subwoofer for Quad 988 electrostatics


I am the owner of the Quad 988's along with Thor TPA 60
watt monblocks with a Thor Preamp. The rest consists of a
Cary CD Player and a VPI turntable. I have previously started a thread with regard to the best speaker around $15,000 per pair. It was suggested that I consider a subwoofer instead. Well, after careful reading it was suggested that I try the Audio Physic Minos subwoofer, which
in Issue 137/138 was reviewed very favorably in the Absolute
Sound. In fact, Paul Seydor owns the 988 and said the sub
blended seamlessly. The other choices are: 1. Vandersteen
2. Definitive Technology Reference Cube, 3. Martin Logan Descent 4. Alon Thunderbolts I am looking for a front firing subwoofer like the Minos as a downfiring sub will
really vibrate my tile floors. Has any fellow audiophiles heard the Minos, or heard it with the Quads?, or has anybody heard the Quad 988's with any sub that blends well
witht he 988's. Thank you in advance for any light that you can shed on the above.
kjl

Showing 2 responses by audiokinesis

Hello Kjl,

Most dipole owners at one time or another try adding a subwoofer to fill in the bottom octave, and most find the sub to be a mixed blessing.

The reason it's so difficult to blend a sub with a dipole is the discrepancy in the radiation characteristics and resonant properties. The dipole's figure-8 pattern puts 5 dB less reverberant energy into the room's bass resonant modes than does the omnidirectional pattern of a monopole sub, so the notes decay more quickly with less muddiness and overhang. That being said, the faster and less resonant the sub, the better the blend (if you have to use a monopole sub).

I used to have Quad 63's and confronted the subwoofer integration issue; I ended up with a pair of Gradient SW-63's (dipole subs that the Quads sat on top of). The blend was very good, though still didn't really do the bottom octave.

I know a Quad 63 owner who's using the woofer sections of a pair of InnerSound Eros speakers as his subs. The transmission-line loaded Eros woofer is free from the resonant colorations that arise with sealed or vented subs, and stick out like a sore thumb in contrast with the ultra low coloration of the Quads.

I sell a dedicated transmission line sub, the Buggtussel Tegmentum, that will do what the Eros woofer sections do but go a lot deeper. The Tegmentum has an extremely flexible crossover (flexible slopes, two-band parametric EQ) that is quite helpful in getting a good blend with a dipole speaker. I would suggest running the Quads full range and just using the sub to fill in the bottom.

Eventually I replaced my Quad 63/Gradient system with a pair of Sound Labs, and haven't even thought about needing a sub since then. But that would be back to the fifteen grand (retail) price range, which I take it you've ruled out.

Gradient has threatened to sell the dipole woofer section of their Revolution speakers as a separate subwoofer, and if so that would be the ideal sub for Quads, Maggies, and such. I have a call in to the importer now to see if the Gradient dipole sub is a reality yet; if so I may be able to offer you an in-home audition.

Best of luck in your quest for that elusive bottom octave,

Duke
Okay, to follow up on the Gradient dipole subwoofer I alluded to above...

A pair of dipole woofer modules plus the active crossover made specifically to work with the Quad 63/988 would retail for about six grand (roughly half for the crossover and half for the woofers - additional pairs of woofer modules available for ballpark three grand). I could of course do better than full retail, but it would still be a very expensive subwoofer system.

Just for the record, the most natural-sounding bass I have heard at a CES was at CES 2001 where they had an active Revolution system set up with three woofer modules per side, so I have no reservations about the naturalness of the Gradient subwoofers (they were way ahead of the older SW63's I used to own). I was amazed that this little system (roughly ten or twelve grand retail at the time) sounded more natural on full orchestral music - at least in the bottom octaves - than did any of the big $40,000 - $120,000 speaker systems in their much larger rooms.

Duke