Help with choosing sub-woofers please


Having survived more than 30 years using full-range electrostatics @clearthinker has finally decided to get sub-woofer(s).  Previously he was put off by the well-known difficulty in setting the cross-over to allow a seamless integration.  Modern sub design and electronic aids seem to have fixed that.

@clearthinker is pretty knowledgeable and experienced in most aspects of two channel audio. He has spent some hours researching sub-woofers but he's having trouble evaluating the benefits of differing design and application approaches.  Such matters are not dealt with qualitatively or comparatively in most postings and videos.  He has yet to listen to any and will be trying contenders in his system.  But it needs to be narrowed down as he can't try them all.

His Martin Logan CLX Anniversaries are -3dB at 56dB and driven by vintage Krell 200 KRS References.  The room is 23 x 15.5 x 8.5 feet, carpeted, plaster ceiling, All walls are deadened with French style fabric covering and 25mm of wool behind.  Symmetrical, no windows.  No furnishing save equipment, two chairs and a small side table.  Subs will be spiked to concrete floor.  @clearthinker  listens to two channel stereo all genres, no theatre in this room.  Cost is not the most critical issue.

Some of the issues that need evaluating (in no particular order) are:

*  Benefit of subs using two opposing drivers to reduce vibration, rock and roll

*  Floor firing vs. side firing

*  How much does size matter?  Small is better if all things are not too unequal

*  Benefit of two subs to create stereo image.  Many say bass isn't very directional below about 50Hz.  But bass heard above that on the MLs is certainly directional

*  To what extent will the sound deadening deal with room modes?  Some say bass waves go straight through wall treatments back to the hard surface behind and bounce right out again

*  Benefit of two subs (or more?) optimally arranged to cancel room modes.  The unlamented Miller who was rude but knew a fair bit about audio used to mention six and eight.  There is freedom to locate.

*  Taking unit price into consideration, is it better to have one hi-end sub, two decent ones or multiple smaller cheaper subs to deal with room modes?

*  Do wireless feeds work well or is good old wire better?  How much does wire  choice matter in feeding subs (that may be a long way from the amp.  Incidentally the Audio Research Ref 6 is fully balanced.

*  Is the KEFKc62 too good to be true?

*  Does it make sense to keep it simple and just to use ML subs and digital set up systems with ML main speakers?  If so, is it worth spending more to get the Balanced Force series?

*  What about REL?

*  Anyone else?

 

Thanks in advance for all your posts.  I'm hoping a discussion of qualitative and comparitive issues  will help others get to the bottom of optimal sub-woofer applications.

 

128x128clearthinker

Showing 2 responses by avanti1960

Taken from a thread on another forum- my experience and continued enjoyment with a pair of REL t9i subwoofers in a room of similar size to yours- 

"REL T9is are tuned and ready to review.

Let me start by mentioning my experiences as they relate to common thoughts about REL subwoofers (myths vs. reality) as they apply to these T9is in my room and system.

Common thoughts-
REL subwoofers cannot play deep. MYTH. These T9is are measuring flat to 20Hz at the listening spot and play deep and sustained quite well.
REL subs are musical, fast and have good tonal definition, low distortion and emphasize quality- REALTY. So far I have heard many shades of bass and the notes are well presented and represented with dexterity. Zero bloating, bleeding and sluggishness.
REL subwoofers are easy to setup and integrate because of their quickness. MYTH. If you really care and pay attention to the sound, they are no easier to integrate than any other subwoofer. Proper technique and process are still required- however they are quite "integratable" even without variable phase control.
REL subwoofers are not punchy. MYTH! These t9is are punchy as heck !
REL subwoofers are a poor value. Leaning to MYTH. So far they sound better than any other subwoofers I have heard or owned and are a perfect compliment to my system. Previous subs include JL Audio D110 and Martin Logan Dynamo 800X. The RELs beat each of them easily. It seems like you get what you pay for. Note- I have heard but not owned SVS subwoofers so I cannot comment on their value. Right now I have no interest in them based on the sound I am hearing which is excellent.

Final comments- they do not harm the midrange! The clarity and transparency I have without subwoofers is still there with the subs engaged and tuned properly. Unlike previous subs I have owned.
I love the sound and they are keepers". 

@clearthinker 

no affiliation with REL or the audio industry.  after trying several subwoofers and never able to fix their integration issues to my satisfaction i decided to try REL. they did the trick.  

it took a few weeks instead of months to integrate them.  

they have solid enclosures that do not resonate and color the midrange.  they play deep enough, they are fast and their bass has a nice quality- not too fat or not too dry,  just nice and right.  i also like the crossover and level click stops so you can log your settings as you fine tune.  

just keep them at least 12 inches or more from any walls to avoid peaks and you will love them.  excellent for music which is all i play.  peace.