Are REL the most Musical Subs?
Forgive me if I have created a redundant thread. I don’t usually post in the Speakers area.
I have a Paradigm sub in my basement HT that has apparently given up the ghost after about 20 years. I’m not a huge bass listener. We used to use the area for movies but lately a different room of the home has taken that over. I listen to classical music and the system gets used primarily for SACD and Blu Ray. No desire for multiple subs. The front speakers are full range, setup is 5.1
I added a REL sub to my 2 channel system a few years ago, an REL, and have been delighted with the results. It doesn’t boom at me. What it does do is add the low level percussion effects that composers such as Mahler, Shostakovich , and modernist composers add to reinforce bass lines. I never realized, for example, how many gentle tympani and gong effects are in Shostakovich Babi Yar symphony.
The REL integrates all of this naturally without calling attention to itself. The Paradigm in the basement never did this but it was an older design and more budget friendly.
So I am inclined to replace the Paradigm with another REL in the basement but was wondering what the current thinking is with subs. I haven’t paid much attention lately and the stuff that I have pulled discusses multiple subs, Atmos, etc, and doesn’t seem to address my needs.
Placement will be different as well. The current sub is placed between the front speakers, and the gear rack is on the other side of the room. 20 years ago I had the energy to bury the cables next to a baseboard heat along the all, after schlepping the sub over the basement testing placement spots,but with advances in DSP I’m now hoping to place the sub next to the rack
The SB1000 Pro is $599 and goes to 20Hz at -3dB. The HT/1510 is $1699 and is -6dB at 20Hz, or you could go with the S/510 with similar extension for $2899. You could get two SB1000 Pros for $550 less than one HT/1510 or one for $1100 less, so that’s where I was coming from with a value proposition. |
@soix +1 SVS includes free shipping and a 45 day return option! |
Speaking of a sub as "musical" in and by itself is somewhat misleading, and yet it’s not entirely without merit in a system context. Before getting to that however it’s primarily about the implementation of subs, as proper integration with both acoustics and the mains as an outset is paramount. With that "out of the way" - be that either via a DBA-approach, the involvement of Digital Room Correction, dual subs, symmetrical to mains-placement or asymmetrical, high-passing the mains or not, etc. - I’d say the differences between sub brands as mostly sealed designs is the far lesser factor here, with the varying aspect, apart from the all-important implementation/integration, being more about total capacity (i.e.: displacement/cone area), extension and design. More displacement means less cone movement = lower distortion, whereas more extension from a similar sized sealed package means (even) lower efficiency, which in turn typically implies higher moving mass and the need for more power and power handling. Design choice is important as well as some of them will offer much higher efficiency, albeit at the cost of larger size (Hofmann’s Iron Law). The aspect about lower extension from similar sized sealed package is not without sonic consequences, I find; those low eff. (i.e.: below 85dB’s) high moving mass, very high power handling and high excursion woofers, even with huge magnets and a ton of power, have a tendency not to mesh that well with the main speakers sounding often too "solid" somehow and with a notable overhang. That is to say: they can sound disjointed and call attention to themselves, less so when being properly implemented overall. Looking at REL subs they usually don’t extend that super low, certainly not into infrasonic territory, and that tells me they’re using relatively low moving mass woofers which, all things being more or less equal implementation-wise, tend to blend better with the mains - certainly in the more limited context of sealed subs. So, more "musical" with main speakers augmented by subs is aided by proper implementation and integration with the mains/acoustics, in addition to being considerate about what you’re trying to squeeze out of a smaller sized typically sealed sub package. If you’re really into making a musical sounding combo of mains + subs, ultimately, treat it as a single speaker system per channel and go with a fully outboard active approach (i.e.: mains + subs), high-pass the mains, use a separate quality DSP unit, use identical quality amps top to bottom (potentially power differentiated, but of similar topology/design) and, finally, let physics have their say with the subs themselves; if you want infrasonic territory reproduction, then go the distance and be prepared for prodigious displacement and overall size + a boatload of power. If you can’t accommodate this, forget about infrasonics. In any case use 2 subs (or more), preferably (to my mind) placed symmetrically to the mains, and use subs with the biggest diameter woofers (or, overall effective air radiation area with horn-loaded variants) you can afford/will. Anything below 12" with direct radiating designs in pairs or more simply won’t do, and the higher efficiency the better. It’s about physics, design, proper construction and implementation/integration, folks, not the damn brands. For this context and the wishes of the OP nonetheless I’d open up the field of brands and consider them in the light of the above. |
@phusis +10 |
