Sub output: Is it the woofer size or the rated RMS

I may be wrong, but I believe the Sunfire True Sub (I bought mine 2 months after they came on market)was the first "small" sub (12" cube). As Drew posted, it takes a lot of power to produce a FR response down to 16Hz in such a small enclosue (even though a 12" speaker is not "small").

Bob Carver designed the 2700w RMS amp to compensate for the small box. Was Carver motivated by market demand for a small sub? I think so and more power to him.

I'm not sure if this is relevant, but the flagship Ampeg concert bass guitar amp/speaker cabinet is one of the most popular among rock musicians.

The amp does 300w @ 4ohms. The cabinet has 8 x 10" woofers. Low FR is 58Hz @ -3dB and 40Hz @ -10dB. SPL is a thunderous 130dB.

Here's what Ampeg has to say about choosing an array of 10" woofers over larger woofers:

"Why do we use eight 10” speakers? Because we learned early on that 10” speakers work much more efficiently than fifteens or eighteens—and if you put eight 10” speakers together, you can move a much larger column of air. In fact, you’d need five 18” or six 15” speakers to move as much air as the SVT-810AV! And they simply wouldn’t be able to respond to transient peaks as quickly as our tens."

Isn't Q the dude from Star Trek w/ God-like powers?

I don't understand 1/2 of what you guys are saying. Alls I know is, for home theater I want 2 passive cabinents w/ 2 x 15" JBL woofers in each driven by 2 mono 1000w Boulder amps. For stereo music, I'll take a pair of 12" RELs.

Or, I'll take either of the subs (I think its the gigantic one that comes w/ extenal amp & XOver) from Wilson Audio. With Wilson, I wouldn't need more than one sub.