Are subwoofers worth the trouble?

I agree with the above comments. In my opinion, it's easier to make a bad subwoofer than anything else. The integration between your main speakers and the sub is a pain. The easy trap to fall into is running the sub too loud, believe I've been there. It sounds awesome at first then it starts to really irritate you. The best setting I found so far is to set the cross over at the lowest possible level and turn up the volume of the sub just enough to notice it.

Well if your not going to turn it up then most good fullrange speakers can accomplish what your subs are doing. I'd have to admit that right now I don't even have a sub. Thats because I sold the amp and crossover to buy my thiel speakers. (and it was a very good trade up) But everybody who listens to it asks where I put the sub. When I tell them that I don't have it hooked up they are astonished by the bass they heard. So if your not in it for the full on effect then you may not get your moneys worth and would be better off upgrading the rest of your gear. Anyone heard the Avalon Opus? There is no way you would ever need a sub with these. Good speakers and good gear and wire make woofers seem like subs. But better blend! If any sub is going to beat out a good set of fullrange speakers than it has to be turned up somewhat loud, Then your using it for effect. With my system if I don't turn it up and use it for effect and power and drive than there would be no point!

Yes, subwoofers can cause trouble. Yes, they are worth the effort. Subwoofers are no more difficult to set up than any other components, its just that they really, really sound bad when less than optimized. There are two key elements to getting great low frequency performance from your system. The first is your room. Can your room support low frequency sound? Room dimensions and type of construction can make or break bass performance. If your room cannot tolerate bass, than you're probably better off staying away from speaker systems that go below 40Hz. The second element is the equipment. No bass at all is better than a cheap/bad subwoofer. My preference is towards mating subwoofers to full range speakers. The deeper your main speakers go, the better the potential integration of the subwoofer. You will have to pay attention to phase cancellation effects. An advantage of this approach is that there's no need for an additional crossover in the main speaker path. REL and Audio Physics have products along these lines. Also, you can probably get smoother, more accurate bass from a subwoofered system than from single speaker systems. Positioning a speaker for accurate imaging, best soundstaging and smooth frequency response can be very difficult. A separate bass module gives greater flexibility in speaker placement. A good subwoofer in a well set up system should not be perceptable unless there's deep bass in the music. For music, subwoofers are NOT an effect, instead they add a sense of naturalness to the music.

You are headed in the right direction by starting with a REL. I have a REL, and this is the last sub woofer that I will ever buy. This sub blends in so well with my mains, that I don't know that it is there until I turn it off, and then I miss it. If your mains have plenty of low base, you probably can do without one, but in my opinion a sub fills out what is already there in a recording, that main speakers sometimes cannot reproduce. The key is to make it blend in so that its not just a boom box.

Very much agree with Onhwy61. He's a "good'un", as John Atkinson likes to say. I agree with highway on every point he describes. Of course I don't use mine for "effect". I'm not a neophyte at this.