Do I really want to add a sub?

pearsall001

That's the big question I have. I've read a lot about the benefits of adding a quality sub to a two channel system. Apparently if pays off regardless of how well your speakers perform bass wise. The description's I hear are that it increases the soundstage in all directions, projects a better separation of instruments within the soundstage & just gives you much more of a feeling of being there. The only drawback is the integration, it has to be flawless to pull it off. Set up properly you shouldn't even know you have a sub running except in the musical experience. Here's a list of subs that I'm checking into. Feel free to comment on your experiences & recommendations.

Polk DSW Pro 500 - REL T1 or R 305 - ACI Force XL - Velodyne DD-10 - Totem Storm - Revel Concerta B12 - Vandersteen 2Wq - Sunfire True Subwoofer EQ.

PolkThug

I'd want one for the <40Hz stuff. Like you said, it all depends on how you can integrate it. I know that freeing up some of the bass duties can help some midrange speakers.

Early B.

Only one way to find out....


Tell us about your placement options. Can the sub be placed between the speakers?

Have you considered replacing the SVS and going with dual subs for both HT and music?

madmax

The sub should match the speed of the main speakers. Not a problem unless you have high efficiency drivers, ribbons, eletrostatics or horns. If you do then look for a quick subwoofer. Subs are fun, unnecesary and require a user who can control themselves.
madmax

Early B.

Pear - you'd be better off upgrading to the AAD 2003's or some other kind of full range speaker, thus foregoing the need for a sub(s).

In addition to the sub(s), you'll need an external crossover and amplifier (if subs are passive, and they should be), cables, power cord, and perhaps some sort of equalization system, all of which add cost and extra junk in the signal path.

hearingimpared

Phil, what is wrong with the SVS you have?

I agree with EB, you'd be better of with a full ranges speaker like the floorstanding AADs we saw/heard at Quest for Sound.

Face

How about hooking up a pair of subs in parallel to your current speakers?

I'm thinking about going to some smaller mains with a pair of custom built subs. They have identical efficiencies which will make things easier. But I'll have to run test tones or room eq wizard to determine the crossover point and then build them to blend in with the mains.

pearsall001

hearingimpared wrote: »

Phil, what is wrong with the SVS you have?

I agree with EB, you'd be better of with a full ranges speaker like the floorstanding AADs we saw/heard at Quest for Sound.

Joe & EB,
The SVS in great for HT but falls short for two channel as far as I'm concerned.

Right now I'm enjoying the AAD 2001's too much to think about letting them go. Especially now that they're under Krell power! Those puppies are singing up a storm!

I'm just kicking the sub idea around & was looking for feedback. Probably won't happen but you never know.

But I were to give it a shot, which sub would you recommend.

VR3

VMPS kicks butt man ---

I don't like Brian.. but man are his subs accurate

jm1

pearsall001 wrote: »

Joe & EB,
The SVS in great for HT but falls short for two channel as far as I'm concerned.

Right now I'm enjoying the AAD 2001's too much to think about letting them go. Especially now that they're under Krell power! Those puppies are singing up a storm!

I'm just kicking the sub idea around & was looking for feedback. Probably won't happen but you never know.

But I were to give it a shot, which sub would you recommend.

I have not heard the Plus series so I cannot directly comment on them. On the other hand, I will say that the SVS PC-Ultra series integrates extremely well with the brilliant Dynaudio Confidence C1 monitors. I also use an external active crossover.

There is someone on the net who has made it his mission to review subs. I believe his name is ‘Criagsub’ on some of the forums. A couple of months ago when I last found his review list, the JL Audio Fathom f113 and the SVS PB13-Ultra were at the top. IIRC, the PB13-Ultra edged out the Fathom f113 in the two channel listening category as well as scoring higher overall.

The lowest octave contains the ambient information cues which help to recreate the acoustical space of the recording. Having this information reproduced makes the recording more realistic. Regardless of the L+R speakers I have, I will always have some means of reproducing the lowest octave of information.

If you decide to pursue this, I believe I saved some articles on where the crossover frequency should be. Let me know if you are interested and I will have a look and forward any documents I find. I think I may have also posted some on the forum. I can also try to describe how I integrate the phase between the sub and monitor as I have not seen this mentioned anywhere.

If you are happy with your current system and AAD 2001's, I would highly recommend making your system capable of reproducing the full audio spectrum. Think of a sub as a speaker dedicated to reproducing a specific range of frequencies. As with any speaker, some are better than others. Move past the misconception that its bad to have a sub in a two channel system.

treitz3

If you are in no hurry, Polk has a new sub coming out soon that you might be interested in. It's called the DSWmicropro4000. Evaluations to come.

