Subwoofers


I sold the first sub I ever owned, a Rel Strata III with the intent to upgrade, but now finding it difficult to decide what to buy. Given my system, GMA Europa Max speakers, and my orientation is for 2 channel audio, what should I buy? I am torn between the Rel Britannia B3 or the Martin Logan Depth. Are the Vandersteen 2wq subs as good as people say? Am I just being snobby towards them due to their inexpensive price?

Thanks.
mdomnick
>Lastly in 5 to 10 years every amp will be a digital model and every hi-end pre willbe like the DEQX<

What a ridiculous statement that is.

And BTW, Chazzbo, is english a second language for you?

Oz
Mdomnick - I know you bought the ML Depth, and I hope you're happy with it of course. I didn't see this post until now, but still think I should relay my experience.

While I'm sure the ML subs are good subs, I spent some time auditioning them and found the lack of adjustments to be a deal-breaker to me. I spent plenty of time comparing the ML Dephth and Descent to the REL Strata. The ML subs only have 2 crossover points, something like 40hz and 70hz. So if one of these two crossover points isn't the perfect integration with your speakers, then you're pretty much out to lunch with one of these subs. I couldn't get either ML sub to integrate with my dynaudios nearly as well as the REL Strata, but I hope it works out for you.

I ended up purchasing a velodyne DD15. With its remote control, I can change it from being fast, accurate, and musical and integrated with my Dyns for classical, jazz, etc. Then I can hit a button to change the EQ curve a little bit to rock out with AC/DC. Then I can hit another button to crank it and make Jurassic park a blast. All of which will be using the built in EQ to fix major +/- 10db peaks and valleys that my room brings. I feel as though bass equilization is an ABSOLUTE necessity, unless you have measured your room to be flat.

That type of functionality is worth my money.
Goatwuss, the ML Depth has (the important low pass) x-over points at 30, 35, 45, 55, 65, and 80 Hz (a total of 6, not 2)

If you are concerned about using high pass filters (40 and 70 Hz for the Depth) I'm curious why that would be important to you. Most folks interested in good sonics use a separate set of interconnects for the sub and don't pass the main audio signal through it. Besides, why would you want to castrate the low end of the main speakers (especially Dynaudios!), since the purpose of a sub is to augment and extend the low end response of the main speakers, not to replace it.

The ML Depth also has a full complement of other adjustments necessary for good sub setup: 4 phase angles, level adjust, plus separate 25Hz level adjust (very useful) as well as separate LFE input for an HT processor which bypasses the subs own settings.

Providing additional functionality for creating sonic environments, adjusting equalization for problem sources, etc. should be done through the (HT) processor IMO, not the sub. Getting those functions by directly altering the sub's response means that the driver-enclosure design can never really be optimal across all functions.

I agree with you that adjusting for room response and finding proper placement is quite important, but if you can't achieve good results using the 25Hz level and phase angle adjustments on most subs, then you need to treat the room, which most people agree is primary source of bass response problems.
I used the Vandy subs in my system for a number of years and they were certainly excellent for augmenting the bass. The one problem I had with this sub was that it placed a crossover directly in the signal path. Even though I used Vandy's highest quality crossover (not the little black box that comes with the sub), I could always hear some upper midrange grunge when this crossover was placed in the system. It got to the point that, when I wanted to listen to music that did not contain deep bass, I would disconnect the sub. Of course, at the time I was using Quads as my main speakers and these are quite revealing of midrange anomolies.
I am now using a REL Strata III. It does not produce as much bass as the Vandy but it is close and it has the advantage of not introducing a crossover into the signal path. I suspect you already knew that this was a significant advantage of the REL design. All this to say, if you are using the sub in a music only system and if you are sensitive to anomolies introduced in the midrange, I would be careful with the Vandy sub system. After experiencing the REL, I could not live with the Vandy again. I cannot comment on any of the other subs mentioned.
Goatwuss,

Thanks for the comments, but I think Nsgarch has detailed the crossover in the Depth. As much as I can appreciate the tweaks one can apply with the Vel (and I really like the idea of a remote to help set up the sub since I currently live alone) I come from the camp of set it and forget it. I am not one who like to make tweaks based on what flavor music or movies...hence my move to a tube based, no 'frills' system. My pre doesn't even allow for bass/treble adjustments; this of course makes all the upstream gear and cables even more important. I found worring about "is this the best setting" to be distracting from just sitting back and enjoying the music. And of course I can tweak the bass in my pro as necessary for movies, but that is a distant second to 2-channel.

Cleopatra,
Thanks for the info on vandy...they truely do seem to be a good buy given their price. I very much liked my Rel, and hope I made the right decision...I was set on the B2, but got a little scared off due to the extra $$...I have a wedding to pay for in July. I admit not being well versed in subs as the Rel was my first, but as much as I liked it, I felt it was too subtle. I'm not looking for punch me in the gut bass, more pat me on the butt bass. We'll see in the ML delivers that. I can always return it if it doesn't.