How is this even a discussion in the audiophile world any more?
- 2 subs is better than 1, due to evening out of peaks and valleys. 4 is better than 2. In a rectangular room, 3 may not be better than 2 (may not be intuitive but trust the math). This works because of inability to localize bass (see below).
- bass traps obviously can help. They also have to be very big to work really well, and the bigger the room, the bigger they need to be due to the frequency of the bass nodes. Small resonant traps also have small bandwidths.
- No matter how much some people will plead, we can't localize bass less than about 120Hz, hence using 80Hz with steep crossovers. There will always be lots of claims this is not true, and in every case this will be a factor of unequal room response between channels, poor sub/main positioning that causes unequal room responses and/or beamed cancellation effects, inadequate slope, or distortion. Don't believe me? You don't have to. There are a plethora of studies done on this (proper ones, not ad-hoc with improper setups). If you choose to ignore them, I can't help you.
- When Toole was talking about the potential for equalization, he was not talking only about frequency, but phase as well (between multiple bass units) for optimization
- If you think massive floor standers with deep bass response are the "ultimate" in reproduction, you either have an acoustically great room with a significant amount of acoustic treatment, and well shaped room at that, or you are misinformed. The position for optimum bass response in a room of two speakers is not going to be the same location for optimum in-room response, imaging, sound-stage, you name it. It sure sells some expensive speakers though, and since the average audio reviewer blathers over anything expensive, from pictures probably has a less than ideal listening room, and almost assuredly knows the bare minimum about acoustics and likely even less about the science of sound, should one be surprised? Most don't even attempt to measure in-room response, let alone direct/reflected energy at the listening position in order to optimize performance and/or provide consistent reviews.
- On the spouse factor, discreet subs are likely to be a better sell than large floor standers in less than optimum locations for bass, SQ, or spouse acceptance.
Whether you believe any of what I wrote or not, does not really matter, people will still pay me to design and implement acoustic spaces and the sound systems in them, and acoustic products that use these and more complex principles (and tools), that are based on science, not conjecture. Many aspects of the perception of sound are subjective. Many aspects are not. You will have an easier time achieving audiophile nirvana when you accept which are which. Reality is a harsh mistress. She's not your mom.
- 2 subs is better than 1, due to evening out of peaks and valleys. 4 is better than 2. In a rectangular room, 3 may not be better than 2 (may not be intuitive but trust the math). This works because of inability to localize bass (see below).
- bass traps obviously can help. They also have to be very big to work really well, and the bigger the room, the bigger they need to be due to the frequency of the bass nodes. Small resonant traps also have small bandwidths.
- No matter how much some people will plead, we can't localize bass less than about 120Hz, hence using 80Hz with steep crossovers. There will always be lots of claims this is not true, and in every case this will be a factor of unequal room response between channels, poor sub/main positioning that causes unequal room responses and/or beamed cancellation effects, inadequate slope, or distortion. Don't believe me? You don't have to. There are a plethora of studies done on this (proper ones, not ad-hoc with improper setups). If you choose to ignore them, I can't help you.
- When Toole was talking about the potential for equalization, he was not talking only about frequency, but phase as well (between multiple bass units) for optimization
- If you think massive floor standers with deep bass response are the "ultimate" in reproduction, you either have an acoustically great room with a significant amount of acoustic treatment, and well shaped room at that, or you are misinformed. The position for optimum bass response in a room of two speakers is not going to be the same location for optimum in-room response, imaging, sound-stage, you name it. It sure sells some expensive speakers though, and since the average audio reviewer blathers over anything expensive, from pictures probably has a less than ideal listening room, and almost assuredly knows the bare minimum about acoustics and likely even less about the science of sound, should one be surprised? Most don't even attempt to measure in-room response, let alone direct/reflected energy at the listening position in order to optimize performance and/or provide consistent reviews.
- On the spouse factor, discreet subs are likely to be a better sell than large floor standers in less than optimum locations for bass, SQ, or spouse acceptance.
Whether you believe any of what I wrote or not, does not really matter, people will still pay me to design and implement acoustic spaces and the sound systems in them, and acoustic products that use these and more complex principles (and tools), that are based on science, not conjecture. Many aspects of the perception of sound are subjective. Many aspects are not. You will have an easier time achieving audiophile nirvana when you accept which are which. Reality is a harsh mistress. She's not your mom.