The descriptive words that you explain are accurate indeed, but only with proper integration. Admittedly, this can be a difficult task. However, when done the end result is very pleasing to the ear. Yes, getting a full range speaker does help but I like to tweak the spectrum of frequencies to the room and genre of music and having a sub helps to do just this.

I don't know what the Tyler Acoustic Talos 7U's that I have go down to, but with my amp, it sounds like they do not require a sub, yet I find myself continually keeping the sub in the mix. Not very loud, mind you, but definitely in the mix [I don't like boom at the bottom]. Having the Velodyne SMS-1 helps me with the integration between the sub and the mains and is infinitely adjustable to achieve what you would want to do to the spectrum of frequencies.

I have heard very few speakers that couldn't use the benefits of a properly integrated sub

Systems

You might want to add Bag End to your list of choices.For music they are fabulous with very tight detailed bass.http://ultimateavmag.com/subwoofers/1104bagend/

Music Joe

I think you're going to need one with very quick attack and low overhang to integrate with a Phil Jones built speaker.

hockeyboy

YES> Go SVS

dorokusai

No, don't do it, terrible idea.

pearsall001

dorokusai wrote: »

No, don't do it, terrible idea.

Not even with the new Polk subs. Surely you jest.

dorokusai

Nah, just trying to be different.

pearsall001

Music Joe wrote: »

I think you're going to need one with very quick attack and low overhang to integrate with a Phil Jones built speaker.

I take it that you know a little about Phil Jones & his incredible speaker designs. Those Soliloquy 6.5's that you have are another one of Phil's masterpieces. Any suggestions on what would integrate with my AAD 2001's.

pearsall001

dorokusai wrote: »

Nah, just trying to be different.

Just how good are those new Polk DSW Pro subs. Nothing but the truth now.

dorokusai

pearsall001 wrote: »

Just how good are those new Polk DSW Pro subs. Nothing but the truth now.

They haven't made a subwoofer like the DSW series in a decade, and it's about time.

I-SIG

You gotta do it, man! As stated, you need to take your time with a 1/3 octave bass CD that goes to 20hz or below. When I did my setup with the single SVS it probably took 3-4 (or more?) hours doing a sweep, plotting in Excel, making a change, doing a sweep, plotting it, comparing it, etc. It's well worth the effort.

Unfortunately with my room response a sub is absolutely necessary or else I have a 10+ dB canyon.

Wes

Music Joe

pearsall001 wrote: »

I take it that you know a little about Phil Jones & his incredible speaker designs. Those Soliloquy 6.5's that you have are another one of Phil's masterpieces. Any suggestions on what would integrate with my AAD 2001's.

Comparing notes and rambling on and on...as I tend to. So forgive me in advance
I think the AAD's are a cut above anything in the Soliloquy line, as put together by Mr. Berman. I think Phil had a bigger hand in AAD production.
Reading a review, I'm reminded how Phil Jones increased output ability with very low coloration. A 5" metal matrix woofer in a lead lined cabinet that'll do 32hz in a 14x20 room! Just amazing. A solid step in the direction of those $12,500 AAD 7001i monitors.
Phil, a bass player himself, designs speakers that deliver a great in room construct of that instrument, and it does a great piano which ain't easy.
I do love my 6.5's, they're efficiency, although not as advertised, is a strong suite. The added rigidity lowered coloration and increased the jump(?)boogie. They've always been focused stable imagers and reproduce the nooks,crannys,texture, have low volume musicality and now it hangs together at high volume(to me)as well.
The poly 6 inchers in the 6.5's appear like they are molded or machined to be thinner closer to the surround. I think mine are now at an elbow where its pointless w/o a better driver. Those AAD's of yours w/ metal ceramic matrix woofer and waveguide aluminum tweeter and absolutely knuckle-buster cabinets are a more refined next level over Soliloquy.

My rookie subwoofer hypothosis...with full response from a pair of point source sized units means you probably won't want to mess with what they do already. I too am kicking around the idea of subwoofer. HT soundtrack effect envy?

Important to me is a sub that leaves the mains alone and puts nothing in their signal path. Agree?
No bloat or overblown unless I add it. 1 or 2, Big or small? Choices...2 smaller units near the mains but then there's all the cords and wires. Twice the headache? And they may not work well there.
One of those Velodyne SMS-1 controllers seems a must? I haven't heard what it can do but, logically it seems a needed tool.

I'm seeing these great reviews over on AVS about all these new internet only (big&ugly) monster-subs in well braced cabinets with class D plate amps and said by many to be musical. I notice they all have pretty limited adjustments. But prices are low enough to consider the SMS dsp thingy.
The DD18 I did hear was very impressive for music...so big woofer with class D power can jump or boogie...impressive price too
I've read the phrase 'fast bass' is a misnomer so whatever that sound of attack and no bloaty overhang is...I think it's what we would clearly notice it if we lost it or messed it up.

