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. 
128x128jbhiller
Points taken, but since I have Vandersteen 2Cs and those already go down to the low 30Hz, would I still benefit from a sub that only goes down a few hertz lower?
I come from a place of having hated subwoofers as well.

For as long as I can remember, whenever I expressed that I didn't like systems with subwoofers, the reply would be "you just haven't heard it done properly.  My set up integrates the sub properly."   Then I hear the set up and instantly hear a subwoofer.

But I had to downsize from some big floor standing speakers (Thiel 3.7s) to smaller ones (Thiel 2.7s) and I wanted to see if I could bring back some of the scale of the large speakers by trying subwoofers.

I bought a pair of JL Audio 110e subw - highly raved over even by TAS.(I have some severe restrictions in the sub I can choose - they have to fit under a projection screen and the JL subs were about the only ones small enough to do so.  Fortunately they are super high quality subs).

As they can be used from the line level from a speaker (like REL) I tried variations of that approach.  I heard some of the things you get with adding a sub - an expanded sound, more 3D imaging etc.   But the main thing I just couldn't get around was that they changed the TONE of my system.  I'm super sensitive to tone/timbre - it has to be right in order for me to want to sit and listen to a system, and my speakers/amp combo have been carefully selected to get just the tonality I find to be believable and compelling.  If I alter that, I'm playing with the most important feature of my system.

Even selecting a fairly low crossover point (again, running my speakers full range), the sound would darken overall to the degree I was not pleased.

I also bought an expensive JL audio CR-1 crossover which I've yet to try, so I'd be instead actually splitting the signal between the mains and the sub - how you are "supposed" to do subwoofers by the lights of JL audio and countless denizens of subwoofer forums.

I'll see how that goes.  I haven't gotten around to it as it's such a freaking time consuming pain in the butt.   But if I can't integrate the sub without preserving the tone/timbre of my system, I'll have to abandon the idea.


I was a recording engineer. I produce live concerts. I’ve taken RTAs to venues for decades.

There is very, very little sound below 60Hz. A double bass is ≈41Hz on open E. A bass drum after ring can have some 20Hz-ish sound, but only in some halls. Piano can go ≈27Hz, but it’s hardly ever played that low. Few studio recordings have any real low end.

IMO, the point of a sub it to reduce the load on the main woofer. When the mains start heading south in an anechoic chamber, phase response and impedance are starting to go south as well. Crossover an octave higher and there is a LOT more power and control available for those frequencies because it is not being eaten up trying to drive the woofer.

Tube amps in particular benefit as transformers are not particularly good at low frequencies.

I like 1st order high pass on the main amplifier and 3rd order low pass on the subs. That puts the phase correct-ish at XOver.

If you can afford it and have the space, use two subs very close to the mains and GET THE PHASE RIGHT!!!! A 0/180° control is mostly decoration. At the very least, a continuous 0 through 180 control. It’s easy to add a ± phase switch to most subs with a DPDT switch between the driver and the internal amp.

The difference good sub integration makes is out of all proportion to the frequencies.

P.S. Martin Logan subs have tremendous flexibility and are very easy to integrate. I looked at all manufacturers earlier this year and ML offers the most bang for the buck. I'd love a pair of top of the line JL or REL, and while I could afford it, I just can't justify the cost. ML integration beats them six ways to Sunday with multi slope XO, ARC and remote control.
" IMO, the point of a sub it to reduce the load on the main woofer"

RELs don't do it this way, they are designed to pick up where the mains drop off. Vandersteen Subs do this, however.
@bstatmeister I honestly don't know,not having experienced what the *swarm* is claimed to do.I'm going to give a second sub a try next week and see what happens.I just wanted to point out some things for further research if you were interested.
What prof noted in his experience is interesting as well.I haven't noticed any change in timbre with my single sub in my room.I guess I'll find out soon:)My room is practically square and even with room treatments the bass sounds best when I'm in the room adjacent to it.I'm going to see if it is a positive change to further break up the reflections.I'll post the results here good or bad.