Subwoofers - crazy upgrade!

Since your double impact has some legit ~30hz extension,  you could see if you room permits a [1/4,1/4], [1/4, 3/4] location for them, at which point they can also serve as part of the distributed bass array (this depends on your room size, of course).

It would imply that you put the 2 subs behind you at the [3/4, 1/4] [3/4, 3/4] or [3/4, 0] [ 3/4,1] locations and you would technically have a 4 sub array, where the double impacts also serve as quasi-subs.

Almost always, the ideal position for 2 subs would be behind the listening position if you have full-ish range speakers.

$640 for the 2-10 vs $860 for the 4-10...4-10 sounds like a better deal to me, especially since you can get physical drivers at the heightwise null locs with the 4-10.

@buellrider97 wrote

@deep_333 , Thank you for the advise. I have Tekton DI’s on Townshend Podiums. My question was veiled as I didn’t want to mention the Tekton subs , but that’s exactly what I was curious about. I can’t afford 4 REL’s , so it would probably boil down to a pair of SVS, Tektons or a Swarm. I’m currently running a modest SS kit amp. As soon as I get some balanced cables and relocate my TV, I’ll run the DI’s with 180 watt tube monos, but I still want subs. What’s your thoughts on the 4-10’s Vs the 2-10’s ? Regards , Mike B. 

@lewinskih01

In my case, going from 2 Rythmiks F12 to 4 didn't make the bass louder (as I did adjust the power to a target) and I couldn't tell if they were distorting less (they weren't to start with), but the improvement came from a more homogeneous bass response across the room.

Going from 2 subs to 4 subs helps with better bass distribution but it's not he same as if you coupled/stacked them together.  When you couple them its a new subwoofer that has twice the power and twice the cone area. It will far outperform and move more air, with more force than any of the single subs. 2 double stacks will outperform 4 single units spread around the space.

This is the same reason why at pro concerts the subs are always stacked in a cluster rather than spread around when output is the goal. 

@lewinskih01    A good analogy is each of your subs are capalble of generating a certain size wave. All 4 of them are generating the same size wave in different locations evenly around the room.

If you stack them they now become 2 units instead of four but they each push double power and double cone area and can create 2 much LARGER waves. Almost double the size!!! Big powerful waves instead of 4 little waves.

It's physics. It's how it works.

@gdaddy1 

sorry, but it's not. At the same sound level in the room, the 4 subs/amps put out the same energy whether they are stacked one on top of the other or spread out. When stacked, acoustically both subs behave as one larger one, but still outputting the same energy as if they were spread out. The advantage of spreading out is the more even bass response in the room across different locations.

Stacked subs provide larger headroom, but that's rarely the issue with multiple good subs in a living/audio room. Stacked subs can push twice the power and surface, but that's headroom and not SPL at a given sound level in the room.

@lewinskih01  At the same sound level in the room, the 4 subs/amps put out the same energy whether they are stacked one on top of the other or spread out. 

That's just not true..it takes LESS energy to get the same sound level in the room. When you stack them, without changing any of the settings, you would get a 3db to 4db boost in your room just by making stacks of two instead of 4 seperated locations.

Acoustic coupling vs. amplifier power

People often confuse these.

Case 1

One sub.

100 watts.

Reference SPL.

---

Case 2

One sub.

200 watts.

Cone excursion increases by about √2.

Pressure increases by √2.

Result:

+3 dB

---

Case 3

Two identical subs.

100 watts each.

Total amplifier power = 200 watts.

Pressure doubles because both cones radiate together.

Result:

+6 dB