Do you need a sub, for SDA 1C's for 2 channel music??

Mr. Bubbles

I would not think a sub beneficial to any of my SDA's but do consider the 1C's to be the weakest of the bunch on the bottom end. It's no secret I am not a 1C fan (as compared to other SDA's) but as compared to most other speakers/ brands they sound great with a very extended bass (though not at a prominent level in the overall mix). Very few subs will reach as deep as the 1C's which means that adding a sub will effectively raise you lower cutoff frequency while adding volume on the bottom end, or cost you many many times over the cost of the SDA's or even other better quality amps/ pre's , etc. Most of us listen to the SDA's for their sound quality and staging. Adding a sub can (not necessarily always) introduce issues that hurt that sound quality even if they are top notch subs. I think some great subs could help but I believe the same or even less of the amount required to purchase a sub that would be of benefit could be put to much better use on other items for improvement of the sound in a system. But everyone is different. It's your money and your ears, enjoy they way you wish.

westmassguy

My 2As perform double duty for 2 channel, and Home Theater. I have 2 subs, a 12" in front, and a 10" tucked behind the sofa to rumble the butts of those seated there. My Receiver/Pre-Amp, has the MCACC auto calibration, plus several memory settings for manual configuration. I have the receiver set to 50 Hz sub crossover, since all my Polks extend below that. It's not the specified THX crossover of 80 Hz, but it's my system, and I prefer the lower crossover. The sub's levels are set conservatively via the MCACC, and my preferred Manual Setup, which is strictly distance, and level matching with a Digital SPL meter. For Home Theater, the subs are always available. For 2 channel, I can turn the subs on or off via the Receivers Digital Direct, and Pure Direct. I prefer Pure Direct with no subs. I've tested most of my favorite tracks with and with out the subs, and with very few exceptions, the subs do not improve the overall bass impact. My Living Room is about 20 X 16, and the 2As do a marvelous job in the bass region by themslves (I also upgraded the dimensional inductors, and capacitors which improved the bass output substantially in the 2As).
Granted, my subs are mid-fi, and I'm sure some uber expensive servo or motion feedback units would add that nth degree of extreme low bass to my Home Theater and certain types of music, but I'm extremely happy with my system the way it is.

heiney9

allstock wrote: »

So let me see if I understand the "anti-sub" crowd correctly. Oddly enough it seems that none of you have actually tried or experimented in this area, just surmised that I have somehow created a "ghetto bass mobile" in my house. Are you saying that sda's are the last word in bass reproduction, with no room for improvement? That speaker location that is ideal for bass response is also ideal for imaging/soundstage/sda? Perhaps your musical taste runs more towards chamber music or solo violin pieces? Whatever, the op asked a straightforward question, I offered my opinion and my experience with my own set up.

Why so defensive? No one said any of the above. The rest of us offered up our opinion as well. Don't take things personally and stop drawing incorrect conclusions about other peoples posts. No one said you had a "ghetto" set-up and for me personally I don't listen to chamber music or violin music. Also ftr, the OP is getting straight forward answers.

In my experience if people are lacking bass, especially at lower volume levels like one person said, they need to look at their gear. I'd always recommend spending the $1-1.5K on better gear rather than a sub for 2ch. Also other than line level and daisy chain how would one *properly* incorporate a sub? That right there would be a compromise many of us hard core 2CH guys wouldn't like.

H9

heiney9

Mr. Bubbles wrote: »

I would not think a sub beneficial to any of my SDA's but do consider the 1C's to be the weakest of the bunch on the bottom end. It's no secret I am not a 1C fan (as compared to other SDA's)

And you are entitled to your opinion, but I will say you are in the minority as to the 1C's. A small minority at that.

H9

Toolfan66

heiney9 wrote: »

Why so defensive? No one said any of the above. The rest of us offered up our opinion as well. Don't take things personally and stop drawing incorrect conclusions about other peoples posts. No one said you had a "ghetto" set-up and for me personally I don't listen to chamber music or violin music. Also ftr, the OP is getting straight forward answers.

In my experience if people are lacking bass, especially at lower volume levels like one person said, they need to look at their gear. I'd always recommend spending the $1-1.5K on better gear rather than a sub for 2ch. Also other than line level and daisy chain how would one *properly* incorporate a sub? That right there would be a compromise many of us hard core 2CH guys wouldn't like.

