How many on ASR don't runs subs of any kind.? & why.....

[Sal1950]

At one stage, I ran a 4.0 setup using 4 Quad Electrostatic speakers .... it sounded great! But it failed the WAF.... and was ultimately retired in favour of other more "living space friendly" alternatives....

Bummer.

 

[Mike123]

My room resonances are 41/65/82/130/164 Hz. I have a lot of bass and I have to cut it down a lot with the DSP. After digital correction I have a linear frequency range from 35 Hz. I don't think I need two more boxes.

 

[Robbo99999]

I will once again reiterate that subs are not for extending your low frequency range or volume but to smooth out room nodes by taking advantage of multiple sound sources. This is relevant up to about 160hz in most rooms.

Well it can be for extending your low frequency range, depends what type of speakers you have.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I will once again reiterate that subs are not for extending your low frequency range or volume but to smooth out room nodes modes by taking advantage of multiple sound sources. This is relevant up to about 160hz in most rooms.

FIFY

 

[MattHooper]

Anyway, so much of what we hear/like/dislike in our systems .... I really believe comes down to low frequency response....
....how It sets the foundation.
Like Toole and Olive estimate, weighs in at maybe 30% in determining subjective preference.
Must admit, I think low frequency performance's contribution to SQ, is somewhere between 10X-100X more important than electronics SINAD, amp types, yada, etc.

Despite the emphasis many audiophiles put on obsessively chasing low, flat bass response with multiple subwoofers, room, correction, etc.

In practice, having had many different floor, standing loudspeakers in my room over the past several decades, I’ve never really had a problem getting very satisfying bass. Without any heroic measures beyond just moving the speakers around. (I have a 15’ x 13’ room and my floor standing speakers tended to range from 25 to 30/35 Hz).

I’m not talking of course about technical perfection. No doubt room sweeps would show some room nodes.

But subjectively, the bass sounded very even and satisfying to me with almost all of my loudspeakers. When there was the occasional obvious node or contribution from the room… it was occasional. Not at all determinative to my enjoying the bass overall.

And I know there are those who will always say “ you don’t know what you’re missing until you’ve been more rigorous about addressing the bass performance in your room.” I’ve tried that too, and didn’t find it a revelation.

 

[Sal1950]

And I know there are those who will always say “ you don’t know what you’re missing until you’ve been more rigorous about addressing the bass performance in your room.” I’ve tried that too, and didn’t find it a revelation.

Maybe you didn't use correct info - measurements, etc ?

 

[xanalog]

In practice, having had many different floor[,] standing loudspeakers in my room over the past several decades, I’ve never really had a problem getting very satisfying bass.

I think your reference is to 'full range' types, and your assessment is my subjective preference.

Bass-content at anything lower than F3=40Hz, gives me the heebie-jeebies.
After ~10 minutes of bass-listening, I feel drained and any further sustained exposure becomes tiring and painful... no matter, what genre.

Similar negative physical affects to those that have been true for motorcyclist, even with correctly-fitted helmets and earplugs.
[ymmv, in either case.]

 

[Snarfie]

Despite the emphasis many audiophiles put on obsessively chasing low, flat bass response with multiple subwoofers, room, correction, etc.

In practice, having had many different floor, standing loudspeakers in my room over the past several decades, I’ve never really had a problem getting very satisfying bass. Without any heroic measures beyond just moving the speakers around. (I have a 15’ x 13’ room and my floor standing speakers tended to range from 25 to 30/35 Hz).

I’m not talking of course about technical perfection. No doubt room sweeps would show some room nodes.

But subjectively, the bass sounded very even and satisfying to me with almost all of my loudspeakers. When there was the occasional obvious node or contribution from the room… it was occasional. Not at all determinative to my enjoying the bass overall.

And I know there are those who will always say “ you don’t know what you’re missing until you’ve been more rigorous about addressing the bass performance in your room.” I’ve tried that too, and didn’t find it a revelation.

Properties of speakers that creates a large and precise soundstage

Ha, that's interesting. Have not listened to this particular model (but a smaller passive one), but have noticed a general tendency that the moment dome or mini-cone arrays are involved, chances are pretty high that someone messes up the sound quality in an unrivaled manner. My guess would be...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Your room was renovated by a professional acoustician, i guess that will also solve your bass respons for the better an because of that a subwoofer will do not much for you than it is obvious you find it not a revelation.
Would be interesting to know when you first measured/corrected your room with DSP your room could sound or come close as renovated by a proffesionals acoustician.
Above i did with DSP an got ride of my 2 subwoofers i'm quite happy with the result.

 

[Joe852]

Despite the emphasis many audiophiles put on obsessively chasing low, flat bass response with multiple subwoofers, room, correction, etc.

