What percentage of audiophiles use a sub ?

A couple of folks have indicated that you should just improve your speakers rather than add subwoofers.

The problem is: The physics of wave propogation at low frequencies (i.e. long wavelengths) suggest that these frequencies will usually remain smoothest (minimized cancellation) when originated at, or near, the wall(s). So, unless your upgraded speakers work best in-wall/onwall/against wall, this "solution" doesn't address the issue.

As to high-end 2 channel products failing to embrace .1 (or.2 or .3), that may indeed tell you something. Just something different than has been implied here. Subwoofers definitely do not hew to the "purist" 2 channel philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the choice of a subwoofer is "wrong". Maybe the philosophy needs to be re-thought.

Marty

PS - You could always forego the sub and smooth the bass region with Digital Room Correction, but I suspect that this is a greater transgression against the 2 channel orthodoxy than even the dreaded "s word".

Most every speaker I know of suffers in imaging, transparency, sound stage and overall clarity when closer to a wall.

Its true that an advantage of a separate sub or two is that the speakers can now be farther away from walls where most everything except bass performance often benefits.

I don't understand any dogma that says subs are inconsistent with two channel stereo reproduction. That makes no sense to me at all.

Tiggerfc : Yes, indeed. Should audiophiles call them "auxillary bass drivers" ?

LOL!!! No no. I wasn't trying to offend anyone or say you can't or that it's wrong. Forgive me for loving my two channels of joy. I just feel that adding a sub approaches the more is less philosophy. And I'm even taking cues from professionally installed with the top of the line products and sound isolation, room treatments....you name it. And I hated hearing the sub. It was so isolated from the rest of the music. I could hear where it was coming from even when it was turned down.

Now on the subject of sound wave propogation. Those very low frequencies will never develop in your listening field. So why bother trying to produce it? I'm not going to start in on the numbers game but if you have a sub and have some specs, do the math. I'm perfectly happy with the bass response out of my monitors. My 43Hz is plenty low. My buddy came over just earlier today for a listen and asked where the sub was at or if there were any other speakers. I told him "yer lookin at it." And the sad part is I only had the volume up 1/6th of the way.

And again, its just another speaker to add more distortion and I don't think the addition of more bass is congruent to the philosophy of resolution and clarity desired by hi-fi audio purists. Then again that is simply an opinion. If you are getting offended then take a deep breath, call me nuts, and move on. ;-)

I really love topics like these. So stimulating.

I Dynaudio monitors that do a fantastic job with an extended low end for their size.

Set up properly, they almost do it all but small speakers cannot move enough air to deliver a muscular low end as larger full range designs can. So I have to say they almost do it all, but do require a sub to really do it all to the extent of good full designs. All smaller monitors I have ever heard do, even Magico Minis.

For many, they do it all enough that it does not matter which is fine, but I have yet to hear small monitors that can compete with equally good full range speakers for delivering the oomph that some music requires.