Does one need a subwoofer for quality bass?

Assuming one has a treated room , what does one look for in quality bass reproduction. Stereophile seems to segregate speakers based on how low they go. What is the reason for this? Is more bass more “accurate” (here’s that word again!) or is just all personal preference?

ML models vary in bass response – CLX and Summits are on opposite extremes. Once re-released, if the new Summit will have more bass than the Spire, does that mean it will be better bass for musical enjoyment or just more bass slam for more oomph?

Does one need a subwoofer for quality bass? I have heard that adding a subwoofer contrasts the bass with the mids and highs, improving them in the process. Is this true or is it a myth?

(I am assuming that if one’s room is partially treated, the bass gets stronger but muddier, and may be outright anemic in an untreated room)

Thanks

For me with my Vantages, 2-channel stereo listening does NOT involve my subwoofer. (I set my Vantages to LARGE.) I am in the camp where a subwoofer may introduce low frequency emphasis that is not meant to be there on the original recording. I use my sub when i play multi-channel music and movies.

David Matz said:

What is the reason for this? Is more bass more “accurate” (here’s that word again!) or is just all personal preference?

Click to expand...

For 2-channel only, if a speaker can reproduce well down to 40 Hz or lower, that should be adequate. The key word is "well." This means play at an acceptably high volume, and with acceptably low distortion. Of course, being able to play to a lower frequency is even better. But most music has little useful content below 40 Hz.

For home theater I'd say a subwoofer is mandatory because sound effects down to 20 or 30 Hz are common, and are a necessary part of the experience.

--Ethan

I was in the camp that beleived that I absolutely needed a subwoofer for good two channel sound.

That has changed. Now that I have a better source player (Rega Apollo), the 2 channel bass is amazing on good recordings and my current subwoofer detracts from that. I actually could not beleive the bass I was getting from the Clarity's whith the change is source.. had to do a double take and quite enjoy it now.

For HT, the swubwoofer is absolutely necessary.

Agree with Ethan -- a sub should not be necessary for two-channel, assuming your speakers are capable full-range speakers. But one is pretty much mandatory for quality home theater.

What you are looking for is not necessarily "bass slam" which really refers to volume of the bass more than anything. You want a setup that can deliver an even frequency response (within about 3 db or so) down to at least 40 hz. and preferably 30 hz. or lower. You want accurate bass transients (meaning not muddy, but clear transients -- often referred to as quick or taut bass), and you want distortion-free bass.

To get all this, the speaker is only part of the equation. Associated components (source, preamp, amps), cabling, and the acoustics of the room and speaker placement all make a big difference in the quality of bass for two-channel listening.

I am talking music only, not the boom and bang of Video sources. I come from a family of musicians, I never played an instrument, so you could call me the listener. I used to marvel when they all got together at our house for a rehearsal. I took note of how the bass player and the drummer not only the sound they produced, but the vibration on the floor. Presently I have Difinitve speakers, and my two towers have 1,500 watts each. also the center has another 300 watts for the low range, and still something was missing, so I bought my first sub-woofer thinking what a mistake this is going to be. When I fired it up for the first time it almost brought tears to my eyes, reminding me when years ago my family got together and played live music! Now I am a firm believer in a sub-woofer in a 2.1, or 5.1 set etc. :music:

With my Vistas (in my room) I think it is essential. The Whise Profunder blends in with the fast ML sound really well. I've tuned mine in very accurately with a sub management system (DSP1124P) - There's something missing if the sub is not on. And not just bass - the whole range sounds less coloured (strange, but true), less constrained and more agile if the sub is on.

The Summits and the Spire are fine without it, but I like the extra weight from the Descent on two channel recordings myself.

I did not want, nor did I think I would need to add a sub to my 2 Ch set up, but when I did, it made a huge difference. That said, I have older generation MLs in my 2 Ch enviorment and at least with my room and particular speakers (Monolith III's) is made a huge (favorable) difference for me.

I find a huge difference in recording material as well as some CDs sound great without a sub boost but others just need that exstra umph in my room.

David Matz said:

Assuming one has a treated room , what does one look for in quality bass reproduction. Stereophile seems to segregate speakers based on how low they go. What is the reason for this? Is more bass more “accurate” (here’s that word again!) or is just all personal preference?