In practice, having had many different floor, standing loudspeakers in my room over the past several decades, I’ve never really had a problem getting very satisfying bass. Without any heroic measures beyond just moving the speakers around. (I have a 15’ x 13’ room and my floor standing speakers tended to range from 25 to 30/35 Hz).

I’m not talking of course about technical perfection. No doubt room sweeps would show some room nodes.

But subjectively, the bass sounded very even and satisfying to me with almost all of my loudspeakers. When there was the occasional obvious node or contribution from the room… it was occasional. Not at all determinative to my enjoying the bass overall.

And I know there are those who will always say “ you don’t know what you’re missing until you’ve been more rigorous about addressing the bass performance in your room.” I’ve tried that too, and didn’t find it a revelation.

If you're in a bad room the solution is to move to a house with a good room. That probably means a big room and fairly light weight construction. Wood frame and drywall lets the energy escape. I had a system in the basement of a little brick house. I eq'd the bass to +-1 db. I had a couple dozen homemade bass traps. They made a pretty big difference but it never sounded right. Now I'm in a big room in a house with wood frame construction that lets a lot of bass energy pass through the walls. I measured it and there are still pretty big variances in the bass when measuring a sine wave but I don't notice it with music or movies.

 

[Ktacos]

Wish I could run my subs. My last desktop was handling the crossover spoofing the 5.1 surround output but that thing died and good dsp units aren't really affordable atm. One day I'll get them going again.

 

[dualazmak]

Just for your reference...

- Reproduction and listening/hearing/feeling sensations to 16 Hz (organ) sound with my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active stereo audio system having big-heavy active L&R sub-woofers: #782

- A nice smooth-jazz album for bass (low Fq) and higher Fq tonality check and tuning: #63(remote thread)

- Summary of critical factors in integration of subwoofer(s) and main woofers in our individual acoustic environments: #3(remote thread)

- The latest system setup of my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active audio rig, including updated startup/ignition sequences and shutdown sequences: as of June 26, 2024: #931

- The latest Fq-SPL (re-confirmation) of multiple amplifiers SP high-level output signals and that of room air sound at listening position: all measured by “FFT averaging of recorded cumulative DSP-processed flat white noise” (as of June 8, 2025): #1,009

 

[gnarly]

Despite the emphasis many audiophiles put on obsessively chasing low, flat bass response with multiple subwoofers, room, correction, etc.

In practice, having had many different floor, standing loudspeakers in my room over the past several decades, I’ve never really had a problem getting very satisfying bass. Without any heroic measures beyond just moving the speakers around. (I have a 15’ x 13’ room and my floor standing speakers tended to range from 25 to 30/35 Hz).

I’m not talking of course about technical perfection. No doubt room sweeps would show some room nodes.

But subjectively, the bass sounded very even and satisfying to me with almost all of my loudspeakers. When there was the occasional obvious node or contribution from the room… it was occasional. Not at all determinative to my enjoying the bass overall.

And I know there are those who will always say “ you don’t know what you’re missing until you’ve been more rigorous about addressing the bass performance in your room.” I’ve tried that too, and didn’t find it a revelation.

What you say makes sense to me.

There's so many issues in play...

First is the fact that subs even exist...separately that is.
Speakers need to have their full bass extension co-located with the speaker, just like the rest of the speakers' low, mid, and high section are.
The crossover between the sub/extended lows and the rest of the speaker is just as important to optimal sound as any of the other crossovers in the speaker.
The need for properly spaced/located acoustic centers between a sub and main is just as important as the placement of the speakers other drivers in its design.

I don't think folks realize the extent of the integration problems, the lobing and summation issues, that are created when subs are physically separated from speakers.

I think mitigating those integration issues is as much a part of what's going on with multi-sub, as is the smoothing out room modes multi-sub advantage so often heard.
Truth is imo, multi-sub is just a technique to blur/average problems out of existence.....problems, of both speakers with subs, and rooms.
The technique works as far as smoothing out frequency response....but it's a time domain nightmare.

Anybody who thinks small-room multi-sub is the best bass possible, simply needs to listen outdoors to their same speakers set on top their subs properly crossed over... stereo or even mono. The bass improvement is always remarkable.
To isolate the bass/ subs role in the improvement...just turn off the main speaker and listen to sub(s) alone. If comparing floor-standers without subs, a low-pass filter to isolate the sub frequencies can be employed. I use what I hear outdoors as the goal for what I want to achieve indoors.

So far indoors, plain old floor-standers with deep bass extension, or mains on top of subs...with time honored attention to room placement, has come closer to outdoors than any multi-sub attempts.
Sure, multi-sub gets frequency smoother, and makes for a more ambience-type sound, but it loses the raw impact of bass transients that make sound so alive and exciting.
Great bass transients have directionality...the hit in the chest etc. Multi-sub loses that directionality which can be heard outdoors.
(Imo, we've become smooth frequency & directivity obsessed, in an effort to find what pleases the masses...but I digress.)

