1 sub? 2 subs?


I'm interested in adding a sub(s) to my current system. My system is used for both music (75% of the time)and HT. In adding a subwoofer, I would like it to be as musical as possible...explosions etc for theater are less important since I think of those types of sound as more for entertainment vs. something that must sound exactly right (anyway, I have no idea what most of the explosions really sound like because I've never heard it in person). My front speakers are Sonus Faber Concertos. The room is 16x25 with 9 foot ceilings and opens up into another room that is just as big.

I've been following many of the threads here on Audiogon(which have been incredibly informative) and have noticed that some feel that 2 subwoofers are needed to obtain the best overall sound. I'd like some views on the issue of one vs two subs in this setup. If I go with two subs could I get smaller subs eg 2 Sunfire Trues instead of one large eg. 1 REL Storm. Also, any recommendations are welcome. I'd like to keep it under $2K and am willing to buy used. Thanks for all your help.
Dave
milo
while i still tink the best results will be obtained w/two subs (even in a smaller room - 2 subs will ameliorate standing-waves ewe can get w/only one), if ya have to get by w/only one, then it should absolutely be centered between the speakers. if ewe can get it into the near-field (ie: as your coffee-table/footrest/etc), even better - ewe can reduce the wolume & still get the same effect. also, keep the x-over as low as possible - critical for *all* sub usage; especially important w/only one.

ymmv, doug

Gmorris, maybe you have heard the Sunfire in carefully set up surroundings, but I have heard it many times in 3 different well designed listening rooms in NYC, and every time it was more thud than tone. Now granted, they may not have taken the time to impeccably optimize set up, but the first time I heard a REL sub it was brand new, and just plugged in at a dealers. Without any kind of set up, no break in, no careful setting of crossover frequencies I immediately sat up and asked what was that! It was a stunning sound, unlike any sub I had heard. So under the most undesirable circumstances the REL was a knockout, and under very decent circumstances the Sunfire was consistantly typical of everything that made me dislike subs in the first place. If there was a sub that sounded like a REL that was the same size as the Sunfire I would stand in line to be the first customer. The only other sub I have heard that impressed me was the big Aeriel, which costs a heck of a lot more money than the Rel, and is probably not as versatile, being better matched to Aeriel speakers , wheras the REL can compliment a wide variety of systems. Sorry, you can keep your Sunfire, I'll keep my REL, thank you very much.
I have a REl Stentor. A little more in price then quoted but I also wanted to push Rel. You can always get one now and upgrade later to a second one.
i've heard the 18" velodynes, the sunfires, the rel stratus - in all cases i was extremely underwhelmed: boomy one-note thump. then again, the set-up seemed to me to be less than optimal. the only time i ever heard a powered one-sub set-up integrate well was an old-style hsu (the short, fat model), centered between the speakers, & in the nearfield.

i'm a firm believer that the best way to do low-frequencies right is not to try & defy the laws of physics by cramming one or two drivers into a small box, & then using electronics to compensate, but to keep everything as simple as possible, and use big boxes, optimized to the drivers. thus, my preference for the vmps subs, which are far more accurate than the smaller powered-subs, and the equal to the largest way-expensive powered models. the only subs i've heard that competed on an equal footing to my pair of larger vmps' were the sub towers from the old infinity irs series, similar to the top-line genesis - six 12" servo-controlled drivers per side, in 75"-tall towers.

ymmv, doug