Subwoofer: should we even use them at all?

Marty,

You are right: after further reading about the QOL, I realized it doesn't do what I need. So that one's out.

Switching cables between the Lamm and an Onkyo doesn't sound like me. I'd rather spend the time I have for listening to music just listening to music rather than swapping cables. We are likely alike along these lines.

About the Lamm: this is not their reference preamp; it's their entry pre, in Lamm terms. So it's not a huge investment compared to the other components, and is similar to the ARC and Joule pres you replaced with the Onkyo+Audyssey. BTW, at the time I was looking for a pre I did consider that Joule pre.
The problem is I cannot listen to any of these options beforehand, so it comes down to a leap of faith.

But the two Rythmik subs I already have and I'm sold on using them.

I'm also ditching the path proposed by miniDSP. Too complex to implement and cumbersome to operate, especially the latter.

So it looks like I need a DEQX, or Onkyo 5509, or HK 990 to replace my DAC and pre, and using Dirac or another DRC software at the server, and call it a day. I can't see other practical alternatives as of now.
I might start with the DRC software and a cheap crossover between pre and amp, knowing it's a temporary setup, and finally settle on replacing the DAC and pre with a digital processor.

Lewinski,

If you need an inexpensive, sand-alone active x-over, see if you can find an NHT x-2. It's now discontinued and hard to find (probably because it's pretty widely sought after and used offers tend to get snapped up quickly), but it's a very good sounding unit, quite flexible, and a steal for the $.

Good luck with the project.

Bo:

I've thought about Audyssey Pro and looked into buying the calibration pack, but I haven't yet pulled the trigger. Knowing myself, I might get sucked into another year or two of compulsive tweaking and I'm not sure I want to do that. But, either way, thanks for the recommendation.

Audyssey is not an easy system. Even when I gave the instructions to clients and friends, it was difficult.

I work at mm precision. There is no room for error. When you do not work extreme precise it will work against you.

This is a big advantage for me, but for most it is a disadvantage.

The professional microphone can measure about 1000-10.000 times as much information compared to XT32.

But you also can make more measurments. You also have a lot more options to change.

You can make your own target curves. I did read many articles about human hearing. This gave me the freedom to create a superior articulation of voices.

I can let all people hear details which the best highend pre amps of far above 15000 dollar cannot reveal.

That is why a person who is distributer of many highend brands said: you can put the highend market up side down.

I use the knowledge and thinking in highend in every price level I sell. This gives me the option to create a 3 dimensional stage for a lot less than what was possible in the past.

here's the thing about subs. you have to put them in a position to succeed.

what do i mean by that? first off, older subs are too slow. integration issues were rightly noted. thats not the case with the new 'super-subs' that are out there (JL Audio, REL, Velodyne, etc). these newer subs are very quick and can keep up and properly augment mains in the right circumstances, leaving a drastically improved playback for those who will put them in a position to succeed.

what circumstances are those?
1) sealed subs (no ports)
2) sealed mains (no ports)
3) sub position flexibility (but close to the front plane of the mains)
4) adequate setting flexibility (namely, LP filter freq and slope, phase and volume)
and finally
5) digital room correction within the subs (JL Audio has the ARO system).

and here's why:
one of JL Audio's designers wrote a white paper in which he astutely identified that each source of bass will make the integration of a sub more challenging. ports are a source of bass, and a non-linear one at that! main channels are typically designed using ports to make the speakers A) more dynamic B) louder and C) seemingly deeper in the bass (though its really just a port-tuning phenomenon which tricks the listener. the truth is that the frequencies roll off sharply below the port tuning frequency). ---the nonlinearities of the port (whether on the mains or the sub) create a host of problems (room nodes, freq bumps) that are tough to work around. ergo, #1 and #2 above...the fewer ports, the fewer sources of bass that you have to contend with. --this is reason #1 sub integrations fail.

positioning is a function of getting the timing relationships correct. subs tucked way behind the plane of the mains means their sonic impulse has to travel further to get to the listener--and this gives rise to timing errors. plan on putting the subs close to the mains to maintain timing relationships. this is reason #2 sub integrations fail.

setting flexibility is critical to getting the most out of your subs. when you start with sealed mains, you have speakers that will have a very linear rolloff in the bass (excl room nodes, but more on this later). the subs come from the bottom up...where you have to play with settings to get the subs to roll off quickly once you reach the frequencies that the mains handle properly. if your speakers roll off 3 or 6db at 50hz, then its natural to start the subs LP filter around 40-60 (experiment) and play with the slope (12, 24 db per octave) to get the subs to drop off quickly so as not to intrude on the mains. phase should be set before anything though---check phase w/ mains and dial in for least output when both mains and subs are running, and then reverse phase of the subs. now that phase, crossover and slope are all set, play with volume to your liking. ---improperly setting phase, x-over, slope & volume (with volume the least important factor) is reason #3 sub integrations fail.

(note the mains are running full range---no parts in the signal path is best, and its preferred, given sealed mains and their natural linear rolloff).

finally, some digital room correction is in order. most high end subs have some feature to do so, and generally they're about removing room nodes (points of elevated volume)..these are far more problematic than nulls (points of reduced volume). run the sub's digital correction which will identify the nodes and shelve these frequencies down in order to reduce the node...and the beauty is, with sealed speakers / subs, you only have room-generated nulls, not port-generated! the digital correction will eliminate the node for the sub, so even if the main still aggravates the room-node, it will be counteracted by the sub's digital correction which has nulled out this freq from the sub's playback.

i've done just this, using magico S3s w/ JL F110s, and the setup is startling---the above is best bang for the buck sonics possible (as big full range speakers are expensive, for one reason---bass is expensive! so save a bunch of $$ and get the bass into a diff box and put the subs in a position to succeed).

then again, YMMV.

cool post...thanks Rhyno.