Are subwoofers bad for music?
 

Steve Guttenberg - Are subwoofers bad for music?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNwJOXwMcw8

Dan,
I saw that earlier. To each their own. I added a pair of REL 212/SE's to my Tannoy Canterbury GR's and now have the best sound I've heard in my home or anywhere else for that matter. It's so darn good I struggle to do anything productive. If using subs with music means you're out of the club, count me out. I'm an extremely happy music listener and have zero plans of disconnecting them anytime soon. More likely, never.

Sorry, Mr. Guttenberg. Have a good day and enjoy your music.

Agreed. Single best addition to my system, by a long shot.

I love my subs, just do let them over power and aka be to out of balance. I know it is music taste etc, but there is a science and a realistic approach to how it should sound in a given system and environment right :)

I tend to agree that Movies with todays effects and sound tracks seem to over some of the best you can get from a sub, but heck even very good full blown classical not just rock or pop can gain from a sub to reproduce what all there is to hear IMOP of course...

I turn my subs on sometimes, depends on my mood, and if my wife is asleep upstairs.[emoji849]

Same here. Subwoofers rock. No doubt they must be dialed in correctly to the system, but when that is done right a good subwoofer(s) add a dimension to the lowest octave that very few full range speakers are able to reproduce. Love my sub.

Couldn’t live without my sub!!!

no, they're not ...........

Subwoffers?!

They enrich the music as long as they're not set so high that they call attention to themselves.

Anything that helps you to enjoy music in your home more is awesome for music because if we are all more engaged with music we listen more, likely stream or buy more which is good for the artists and ultimately good for the art. Who cares what reviewers or anyone else thinks .. if it makes you happy then that's all that matters. Just go with what you like and you're good ... subwoofers and all! :-)

George

+ So true.

Kal.......Thanks. Sometimes the fingers get ahead of the brain.

OK. I wanted to assume that Steve Guttenberg had used that spelling in derision.

I feel 99% of the time individuals have them set so that they are too noticeable.

Yes. They want to hear something from what they just purchased. The setup for the sub should be so that, almost all the time, you cannot be consciously aware of its action.

Jim,
This is the only area where I'm in the 1%. :D

When feathered in properly, I consider them the 4th dimension of music. :o

Two tip offs to this anti-sub line being baloney:

First, when a guy who has dropped 5 figures on his hifi starts saying things like "I don't need...". Well, of course! You don't need a 5 figure hifi, so why after dropping all that cash are you Mr Reasonable all of a sudden. If you were only focused on "needs", that Bose all-in-one would have been just fine.

Second, too much bass at live shows? I thought we were looking for fidelity. If you don't like bass, listen to different music...

...and while you're listening to that different music, you'd be very well served to have a well-matched, well-tuned sub

Wholeheartedly agree!

Agreed.
Like many, when I got the first pair of subs I balanced our system like Christopher Walken.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QVjuUgIeY

One dead giveaway that subs are not correctly set up is having to fiddle with them all the time. Steve mentioned this in his podcast. I never have to mess with my subs once I get them set up properly.

Are subwoofers bad for music?
 

+1

The only problem I see with most subwoofer integration is when they are not properly tuned and they present huge peaks at various frequencies or time delays that smear the sound.

When a sub woofer is properly “feathered” in, it will not be booming and it will fill in the lower frequencies that are otherwise missing. How can that be a bad thing? The goal is an in-phase, flat frequency response down to 20Hz. Granted it’s not as easy as simply plopping one down by your speaker, plugging it in and listening; it takes some effort.

Of course, those issues must be managed with all speakers placed in real rooms.

I love my subs. They were set by a pro though.
To make them sound perfect for music, they are way too loud for movies. I had them set to play perfect with music though.

I have 1,000+ SQ FT, so I needed more than SF O3 can put out for the room size. In a hotel room at Denver Rocky Mountain Audio Fest the O3s sound amazing and bass heavy in a small hotel room. If I move these to my office I wouldn't need a sub.

I'm on this wagon!

I personally can't even imagine the life without deep and clean bass. So, the subwoofer for my music system is a must!

Who's Steve Guttenberg?

I'm jumping in a little late but most speakers don't have a good response below 30 Hz. I have lots of organ music with soft 20 Hz and below notes. Also, there is important low frequency information in this range that enhances and enlarges the sound stage. I note that the Wilson WAMM Master Chronosonic is not complete without the accompanying MC Subsonic subs.

Many super expensive European super-speakers come with built in subs. I agree with Jim that you must be careful not to turn up your sub volume too much and if you are not interested in below 30 Hz material put your money in a better speaker.