H9

This ^^^^^^

Schurkey

MOST "subwoofers" on the market are barely "woofers" let alone SUB-woofers. Adding one of these mass-market disasters is not going to provide a surplus of musical enjoyment.

A REAL subwoofer is probably a worthwhile addition to 1Cs; or most any other speaker system--movies OR music. Problem is that the $1K subwoofer price tag that arouses controversy is unlikely to buy a REAL subwoofer, even on the used market. I was toying around with the idea of adding a sub about a month ago. Used (damaged/pieces missing/outright BEAT) Velodyne ULD-15s were still advertised at ~$500, and I wouldn't touch them in that condition at that price with a ten-foot pole.

Moving the speakers--or the listening position--so that the listener(s) aren't in a bass null is the best, most efficient (some might claim "only", and with justification) solution to a lack of bass.

Room treatment/equipment positioning is CRUCIAL, and virtually no-one pays any attention to it. Even I am guilty of this to some extent.

Adding a sub can assist in getting the null out of the seating position, while leaving the listener/main speaker position in a suitable arrangement to provide good mid-bass, midrange, and treble.

Until I can find a suitable sub at a price I can tolerate...I use the Buttkicker at low volume.

motorstereo

I used to be in the no sub needed crowd with my 1.2tls. I had an m+k 12 dual push pull that really didn't seem to add much if anything. Then I stumbled across my current def tech 18'' sub which goes down to 13hz. I have it crossed at 40hz and I really like the added depth it gives the music. I have switches on my pre to turn it on or off and there's no doubt it's much better switched on. No I'm not a bass hound either and I have the sub's volume at less than 1/4 99% of the time. I'm thinking if a quality sub can help out one of polk's best it could certainly help out the lesser models.

heiney9

What music do you listen to that has instruments that go lower than about 20Hz?

You realize the 1.2's go down to about 18Hz (+/- 3db). I'd really have to question how much "extra" you are truly getting with that sub, especially with recorded music. There is so little recorded music that has sounds on it that low. I realize room interaction and placement can be a huge variable from one system to another. But the bottom line is, a properly executed SDA system w/appropriate gear has all the bases covered......pun intended.

H9

leroyjr1

heiney9 wrote: »

What music do you listen to that has instruments that go lower than about 20Hz?

You realize the 1.2's go down to about 18Hz (+/- 3db). I'd really have to question how much "extra" you are truly getting with that sub, especially with recorded music. There is so little recorded music that has sounds on it that low. I realize room interaction and placement can be a huge variable from one system to another. But the bottom line is, a properly executed SDA system w/appropriate gear has all the bases covered......pun intended.

H9

You do realize that even though SDA's go down to 20hz you can gain more authority at that frequency.

heiney9

20Hz @ +/- 3db is the same, it's either there or it's not, unless the sub is putting out a higher spl. In that case it's not apples to apples. I believe that a lot of people augmenting SDA's with subs and stating it's a large improvement have the subs running at a higher spl (more output) giving the impression of an improvement when in fact it's the sub playing louder that gives the effect. Nothing wrong with liking your system that way, but it's not attributed to the sub hitting lower, etc. It's simply a case of enhanced bass output.

Again I said "some", not "all".

H9

heiney9

Plus, no one has really shown any recorded music outside of organ and synthetic music that even approaches 20Hz on the recording. So it's pretty moot anyway.

H9

westmassguy

heiney9 wrote: »

20Hz @ +/- 3db is the same, it's either there or it's not, unless the sub is putting out a higher spl. In that case it's not apples to apples. I believe that a lot of people augmenting SDA's with subs and stating it's a large improvement have the subs running at a higher spl (more output) giving the impression of an improvement when in fact it's the sub playing louder that gives the effect. Nothing wrong with liking your system that way, but it's not attributed to the sub hitting lower, etc. It's simply a case of enhanced bass output.

Again I said "some", not "all".

H9

Well put heiney9. I have sweep test tones I use for testing woofers after re-edging or re-coning. My 2As have tremendous output at 20 Hz, which is the lowest frequency my tests will hit.

leroyjr1

westmassguy wrote: »

. I have sweep test tones I use for testing woofers after re-edging or re-coning. My 2As have tremendous output at 20 Hz, which is the lowest frequency my tests will hit.

