Adding a sub. - can i start with one?


I’m pretty happy with my setup I’ve assembled over the past year. However I feel I am missing some oomph and I find I am turning up the volume a lot. My space is big (converted barn) with 18 ft vaulted ceilings and about 700 sq ft of space with hardwood floors and minimal soft furniture. 
 

So I am thinking adding a sub woofer will help increase the bass and maybe give me more of the kick in the sound I’m used to in my old room and prior older speakers and amp. 
 

I’ve read that most people add 2 subs to a system instead of one. I’d prefer to spend the 2500 per side over time and just get one for now. What’s the thinking on one channel sub vs two and can I consider going from 1 to 2 later on as another upgrade?

daveinpa

Hey @lalitk - curious, how high are your ceilings? Are they also high like the 18’ vaulted ones like the OP?

The REL carbon is a wonderful sub, and much improved over the 510 in terms of speed. It’s a nice move for your room and space. That said, it’s not only about output power, but also the ability to move sub-audible waves - sometimes room gain and reflections amplify this, and others do not. So seems the OP will have to test around.

Luckily the thread is not a “which sub should I get” or “Rel vs SVS”, and many of the sub companies offer a satisfaction guarantee.

If I had the funds, I’d get two Rel G1 Mk2 for my 18’x23’ room with 18’ high sloped ceiling (that is my listening space). With the 510, you also need more time as phase is managed by a pot in the back of the sub and not from the listening chair (the G1 has a remote for this). But unfortunately, time and money often factor into “the right decision”, despite it not resulting in the absolute best sound.

 

Started with one sub. A REL Carbon Special and yes, amazing first impressions. However, it only took a day to realize I could not fully integrate it for every type of music. I was constantly up from my seat to adjust gain. It was short lived experiment because I didn't listen to people here. I had to learn the hard way. I stepped up to the REL 212sx and it was a different story. I could get by with just one. I do not know if it is because it has four drivers, but I was able to quickly set it and never had to change it. I now have two because being type-a, it bothered me that I had bass information from one of two channels. It never "felt" complete or the "best" it could be. I added a second 212 and I will never go without. Magic, not just in tight, fast bass, but especially in midrange extension. The lesson here is that two are better than one, but the right one may be all you need. Happy hunting. 

@izjjzi I tried the 212SE in my room and it is very good. I had it set to about the lowest crossover frequency, and I could tell the soundstage was wider and cleaner on one side vs the other. I could have lived with it, but I would definitely benefit from two. I hear the 212SX is even better, and if I wanted to go through and spend the time integrating it, that would also be a contender.

@blisshifi The 212sx sounded amazing out of the box. The pair are actually difficult to adjust so not to be integrated. Took me a few tracks to integrate the first and a few tiny adjustments to get the pair in order. Placement was also far less a factor with only small changes needed to gain alone to satisfy. Highly recommended as for me, these are practically fire and forget subs.

Two subwoofers is recommended for a normal size listening room.  The room the OP described appears to be an entire building.  I wonder if he should be thinking of eventually having 3 or 4 subs for this space?