So how many people are using subwoofers


with full range floorstanders? I need just a little more bass weight out of my system and have vascilated between REL subwoofer or upgrading my amp from Conrad Johnson MF-2200 to an MF-2500. 60-70% of the music doesn't need a sub,but that other 30% keeps me off balance. Is the amp upgrade going to give me more bass weight (along with other benefits) or should I just go for the sub? I think I know the answer but would like to hear other opinions.
existing system=
CJ PFR pre
CJ MF-2200 amp
Theta Miles cdp
Silverline Sonata speakers
Homegrown silver lace ic's
MIT-2 bi-wire
128x128artemus_5
I've been using a REL Storm III with Martin Logans and it is simply terrific. I agree with whoever said REL is an excellent choice for a musical sub.
To "piggyback" on the comments by Craig (Garfish), don't overlook the Vandersteen 2WQ sub. I recently added a pair of them (they are intended for use as a stereo pair) to my Vandy 3A Sig's (a reasonably full-range speaker with good response to about 30 Hz), and can highly recommend them. Because the Vandy 2WQ subs come with their own crossover, and are adjustable for both "Q" and efficiency, they are easy to integrate with just about speaker. Both subs have built-in 300 wpc amps as well. In a post I made 3-4 months ago which summarized the subwoofer tests performed by Widescreen Review magazine, the Vandy subs (both the 2WQ and the V2W) were among the highest rated models. You can often find the Vandy subs for sale on A-gon for around $800-850 (infact, there is one currently listed).
I added REL stadium IIs to my proac supertowers and it was about my favorite upgrade ever. It only adds - just use it at its lowest eq cutoff and at a moderate level. You'll hear stuff you never knew was there.
I think that you will get more out of the addition of a QUALITY sub(s) than you will an amplifier change. Keep in mind that this requires more physical room space, greater electrical demand, the aquisition of another amp and speaker cables if passive, the purchase of an interconnect or speaker cables if powered, etc... There is a LOT to think about when adding a sub(s).

Obviously, the biggest difference would be if your main speakers are pretty anemic to start off with. That last comment may not apply to your specific situation with the Sonata's, but i included it as a point of reference.

A high quality sub will help the most and be easiest to blend if you take the following matters into consideration:

You can actively cross over the mains at a relatively sharp slope to minimize their load and excursion. The use of a flexible crossover and "Q" or "blending" control is a MAJOR advantage.

You can run two subs and optimally place them ( not tucked away in the corner to go "boom, boom, boom" ).

Sealed designs are best in terms of being "tight" with excellent transient response but typically require very large boxes and BIG power. Second choice would be a very well designed transmission line, but these are much harder to build let alone mass produce. There may be some exceptions to this ( like any other "rule" ) such as the Linn Isobarik ( sometimes called "compound loaded" ) design. Craig's Vandy 5's use a variation of this design along with active equalization to achieve excellent in-room response.

Vented designs ( ported, slot loaded, passive radiator, etc... ) TYPICALLY suffer from poor definition, lack of punch, thicker and muddier sound, etc... This has to do with their measurably poorer transient response and increased ringing. As mentioned, there are exceptions to the rule IF the designers have done their homework. Vented designs, as a general rule, will show higher levels of output and greater low frequency extension. This is typically achieved at the expense of "speed", "pitch" and "definition" though. As George mentioned, "pitch" or "tone" of bass is also very important.

Driver size, excursion and how it loads into the room DOES matter. Front loaded designs will produce the most "punch" but also the highest distortion and ability to localize. Downloaded designs are easier to place, harder to localize and produce less "apparent" distortion. Unless the sub comes with a pre-mounted loading plate, you can fine tune the amount of output, extension and "pitch" of the bass by varying the distance from the driver to the floor. The down-side to downloading is that the drivers are typically of limited excursion and will suffer very noticeable "suspension sag" with age. They are also more prone to blowing up due to reduced power handling because of the natural "driver sag" that takes place. Dipole radiators ( identical drivers mounted on opposite sides of the cabinet ) can produce notably smoother in room response but are also typically lower impedance. This gives twice the radiating area and excursion capabilities when compared to one driver, but you've also got twice the reflected emf and a low impedance to deal with. The same goes for subs with several woofers.

Impedance of a passive sub should be taken into consideration. A lower impedance may offer greater power output capability from an SS amp, but it would have to work a lot harder ( and run hotter ) in doing so. Keep in mind that a lower impedance also reduces damping factor, making the driver harder to control. Very low impedances or very large excursion woofers require BAZILLIONS of watts to control and work best.

Sub cabinets should be deader than dead when you give them the "knuckle test". Otherwise their cabinets will resonate and "clog up" or "congest" the mid-bass, upper bass and lower midrange region. This makes blending very difficult as you typically end up with a sound that is "too thick" and easy to localize no matter what you try.

Take a look at Scott's ( Sdcambell ) excellent post about the Widescreen review subwoofer "shoot-out". If you can, try to pick up a copy of this magazine as it gives a LOT of data on the subs that they tested and others that they didn't. Hope this helps... Sean
>