[2bigears]

leave the bass to the big box and let the monitors sing.is sub integration good enough for music these days????        

[kenk]

leave the bass to the big box and let the monitors sing.is sub integration good enough for music these days????        

First off, how small is the room?

If it is in a really small room, I would think the monitors will be good enough.

[nodiak]

Just because we're dealing with very general opinions here...my experience is one of the best speaker situations for a small room is to use one pair that are rated ~ 40hz cutoff. Speaker placement and room gain will do the rest. No sub. An 8" woofer has been enough for me. If you have to get to 20hz, maybe IB or OB subs is a good bet as they are less effected by the room. I haven't tried either , just what is said about them.
I'm going to try a diy 2way with 10" TL to ~ 300 hz, and a Fostex FE107e in OB for the rest. The 10" should get into the 20hz range, tl's have less boom in my experience. My room is narrow - 11.5' - but long -26.5' -I get some small room problems with reflections, and about half the bass issues because of the length.
Don

[2bigears]

room is 13 by 18.i can make the 13 feet 15 by simply moving the wall as it was not fastened permanently.i have three speakers on the short list but was wondering if some people used a very detailed monitor with sub rather the one box way.if anyone can advise on these speakers that would be great- speakers on list--- Ricks RC4 with powered bass driver, or XT8 array with a sub if needed or the RM 40 with powered bass driver.amp i use is a 32 watt tube with sonic frontier front end.one of these three speakers will be my new driver. will be buying from word only as remote location.any help thks.        

[toobluvr]

some discussion of monitor vs. floorstander in the context of a small room on this thread:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=26375&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

[lcrim]

I have been listening to my living room system without a sub for the last week or so, and it just sounds so much more coherent and musical that the loss of the bottom octave has been a blessing in disguise.  I have also read about "fast" subs and I guess I must need one of those or maybe I just don't need it at all.  As a result, I've been using a lot of bandwidth trying to get suggestions re: a "full range" speaker that doesn't overpower a smaller space and will work w/ my electronics.  Maybe I'm already there.
Let us know what you choose and how it works for you.

[2bigears]

thks for that.maybe a sub just muddies up a good thing.that leaves that option behind.a good speaker should be able to do all.Ricks RC4 with driven bass sounds like a good one along with the RM40 which my be too big for this room.these two speakers are very close in price,i wish i could hear them in an A-B compare test.         anyone comment on both of these well known speakers.thks

[kfr01]

I haven't heard a sub that doesn't sound like a sub yet.  

[toobluvr]

I haven't heard a sub that doesn't sound like a sub yet.  

Listen to a REL!  

Musical and fast, and easy to integrate.  Get the position, crossover and gain right, and it will disappear.  At least that was my experience in every setup that I tried it.

[DSK]

I haven't heard a sub that doesn't sound like a sub yet.  

There's no denying that a sub can take a lot of effort to properly integrate into a high-end stereo system, but once done you would never be without it (except perhaps in a small room).

The intention of a sub is to extend the lower reach of the system without adversely impacting the balance and transparency of the main speakers.

However, to achieve this you need ALL of the following:

1. high quality sub with excellent damping (HT subs need not apply)
2. measurement equipment & software (and a lot of time) to position the sub optimally and dial it in to the main speakers and room
3. address any significant room mode issues
4. ideally the rolloff slopes of the mains and sub will match for symmetrical crossover (often it is necessary to plug the ports of the mains, sealed mains will usually better integrate with sealed or ported subs than ported mains even though it means raising the xo of the sub).
5. the mains must extend down far enough that the xo point to the sub is low enough that the sub cannot be located by ear and instruments are not dragged toward the sub location.
6. the sub xo should be low enough and steep enough that the sub is 20db or more down by 200hz.

Smaller rooms will introduce room gain at higher frequencies (than larger rooms) and may make sub integration difficult without EQ, indeed a sub may not even be necessary or desirable in these instances.

Room effects often mean that the optimal sub position is not at the same position as that of the mains. This can mean that a separate sub will provide greater flexibility and a more balanced FR than one that is integrated into the main speakers.

Proper integration of a sub should make the music more open and effortless, more extended and impactful at low frequencies, and more balanced with greater dynamic range. Most of the time, you should be unaware that the sub is even there.

Most people don't have the measurement equipment and software to do this properly and have to resort to dialling in the sub by ear. This is extremely difficult to do well (I don't think I could do it) and can be very time consuming and frustrating. Most people feel they should 'hear' the sub and end up with a xo level or gain level that is too high and doesn't blend properly. Most people are also using ported mains and do not try stuffing the ports for better integration. Many subs have fixed xo points (eg. 80hz) or cannot be set low enough to prevent too much overlap, and are underdamped (easier and cheaper) sometimes deliberately for greater HT 'impact' (though inappropriate for high-end HT setups anyway... car doors should NOT sound like explosions!). Many people do not consider the rollof slopes and damping of the mains and sub when adding a sub. All these factors collude to ensure that only a small precentage of people actually optimise the integration of a sub for 2-channel systems.

If a sub is muddying up the upper bass or mids, or causing some lack of coherency or transparency, then the above criteria have not been adequately met.

Of course, all this is IMHO and IME. Many of you already know all this and more, but for those of you who don't I hope that it is of some use and you realise not to take comments like the one above to mean that subs cannot be beneficial in 2-channel systems. Cheers!  

[2bigears]

points taken and nicely said.thks for that        

[bpape]

You also need to consider what you listen to.  If you're listening to rock, there really isn't much below 45Hz anyway.  If you like Organ and classical, then I'd do the sub/sat thing.

[2bigears]

i may have to give Selah RC4 a try.i would sure like to A--B the RC4 against VMP RM40.it really sucks living in no stereo land.        

