What's the point of floorstanding when we have subwoofers?

[JustAnAudioLover]

Hi there!

(Let's preface this by saying that, as some of you may have seen, I'm currently asking a lot of questions about audio on the forum ; I want to be sure I understand everything before spending actual money on serious gear)

From what I understand, the main benefit or floorstanding speakers over bookshelf speakers is the low-end part of the spectrum. For instance, if we take KEF's R3 Meta vs R11 Meta, or Monitor's Audio Gold 50/100 vs 200/300/500, or Mofi's Sourcepoint 8 vs 888, the main point of having bigger speakers seems to be the bass.

But subwoofers can achieve even deeper bass, especially thanks to huge drivers, and as someone pointed out in another thread, they can be positioned freely in the room to find the best position in order to avoid having too much problems with the room's acoustics.

Also, if we take KEF's example, the R3 Meta sell for 2200 €. The R11 Meta, on the other hand, are 6500 €. 3 times as expensive ! They are of course way bigger, with bigger woofers, but they seem to work in a similar fashion. Same goes for Monitor Audio : the Gold 50 are 2000 €, the Gold 500 are 6500 €. More than 3 times the price.

For way less than that price difference, you can get yourself a really high-end subwoofer, or two high-quality subwoofers to place wherever you want.

So, my question is:

Why do floorstanding exist when we can just use bookshelves with (one or two) subwoofers?

Especially given:

* Subwoofers can go lower
* Bookshelves + subwoofer = cheaper
* You need way less power for bookshelves

Some of the reasons I can think of are:

* Subwoofers take some additional place in addition to the speakers themselves
* You need an amp with one or even two (that's a lot less common) subwoofers output
* Floorstanding may be nicer-looking to some people
* Floorstanding don't require a stand (and custom stands are often ridiculously expensive)
* Some people may not want to have super deep bass if they live in appartment

But even with these, it seems like the vast majority of people should prefer bookshelves over floorstandings.

Any idea on that subject?

 

[Talisman]

Because a subwoofer is very difficult to integrate without tools, dsp and measurements and it is extremely easy to make everything worse instead of better.
Also if you noticed two bookshelf speakers with stands have a footprint equal to two towers, so better the towers, they can play louder, with less distortion and are often much more beautiful aesthetically and easier to make the wife accept than a huge black cube in the middle of the boxes.

 

[JustAnAudioLover]

Oh, can't you just set your bookshelves' crossover to like 100 Hz in your amp's settings (if supported) and same on the sub? Is that not enough to get perfect crossover between the speakers and the subwoofer?

 

[MattHooper]

Well integrated subwoofers can enhance an audio system and have advantages.

But one replied to your question is:

Because integrating subwoofers effectively asks the consumer to become an amateur speaker designer, and not everybody is interested in that or up to it.

Think about it: a well designed floorstanding speaker, the manufacturer typically has far more knowledge and experience in regards to designing speakers, and has very carefully designed the integration of all the drivers and frequency range in order to achieve a coherent sound - whether that is a neutral sound they might be going for or their own particular sound they are going for.

So then the question is “ if I bought the loudspeakers for how they sound , why would I want to possibly screw that up?”

It’s not easy to perfectly integrate subwoofers. And some people just may not be interested in all the hassle.

I’ve very rarely heard a system with subs that sounds fully coherent to me - rarely is coherent as the floor speakers I have used.

I also tried to integrate subwoofers with my floorstanding speakers - dual subwoofers, crossover, DSP… and I did not find the results satisfactory. I found it changed the overall sound enough in a way that I preferred how the speaker sounded originally without the subwoofers.

Other people have different experience, which is of course fine. But personally, I am super fussy about the character of the loudspeaker I purchase. It’s a character that has been carefully achieved by the loudspeaker designer, and I’m not really into playing amateur loudspeaker designer to try and better it.

(And of course there is the issue of trying to place the extra subs in your room in terms of both aesthetics and performance, adding extra cabling, AC cabling etc)

 

[Timcognito]

Less boxes, more floor and/or shelf space. Ability to get away from the wall and wall reflections with just two boxes.

 

[jcarys]

I'll jump in and say they exist because of tradition and options. 50 years ago subs were not normal, so if you wanted full frequency range and realistic volume you went with floor standing speakers. Floor standers have higher internal volume, so they could produce more sound when amplifier power was far more limited than it is now.

But even today there are many people starting out in audio who need or prefer only a stereo setup. They will go with a simple system with tower speakers. No need to think about sub integration and crossover frequencies, just wire them up and play.

That said, I'm now playing around with the A1 software and was shocked when it recommended a 120Hz crossover for all my bed level speakers (instead of the slightly more difficult 80Hz THX standard). With this algorithm, the software didn't care if it was a tower with deep bass, a smaller tower or a bookshelf. And the results are very convincing.

