Sub output: Is it the woofer size or the rated RMS

It stands to reason that for a given cost it is easier to design and manufacture a smaller driver that will be more accurate than a larger driver, with respect to the inevitable tradeoffs between cone resonances, stiffness, transient response, overhang (the ability to stop quickly when the music stops), various forms of distortion, etc.

It is also true, of course, that a larger driver in a larger enclosure will provide more bass for less power, everything else being equal. But so what? I don't think that Dave's insulting response to Stan's well intentioned comment was called for, and I don't think that "no other reason for doing it, purely marketing" tells the whole story.

Regards,
-- Al

More power in a sub can probably never hurt, but just be overkill perhaps.

Generally, a larger driver, properly driven, will facilitate better low end response but size alone is not enough. Its the quality of the driver and soundness of the overall design that matters most.

There are many things I could say to socalled sogood but will stop with saying that I have been in audio 46 years, some of it as a Krell dealer, have 4 pairs of subs, none of which I would trade for any of his, and will end with what my wife told me to tell him, " its not the size of what you have but what you do with it."

And I suppose she's an expert on........subs.

I just thought Stanwal's " cone linearity " statement was complete hogwash, and implying some advantage, towards smaller drivers.

Truth is, from 20-80hz (normal subwoofer range)...small drivers have no advantage over larger drivers.... at reproducing these very low freq's

Just trying to stop the spread of internet B.S. from taking over.

Sorry for being "insulting" in my approach....my bad...over and out.

Sobad