[Mike Dzurko]

There's no denying that a sub can take a lot of effort to properly integrate into a high-end stereo system, but once done you would never be without it (except perhaps in a small room).

The intention of a sub is to extend the lower reach of the system without adversely impacting the balance and transparency of the main speakers.

However, to achieve this you need ALL of the following:

1. high quality sub with excellent damping (HT subs need not apply)
2. measurement equipment & software (an ...

DSK:

I FULLY agree, excellent post  

[zybar]

There's no denying that a sub can take a lot of effort to properly integrate into a high-end stereo system, but once done you would never be without it (except perhaps in a small room).

The intention of a sub is to extend the lower reach of the system without adversely impacting the balance and transparency of the main speakers.

However, to achieve this you need ALL of the following:

1. high quality sub with excellent damping (HT subs need not apply)
2. measurement equipment & software (an ...

GREAT POST DSK!!

I found that a product such as the TacT preamp made this effort much easier and more effective (after climbing the fairly steep TacT learning curve).

George

[JoshK]

DSK's post was most excellent!  I think all should read it, read it again and then read it somemore, until you fully understand what he is saying and why it is that way.  There is only one thing I might disagree with and it is the desire to be done 20db by 200hz, and I think it should be more like 40db, but that depends on mono sub, xo point, and acoustic rolloffs.

I think another big problem that many people have, and manufacturers have only encouraged the troubles is confusing electrical rolloff with acoustic rolloff.  They are not the same! It is the acoustic rolloff, xo point and summing you need to get right, not the electrical.  Off the shelve xo's for adding subs to a stereo system that don't have a LOT of flexibility are a hope and a prayer at working out at best.   If you have measurement gear and know how to use it, you can probably make it work out ok, without it you are stumbling in the dark.

[lcrim]

I have to point out that there are those that feel that it is not possible to integrate two drivers even in a single speaker w/o having coherency issues.   Much less adding a separate enclosure to do bass frequencies only.  Many people use single driver speakers  initially probably to gain efficiency for use with a low wattage amp but then discover these other benefits.  I am probably headed in this direction.  As has been pointed out above, most music is above ~40 Hz.

I managed to get my sub much better integrated today by using the speaker level inputs rather than the line level.  My Eastern Electric MiniMax preamp inverts absolute phase and with the speaker level leads on  the sub reversed to allow for this as I had done previously to my speakers, things started to sound much better.   Also the fact that the speakers are amplified by tubes and the sub by a ss plate amp with a different order of harmonic distortion probably made the sub stand out as a source.

[brj]

As has been pointed out above, most music is above ~40 Hz.

I agree that this statement is true if you only consider the distribution of musical notes with respect to frequency (Hz).  What it tends to overlook, however, is how the acoustic energy is distributed with respect to frequency.

At a given volume level, the lowest notes deliver the largest amounts of power, and thus typically provide the foundation for a given work.  Those notes are the ones that "load" or "pressurize" a room, and often provide much of the raw force in a given piece.

Obviously, the significance of this effect will vary with the type of music.  If you listen to solo soprano recordings most of the time, you need not be concerned!  However, for those types of music that do play into the lower depths, a decision to remove, say, the lowest 5% of the frequency spectrum removes much more than 5% of the music's energy content.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with such a decision, especially since delivering all of that energy in the form of good, tight bass is difficult, and typically expensive, to do well.  Just be aware of the other implications in the decision when you make it!

(It has been awhile since I've looked at such things, but if you want to dig further into the technical side of this, perform some searches on "power spectral density" or PSD.  The term is general to the realm of signal analysis, but at some level, acoustics is really "just" the study of one particular type of signal.)

[Dusty Chalk]

Actually, some of the best sound I ever had consisted of a MF Pre -> Sunfire Jr. -> MF Power -> Spendor S3/5's.  Once you get the phase and crossover and volume tuned right, the sub just disappeared, even though the Spendor's were being used in a nearfield configuration.  Using the Sunfire's crossover was crucial, though -- when I used an integrated, and powered the speakers on a separate signal path, the synergy just melted like a wet wicked witch.

And my room was tiny.  It was terrible -- something like 10x12x7 (yes, 7, it was a basement room, with the shortened ceilings).

I truly believe that that simple phase continuous control is Sunfire's secret weapon -- the should put it in a separate box.

[john1970]

As you know I have ordered the VMPS RM40s to be used in one-half of my small living room (12 x 28 x .  Before the VMPS RM40s my system consisted of Linn Index Speakers (great acoustic suspension speaker for the early 1990s) and a pair or REL Strata III subs.  

Although the subs extended the bass down to mid-30 Hz (with corner loading), I was never able to achieve the 20 Hz bass claimed by REL.  In fact the REL Strata III driver starts to break apart at 25 Hz.  When one of the sub amps died and servicing was going to cost me 2/3 of what I paid (purchased two as discontinued / demo from dealer), I sold the working sub and the broken one.  

My next plan was to find a pair of forward firing 12" sealed subs to place underneath my Linn Speakers.  I moved away from downward firing subs because the bass does not impact you and only loads the floor.  After realizing that two new B&K subs were going to cost me ~$2K I decided to purchase a full-range set of towers.  

In theory you should be able to nicely integrate a sub with your monitor speakers assuming that the sub has the following characteristics:

1) adjustable crossover slopes (ranging from 12-24 db/octave)
2) parametric bass EQ (1 or 2 points)
3) obviously adjustable crossover points (ranging from 20 to 100 Hz)
4) soft clip circuit to prevent damage to the driver
5) for musical applications used a sealed or passive radiator system.  Ported subs with have your typical port noise (which is great for HT, but awful with music).

I hope that you find this helpful,

John