2. speakers
  3. 1120530937

Front- vs. Down-Firing Subs and Amp Issue

A couple of assertions in the audio world have me perplexed as to how to select a subwoofer for my two-channel system.

Richard Hardesty makes the blanket statement in his Audio Perfectionist Journal that down-firing subs should never be used for high-end two-channel audio. Only front-firing subs are suitable for this application. I see, however, that some of the most-recommended subs on a'gon (Hsu TN series, ACI and REL come to mind) are down-firing (or up-firing in the case of Hsu.) Maybe the answer is that audiophile subs can't be purchased at the price point most mortals can afford, and the lower-priced subs just happen to be down-firing? Oh, Hardesty also says ported subs are not suitable for high-end audio; must go with a sealed box. Interesting.

The second assertion comes from Mike Barnes at nOrh, who says on his website that the plate amps used in 90% of subs today is crap and puts out only a fraction of power that is claimed. The sound that was rattling his windows and creating "earth-shaking bass" was not bass at all- it was distortion. He also states that he began tests in subwoofer development using the popular Peerless 12" woofer, which was literally shredded by a (non-plate) 150-watt amp.

So now I'm confused. Is it possible to buy a high-quality sub for relatively little money? I can't bring myself to spend $3-5k on a pair of speakers only to turn around and spend nearly that much on a sub. Oh, and then I hear that if I want the best possible configuration I need two subs at twice the price, making my subs more expensive than my speakers. Is this just a fact of life that I'll have to come to grips with if I don't want to buy speakers that go down to 20hz?

Thoughts?
aggielaw

Showing 2 responses by aggielaw

aggielaw OP
267 posts
 
Thanks for the insight, Dave. A link to my system is: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vdone&1107477492&view

I have a Velodyne CT-120 sub in the system, which I think is not listed in the thread above. It sounds nice, but I keep wondering if it could sound better.

My room is approximately 11'x17'x8', set up on short wall. Acoustically, it's a nightmare, with a cinderblock exterior wall with large windows on the right and an open wall starting at 3' in front of the left speaker on the left. The front and rear walls are wood. There's an exterior door on the right wall toward the back, so the listening position is 4' from the back wall.

Music tastes are primarily progressive rock, soft rock, and jazz (I'm a big Chuck Mangione fan and like other upbeat jazz as well) with a bit of country and "world music" for want of a better description. Occasionally I listen to classical, but not as often as the other genres listed.

Thanks,
Howard
aggielaw OP
267 posts
 
The arguments against down-firing subs that I've seen revolve around gravity's effects on the woofer. I've never heard a down-firing sub, so I don't have any personal basis to compare the two types.

I couldn't find Hardesty's assertion that front-firing is better, and he has a hard-on for all things Vandersteen. From the photo on the Vandersteen website, it looks like their subs are down-firing. Interesting.

The consensus that sealed subs are more tonally accurate than vented subs makes me wonder: is this premise true of woofer-handled frequencies as well? Is it important to have sealed towers or monitors as opposed to vented models for accuracy?

I don't have any answers, but the great responses I'm reading are making me alot smarter so far!
More to discover