It leads me to believe that if I were building another home theater system from scratch, I would probably go the monitor plus sub(s) direction. I don't think I would go as far as bookshelves all around, but something like the Arendal monitors would be a strong option.

In the end you live in a great audio commercial environment - you get to choose whatever speakers work in your space and make you happy.

 

[levimax]

It depends on many factors so no one size fits all. The best solution for sound quality is both full range mains and 2 or 4 subs placed strategically in a treated room and then DSP.

Since this is not practcal in most cases then compromises need to be made. Since full range floor standing speakers don't take up more floor space than stands and booksheves and they will have better integrated low bass and be much easier set up I think that is the best place to start and then add multiple subs later to smooth out LF below Schroeder if desired.

I have found that good sub integration, especially with smaller ported bookshelf speakers with limited LF extension and lots of group delay, is MUCH harder to accomplish than the sub manufacturers and EQ software companies would lead you to believe.

 

[Purité Audio]

The majority of floorstanding loudspeakers will still need an additional sub/s if you want really full-range.
Keith

 

[terryforsythe]

To add to what others have stated, more often than not subwoofers are not properly integrated into the system, and the system will not sound as good as with tower speakers. Without DSP it is challenging just to get marginal results due to issues with time delay and group delay. In my opinion, though, DSP changes everything and make subwoofers an attractive option.

The other issue is that people use small bookshelf speakers with high compression and harmonic distortion below about 100Hz, then they cross them over to the subwoofers at 60Hz. Few bookshelf speakers should be crossed over that low.

As far as looks go, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I prefer the look of bookshelf speakers on stands and the subwoofer hidden away, but I certainly appreciate that some people better like the look of tower speakers.

 

[DVDdoug]

Oh, can't you just set your bookshelves' crossover to like 100 Hz in your amp's settings (if supported) and same on the sub?

Maybe if they are "matched" from the same manufacturer. Usually you have to adjust/match the levels. That's not necessarily a bad thing because it gives you another adjustment to adjust to your taste.

Subwoofers can go lower

You can't over-generalize. There are, of course, some full range speakers with more, deeper, better, bass than some subwoofers.

Because of room acoustics/resonances ("room modes") two full-range speakers in different locations can be better than one sub. (Or multiple subs can accomplish the same thing.)

The main monitors in pro studios are usually full-range, although they might have an integrated sub (for example with a 4-way active setup). And they would have a separate subwoofer for movie mixing.

Subwoofers are "fashionable" mainly because of home theater. Most people don't want 5 or more large speakers in their living room. And the "point one" LFE channel doesn't work without a sub. (The LFE channel is not included in the stereo downmix.)

 

[levimax]

Oh, can't you just set your bookshelves' crossover to like 100 Hz in your amp's settings (if supported) and same on the sub? Is that not enough to get perfect crossover between the speakers and the subwoofer?

Unfortueneatley no.

 

[JustAnAudioLover]

The majority of floorstanding loudspeakers will still need an additional sub/s if you want really full-range.
Keith

If you need subwoofers anyway (for optimal results), wouldn't floorstanding be more interesting due to their lower price point?

 

[Purité Audio]

I would look firstly at really fine measuring and thus transparent designs, compare specifications, aesthetics and of course price then choose .
Keith

 

[Bjorn]

Capacity, low modulation distortion is still very important above subwoofer region. Then there's directivity control and integration with the room.

A satellite speaker have a lot drawbacks in these areas, and thus have very little to do with high-end even with subs.

 

[Daverz]

Oh, can't you just set your bookshelves' crossover to like 100 Hz in your amp's settings (if supported) and same on the sub? Is that not enough to get perfect crossover between the speakers and the subwoofer?

The sub(s) and mains need to be phase aligned at the crossover frequency (peaks and troughs arriving at the same time at the listening position). It's nice if the sub is also time aligned (initial impulses arriving at the listening position at the same time) as well, but it's not always possible to have exact time and phase alignment, and phase alignment should be prioritized. REW has tools for this.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

But even with these, it seems like the vast majority of people should prefer bookshelves over floorstandings.

Any idea on that subject?

Saves floor space.
(spoken by a man who uses floorstanders and subs)

 

[DonH56]

With a crossover at 80 Hz, the subs need response to ~160 Hz, and main speakers need to go down to ~40 Hz, a one-octave overlap. Even at 80 Hz, few bookshelf speakers can product sufficient bass without high distortion, and with a 100 Hz or higher crossover it is easy to localize the sub. Below is my ancient long post on "Why Subs" but you can read into it why I prefer larger mains as well.

