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
Everyone needs a powered subwoofer...if you have one, you need another...if you have 2 you still need another. Richard Vandersteen and I were discussing this very point. Woofers are the prime user of power from the amp. If done correctly, powered subs take the burden off of the main amp, and therefore the amp is loafing and working with an ease, that is clear to hear. Also, the sub can be placed more comfortably in the room to provide a smoother low end ...no hot and weak spots. Vandersteen says that he uses 4 subs and it really makes a difference
Dear Stringreen: Harman/JBL people made several studies about the " ideal " number of subwoofers for a smooth response and high bass quality, here is the link where one of their conclusions was that four subwoofers are the " number " but two subs are very good too:

http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Documents/White%20Papers/multsubs.pdf

and here what Vandersteen has to say about:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1117893153&openflup&84&4#84

Btw, Johnnyb53: maybe there is no " fast/slow " subs, please read this:

http://www.soundstage.com/maxdb/maxdb061999.htm

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

11-12-11: Rauliruegas
Btw, Johnnyb53: maybe there is no " fast/slow " subs, please read this:

www.soundstage
Sounds to me like he *does* believe in faster bass, but somehow finds different words to express it. It's like saying that ice isn't slippery. Technically it's not, because the pressure of the object on top creates enough heat to melt a thin surface of water, which *is* slick. But it comes out the same place: step on ice, it's slippery.

By the same token, he can argue (speciously, I think) that the rise time at 40Hz isn't important, but a fast sub will have a fast rise time to mesh more easily with the rise times of the overtones of the bass note it's producing, and properly designed it should also stop quickly. This trait of speed makes it easier to blend the sub for musical purposes.

I agree that speed isn't all that important for car crashes and explosions in home theater (even there, better is better), but for music of most kinds it's absolutely essential.
Dear Johnnyb53: I think that the people can read the link and " form " their opinion about.

I agree with some of the points on that article. Sometimes is good to read 2-3 times articles like this one.

I tested along my audio distributors friends several times different subs as stand alone units and I can tell you that that fast/slow subs can't easy to detect.

The " perfect " integration in stereo fashion of subs to satelite speakers are a must and this can be achieved with fast/slow subs in the same system.
A stand alone sub sounds makes no music and even makes no sense when you heard. The relationship between the subs frequency response performance with/inside the satelite speakers is what it counts.

Anyway, the article opens a sligthly way of thinking on that subject.

regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Dear Stringreen: This is another Harman white papers on subs:

http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20111112/13680.pdf

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.