Is there a non-gigantic high-powered decent looking sub that IS musical and has parametric,variable phase,30hz cut-off,high level inputs.
This guy at another forum seems to be providing a nice service and I've found the thread an interesting if laboured read. Not absolute but could provide aid to winnow the field.

hobbyist subwoofer ranking post

More ((THUNK)) to the slab bass, like a '68 camero hitting a tree near you're driveway

steveinaz

If you are really fussy about tight controlled bass, it's very difficult. The big problem is, you are a slave to the listening room---it's fine if it works to your advantage, but if it doesn't it can be tough to get the sound you're looking for.

I tried an SVS 29-31PC+ (I think?) I just couldn't get what I was looking for out of 2-channel. But I'm sure my room at the time, and the furniture played a role. My "curves" actually looked really good, even the guys at SVS were impressed, but I felt the bass was a bit muddy. I think my set-up was too cramped. The house I have now would probably work much better; the livingroom is very deep as it is actually 3 rooms in length. The kitchen/dining room/livingroom are all in one huge space.

treitz3

pearsall001 wrote: »

Just how good are those new Polk DSW Pro subs. Nothing but the truth now.

I am in possession of one and trust me, I will be honest. This sub is unique compared to others I have seen and has a built in mic system to tame the acoustics to the rooms properties. Beautiful looking sub, gotta give it that. Hooking it up as we speak, but no further comment will be made for approximately eight more days.

Early B.

Music Joe wrote: »

I think the AAD's are a cut above anything in the Soliloquy line, as put together by Mr. Berman. I think Phil had a bigger hand in AAD production.

I've had very limited experience with both brands (Soliloquy 5.3 and AAD 2002). AAD exaggerates its build quality with eloquent descriptions. For instance, they claim the cabinets are lead lined, but when I opened up the AAD, there were a couple of lead patches, just enough to say it has lead in it. I will say, though, that the bass from the AAD was very impressive and not an exaggeration at all.

Of course, I'm only guessing, but I'd be willing to bet that the Soliloquy 6.5 and the AAD 2003 floorstanders would sound very similar. One thing Phil Jones can certainly do -- that's extract a whole bunch of bass out of 6" drivers.

BlueMDPicker

I use a single passive sub (Revel Sub15) in the right corner of the soundstage and a sub amp/xover (Revel LE-1) with my Revel Ultima Gems in a space that is impossibly demanding. The listening room is 18x34, open half of its right flank, with a ceiling that slopes from 10' to 20'. It sounds spectacular and no one who has heard the system has a clue there's a sub in the mix (or where the sub is located for that matter.)

The genesis of this system was Polk RTA-12C's with a Polk PSW-650 that I threw together for ****-n-grins one weekend. I was completely shocked, after the array of speakers and gear that had cycled through this space, what had been lacking: a balanced presentation across the audible range.

I encourage you to experiment, set aside the perceived need for two subs, and discover what might be awaiting. Have fun!

pearsall001

BlueMDPicker wrote: »

I use a single passive sub (Revel Sub15) in the right corner of the soundstage and a sub amp/xover (Revel LE-1) with my Revel Ultima Gems in a space that is impossibly demanding. The listening room is 18x34, open half of its right flank, with a ceiling that slopes from 10' to 20'. It sounds spectacular and no one who has heard the system has a clue there's a sub in the mix (or where the sub is located for that matter.)

The genesis of this system was Polk RTA-12C's with a Polk PSW-650 that I threw together for ****-n-grins one weekend. I was completely shocked, after the array of speakers and gear that had cycled through this space, what had been lacking: a balanced presentation across the audible range.

I encourage you to experiment, set aside the perceived need for two subs, and discover what might be awaiting. Have fun!

Speaking of the devil. I stopped in a HT showroom today & inquired about subs. He doesn't stock much gear because he is strictly a custom installer. He has a small setup just to show people his quality of work.

His highest recommendaton was for Revel subs for both HT & two channel. He couldn't say enough good things about them & he said he can get me any sub of my choice. And that's from all manuf. He wasn't pushing anything on his display floor...because he really doesn't have one. I'll be checking into them, that's for sure.

hockeyboy

I agree with zero. Not just one sub, two. My passive SVS 20-39's are bomb. Not a space save by any means however.

[Deleted User]

I would definitely recommend the sunfire subs. To me, I have not experienced anything comparable to it. I have two sub setup and the sunfire signature that I have has dual 13 inches, and it is much smaller in size compared to other manufactures 12 inch and some 10 subs. The reason I have two, well, the sunfire goes very very low even at low volumes on top of that will definitely feel the vibrations! But I just would not recommend the sunfire's for music though, it is awesome for movies. The polk subs blend very well on my experience with them while listening to music.