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
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.
Dear Sirspeedy: +++++ " ).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 you know your Ascents are not the only speakers that are " superb down to 35-40 Hz ". I can tell you that the moment when you can integrate two subs in a true stereo way in your system: you will be shocked!!. The Sumiko people loose/missed the real subs subject.
Btw, what you think or what I think about is totally irrelevant, what is relevant is a FACT and that fact will tell you anything about: the FACT : " the integration of two subs in your system ", you have to try it, you have to heard it at your place: is the only true way to really knows about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Thanks SirSpeedy and Raul, for continuing to address the one sub/two sub question.

Of course I am in the ideal position to mediate, since I have NO sub! I can expostulate from a position of pure innocence, err, ignorance. ;-)

My decision is: you're probably both right. Assuming proper implementation, one sub is better than none, and two subs are much better still.

I don't for a second doubt Raul's statement that two subs make a huge improvement. He's done the work, he's heard the results.

SirSpeedy is probably correct that my speakers and his are similar in bass performance. Audiophiles who visit occasionally miss a bit of bass slam, but they are universally impressed with its articulation and tunefulness. As Raul said, there are quite a few excellent main speakers that will go down solidly and cleanly to 40 Hz or so. It's that last octave (and below) that's so difficult.
Hey,Raul!!I'm not arguing with you!My only real point was to sort of indicate to Doug,or anyone else interested,that if money is an issue,as well as space limitations,for two subs,you can get great results with one.That's it!

As for the stereo option,to my way of thinking,if one is crossing over as low as I am(and Doug's main speakers will most likely need),then any low frequencies are perceived in "mono" anyway!Now Raul---"THAT HAPPENS TO BE THE REAL FACT!!

The only advantage of the second sub(and one has to understand that there is a difference between how we configure a sub set-up.How low the crossover point,will have a huge impact on whether a stereo set will perform.EX:As I'm sure you know,a higher cutoff point will sound better with 2 subs.What you don't seem to grasp,Raul,is that if the main speakers are quality performers down to "nearly" the low octave,and you crossover "LOW",like 25-35 hz,since everything is already mono,at that point,the only advantage of the second sub is for evening out the acoustic energy(response),which may or may not be such a big problem,as the ROOM DETERMINES THIS!!

Now,before you kill me on this,which I know is coming,you have NOT heard every room,or mine,so give some consideration to this.Some hobbyists may be able to extend listening pleasure,and save a few bucks too!That is why Sumiko(Sterling Trayle,actually)argued I try one first.They were not out to ONLY sell product.Rare in this hobby.Best wishes!!
Dear Sirspeedy: +++++ " then any low frequencies are perceived in "mono" anyway!.. " +++++

I don't know at which frecuency you are cutting your REL. But, for example, if the crossover is at 27-30Hz and if the low pass filter is of second to fourth order then your REL is reproducing frecuencies as high like 80-100Hz that does not percieved in " mono way " and that are interfering with the same frecuency range of your main speakers.

Any way, as I already told you what you or I " think " is irrelevant: only the " facts " count.

+++++ " ,you have NOT heard every room,or mine.. " +++++

You are right and I agree with you.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.