Do you think you need a subwoofer?

I agree - I only have one on the left channel (where LFE for DVD's is) and with music it really needs to be in the center between the two other speakers or else it sounds not so great. Like, who knew bass players never crossed the stage?

Raul - How do you like your supertweeters. I only get up to about 22000-ish. Is it tiring?

Excellent point Eldertford. And I agree that most manufacturers leave them out because it shows the weakness of their overall construction - crossovers, etc, or weakness of integration of materials (both if you are really unlucky). When this happens the mids and tweeters or the sub come off as more colored when listening to different Hz frequencies individually. Better to have a family sound, I think, and stick with the same products in speaker implementation.

Dear Eldart: +++++ " I regard the "subwoofer" not as a separate speaker system, but as part of the main speaker system...the part that the manufacturer left out because of size and cost. " +++++

I agree with you. It is always more " confortable " to design speakers with out that low end octave. So, they give us what they want not what we need, well: not what the MUSIC needs.

Like Stevecham told us, the name of the game is: "Integration" .

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Gmorris: +++++ " . I have been able to obtain seamless integration of the subs with the maggies after many weeks of experimentation and frustration. " +++++

Always is a hard work for the seamless integration of the subwoofers: test and error experimentation.

The Maggies are wonderful main speakers and I never heard along with subwoofers, but I can imagine.

+++++ " To fully recreate the recording space you need the lower octaves even if the recording involves instruments sans the lower registers. " +++++

THis is absolutely true. I agree, too, with any single word about the advantages of two subs instead only one.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Eldartford, I would like your opinion on something because you have had experience with a wide variety of sub types, development, and placement in different systems – not just one or two purchases in their own system. This is in regard to all-in-one designs, like my Vandersteens, where the subs are separately powered, driven, and integrated into the same cabinet as the other drivers. As you know these incorporate a high-pass filter just before the amp inputs and, ultimately, the lower end is passed to the subwoofers and the rest to the three-way drivers (woof, mid, tweets) above. This makes these speakers easier to drive than some, but what do you think about the sonic tradeoffs of such a design? I have had subs previously, but really did not care at all for the extra space required, additional connections, placement concerns, etc., etc. Realizing that there are always trade-offs to be made, I chose practicality (if you can call the cost of these speakers as practical), possibly over function. I will note that the sub section performance of the Vandys was very good, at least to my ears, once the speakers were positioned properly (which took some time). But, after I had the 11 bass band contours adjusted, the lower bass seems to integrate perfectly and seamlessly. Wondering your impressions of such an approach and what one may or may not be sacrificing with these over separates, especially in terms of conveying the information on analog recordings. Not looking for a critique of these particular speakers themselves (there’s plenty of those to be found) but, rather, the approach. Much obliged!

Dear Eldartford: +++++ " I run the SWs up to 200-300Hz, and there is no doubt that it is better. " +++++

I can't imagine this situation ( maybe because I don't have enough experience with the Maggies ). Which are the frecuency limits of your SWs ?

Regards and enjoy the music.

Raul.