 

[MattHooper]

To isolate the bass/ subs role in the improvement...just turn off the main speaker and listen to sub(s) alone. If comparing floor-standers without subs, a low-pass filter to isolate the sub frequencies can be employed.

When I had dual subs I had the JL Audio truly excellent and intuitive CR1 crossover,(and I was employing the Dspeaker Anti-mode).

The CR1 crossover had a very handy feature - a button that you could press to switch between the speakers run full range without the subs, versus crossed over to the subs. It made it so easy to quickly and constantly check the contribution by the sub integration.

When I had it dialled in his best as I could, I had my son (about 23 years old at the time) - who often enjoys listening to my system - sit down for a listen when he was visiting from school. He didn’t know I was doing anything with subwoofers, and doesn’t know anything about subwoofers, so all I asked him to do was say sit in the listening position, here’s this box beside you, I just want you to listen and at your leisure, play whatever music you want, press this button on and off and tell me which you like. He didn’t know which position had subwoofers employed. He was unequivocal about preferring the sound of the speakers without the subwoofers. (and this is a rap-loving young lad).

That helped solidify that it wasn’t just me who was finding the sound less satisfying with the subs.

Sure, multi-sub gets frequency smoother, and makes for a more ambience-type sound, but it loses the raw impact of bass transients that make sound so alive and exciting.
Great bass transients have directionality...the hit in the chest etc. Multi-sub loses that directionality which can be heard outdoors.

Yes, that puts very well what I was subjectively experiencing. I also didn’t care for this slight change in overall tonality with the subs.
I bought my Thiels for a very particular sound that I loved, and that started to alter somewhat with the subs added. As I’ve said, I feel like I was playing amateur speaker designer against Jim Thiel’s own expertise.

Ultimately, I didn’t know whether I simply didn’t care for even well integrated subwoofers with those speakers in my room - the Dspeaker unit showed nice smoothing of frequency response in the bass. Or whether there was some even more tweaky work to be done to optimize things that I wasn’t aware of or wasn’t in to chasing.

If I’m reading you right, you were suggesting it’s possible I simply may not have preferred even perfectly integrated multiple subs in my particular case. Hard to know.

I’m certainly not anti-sub. I really like the idea of having the complete frequency range produced. And I have heard some nice things that the lower bass frequencies can bring to some music. My own attempts just weren’t successful in getting over the trade-off I heard.

 

[Robbo99999]

What you say makes sense to me.

There's so many issues in play...

First is the fact that subs even exist...separately that is.
Speakers need to have their full bass extension co-located with the speaker, just like the rest of the speakers' low, mid, and high section are.
The crossover between the sub/extended lows and the rest of the speaker is just as important to optimal sound as any of the other crossovers in the speaker.
The need for properly spaced/located acoustic centers between a sub and main is just as important as the placement of the speakers other drivers in its design.

I don't think folks realize the extent of the integration problems, the lobing and summation issues, that are created when subs are physically separated from speakers.

I think mitigating those integration issues is as much a part of what's going on with multi-sub, as is the smoothing out room modes multi-sub advantage so often heard.
Truth is imo, multi-sub is just a technique to blur/average problems out of existence.....problems, of both speakers with subs, and rooms.
The technique works as far as smoothing out frequency response....but it's a time domain nightmare.

Anybody who thinks small-room multi-sub is the best bass possible, simply needs to listen outdoors to their same speakers set on top their subs properly crossed over... stereo or even mono. The bass improvement is always remarkable.
To isolate the bass/ subs role in the improvement...just turn off the main speaker and listen to sub(s) alone. If comparing floor-standers without subs, a low-pass filter to isolate the sub frequencies can be employed. I use what I hear outdoors as the goal for what I want to achieve indoors.

So far indoors, plain old floor-standers with deep bass extension, or mains on top of subs...with time honored attention to room placement, has come closer to outdoors than any multi-sub attempts.
Sure, multi-sub gets frequency smoother, and makes for a more ambience-type sound, but it loses the raw impact of bass transients that make sound so alive and exciting.
Great bass transients have directionality...the hit in the chest etc. Multi-sub loses that directionality which can be heard outdoors.
(Imo, we've become smooth frequency & directivity obsessed, in an effort to find what pleases the masses...but I digress.)

