Anyone with a high-end home theater sans sub?


Is anyone else out there enjoying a high-end home theater without the contributions of a subwoofer, e.g. 7.0?

I always planned on getting one (partly because folks selling speakers say I need one), but enjoy what I've got enough to question spending another $2-$5K on a sub(s) for the deep bass extension.

(As a reference, I have Aerial 8b's, 2 pair of SR-3's, CC3b, Meridian 568v1 processor, and Theta Dreadnaught amp.)
quicke
Flrnlamb wouldn't know good sound if it landed in his lap. He also doesn't know that "high Q" refers to poor quality underdamped bass. High end audiophile speakers are Low Q. THX and Lucas Film are responsible for some terrible theater standards which limit the dispersion of loudspeakers to a degree that is unacceptable. That is why no respected high-end speaker manufacturer has a "THX" logo on their speakers. This is unlike amplifier manufacturers who can build a very good amplifier that happens to meet the minimal and meaningless THX spec without having to screw up the design of the amp.

Also, a Definitive sub is not even close to a 9/10 in bass quality relative to more capable high end offerings. The Wilson speakers (plus countless others) are shockingly better in terms of bass quality than anything made by Definitive. Good examples of Low Q, high quality subwoofers can be found from REL or a Vandersteen.

If you are looking for high-end sound QUALITY, Flrnlamb is definitely not the guy to get advice from.
Waldner123's feelings are hurt. Sorry. Desparate attempt to discredit an accomplished HT designer, and more experience audiophile to boot!...ehem.
Good try, no-one's biting Waldner!
Also, you didn't answer my claim to your HT experience. So that answers that. You've never built an HT for anyone but yourself, face it.

"He also doesn't know that "high Q" refers to poor quality underdamped bass. High end audiophile speakers are Low Q"(Waldner123)

WRONG!!!! YOU JUST STUCK YOUR FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH Waldner!...lol Let's ask THX, any speaker manufacture, recording engineer, acoustician, etc, what "Low Q", "high Q" means!
High Q is Higher control, tighter damping. "Low Q" is what most "home theater subs" are!...not the other way around!! Sorry, your wrong here, as in others.
Anyone else here care to clear this up, regarding the "Low Q, High Q" situation?!
Let's email a few high end speaker makers, acoustical engineers (Rivesaudio.com, PMI, etc), THX, and others to ask...what do you say Waldner???
Sure you want to make that statement about my ignorance here? It's making you look worse, I'm tellin' ya...lol.

I'm not even going to "go there" about THX speakers in theaters or home! Because you obviously don't know what you're talking about regarding eithers applications, and are biased toward audiophile speakers, to no end...good for you. enjoy your lackluster delicate speakers and poor acoustics. Don't sell me what I already have done a thousands times, and it doesn't work. No thanks...

Like I said a ton..."if anyone wants to put up the budget, I'll be more than happy to do what "Extreme choppers" TV show does, and that's have a "Biker buildoff", er, "HT build-off"!!!! I garantee victory at any budget!
I take on any comers....lol
Actually, in clarifying, I'm refering to something else here in regards to "speaker driver Q"! yes, lower "Q" woofer is a tighter driver setup. Higher 2.0, etc, "Q" is typical in boomy subs, yes. "Q" is an often misinterpreted discription, dpending on wether your talking speaker desing, or acoustics. Non-the less, "tighter Q" speaker desings, are better associated with higher quality speaker designs mostly, and weaker Q designs are with lower qualiy, mos often. STill, most "lower Q" speaker designs, like typical audiophile offerings, won't handle deep dynamic bass, in a passive design mostly, from DD/DTS material! This is even more true of "very low Q" sealed enclosure "high end designs", like from Dunlavy, and other sealed speaker designs. There is therefore always compromises in speaker configurations, sadly.
Still, the best solution is a slightly "less than Ideal" "Q" subwoofer situation, to improve output and dynamic range for demanding DD/DTS tracks, and maximize movie impace on earthquakes, dino-romps, explosions, gun blasts, tornados, mass destruction, etc. Your typical audiphile designs just blow all to hell if you don't do bass managment to a more apt sub system.
This compromise is still better than the typical full range speaker setup audiophile chose
Sloppy HIGH "Q" bass is just that-- sloppy bass. It makes no difference whether you are watching a film or listening to music. An audio system will tend to sound best when it is more accurately reproducing the input signal. For movies, there is plenty of intense bass built right into the soundtracks themselves.

With the exception of a very select few high quality, Low Q subwoofers, the lack of an LFE and the presence of very capable front main loudspeakers and audiophile electronics is what defines the home theater as "high-end".

Truth be told, most "home theater" systems are less good sounding than a high-end two-channel system used for movies. Sure, the stereo system may lack many of the rear localized special effects, but from a clarity and sound quality standpoint, they are still far better.

And here is one more that will send Furrylamb into a tailspin. Most center channel speakers sound noticeably worse than having that same information routed to your main speakers, assuming your main speakers are capable high-end designs. Center speakers, like powered subwoofers, tend to be poorly designed in comparison. A really good center channel is the exception, not the rule.