is there really a need for two subs?

I have been using two subs since the year 1981. Stereo subs greatly increase soundstage size, shape, and realism.

I agree with some of the comments above. There is a level you have to reach first before two is better than. Generally, one $1500 sub will out perform two $750 subs. Two really good subs will be even better. The sub does not have to do double duty with the bass signal from 2 channels.

you need to decide if you want nondirectional bass or quality non directional bass as it affects your music enjoyment profoundly for all the reasons stated above by other members.

Members we are, I hope, writing about bass in music, which we have all heard, and not dinosaur footsteps which even I am not old enough-- to have ever heard.---Two sub Tom

For sake of clarity and so that some of you may better understand where i'm coming from, i have two subs in my HT system, two subs in my main 2 ch system and two subs in my bedroom system. The two systems that do not have subs consist of large modified horns / tubes in one and full range drivers / mono-blocks in the other. I could probably use some subs with the horns ( -3 @ appr 30 Hz ) but finding something that can keep up with 104 db sensitivity is not that easy. The "full range" drivers actually have quite measurable output down to 5 Hz ( believe it or not ). I found this out when playing the Cardas sweep tones on the Ayre Acoustics disc.

As such, i'm surely a believer in running dual subs, but would agree that one "good" sub is better than two budget models. Obviously, placement becomes more critical with one sub but you can get good results if you put forth the effort. Sean
>