Torxx, there are all kinds of things that a good subwoofer (or pair) will do for a stereo setup that isn't intuitive. You may find that the highs seem to mellow out with a sub because the tonal balance and the pressurization of the room change.
And here's another one: If you get a sub set up correctly, the most immediate thing you'll notice isn't extra bass, it'll be
imaging! Something about getting true fundamentals in sync with what the monitors are doing that makes the imaging and soundstage "pop."
I don't get why you won't give your speakers the 100+ hours they need. If you have a 30-day eval period, that's 720 hours total. You could have had 336 hours on these speakers in 2 weeks if you'd just set up an FM tuner or put iTunes or a CD player on infinite repeat. It doesn't have to be loud, and if you want to make the sound less intrusive, wire the speakers out of phase facing each other and throw a blanket over them. I consider initial speaker break-in a "mission from God," because I can't seriously listen to, enjoy, tune, or do final placement and setup until that is largely completed first. Energy consumption under these circumstances wouldn't show up on your electric bill with most amplifiers.
And finally, I have successfully integrated several subwoofers into various systems, both in my own house (5 setups) and two more at a neighbor's house. If I want to get a really good sub integration, it may take me 1-4 hours with the help of the frequency generator warble tones on the Stereophile Test CD 2.
But it's well worth it. It's basically spending ONE Saturday morning or afternoon dialing in the crossover point, phase, and volume, playing the test tones, and playing musical tracks you're familiar with. In return, you get more realistic tonal balance, bigger dynamic range, better in-room power response, more realistic soundstage and imaging, and more musical satisfaction from hearing more of the notes, plus the room energy of the original recording.
Isn't that worth a 4-hour investment?
