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 5 responses by danager

Earl Geddes on Multiple Subwoofers in Small Room

This is from 2013 so the software has probably  improved but the theory is still very relevant.  According to Mr. Geddes the improvement of over three subs in minimal but the improvement from 2 to 3 subs is substantial.

 

@clearthinker

Yes this video was more like the ones we record at our DIY meets but I believe he was talking about constrained layer dampening for bass which according to his comments later in the video do provide bass dampening.

This video was from 2013 almost 10 years ago. Before you make a judgement you should know who this guy is. Dr. Geddes (PHD in acoustics) has done extensive research, real scientific research on how we perceive sound, environmental reaction to sound and wave guide design. He and his wife worked together to design experiments to actually measure perception. I just saw another video regarding THD and how our perception of it varies at different volume levels and what harmonics we can detect and which ones are masked by the way our ears work. This reinforces my theories that measurements don’t really mean that much because we’re measuring the wrong stuff but I always like the people who agree with me more than those who don’t.

Dr. Geddes is now out of the stereo biz and makes stained glass windows but I bet his stereo sounds really good while he’s doing it.

Cheers, and good luck

 

@clearthinker you are correct regarding passive bass dampening it's not a practical  strategy.   Nelson Pass made an active dampener that would listen and then apply a 180 degree phased mirrored sound to compensate much like noise cancelling headphones but it either didn't work or was never marketed correctly but I like the concept as it could easily be place in the rear of the room without the hassle of running wires or futzing with wireless connections.

@phantom_av

I'm not sure that's true.

While 

2 is better then 1, 4 is better than 2

is true 3 is almost as good 4 properly placed and EQd beyond that its just spending  money that could have been spent elsewhere for to actually improve the sound.

Rather than a wireless sub and dealing with the network delays and active bass trap would effectively kill the reflection node 

https://www.totmusicstudio.net/products/psi-audio-5