Sub Neccesary?

[Tesla]

I have temporarily disconnected my sub and last night watched Mr. & Mr.s Smith.

The sound quality was much better, although the big booms were not there for the expolsive stuff the quality from the front Missions was definately far greater.

Is this the case of having a bad matching sub or perhaps I just do not need one in my 4mx4m bedroom?

 

[james.miller]

could well be mismatched, yeah. or maybe you just have it set up badly? Its also pretty hard to place a subwoofer in, im assuming an upstairs, bedroom.i had a hell of a time finding the best place for my sub, only to eventually find the best place was right between the front speakers. or right in front of the bedroom door in otherwords my room just seems to be an impossibility - most of the bass is contained inside which is quite remarkable for a room with a wodden floor and ceiling and no sound deadening. but i also have a flatspot in the midrange that i cant seem to fix with any pair of speakers i've tried, and thats lots lol


anyway me = off on a tangent. What speakers and sub are you using, and how is the sub set up? tbh you should really be gettting much of an output from the sub except those big bangs and such if its setup correctly

 

[Tesla]

I configured it using an 80hz test tone. (I think, may of been 76)

The placement is not something I have played around with as there is only one place it can go.

It's a Sony sub, SA-W305, it's 45W so no monster.

The front speakers are Mission M74.

I am going to whack House of Flying Daggers on now as I have watched the drum scene a million times on my seperates and on all of the One Box kits my business installs.

 

[squiffy]

It's a Sony sub, SA-W305, it's 45W so no monster.

That explains it. A low quality subwoofer will make your system sound worse. Double check distance, phase settings and subwoofer gain.

Personally I wouldn't bother reconnect it and just save up for a better sub.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

As already said, the Sony sub probably simply can't cut the mustard.
The result will be a combination of poor integration linked to a sub that probably isn't really a sub. Chances are that it can't really accurately reproduce genuinely low notes.

My personal view (which is FAR from popular) is that subs are more hassle than they're worth. The simple fact is that unless you own OCUK, chances are that you have finite cash available for your stereo fetish. Assuming that to be the case, I think instead of spending £500 on a decent sub, buy a good s/h pair of stereo speakers that will improve the WHOLE of the frequency range, not just the lowest octaves.

 

[squiffy]

My personal view (which is FAR from popular) is that subs are more hassle than they're worth. The simple fact is that unless you own OCUK, chances are that you have finite cash available for your stereo fetish. Assuming that to be the case, I think instead of spending £500 on a decent sub, buy a good s/h pair of stereo speakers that will improve the WHOLE of the frequency range, not just the lowest octaves.

For stereo I agree, as music doesn't really go down that low, a pair of good floostanders (or standmounts in a smaller room) will reproduce entire frequency range. In a HT system though I would disagree entirely, unless you have floorstanders with subwoofers in (ie Definitive Technology) and not general bass drivers that are crossed over higher ie 120hz, floorstanders do not come close to a dedicated sub bass depth, output, or distortion.

A "excellent" subwoofer is £800+ IMO. Don't pay for the name also, I use lesser name brand that outperforms a £2100 M&K that's three times more expensive than mine!

 

[Tesla]

Well the sub has been completely removed now.

I think the next thing I will buy is a stereo amp but to be honest I cannot really fault my current setup, I know it can be improved but the question is justifying spending money on it, and I cannot really do that.

Currently listening to Michael Jackson - Bad (album).

The sound is far improved without the sub, much tighter.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

For stereo I agree, as music doesn't really go down that low, a pair of good floostanders (or standmounts in a smaller room) will reproduce entire frequency range. In a HT system though I would disagree entirely, unless you have floorstanders with subwoofers in (ie Definitive Technology) and not general bass drivers that are crossed over higher ie 120hz, floorstanders do not come close to a dedicated sub bass depth, output, or distortion.

A "excellent" subwoofer is £800+ IMO. Don't pay for the name also, I use lesser name brand that outperforms a £2100 M&K that's three times more expensive than mine!

I understand your logic, but I still can't say I agree.
Just think about the average film. Most of it will consist of a combination of dialogue and music, with the odd section of low bass thrown in for good measure. Are you really trying to suggest that it's worth improving 5% of the sound from the film at the expense of the other 95%? To me that just doesn't make sense.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that a "good" sub is a bad thing, just that IMO there's better ways to spend the cash, i.e. on an even better pair of stereo speakers. Taking it a stage further, if we assume that a reasonable sub starts at £500, and a good one at say £750, that means that you'd probably spend the same again on a front stereo pair, thus have a budget of at least £1000. That would get some pretty damn impressive full range speakers. eg. the Impulse H2s I heard recently can be bought for around that (if you can find a pair). They run down to 28hz, (-6DB) with no problem. Whilst that still isn't as good as a seriously good sub, as a pair of speakers, they'll marmalise most speakers I've come across, have amazing dynamics, be completely coherent across the frequency range, and nearly make the sub superfluous.

