are well past their shelf life, but I DSP’d the 15" and am x’ing it over very low~ 45 hz. The Rhythmik is running without DSP, placed midwall on the opposite side in a corner-and crossed over a little higher-it’s a weird room. I got the levels matched at the listening position and have only enough loudness that they blend into the multiple woofers in my horn array. With some fiddling around-a few crude measurements, and some listening, moving, and listening, they seem to gel nicely and add a nice further dimension to my listening. I don’t listen particularly loud to begin with, but augmenting the bass--running as a parallel system, no high pass to my main system--has given the system more gravity and spaciousness, more music at relatively sane levels.
The moral, I think, is that these things can work, not just because the technology is better than it was 20 years ago, but because the strategies for placement and dealing with room interactions are more effective.
PS: I can't speak to the open baffle or dipole, one of the others can address. I know that using a dipole like a Maggie was one thing HP used to tout with the Crosby Quad back in the day, but I never tried it. A DIY build makes sense to me even if you have to get some help from a competent cabinet maker. Good luck and have fun. I certainly am, and it has added joy to an already good system.

cjk---The Rythmik 12" that whart just received is the F12G (G for GR Research) and it has, as he mentioned, a paper cone. The exact same sub is available with an aluminum coned-woofer instead, and that is the plain ol' F12. Danny Richie of GR Research (who designed the paper-coned woofer) feels that paper has a couple of advantages over aluminum: 1- greater resolution and transparency; 2- a more natural timbre and tonality; 3- lower mass and energy storage; and 4- can be crossed over at a higher frequency than can aluminum. Brian Ding of Rythmik Audio (designer of the aluminum-coned version of the woofer) recommends the aluminum-coned F12 for applications where higher volumes will be required (HT, bass heavy material at high SPL). That is because aluminum makes for a stiffer cone, less subject to cone breakup when driven hard. Other than the cone material, the subs are identical. One Rythmik customer (DonH50) just added two more F12's to his system (for a total of four), his speakers being Magnepan MG3A's, and is very pleased with the F12's. If you listen to acoustic music at moderate volumes, or want to x/o at higher than 80Hz, go with the paper. If you listen at high volume to bass heavy material, go aluminum. The difference is subtle, and either will work great with your speakers.

I understand your confusion regarding the Open Baffle nature of the Dipole Sub. I had never heard of the concept and design (though it was not unheard of; the Finnish company Gradient offered an OB/Dipole sub designed and marketed specifically for the Quad 63 speaker a couple of decades back) until I started doing some deep research into subs to mate with perhaps the hardest speaker in the world to add subs to: the original Quad ESL. Open baffle speakers and subs have a cult of enthusiasts who feel that putting a dynamic driver in a sealed or ported box leads to, well, boxy sound! Subs would seem to be a poor application of the OB concept, as the front-to-back cancellation (endemic to OB design) at subwoofer frequencies is a real problem, one leading to loss of output as frequency descends. But OB enthusiasts are guys who find the sound of sealed and ported-box subs too fat, thick, heavy, and boomy. Plus, they "load" the room in a way OB's don't, making the room itself a giant speaker enclosure. More of the room's modes are excited by boxed vs. OB subs, and the result is the "slow" sound of most subs, to use the parlance of the general public!

Cones can be used in free air (rather than in a sealed or ported box), but have to have their electrical and acoustical characteristics tailored specifically for OB use. Danny Richie of GR Research is a long-time designer of drivers, cross-overs, and DIY speakers and subs (including some OB's), and has his driver designs manufactured to his specifications. He offers DIY kits containing those drivers, the x/o component parts, and diagrams for building the open baffle or box within which the speaker or sub parts are installed.

When Danny heard there was a fellow Texas-located designer who had a new patented Servo-Feedback subwoofer design, he envisioned combining it with the OB/Dipole sub design, and contacted Rythmik Audio's Brian Ding in Austin, Texas. The two put their big brains together, and created the world's first and only only Open Baffle/ Dipole Servo-Feedback Subwoofer! By the way, the sub is used in the remarkable $20,000 Serenity Acoustics Super-7 loudspeaker, as well as the GR Research Super-V, recipient of "Best Bass At The Show" award several years running at RMAF. The best bass reproduction available at any price. Not the most output (owing to the nature of it's OB design, and it's "mere" dual 12"-drivers)---for that you want to go with 18" drivers, massive ported enclosures, and class-D pro amps. But for highest sound QUALITY, this is IT!

But the OB/Dipole sub won't be for everyone. It needs to be out in the room (a minimum of 3' from the wall behind it, as with all dipoles), it needs to face you, and it won't have the sound some listeners expect from a sub, one that lets you know there is unquestionably a sub in the system. The OB disappears, it's presence undetectable except that your main speakers now sound like their woofers just gained an octave or more of response at the bottom, the speakers now sounding more transparent, less strained, and playing louder and cleaner. But the standard Rythmik F12 or F12G (or F15, with an aluminum 15" driver, or F25, with dual 15's!) will give you that too, just not with quite the utter transparency of the OB. NO other sub will give you that, but the Rythmik's come closest. They have Brian Ding's Servo-Feedback system for controlling the operation of the woofer, a very high quality driver, amp, and enclosure, and the best controls available in any sub on the market, to integrate the sub seamlessly with any speaker. Sterling Sound in NYC, famous for their world-class LP mastering, has a dozen of them in their monitoring systems. They could buy any subs they choose, and they chose Rythmik.

Oh, one (I promise ;-) other thing. The Rythmik Sub is what speaker builder Jim Salk builds in to some of his models. He also offers the Rythmik Sub in his own designed and built enclosure, featuring greater internal volume (for increased efficiency) and more robust bracing (for more non-resonant sound). His finishes are beautiful real wood, much nicer than the Rythmiks (except the Piano Black Rythmik whart got---it's real nice).