frequency range for instrument vs speaker


http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm

After seeing this link in another thread, I wonder about this. Let say that you don't listen to any classical instrument/music, normal rock and pop with no heavy synthetizer, just drum, guitar, etc, it seems that there isn't really any need for speakers that go much below 40Hz, considering that the lowest instrument, the kick drum (I assume it is the same thing as bass drum?) only go down to 50Hz.
Certainly listening to this type of music via speaker that go down flat to 40Hz vs 20Hz, bottom end is certainly quite different but I am not sure what is it that I hear in the subbass area (according to the chart) that is not suppose to be there, at least according to the instrument's frequency? Does drum give out something lower than its fundamental?
suteetat
Clearly a sub often if not usually makes a big difference but the existence of lower frequencies in the harmonics is not required to explain it.

Often when adding a sub, the difference can be the result of the sub being able to better deliver flat response without compression at louder volumes at even the same frequencies that the mains would have to cover otherwise, along the lines that Drew_Exckhardt explains so nicely in detail in his posts.

The chart indicates "low fundamentals" for several instruments. Not sure what that is or how different from the "fundamental". Could it be the same thing as frogman's "undertones"?

There is [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_fundamental]This[/url] that I found which seems relevant to the discussion.
****Clearly a sub often if not usually makes a big difference but the existence of lower frequencies in the harmonics is not required to explain it.**** - Mapman

Very true, but it is required when the sub is used in a purely "augment" mode as many (most) subs are used; as opposed to using the sub's internal xover, when the benefits you describe are technically as well a audibly obvious.

Another term for undertone is "difference tone".
Or "combination tone"?

From what I read, it would seem to account for hearing frequencies lower than the fundamental but is believed to be most likely due to non linear inter-modulation distortion associated with how we hear more so than an aspect of actual sound per se, an "illusion" per se, so most likely not something that the speaker would play a role in producing assuming the speaker does in fact deliver the real instrument fundamental frequencies up to snuff.
****so most likely not something that the speaker would play a role in producing assuming the speaker does in fact deliver the real instrument fundamental frequencies up to snuff.****

Some modern composers have exploited these difference tones in their music, and the tones are audible to the listener (audience). When I was in music conservatory we performed an experiment to find out if the remarkably loud difference tones produced by certain combinations of fundamentals heard in the performance of Eugene Bozza flute trios were captured by a recording, and they most certainly were. So I think while some of these effects may occur in the recesses of our hearing mechanisms only, undertones, in the usual sense, can most definitely be captured by the recording process, and hence need to be reproduced by speakers if the complete timbre of instruments is to be reproduced.

The cool thing about all this is that there is so much to this stuff that is still not fully understood.