 

[Tunney]

I used to have a pair of M74s and they're big enough that you'd only really benefit from a "proper" sub-woofer (i.e. one that costs £600+).

If you can find the information, check out the quoted frequency response for the M74s and your Sony sub. I wouldn't be surprised if the lower frequency is near identical. You might not get as much bass with the sub, but the audio produced will sound a lot more natural.

 

[Manlove is my forte]

7 days ago my answer would have been "Pah 5.0 is good enough, if you have the right amp and front speakers". 5.1 is only worth it if you have £700 + for a sub.

However. I listened (I don't watch films I listen) to Jurassic Park just over a week ago and I was a bit undreamed by the T-Rex scene, I said to the missus, that a sub was back on the "To buy" list. ( I'm broke so the "To Buy" list is actually very long)

Last Monday I saw that my local hi-fi store has a sale. I saw a Yamaha YSTFSW100 on sale for £119.00 I had a quick look online at the specs, and it seemed decent enough for the price, sure it was a lot less powerful than I would like and the low end of the frequency is about 14 Hz higher than I would like. But for £120 it was not bad. (to get the power and the range I want it would cost at least £700).

ATM I am living with my parents (whilst the bathroom is being renovated) so I hooked it up to my dads amp (which currently only has a mixed match front selection of speakers) and fired up the mines of morier in lord of the rings. Sub off - meh - ; Sub on - Wholly $%|7 I have not heard these sounds before.
But I was still not sold. My dads system is uncompleted and very mismatched. I took the sub home, hooked it up and fired up Jurassic Park, went to the T-Rex scene and listened. I was getting my thumps even on this "Tiny" little sub.

However I went to a demo of a pretty expensive (in compared to my system) system that my dad has his eye on. My first comment was "I need a new sub".

But TBH I think that it has added clarity to my main speakers, which were having to do the LFE and the rest of the sound, which made vocals especially sound muffled. I think the Bass and LFE sounds crisper and is more pronounced, there is actually a rumble and I feel more immersed in the scenes I have watched.
I certainly feel that I have been missing something from my system for the last 3 years, and I will now be sitting down to watch all my films all over again.

Would I like a better sub. Hell yeah. Should I buy one… No. I can neither afford the cost or to fall out with the neighbours (live in a semi)

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Squiffy,
One other question, do you own, or have you ever had the chance to have an extended dem to be able to compare say:
1. A £500 sub mixed in with a mid range pair of speakers, compared to:
2. An even better pair of speakers. Lets say with a suggested RRP of £1500 upwards?

I would hope that what you're suggesting is not purely based on what's written in "What Hi-Fi".

 

[squiffy]

I understand your logic, but I still can't say I agree.
Just think about the average film. Most of it will consist of a combination of dialogue and music, with the odd section of low bass thrown in for good measure. Are you really trying to suggest that it's worth improving 5% of the sound from the film at the expense of the other 95%? To me that just doesn't make sense.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that a "good" sub is a bad thing, just that IMO there's better ways to spend the cash, i.e. on an even better pair of stereo speakers. Taking it a stage further, if we assume that a reasonable sub starts at £500, and a good one at say £750, that means that you'd probably spend the same again on a front stereo pair, thus have a budget of at least £1000. That would get some pretty damn impressive full range speakers. eg. the Impulse H2s I heard recently can be bought for around that (if you can find a pair). They run down to 28hz, (-6DB) with no problem. Whilst that still isn't as good as a seriously good sub, as a pair of speakers, they'll marmalise most speakers I've come across, have amazing dynamics, be completely coherent across the frequency range, and nearly make the sub superfluous.

I've used speakers which cost thousands of pouinds more than my floorstanders (Kef Reference 2.2 btw) they still don't have ANYWHEERE near the bass performance of amy subwoofer.

Put on Titan AE or any other action movie and you'll see what I mean. I agree for the majoirty of films such as drama you don't need a sub. But for any modern film even animation a subwoofer does add a hell of a lot to the experience. You get more bass than 5% to the subwoofer, especially if you set small 80hz to all (recommened by Dolby, and imo sounds the best in my setup, my room)

You could also have problems with bass resonace with a stereo pair of full-range speakers, it can be better just to have one subwoofer that can be moved to the best place. You can't do that will full-range speakers.

If you don't think a subwoofer isn't needed then you've not felt a good one.

No-one who has demoed my system has thought a subwoofer isn't essential. Worth every penny

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Put on Titan AE or any other action movie and you'll see what I mean. I agree for the majoirty of films such as drama you don't need a sub. But for any modern film even animation a subwoofer does add a hell of a lot to the experience. You get more bass than 5% to the subwoofer, especially if you set small 80hz to all (recommened by Dolby, and imo sounds the best in my setup, my room)

You could also have problems with bass resonace with a stereo pair of full-range speakers, it can be better just to have one subwoofer that can be moved to the best place. You can't do that will full-range speakers.

If you don't think a subwoofer isn't needed then you've not felt a good one.

