Onhwy61, besides REL, who else makes sub-bass systems, do you know? Vandersteen? I have full range drivers and a very, very budget subwoofer that I place behind my listening chair. It is crossed over at 40hz and it doesn't have much on volume. All it does it give anything below 40hz added weight. Most bass that I want comes from my full rnage mains, but sometimes they lack the grunt I want. The sub behind my chair gives it a tiny push.
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?
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?