2. speakers
  3. 1330274485

Audio Pro B2-50 Subwoofer Anyone?

I realize that Audio Pro has not distributed in USA for over a decade, so this thread may be aimed at the Europeans. My Audio Pro B2-50 has served me well since I purchased it in about 1987. It has supplemented my previous speakers which lacked the bass I needed in the 70 Hz and down registers (Dahlquist DQ-10, Quad ESL 63, Tyler Woodmere 2- to a lesser extent). My new Tyler full-sized Woodmere speakers solidly go down to the upper 20 Hz region, so the sub is currently dialed in to crossover at 30 Hz, the lowest setting on the dial. Question: for 30 Hz and down, what difference would I notice between my aging Audio Pro sub and one of the newer models, such as JL Fathom F113? At this frequency, my music application is strictly classical/ heavy orchestral. Thanks to anyone who gives me some idea.
rtilden
stanwal's avatar
stanwal
3,147 posts
 
I use to sell Audio Pro and Quad in the 80s. I have several sets of subs now including REL. IF your speakers actually go down that far flat I doubt if you would hear a big difference on most music. I don't really know the Tyler line well, I loaned a pair of large Hsu subs to someone with Tyler's; not sure of the model. They had a supposed list of $10,000 and weighed almost 200 lb. In this case the subs made a considerable difference and he ended up buying a sub. The 113 will generate much more bass than the Audio Pro; the question is whether you want or need it. With my Spendor S 100s or GamuT L5 I don't use subs most of the time; I don't find it necessary and I am somewhat of a bass freak. Long story short, the Fathom will give you more bass; if you think the Audio Pro is helping now then you should probably get it. I am not sure that Tyler's have the frequency range they claim; if they did I don't think the AP would be making any difference.
dopogue
1,773 posts
 
I had a B2-50 and agree with Newbee. It definitely poops out early.
rtilden OP
156 posts
 
Thanks for your replies. Each is consistent with my thoughts. I have played with the sub on/off and do not think I am getting any deeper bass than my speakers provide. In fact, my speakers are giving 'more' bass than the sub. Each Woodmere speaker has (2) 10-inch Seas woofers in a generous cabinet, which provides good, deep, solid bass. But the size of my room (30x31x12) has me wondering if an improved subwoofer would give me anything meaningful below what my speakers can offer. I am not a bass nut, and I don't need 'more' bass. Just wondering if an improvement can be made in the impact of orchestral music. Sounds like a definite 'maybe'. I'm betting that my room is the key factor in determining the answer, and that I won't really know until I try it. Thanks again.
yogiboy's avatar
yogiboy
5,675 posts
 
My main reason for using a sub is not for bass improvement.Your amp does not waste most of its power in the low (20-40 hz)end.
stanwal's avatar
stanwal
3,147 posts
 
But remember that subs like the REL do NOT have a signal output for the main amp so can't be used that way. I believe that the JL may be similar as I think the review of one I read said that it lacked a high pass filter; I took that to mean that it also had no signal out to the main amp that had the low frequencies removed. Or at least that is how I remember it; it is late at night and I am a little sleepy. I bought a big amp just so it could drive the low end with no trouble.
More to discover