Curious as to what tremendous output you're getting at 20hz with your 2A?

westmassguy

leroyjr1 wrote: »

Curious as to what tremendous output you're getting at 20hz with your 2A?

The sweeps start at 150, and go down from there. I don't have precision measuring equipment, just my ears, and I can see the woofers and PRs moving quite a bit.

nspindel

+1 for room treatments. I have GIK tri-traps in the four corners and six GIK 242's in quite a small room. I had thought that a bass "trap" would mean I would get less bass. It doesn't mean that at all. What I got was tighter bass. Less grunge and more punch. When my speakers want to go deep it feels effortless and natural.

SDA's are from an era before subwoofers became overly popular. They are designed and voiced to stand on their own. They are quite capable of producing tight, accurate, and natural sounding bass on their own. But they need the right power. I used to have my SDA's powered by an NAD amp, then I dropped much bigger coin on the Krell and the difference was off the charts, especially when it came to the bass. With the right power and the right acoustic setup, SDA's do not need a subwoofer.

Toolfan66

Don't need no stinking subwoofer!!








Somebody had to say it again..:razz:

F1nut

Stereo Review Magazine wrote:

We have never measured a low bass distortion level as low as that of the SRS...we found that the passive radiator response varied only a total of 7dB between 12 and 90 Hz. Polk calls the passive radiator a "sub-bass driver" with good reason...it is quite an experience. Furthermore, with the SRS it is not necessary to play the music loud to enjoy the tactile qualities of deep bass...Spectacular!

Polk Audio wrote:

SRS bass performance is breathtaking. The use of small active drivers coupled to a huge sub-bass radiator achieves a bass response that is extraordinarily tight, fast (no boominess), deep and distortion free. In fact, the distortion at 25 Hz is lower than that of many audiophile-quality tube amplifiers.

Say it again.....HARRRR, we don't need no stinkin' subwoofer.

motorstereo

Pretty much all the music I listen to benefits from the use of this sub. Sure the 1.2s go low but the def tech does it with authority and definately adds to the music.

I've gone to great lengths to set those babies up properly so no it's not the room. I also thought I had all the bases covered with just a properly set up pair of 1.2s. The dual 12" m+k was a decent sub I thought and it didn't add anything so it came out. I came across this 18" beast mainly for flipping and hooked it up on a whim. The def tech is staying put and chalk up one more misconception that I've made about these big guys. The 1.2s make excellent bass but I've found it's much much better to use a quality sub with them, cross it low and don't let the sub become noticable until you turn it off.

nspindel

motorstereo wrote: »

Pretty much all the music I listen to benefits from the use of this sub. Sure the 1.2s go low but the def tech does it with authority and definately adds to the music.

I've gone to great lengths to set those babies up properly so no it's not the room. I also thought I had all the bases covered with just a properly set up pair of 1.2s. The dual 12" m+k was a decent sub I thought and it didn't add anything so it came out. I came across this 18" beast mainly for flipping and hooked it up on a whim. The def tech is staying put and chalk up one more misconception that I've made about these big guys. The 1.2s make excellent bass but I've found it's much much better to use a quality sub with them, cross it low and don't let the sub become noticable until you turn it off.

Your gear, your ears, your money. The choice is yours. But I'm sitting here right now listening to the smallest speakers in the SDA line, and my chair is vibrating. I stick to what I said before, you need a new amp, not a subwoofer. But if you enjoy it, to each his own. The only thing I need with my hi-fi is more hours in the day to enjoy it.....

Toolfan66

nspindel wrote: »

your gear, your ears, your money. The choice is yours. But i'm sitting here right now listening to the smallest speakers in the sda line, and my chair is vibrating. I stick to what i said before, you need a new amp, not a subwoofer. But if you enjoy it, to each his own. The only thing i need with my hi-fi is more hours in the day to enjoy it.....

qft..

motorstereo

nspindel wrote: »

Your gear, your ears, your money. The choice is yours. But I'm sitting here right now listening to the smallest speakers in the SDA line, and my chair is vibrating. I stick to what I said before, you need a new amp, not a subwoofer. But if you enjoy it, to each his own. The only thing I need with my hi-fi is more hours in the day to enjoy it.....

