Why the fascination with subwoofers?


I have noticed many posts with questions about adding subwoofers to an audio system. Why the fascination with subwoofers? I guess I understand why any audiophile would want to hear more tight bass in their audio system, but why add a subwoofer to an existing audio system when they don’t always perform well, are costly, and are difficult to integrate with the many varied speakers offered. Additionally, why wouldn’t any audiophile first choose a speaker with a well designed bass driver designed, engineered and BUILT INTO that same cabinet? If anyone’s speakers were not giving enough tight bass, why wouldn’t that person sell those speakers and buy a pair that does have tight bass?
128x1282psyop
psyco P I totally agree with you. I think the subwoofer thing is a big step in the wrong direction. I sincerely believe most listeners are not satisfied with the sound of their systems, and they mistakenly believe that what is missing is " the bass "  
kink56,

     The real strength of a 4-sub distributed bass array system is with musical content. There are 4 subs with 10" drivers strategically positioned around the room, driven by an abundance of power with the sole responsibility of reproducing bass frequencies between 20 Hz and whatever the crossover frequency is set at.
     The result is very fast bass which is very smooth, detailed and agile.   There's also the added benefit of very good bass dynamics due to the ample power reserves. 
     Prior to using the AK Debra dba system, I was unable to seamlessly integrate very good deep bass response with my fast Magnepan 2.7QR dipole panels with either a single or dual subs.  I perceived that bass as a bit lagging and disconnected. I believe the nature of the bass produced by good dba systems will allow them to be seamlessly integrated with virtually any pair of main speakers.
     The fact that 4-sub dba systems are also excellent for ht use is just  icing on the cake.

Tim
Sorry everybody, I posted this morning after the first page and not at the end of the thread.
This is a very timely topic for me as I am about to buy some new speakers. I have listened to both the Vandersteen Treo CT and the Quatro Wood CT at Audio Connection in Verona NJ. I was very impressed with both. These demos however were performed using John Rutan's house Aesthetix amps.
My amp is a Pass X-250.8. It is powerful and has very good bass control. I would love to bring it in and demo the speakers with my electronics but the problem is that it's so heavy to put in the car along with my pre and drive for 1 1/2 hrs to Audio Connection to do a more proper comparison between the two speakers. Also, my wife and I will be moving in a couple years when she retires so my listening rooms will change over time.
My two questions are:
1) Is it better to get the Treo CT and add a Vandersteen sub that can be positioned in appropriate locations as we move or just get the Quatro CT and not bother with subs?
2) What's the consensus on adding an AR REF 6 pre in the future to compliment my Pass amp, or could anyone recommended a different similarly priced preamp?
Thanks so much for any advice.
Bruce
Why do you think you will need a subwoofer with any of those Vandersteens that you auditioned at Audio Connection? I use a subwoofer with my small stand mount speakers that only go down to 75hz. I would think those full range Vandersteens would not need a subwoofer!
I am a former AudioKinesis owner and really respect Duke's work. His Swarm is a great system. I took a similar path as I wanted smaller drivers and boxes. I use 8" drivers in 0.4 cu. ft. sealed boxes. The four boxes sit at various spots in the room. I use a Beveridge RM-3 active crossover with LP and HP boards cut at 100 Hz, Linkwitz-Riley 4th order 24 dB slope. Amplifiers for above 100 Hz are either Atma-Sphere or Music Reference, the bottom a vintage Luxman. I use this set up with my ESLs and box speakers and all I can say is I wish I did this a lot sooner. I can't see going back.