Maybe the peakiness and or dips in your in room bass frequency response is actually something you like when you talk about "impact of bass transients that make sound so alive and exciting". But I don't know how many peaks or dips you have in your in room bass frequency response, but you'd probably have some if you're not optimising sub location (and/or not using roomEQ, don't know if you are). Maybe I'm just offering the idea that the things you describe could actually more be attributable to in room frequency response rather than other factors. I used to quite like just letting Anechoic Flat speakers "run free" without roomEQ and yet I know that i had peaks & dips in bass frequency response.

 

[MattHooper]

Your room was renovated by a professional acoustician, i guess that will also solve your bass respons for the better an because of that a subwoofer will do not much for you than it is obvious you find it not a revelation.

The room certainly does overall sound better than ever after the renovation (which was done in 2009/2010). And there is a certain amount of treatment for bass. But not as much as it would take to get a room like this perfectly linear all the way to 20 Hz.

When I say, I’ve always achieved satisfying bass response, I’m including all the years before the renovation as well. (Though I might have a bit of a lucky room. I’ve had a couple speaker designers have a listen, and this was before the renovation, and they both said that they were surprised at how good the sound was in the room, generally smooth and balanced. Perhaps it has to do with the particular shape, bay windows, a very large opening in the room to one side into a hallway. Dunno …)

 

[Snarfie]

The room certainly does overall sound better than ever after the renovation (which was done in 2009/2010). And there is a certain amount of treatment for bass. But not as much as it would take to get a room like this perfectly linear all the way to 20 Hz.

When I say, I’ve always achieved satisfying bass response, I’m including all the years before the renovation as well. (Though I might have a bit of a lucky room. I’ve had a couple speaker designers have a listen, and this was before the renovation, and they both said that they were surprised at how good the sound was in the room, generally smooth and balanced. Perhaps it has to do with the particular shape, bay windows, a very large opening in the room to one side into a hallway. Dunno …)

If i'm correct saw you are using Thiel speakers who are build by design phase coherent just like my Vandersteen speakers. Do you hear a difference using these speakers compared to speakers who are not build phase coherent. I do in imaging staging natural voice (limited baffel design tweeters so no or less boxie sound) they dissepear with quality recordings completely and enhanced using DSP. Using also compared to you a mild form of room treatment carpet absorption panels for first (wall) reflections.

 

[MattHooper]

If i'm correct saw you are using Thiel speakers who are build by design phase coherent just like my Vandersteen speakers. Do you hear a different using these speakers compared to speakers who are not build phase coherent. I do in imaging staging they dissepear with quality recordings completely.

Yes I have Thiel 2.7 (which replaced Thiel 3.7s) and Joseph Perspective speakers.

The Thiels have always sound staged and imaged among the best of ever heard . But to me, their most prominent characteristic is the sense of density solidity, and precision of the imaging. They just seem to line up all the Sonic information in a way that solidifies the sound more than most speakers I’ve owned or have listened to.

Even thought the high order crossover speakers seem to image really well on their own, when I switch in the Thiels I always notice more precision and density in the imaging.

I don’t know enough to untangle where that’s coming from - maybe most are all of it is coming from the coaxial design (though frankly I still don’t get the same impression of sonic density from for instance KEF speakers).

It’s been a long time since I heard Vandersteen speakers and aside from remembering them to sound open and not boxy, I don’t have a good memory of their particular imaging.

 

[wadude]

The lowest note on a double bass or an electric bass is 41hz. My speakers are just barely able to get down that low. That’s good enough for me because the vast majority of jazz and rock groups don’t even get down to 41hz. Rap music, some electronic music and the Saint-Saëns organ Symphony will get down lower than 41hz but I don’t listen to that stuff.

The standard, meaning you won’t get hired without one, double bass in an orchestra uses an “extension” on the E string which lowers that string to C (32.7hz). The very common five string electric bass guitar uses a low B string (30.9hz).

 

[gnarly]

If I’m reading you right, you were suggesting it’s possible I simply may not have preferred even perfectly integrated multiple subs in my particular case. Hard to know.

Yes, you are reading me correctly. I know a number of folks, myself included, who do not prefer multi-sub no matter how well set up.

"Get the kick drum out of my butt"!....a quote from Paul Hales a few minutes into this interview from starting-time link...

The entire interview is reflects a number room tuning principles that match my experiences. Practical real world stuff imo.

 

[Oddball]

A bold statement. But let's discuss it.

In right setup subs will do what they do - improve the low end of speaker response in every way. There might be a need for a significant number of them and some placement issues obviously.

The only real question is if the room, the budget, and other right gear are able to accomodate.

As a hyperbole, see below.

Focal 1000 Utopia IWLCR & IWSUB Speaker System Review

Focal's 1000 Utopia and Astral 16 deliver reference grade performance from an in-wall speaker. Check out our exclusive, in-depth, Focal 1000 Series Theater installation and a sneak peek at Dirac ART.

www.audioholics.com