I do believe you're right. My recently overhauled 650wpc Mcintosh amp just ain't cutting the mustard. Would you have any suggestions on what I might upgrade to:biggrin:?
On a serious note though I do agree there just isn't enough time in the day to enjoy the tunes. Enjoy your set up as I will mine.

nspindel

Just because it's a 650wpc Mac doesn't mean it's an ideal fit for your SDA's. If you're finding the sound to be lacking to the point where you need to add a sub to speakers that were designed to stand on their own, maybe it's not a great match. Doesn't mean it's not a great amp, just might not be the right amp for your speakers. Building a hi-fi system is all about synergy.

allstock

motorstereo wrote: »

Pretty much all the music I listen to benefits from the use of this sub. Sure the 1.2s go low but the def tech does it with authority and definately adds to the music.

I've gone to great lengths to set those babies up properly so no it's not the room. I also thought I had all the bases covered with just a properly set up pair of 1.2s. The dual 12" m+k was a decent sub I thought and it didn't add anything so it came out. I came across this 18" beast mainly for flipping and hooked it up on a whim. The def tech is staying put and chalk up one more misconception that I've made about these big guys. The 1.2s make excellent bass but I've found it's much much better to use a quality sub with them, cross it low and don't let the sub become noticable until you turn it off.

Hey Motorstereo your wasting your breath. Once the (literally) old boys have spoken, no further debate is necessary.

motorstereo

nspindel wrote: »

Just because it's a 650wpc Mac doesn't mean it's an ideal fit for your SDA's. If you're finding the sound to be lacking to the point where you need to add a sub to speakers that were designed to stand on their own, maybe it's not a great match. Doesn't mean it's not a great amp, just might not be the right amp for your speakers. Building a hi-fi system is all about synergy.

The Mac has great synergy with the polks; by far the best I've heard out of the dozen or so amps that I've had. It replaced and handily beat a carver tfm 45 which wasn't exactly a slouch. I've also never heard anyone complain about a lack of bass coming from Mcintosh gear. What I do know for a fact is that this 18'' sub digs deeper than the 1.2s and adds to the overall experience. On my Yamaha pre there's a switch for both pre outs; one controls the sub and one for the mac. Every now and then I'll switch the sub off. It's not a night and day difference but it is noticable. At this point I'm finding it's all the little things combined that add up to a great sounding set up. Imo a big set of speakers like the 1.2s certainly are deserving of a big amp, a big sub, and a big room to round out that synergy.

nspindel

nspindel wrote: »

Your gear, your ears, your money. The choice is yours.

Not much more to add. Enjoy.

brgman

If the SDA's don't have dynamat on the basket and Larry's rings you are missing out on the bass available.

westmassguy

brgman wrote: »

If the SDA's don't have dynamat on the basket and Larry's rings you are missing out on the bass available.

And the dimensional woofer's inductor upgrade too. Made a huge difference with my 2As

Toolfan66

allstock wrote: »

Hey Motorstereo your wasting your breath. Once the (literally) old boys have spoken, no further debate is necessary.

Only your saying that, I have no problem it this thread as I don't see where anybody else does. We all have our own thoughts on this. I'm not saying your wrong in what your doing.

Relax, your just not going to get anyone that is against it to try it..

heiney9

Again not one sub user has shown me any recorded music (for 2ch, not HT mutichannel) that plays lower than the SDA's can reproduce. There simply aren't that many recordings out there that have output below about 25Hz.............so whatever you are hearing out of your subs is NOT some magical low hitting bass because the source you are feeding it doesn't contain it.

Motostereo your Mac deserves a much better pre than a Yamaha. That's part of your bottle neck right there.

H9

pearsall001

allstock wrote: »

Hey Motorstereo your wasting your breath. Once the (literally) old boys have spoken, no further debate is necessary.

How true. But for some reason the anti-sub group always assume adding a sub/subs is all about adding to the bottom end. That is just the tip of the iceberg as far as what they add to the musical experience. Keep in mind the speakers will now have a much sweeter, cleaner, clearer midrange & midbass along with taming nasty room nodes. The amp will be less burdened from trying to power the speakers woofers which are almost guaranteed to be in the wrong place in the room for proper bass reproduction. It's a fasinating topic but very few take the time to research the benefits. Sure the 1.2 dig deep but they would be transformed into a much more musical sounding speaker mated with a sub/subs. Now it goes without saying I'm talking about a hi-quality sube here, not the wall shaking subs designed for HT use. There's a big difference.