This should be called 2.1 listening

[Pete H]

Just some thought that I'm sure will get some different opinions on, but I remember back in the day before I had great subs, I really thought that I had some killer 2 channel set ups and they really reproduced the bass properly, but that's not really the case (for me anyway). For the last couple of years I've played around about every 4 months listening to straight 2 channel with 7's, Corwalls, Cornscala's and RP's with and without a sub and the difference is astounding. If anyone is out there with a good set of mains and doesn't have a good sub and think that you've found nirvana, I would beg you to get into a good sub and enter the playground again.

For those of you that have a sub or subs in the chain, if you haven't turned the subs off in a while you should, and you will see that every time you do, your appreciation for that sub will grow by leaps and bounds.

Just enjoying the music and thought I would share, a little Dave Matthews cranking up loud and life is good!

[Boxx]

Perhaps you did have a great "2 channel" set up, that did indeed, reproduce properly the albums (recordings) you played and were recorded in the past.

In my opinion, yes, a sub does enhance what is recorded today, with today's recording techniques.

However, I have played "vintage" LP's on my 2.1 setup and in many cases it is a disappointment.

It is the never ending adjustments that keep us engaged.... LOL...

[dtel]

if you haven't turned the subs off in a while you should,

I turn it off a good bit, depending on the music and volume, but it's 4 bass bins, 2 each channel so I get great huge sounding bass and really just want that last little thump on the bottom for some music.

It took me a really long time to get the sub volume where it really sounds best, bass is addictive, and can easily be abused.

I have the sub crossed as low as it goes, 40hz, the gain is at about 10:30 at the most, that's where it is the best for me, with these speakers and this room. [:S]

I agree, overall 2 channel really needs a sub carefully adjusted. If you think you don't why does the sub make any sound when it's turned on if there is no info there ?

[thebes]

I personally think subs are the most over used component of audio. Did you ever notice people seemed to be able to listen to records for almost a century without a sub. If you are into rock, or perhaps organ music, then a sub can be a plus, since most big rock acts go for the major bass kick. Other than that, it's an annoyance. If you need a sub, it may indicate more about he state of the qualities of your listening area than anything to do with perceived impact.

I oughta to know, most of my bottom end is up on my ceiling. Gotta do something about that some day.

[Quiet_Hollow]

Did you ever notice people seemed to be able to listen to records for almost a century without a sub.

And guys stay married to women they hate. [:^)] Participation en masse doesn't justify the "correctness" of said behavior.

If you need a sub, it may indicate more about he state of the qualities of your listening area than anything to do with perceived impact.

Which is okay, because acoustically this applies to pretty much anyone that has a listening room smaller than an aircraft hangar. []

[mike stehr]

"This should be called 2.1 listening"

Cornwalls, a pair of SVS 16/46's, a Behringer active xover, a Mackie 2500 watt amp, and Prodigy-fat of the land

[Boxx]

I personally think subs are the most over used component of audio. Did you ever notice people seemed to be able to listen to records for almost a century without a sub. If you are into rock, or perhaps organ music, then a sub can be a plus, since most big rock acts go for the major bass kick. Other than that, it's an annoyance. If you need a sub, it may indicate more about he state of the qualities of your listening area than anything to do with perceived impact.

I oughta to know, most of my bottom end is up on my ceiling. Gotta do something about that some day.

I agree... There is much truth in this statement...