ML models vary in bass response – CLX and Summits are on opposite extremes. Once re-released, if the new Summit will have more bass than the Spire, does that mean it will be better bass for musical enjoyment or just more bass slam for more oomph?

Does one need a subwoofer for quality bass? I have heard that adding a subwoofer contrasts the bass with the mids and highs, improving them in the process. Is this true or is it a myth?

(I am assuming that if one’s room is partially treated, the bass gets stronger but muddier, and may be outright anemic in an untreated room)

Thanks

Click to expand...

What kind of music do you listen to?

I must say that IME all but the largest dynamic driver systems, big Wilson's, VMPS's, and others, require a sub to generate a realistic bottom end of large orchestral music, organ and some modern, electronic music. On the other hand, if your listening is limited to jazz, chamber, and female vocals you may not need a sub.

SundayNiagara said:

What kind of music do you listen to?

Click to expand...

Blues, rock, jazz, vocals, classical piano & violin.

tonepub said:

The Summits and the Spire are fine without it, but I like the extra weight from the Descent on two channel recordings myself.

Click to expand...

Jeff,

Sounds like you feel the weight of the bass more as you get the more expensive Logans. Adding the subs adds even more weight to the bass. Is this correct?

With the Monolith III I get good bass but once the sub is on it has more depth. No pun intended. I have the sub set very low 35 Hz. It adds weight to the music when needed. I have done much A-B testing with and without the sub. I like having the sub.

Depends on the speakers. I want bass to 20 hz ! That being said I would take tight real bass to 40 hz rather than loose flabby bass at 20 !

David Matz said:

Jeff,

Sounds like you feel the weight of the bass more as you get the more expensive Logans. Adding the subs adds even more weight to the bass. Is this correct?

Click to expand...

Definitely. But as Risbet said earlier, it depends a lot on what kind of music you listen to as well. I do actually listen to a fair amount of large scale symphonic music from time to time as well as a fair amount of electronic music and even a bit of hip-hop now and then.

The sub is something you can always add later if you feel if your setup doesn't have enough grunt. The Descent is pretty subtle most of the time, but when the music goes way down there, you can really get that last bit of oomph.

In a relatively small room (treated, so inefficient acoustically) I use two self-made subs for extension of the front channels (SL3s)

One sub kicks in from 80Hz downwards and the other one kicks in from 40Hz downwards (they are not in phase so there are partial cancellations)

At high volumes I am always amazed at the sort of power the big sub needs to absorb in order to keep things flat down to 20-odd Hz. It is almost as much as all the other amps put together, even though it has a crossover frequency of only 40Hz!
At high volumes obviously it handles energy of higher frequencies, but still it maxes out 1300 Watts on some recordings.

I have recently played 'Elixir' by Garbarek, lots of deep drums. Without the big sub it is not the same, and without the 'normal' sub it is even less impressive.
It is not that the SL3s can't handle it, but at high volumes you need lots of cone surface and lots of watts. Simple as that.

I've mentioned this before, but with my Summits and a Descent sub, I turn off the sub when listening to music. When using the system as a 7.2 home theater, of course, the sub is absolutely required, and I also have one it the back of the room.

However, with my prior system with Ascents (not the 'i'), the sub was needed when listening to music.

In my previous system with the ReQuests I didn't so much need the sub as much as I really enjoyed the extension and foundation that it provided the system. Similar to what Jeff has stated above, I listen to a fair share of large scale orchestral music as well as Trance and House. Not only do I get more uuummmppphhh on the bottom, I also get a better sense of hall ambiance.

With my new CLS setup I've always had the sub integrated, so I really can't answer the question of whether I need it or not, I simply have always had it that way. I should add that I am running a REL Stadium II, which is well known for the flexibility it presents when integrating it into a system as well as for being a very musical sub, taking on the characteristics of your main amp quite well as opposed to being of the THUMP, THUMP variety.

Personally I think it adds a noticible weight to the music that was immediately lacking when I would shut the sub off using the ReQuests.

I think it all depends on your equipment, your sub of choice, your musical tastes and your room.

David Matz said:

Blues, rock, jazz, vocals, classical piano & violin.

Click to expand...

What speakers are you using?