What percentage of audiophiles use a sub ?

I agree with most of what Byroncunningham said, above. I have not had good experience with integating subs into my 2-channel system. I dislike overbrearing and, more especially, one-note bass. I have never heard a sub-based system that delivers the delicate differentiation of sounds in the sub-40 Hz region, if one can refer to the bass region as delicate. I find that it's not about the notes per se, but rather it's more about the space and air between the notes. Most sub-based systems just sound electronic and artificial to me.

Granted, I have not heard everything or any of your individual systems. The only two solutions that have heard and believe came close to providing "authentic" bass are the (now discontinued) NHT Xd system and the Meridian Tri-Field system. The NHT demo I heard was very, very good, but I did not care for the presentation of the midrange and upper scale.

The Meridian system was better by far, not only in the bass response but the presentation of the entire soundstage. It was the best "stereo" imaging I have ever heard. But it is an expensive system (needs Meridian full-range speakers), is SS only - no tube options, and difficult to integrate with an analog front end.

For now, I am using Audio Note AN-E speakers. With the right corner positioning I get excellent bass response with only a minimal fall off below 40 Hz. No sub required.

Most full range speakers still lack deep bass and I think a sub that is integrated well fills out the bottom regions when done right. Plain and simple most speakers just don't get below 28-30Hz. My last set of speakers played down to 30Hz but I knew there was much more bass in some of the CD's I played and it pissed me off sometimes because I wanted to feel it, knew it was there and they couldn't play it. Now I have floor standing monitors and a sub I KNOW the sub needs to be integrated better but when the music has the sub bass regions it hits but not like a thud or totally inaccurate bass. Takes time to get it to integrate but I will get it there soon and overall I like the sub and don't regret downsizing somewhat. Its basically a personal preference so be happy with what you got and enjoy the music. Happy 4th :)

Well, perhaps some of my issue with subs and people's description's of "deep bass" is that almost no acoustically produced music goes anywhere near as low as 28Hz. Some pianos don't even go that low. An organ, some pianos, perhaps a doublebass provided with a low C extension, maybe a contrabass trombone, I'd have to look that up, or the very largest tuba, that's about it. And very rarely are those notes actually called for even on these instruments, and when they are, they don't sound anything like any sub I have ever heard, even a well-integrated one (I have heard them both in stores and in people's homes). So I do repeat that they are really only for movies and electronically produced music, and are simply not necessary for listening to acoustically produced music. In fact, if they are used for this, the result is invariably not realistic sounding, IME. The timbres are just not right.

Well, perhaps some of my issue with subs and people's description's of "deep bass" is that almost no acoustically produced music goes anywhere near as low as 28Hz. Some pianos don't even go that low. An organ, some pianos, perhaps a doublebass provided with a low C extension, maybe a contrabass trombone, I'd have to look that up, or the very largest tuba, that's about it. And very rarely are those notes actually called for even on these instruments, and when they are, they don't sound anything like any sub I have ever heard, even a well-integrated one (I have heard them both in stores and in people's homes). So I do repeat that they are really only for movies and electronically produced music, and are simply not necessary for listening to acoustically produced music. In fact, if they are used for this, the result is invariably not realistic sounding, IME. The timbres are just not right.

A sub is not limited in function to the lowest reaches of its range. It augments a range where certainly less of the music lives, but pointing at just the lowest realms of that range is viewing its purpose through blinders - you are not seeing the whole picture. It also takes some of the burden off of the midrange drivers by supporting part of that lower range that they'd otherwise have to handle. Certainly I completely agree that subs are not "necessary" to enjoy acoustic music, but in my experience they can enhance my enjoyment of it. The music I listen to is pretty wide in scope - much of it is acoustic and vocals.

Certainly I completely agree that subs are not "necessary" to enjoy acoustic music, but in my experience they can enhance my enjoyment of it.

The problem with these types of discussions is that people prioritize things in different orders.

I'll agree with Learsfool that a very high percentage (but not all) of the sub-augmented systems I've heard over the years sound unnatural to me when playing acoustic music.

Part of that is the nature of recordings while another part is that a living room doesn't have the same acoustics as a concert hall.

Simply put, any system playing recorded music - regardless of cost - is a set of compromises when compared to a live acoustic performance.

However, it is no surprise that some people are very happy with their added sub while others look at it as a complication that may or may not improve the situation.