Two Subs?

Back when I had the REL Storm I was getting much better bass response than when I didn't have the sub connected. No question it sounded, and measured better with the sub on. But there was no way around certain room modes, despite trying several diferent locations within the room.

With the two Rythmik subs well placed and dialed in I get much better sound than with the REL, at least for my taste. It took many iterations of placement and dialing in all the variables in the sub's amps, but well worth it for me. Frequency response is much smoother as well, and I was able to significantly reduce the impact from those room modes that were affecting the response so much. To me, this configuration sounds much better than the one with one REL.

But I don't have experience with active crossovers, although I've been toying with the idea of actively tri-amping.
Bob, what crossover do you use? Conceptually, having one amp for mid/highs, one amp for the bass drivers, and then the two subs running in mono makes sense to me, but trying it at home would be expensive.

I've always found room modes to be an issue with a single sub, ie very noticeable by ear variations in bass levels at different room locations. Also I find that it is possible to address to my satisfaction as long as listening position stays the same. I am confident the more sophisticated and complex eq solutions have up side as well, but not critical for me personally. I would prefer to have two subs rather than one though to help smooth out things within the room better and would probably go down that route next time, though I could probably live without it quite fine just as well as I have managed to do in the past.

Wolf,

For the record, "smooth" is used in that sentence to mean "flat" FR - as in the peaks and valleys evident in the readout of a single sub have been "Smoothed" by the addition of a second sub or EQ. I hope I made it clear in my post that it's a personal preference, but I definitely find the bass more satisfying when the read outs are smoother. I've never enlisted the help necessary for a blind A/B test, so there's always that factor at play, but I'm pretty comfortable that EQ and/or multiple subs is more satisfying for me.

Id never say that my preference is/should be universally shared, but - if asked my opinion - that's the way I'd point someone. YMM certainly V.

Marty

Martykl...I understand. And I also understand that room correction "flattens" bass, resulting in flattened bass even if the music has large bass as in a giant bass drum (for example, one of those pops up here and there in a fave Scofield/Frissell album). There's the rub. I'm happy you're comfortable with your flattened bass, as I'm comfortable with my sometimes bumpy, and to me anyway, more realistic room sound. Bass level issues are a matter of degreee of course and I can't live with what I consider to be unnatural lumpiness in anything, including people (Hollywood plastic surgeons get no "support" from me). I insist my preference be universally shared by everyone at all times forever, and invite everyone to join in my Campaign Against Unnatural Lumpiness.

I live in LA. No "natural lumpiness" here. All smooth, all unnatural, all the time. Couldn't be happier.
One man's meat....