FWIWFM - Don

Why Subs?

I use subs, and have for decades, for all the usual reasons:

- Very (perhaps extremely) few "large" speakers actually play well below 40 Hz let alone 20 Hz. They distort heavily when presented with large bass signals (which most are -- see Fletcher-Munson) and driving them hard down low robs headroom for higher frequencies and causes distortion well above the fundamental signal frequency (harmonic and nasty intermodulation). Subs typically enable the mains to operate with much lower distortion.

- Very rare is the room setup such that the best place for stereo imaging and soundfield is the best place for the subs (or deep bass drivers) to counter room modes and such. Having independent subs provides placement options to smooth the in-room response. It is almost impossible to counter a null without subs (typically must move the MLP or change the room's dimensions though there are purpose-built panels that can also work). This is one of the things that led me to subs despite having quite capable mains.

- Powered subs offload the main amplifiers of the need to provide deep bass energy, providing more headroom and cleaner sound from the amplifiers.

- Music (let alone action movies) often contains deep bass content even if it is not real obvious. Kick drums, tympani, organ, sure, but also piano hammer strikes, plucked strings, beat patterns from instruments playing together, etc. May not really notice when they are there but usually obvious when they are taken away. Having subs fill in the bottom octave or three can make a difference.

- Purpose-built subs can provide high output cleanly at relatively low cost. The amplifiers and drivers need only cover a fairly limited frequency range so have fewer constraints upon them than woofers in a full-range system.

I do prefer main speakers with fairly deep bass and always have. Crossovers are not brick walls so a fair amount of energy still comes from the mains an octave below the crossover frequency. Higher-order crossovers allow you to reduce the overlap, but I still like having the capability. I have never really understood the idea of running "passive" bi-amping as implemented by an AVR (sending full-range signals to multiple channels and letting the speaker's crossovers separate frequency bands -- wastes amplifier headroom and seems to me of little benefit). Nor do I agree with the "plus" setting putting subs and mains in parallel; again, my idea has always been to isolate the two for the reasons above.

My first sub was a DIY design using an Infinity IRS woofer with my own control box to provide the crossover and a servo circuit using the second voice coil of the woofer. I had a Hafler DH-220 around so also incorporated a circuit to bridge it for use as a subwoofer amp. It worked well and the -3 dB point was ~16 Hz. I now run four small (F12) Rythmik subs using a similar (but updated) servo design with my Revel Salon2's and am happy with the result.

FWIWFM/IME/IMO/my 0.000001 cent (microcent) - Don


Stereo subs:

I have gone back and forth on stereo subs over many years (since ~1979/1980 when I built my first sub) and ultimately decided it is not worth it. It limits placement and correction options, almost no stereo content exits at sub frequencies (remember a wavelength is >11 feet at 100 Hz, >22 feet at 50 Hz, just how much stereo separation can there be in a normal listening situation?), and the end result was always much better when I ran the subs mono and placed them optimally for best in-room bass response. If your crossover is so high and/or filter roll-off so low that your subs intrude into the lower midrange you might appreciate stereo but I have always rolled off well below the point at which I could localize the subs. For years I ran stereo subs but many tests blind and otherwise convinced me stereo subs are just an unnecessary hassle that actually reduced my system's performance and sound.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I think the home cinema crowd is way ahead of the hifi people here. Subwoofer integration is difficult without DSP (to the point that it's almost no point in trying). But as soon as you have a system with high pass support for the speakers and DSP / room correction of some kind for the subwoofer(s), it's pretty easy to make it sound better than two floorstanders without DSP. Almost all 2-channel systems in a real room has at least one and often two peaks below 100hz that effectively ruins the systems ability to present balanced bass.

Most modern room correction systems do a good job at integrating and correcting subwoofers, and even something as "simple" as an Antimode 8033 corrects subwoofers so well it's almost magic. Personally I would prefer the more nuanced approach of manual EQ, but I'd take an auto-corrected subwoofer over one with no correction at all every day of the week.

I think a perfectly integrated subwoofer system is so vastly superior to a floorstander, that when I designed our soon-to-be-launched Saranna floorstander, the design goal was to make it sound like a system with perfectly integrated subwoofers.


That being said, it's not difficult to understand why floorstanders exist, the reasons why (history, complexity in setup, visuals) have already been mentioned.

 

[Mort]

If you see

If you need subwoofers anyway (for optimal results), wouldn't floorstanding be more interesting due to their lower price point?

Did you mean bookshelf? Small floor standers or a large 3-way bookshelf combined with a subwoofer can be a lower price point because one isn't paying for unused or barely used drivers.

 

[JustAnAudioLover]

Yeah I meant bookshelves sorry.