1. Home
    2. >
  2. Forum
    3. >
  3. Home Audio Forum
    4. >
  4. Subwoofers Forum
    5. >
  5. Archive through February 27, 2008 Forum
    6. >

Of course you need two subs!

 

Pierre Rousseau
New member
Username: Pierre1958

Post Number: 5
Registered: Oct-07
Posted on   
1. Subwoofers may NOT be completely non-directionless. At frequencies below 30hz you may not be able to hear where the bass is coming from, but you can sure feel it on your body, like wind blowing.
2. With a single subwoofer there is also the issue of recordings with low-frequency phase differences between stereo channels. When these signals are combined in a single mono subwoofer, they often cancel each other out.

See http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#twosubwoofers for a more complete explanation.

A strong argument for the single subwoofer camp may be that sounds over 40hz reverberate in the speakers at double the frequency, that is from 80hz and up, creating a positive aural image of the low frequency SOUND, not the vibration, coming from the speakers, and not the subwoofer, but I am not well-informed about this theory. And it still leaves the issue of bodily FEELING the mono source of the single subwoofer. (I think this visceral sensitivity varies amongst individuals) It seems to me that both these two issues are smoothly resolved by using subwoofers in stereo pairs.

To speculate: It goes similarly in a multi-channel home theater setting, with reservation. It is against my intuition that seven subwoofers in one room will work better than two. Is four better, leaving the rear channels and center without a sub? I think not, because I understand that very few DVD's have full-range recordings in all but the front main channels. The caveat is that I'm apparently a stereophile and my biased opinion is that 5 or 7 channel audio is clearly commercialized nonsense.

I'm first getting two SVS 16-46 PCI's so I can run them in stereo ... and then saving for the new SVS MBS-01 bookshelf speakers to replace my Polk Audio RT35i's, because I like the soft-dome tweeters and the woofers, and while it may be pervasively subjective, there's something silky smooth about brand consistency. I'll test the Polks first. Maybe they're great with the subwoofers.

I'll place the speakers on heavy steel stands, loaded with lead shot, about 8' apart and the subwoofers flanking them ... All at least 3' from the wall. The 24" stands will bring the height of the 17" speakers to 41", which is 8" lower than the subwoofers - a powerful visual presentation and I think with delicate lower-volume performance for very little money, especially if I keep the Polks.

Another possible speaker choice for me to achieve this goal would be a pair of Joseph Audio RM7si Signature Mk.2's.

In such a stereo subwoofer setup, one can experiment with higher low-pass frequency crossover, to better mask the crossover interference.

Also, I consider all audio over 90 db to be no more than noise ... why? Because it causes ear damage. I am very happy with my 50 watt per channel NAD c325bee and I believe I will also be very happy with my low-power 325 watt mono SV's.

To save even more money, I run my speakers on 12 gauge thick-insulated electrical wire.
 

Nuck
Gold Member
Username: Nuck

Post Number: 9034
Registered: Dec-04
Posted on   
k
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us