I personally couldn't imagine owing any large Wilson Speaker without a Thor or a Subsonic sub. Properly integrated they have very little effect on the 30 Hz and above range but a tremendous effect on the below 25 Hz range. What little effect they have on above 30 Hz material I find very beneficial and pleasing to my ear.

Also, if your speaker has a lot of natural bass in the 30-50 range I wouldn't advise a sub. The large Wilsons are careful not to have exaggerated bass in this range in order to mesh with their large subs because some boost in this range is inevitable if you employ a sub the way Wilson recommends. Therefore you may find yourself in the strange situation with a large Wilson (without a sub) of it having less bass than say an Alexia or Sasha because paradoxically I personally believe the large Wilsons are meant to be more compatible with their larger subs than are their smaller speakers. Wilson strongly recommends no HP with their large subs like my Thor. I have tried it both ways and have found LP only(no HP) works by far the best which is precisely what Wilson recommends. Speaker placement greatly affects bass in the 30-50 Hz range. I have my Alexx pulled out from the rear wall significantly. I believe I could achieve about the same effect as with my Thor by re-positioning them closer to the rear wall. But no way can they match the Thor below 30 Hz.

I also believe when using a cross over, that sending the low frequencies exclusively to a subwoofer, allows to free the speakers from a lot of pressure allowing it to sound better on the other frequencies.

All four of my systems have a sub, or subs. 'nuff said!! :yes: :yes:

Didn't he invent the printing press?

I think you are correct but there are exceptions. Large Wilsons like the Alexx or XLF are the exception. Wilson strongly recommends that these speakers be run full range (no HP) so that the Watch Controller does not affect in any way the signal going to the Alexx or XLF. I have tried it both ways and can say conclusively that LP only(no HP) works best. The crossover coloration is noticeable with the HP engaged and Wilson specifically emphasizes the significant effort they put into the HP filters. That's why big Wilsons do not have exaggerated 30-50 Hz bass. It would make integration with a Thor or Subsonic impossible without a HP crossover. Both of these speakers possess both front and rear ports so that bass can be further reduced to allow the sub to perfectly integrate with the speaker. Using the front port decreases bass output in most rooms. However for me I find that the rear port works best and with the Alexx pulled out significantly from the rear wall.

Back when I had my Maggie 1.7's I ran two SVS subs. They blended so seamlessly that whenever friends and audio club members came over they couldn't believe I had two subs in action.

The thing about subs is that you have to take the time to dial them in and keep their output at a level where they don't say "Hey, look at me!"

Once the Maggies left for a new home, and the big Canton's arrived, the subs are not being used. In my smallish room they're just not needed as the Canton's produce a prodigious amount of deep bass.

You know I get what he is saying for a media room I think we all can agree with the need for subs. He goes on to point out that for music listening he is not a big fan of subs. There can be all kinds of issues with integrating subs with your main speakers and particularly if you are overlapping them with your main speakers. Not sure I agree that a 5' cone will produce enough bass as air must be moved but in my opinion its not.

My most recent experience was with Martin Logan Summit X's and Descent i subs. I played around and played around and although I liked the added bottom end just was not happy with the results. Eventually moved on to the CLX and the newer 212 subs.

First off with the CLX there is no overlapping with the bass which I think is significant on its own. Add to that the custom cross over that ML supplies and then the PBK kit for the sub all that makes a world of difference. I can't say enough how the PBK kit has improved the bass. When you really think of it without some type of correction to your room you are not going to have stellar results. The other couple of things that help is go with two subs instead of one that does make a difference and also get the phase set correctly. Setting the correct phase has always been a mystery to me but once I found a method that made sense to me and applied it boy does it work. Also good room treatments are a must for good bass. I was surprised at the rear wall how much that made a difference.

Lastly is the volume to set the subs at. That I agree is a very time consuming task and as this progressed I moved the knob like a micrometer.

I will always prefer no sub for music, hence why I try to find a speaker that can reproduce a large frequency range.

you have obviously never listened to a proper 2.1 set up , let alone a superb 2.2 set up...........

Agree, if your speaker is designed right you shouldn't need a sub for music. But if you decide to go in that direction anyway then using an electronic crossover and a sub from the same manufacturer as the speaker can ensure proper phase between both the speaker and the sub and avoid potential bass frequency cancellation.

Bill, again, here is where we disagree.......... while a given 'full range' speaker may very well have the ability to produce into the 'sub' range it in no way guarantees to do so correctly given all the different room configuration possibilities. This is where a sub, or preferably two, properly placed will produce the 'best' lower octave(s)

The word "need" in these discussions always makes me laugh (at myself as well as the writer). We shouldn't "need" hi-fis that costs tens of thousands of dollars. But we do, and in that context, a well-integrated sub is a great value.