2. speakers
  3. 141613-18279

Ahhh--Problem solved. Adding a REL sub-bass unit...

I'm wondering how many audiophiles have given up on loudspeakers preamturely, or have gone down the rabbit hole of cable swapping to "fix" an issue with their speakers.  

I grew up hating subwoofers and home theatre.  I still haven't come around fully to home theatre.  I've warmed up though.  I've had my own issues with otherwise great loudspeakers, including a pair of Klipsch Forte IIIs.  I was very frustrated as I'm feeding them from a respected tube integrated, I've tried them with a 300B amp, and I've toiled over positioning.  

The issue that I was having was the mids and highs were dominating in my room--despite the size of the woofer and passive radiator. Some recordings were just too bright.  Sometimes I felt the speaker, however "alive" and dynamic was not imaging well, needed soundstage help, and so on.  

I hate to say the REL T9i I threw in the mix today is a panacea because there's always stuff to tweak.  Yet I have experienced this before with a Sumiko subwoofer.  Adding one to the mix and dialing it in so that it's barely audible has brought everything into focus.  Everything is more relaxed and energetic at the same time.  

I'd say that the REL is a room tuning device above all.  I have a larger room (I think it's 15 wide, 24 long and 10 high--in feet).   I'm not sure how much I'd have to spend or what different choices would solve this otherwise.  From a guy that used to reject subwoofers out of hand (my bias came from the 90s home theatre craze) I think that they might be necessary in the lion's share of systems with the lion's share of speakers.  To say, "you don't need a sub" with speakers might be true depending on your room, but I also think in most situations you are missing out on what they can do for so many criteria that are not necessarily in keeping with adding bass--e.g. soundstage, focus, imagine, fullness, taming treble, etc.). 

Finally, I really wish that I could try some other brands as many audiogon members recommended so many respectable names.  I ultimately went with REL because of its philosophy, my similar experience with a Sumiko sub (within the family of REL or somehow related), and the high frequency input connections. 
jbhiller
jmg1949
15 posts
 
Long time lurker here but I thought I would put my two cents in and echo what the OP said. We recently added a REL S-SHO 5 to our two channel system and it just makes everything sound better. In addition to improving the low end, what I had perceived as brightness in the system is now gone. The imaging seems more stable as one moves around the room and interestingly, it sounds better at low volume as well. I think it's more than a placebo effect. I don't understand the physics of why it just sounds so much better overall but couldn't be more pleased. It sounds like a whole new system. For those interested, we have Symphonic Line Legato speakers powered by Odyssey amp and preamp. Large room at 17x35 feet with vaulted ceiling. I'm sure similar results with other subs but REL was recommended by our local dealer who brought one out for an audition.
Jim
dcevans
32 posts
 
Not sure that I can contribute much to what has been posted above.  Actve floorstanders have gained a following, and IMO for good reason. I think that spending money on a quality 2 way speaker with a subwoofer or ideally 2 subwoofers is likely to be less expensive and more tunable to the room without DSP.  If I had $15k, the Vandersteen Quatro CT would be at the top of my list. But in my den (12x14x 8’’), a pair of Heresy III and a REL T9i ($3295  total new) with a crossover at 60Hz and a SET is heaven. 
ieales's avatar
ieales
297 posts
 
You took the words right out of my mouth. So much opinion spoken as fact in @ieales post. And most of it wrong.
Again, please refute with engineering facts. My focus is on music reproduction, not HT. Ported subs can go lower at the expense of linearity, phase and transient response.

I think many fail at integration because they have their sub(s) crossed over too high and with far too much gain.
Most program has no real bass. By crossing over low, almost no signal is reproduced by the sub.

Again, IMO, not enough attention is paid to phase. 80Hz is 14 feet. 90° phase error is ~3ms. Humans use the time delay between their ears for directional information. Phase error causes instruments to stroll and fatigues the listener.

In a concert hall, tympani, bass drum, bass, etc. are all localizable blindfolded and they do not stroll. In the studio, on phase coherent monitors, kick drum, electric bass, either DI or mic'd, don't stroll either.

Too many HiFi systems have horrendous low end phase which causes the aforementioned instruments to stroll or be impossible to localize on well recorded program. A poorly integrated subwoofer is a headache in waiting.

For more than 4 decades, minimum phase error has been a primary focus. For the same period, listeners always comment lifelike, accurate, precise, etc., regardless of room and hardware.

How many have bothered to calculate the phase response of their XOver, loudspeakers and subwoofer amp to integrate their sub and then measure and analyze the result to tweak and verify?
wolf_garcia
4,650 posts
 
Without any regard for "bothering" with calculating "phase response of their XOver, loudspeakers and subwoofer amp to integrate their sub and then measure and analyze the result to tweak and verify?," and simply using a test CD to determine how low my main speakers go, I have imaging from my system that is utterly stable and musically accurate, relative to the recording of course (there still appear to be 27 foot wide drummers here and there, but I've learned to accept them). Listeners are fooled into thinking their systems sound great all the time, as shameful as that might seem to some with a more elitist point of view, but I get it.
joey_v
455 posts
 
I’m looking to add a rel to my system.  I’m hoping I can swing the 25.
More to discover