No-one who has demoed my system has thought a subwoofer isn't essential. Worth every penny

When I mentioned the 5% of the sound, I meant 5% of the time in a film during which a sub is really used, and for some films, that's probably optimistic. As for cutting off at 80hz. If you're using some RS specials, then maybe, but assuming you have a decent pair of speakers 30hz is not unreasonable and all the speakers I've owned in the last few years have been capable of running close to that.

As for your system, I've no idea, what are you running? Your sig suggests a set of computer based speakers.

 

[james.miller]

if you have floor standers why would you set the crossover to 80hz, or isn't that waht you implied? personally, i wouldnt want >80hz getting to the sub. bass in that region certainly is directional hich is why i chose to put the sub right between the two front speakers. It might not be perfect, but at least directional bass will be coming from the center of the soundfield and not the corner of the room

 

[squiffy]

Squiffy,
One other question, do you own, or have you ever had the chance to have an extended dem to be able to compare say:
1. A £500 sub mixed in with a mid range pair of speakers, compared to:
2. An even better pair of speakers. Lets say with a suggested RRP of £1500 upwards?

I would hope that what you're suggesting is not purely based on what's written in "What Hi-Fi".

Yes I have owned both setups. Depending on what the system is,

Hi-Fi - without a subwoofer with good quality speakers suitable for that room, sending full-range. In a smaller room use standmounts, larger room floorstanders. Need to spend more on floorstanders. In my setup I use standmounts, no bass managment so speaker type is critical.

HT, with a subwoofer, bass management, with good quality speakers, speaker selection can be less picky (ie in the sense you can use floorstanders in a smaller room due to bass managment customisation)

Cost isn't the issue imo, if I wasn't going to buy a subwoofer I wouldn't put the extra towards better gear, as I would still buy the best gear I could afford, usually the extra £1000 won't get any noticeable improvement worth the cost (or lack of a component I would want)

I don't buy any Hi-Fi/HT magazines.

 

[squiffy]

if you have floor standers why would you set the crossover to 80hz, or isn't that waht you implied? personally, i wouldnt want >80hz getting to the sub. bass in that region certainly is directional hich is why i chose to put the sub right between the two front speakers. It might not be perfect, but at least directional bass will be coming from the center of the soundfield and not the corner of the room

The crossover is not a brick wall. There's certainly much lower bass coming from L/R which are set to small 80hz, subwoofer set to small 80hz, but switched off. I've compared small 40hz and small 60hz settings to small 80hz, there's very little difference (in my setup) perhaps in a larger room I will play around with these more, but currently they sound best ala THX setup (all @ small 80hz) All speakers in fact lower in bass performance than 80hz. They're not sats.

It doesn't sound the same bass wise as a pair of THX /other 80hz speakers at 80hz.

My sig has nothing about PC audio setup, which is generally low end by comparison (Rotel 920 integrated, B&W 601's)

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Cost isn't the issue imo

If cost isn't an issue, guess you're running with a Meridian system or similar?

Back in the real world, all mere mortals have cost limitations, meaning that if you spend the dosh on a sub, you ain't spending it on a better pair of speakers.

I'm assuming you're not using a set of computer speakers then, so please remind me of your system of use to justify your suggestion.

 

[squiffy]

If cost isn't an issue, guess you're running with a Meridian system or similar?

Back in the real world, all mere mortals have cost limitations, meaning that if you spend the dosh on a sub, you ain't spending it on a better pair of speakers.

I'm assuming you're not using a set of computer speakers then, so please remind me of your system of use to justify your suggestion.

I would rather not say, but close enough/ equal in quality to Meridian.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

I would rather not say, but close enough/ equal in quality to Meridian.

Come on, don't be coy. Heard a couple of big Meridian dems, though they were with 5.1 music and not films. Very impressive, though not my cup of tea.

Clearly if you have virtually unlimited funds and already have some Living Voice OBX (of whatever floats your boat), then adding a high quality sub for AV DOES make sense, though I'd still maintain that for 95% of users that we've all be sidetracked by the latest AV "fad". Still, that's nothing new when you consider how CD took over from LP.

 

[james.miller]

The crossover is not a brick wall. There's certainly much lower bass coming from L/R which are set to small 80hz, subwoofer set to small 80hz, but switched off. I've compared small 40hz and small 60hz settings to small 80hz, there's very little difference (in my setup) perhaps in a larger room I will play around with these more, but currently they sound best ala THX setup (all @ small 80hz) All speakers in fact lower in bass performance than 80hz. They're not sats.

It doesn't sound the same bass wise as a pair of THX /other 80hz speakers at 80hz.

i know its not a brick wall. it can be anything as low as 6db/octave, depending on type of crossover. thats what im talking about - its not a brick wall so content over 80hz will also get thru. Anything in the region is entirely directional. im suprise you dont prefer running the mains at a lower crossover point, frankly i would if i could but im only using bookshelf's so i really dont have that luxury