Do you think you need a subwoofer?


Why almost any one needs subwoofers in their audio systems?

I talk with my audio friends about and each one give me different answers, from: I don't need it, to : I love that.

Some of you use subwoofers and many do in the speakers forum and everywhere.

The question is: why we need subwoofers ? or don't?

My experience tell me that this subwoofers subject is a critical point in the music/sound reproduction in home audio systems.

What do you think?
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
Darkmoebius,

Thanks for the insights. Like you, if I can get another .03% for just $10-20K, I'm all for it! ;-)

Our rings-like-a-bell Salamander Synergy is (somewhat) isolated from the trampoline floor. Each of its eight feet is sitting on a heavy duty sorbothane hemisphere. The rack and all the equipment on it push the sorbothane to its designed load limits, so its benefits are pretty much maxed out. This does help, but a quieter rack on a solid floor would help alot more. I'm afraid those will have to wait until my next lotto ticket comes in.

Raul,

Thank you for the honest answer, which I sort of expected. :-( With all the timing and phase integration issues, it only makes sense to have a sub for each main speaker, as close as possible. Otherwise you're risking sonic mud. Your description of all the work you did to place your subs was very eloquent.

I'm sure the one-sub, bass-is-not-directional idea was invented to sell subs for HT explosions, while keeping the decorator happy by not putting two more large boxes in the middle of the room.

If one sub isn't worth having, we'll just have to wait until the room grows a bit. :-(

It's funny. The cubic volume of air "seen" by our speakers is pretty large, 26 feet x 18 feet x 7.5 feet. Apart from the low ceiling that's probably more space than many speakers get. But the room layout is restrictive. There simply is no space near the speakers for subs, and no other way to arrange the room.

Some day...

BTW, is Hurricane Emily missing you? I hope no one close to you is affected.

Regards,
Doug

Doug
Dear Doug: Tks God Emily pass through our country ( twice ) with not many damage like everyone waiting for. Tks for ask.

regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Doug,I know you are a knowledgeable guy(you too Paul),but I'd like to add some thoughts,as we have some common denominators re main speaker bass output and sub integration.

I have a speaker that extends,extremely cleanly to about 40 hz in room.Maybe a bit lower.My intent(since I previously owned Infinity RS-1b's and IRS-Betas,both stereo sub set-ups,BTW)was to integrate a deeper bass response,without affecting the overall presentation of my current speakers,which I LOVE,and will not consider moving away from!

I only wanted to add frequencies below 35 hz.I actually have my sub crossing over at 24 hz,a gentle roll off above that freq allows a perfect blend with my Avalons.

For practical reasons(as well as financial overkill)I opted for a REL Stentor series II.Placed in the right corner,just behind the main speaker.A little playing around yielded fine results.This has really turned out to be a wonderful configuration,in my room.I was not looking for audiophile bass.I wanted a "subtle" underpinning of low frequencies,while retaining the stunning timbres of my "sealed box" Avalons.I feel that although my big boy Infinities were more power oriented designs,my current set-up obliterates them in seamless perspective,openness,stage presentation and amazing timbres,while implementing a very natural deep bass integration,but NOT bass overkill,which many hobbyists are addicted to.I still can't believe what a dumb move Avalon made by discontinuing such a fine design( easy load,sealed enclosure with stunning mid bass and dynamics,external crossover,massive build,beyond newer models,more weight etc).Well I guess WAF of smaller designs is better for bottom line,but my money is on the Ascents I own.As a matter of fact,I have been told by two industry "higher ups",independently,these were the best speakers Avalon ever made.I don't know,but really don't care.My point being,to pull just a bit more from them,without breaking the bank.Something I'd already done,with all my stuff,anyway.

Now I know Raul loves the idea of a stereo integration,and I'm sure a second sub will benefit me,but it just ain't happening.The performance,currently is SO strong that to my way of thinking,the second unit is not worth it (financially),if you don't have a very large room,and are getting a high level of performance,with one.

Before Raul begins to "rail" at me(I still love you,Raul),let me say that I called Sumiko,before adding the sub.I was ready to go for two(stereo).They felt that since my speakers had superb output down to 35-40 hz,and since my room was only 22.5x13x8,the "second sub" was not a "Real" necessity!

As of now,I'm thrilled,as I think you can be be,since I know you are very capable.I also think your B&W's are similar in output,and presentation to my speakers.Best of luck!!
As a single-sub user for all of a couple of months, I am considering a second sub. My reasons have to do with smooth and even bass performance, NOT more bass. My single sub is in the front left corner. There is plenty of bass energy, and I have the level turned to almost inaudible. What I have a problem with is the uneven response. Some LF energize the room much more than others.

On a side note, my girlfriend complained about the bass keeping her awake while I was listening late at night. The music level was pretty low, in consideration of her. My home is three levels, listening room on the bottom floor, bedroom on the third floor. When I went upstairs to investigate, the music was barely audible. But when I put my ear to the pillow or bed, the bass was rumbling through. My conclusion is that airborne energy dissipates quickly as a function of distance (inverse exponential function) while the structure is a more efficient conduit for LF energy. I believe my single sub generates plenty of energy, but needs some attention to refinement. Perhaps anti-vibration footers designed for industiral machinery would hep. Anyone try this? Interestingly, I have no problems with vibrations affecting TT playback on my suspended wood floor. But the TT is a Micro Seiki...

My flame suit is on, ready for the jokes about listening to music while my lovely girlfriend is in bed. Gosh, I must be such a geek....

Regards,
scott
Don't worry Skushino,

I have to wait until my girlfriend goes to bed before I can watch SciFi Channel or play computer games. And I'm 40 years old! Talk about a dork.

I tried a listening session tonight of one sub versus two(summed mono). Same songs, same passages, seconds apart. Out of that rudimentary test, it seems to me that one sub gets you 80% or more of tonal benefits. But, the second sub adds depth and texture to what's there.

As for energy or room mode cancellation, I kinda got the feeling that I have less problems with one sub than two. How's that for weird? One of my subs must be slightly out of position because it is supposed to cancel a lot energy.

I played a few deep bass laden tracks (Bach organ, Bjork, Pink Floyd) and then walked up to the master bedroom which is on the floor above and behind the living room (tri-level house). There seemed to be more energy in that room with two subs than one. Although, one was still enough to annoy someone in bed.

I think absorption/basstraps are the only real answer to your(and my) problem. Since I have two subs pointing directly forward, I really don't need the added room gain. So, I am going to experiment with DIY absorptive panels on the wall behind the speakers and bass traps in the corners. The same behind the listening position to drain energy away from the wall 2-3 behind my head. I'm also going to put panels at the 1st reflection points.