How necessary is a subwoofer?

[JiminSTL]

Hello to all from the St. Louis area.

First post, and looking for a discussion that probably has been addressed a number of times. May I ask again, with some technical specifics?

My question: whether a subwoofer is “necessary” given the specifics of my use and setup? If not “necessary” might a subwoofer make a significant difference?

My system use is approximately 50/50, music and movies/TV. Fairly large and open great room (GR itself about 27’ x 17’, with a 15’ vaulted ceiling), an adjoining dining area, and a pass-through from the GR to the kitchen). Plenty of soft surfaces.

Equipment presently consists of:

Pioneer Elite SC-35 receiver

Klipsch KV-4 center

KLF-20 L/R (34Hz-20kHz+-3dB, each w/ 2 10” woofers).

Synergy F3 surrounds

KSW10 sub (set @ 50Hz)

Sony BD

What I have is a brief opportunity to acquire a good pair of KLF-30 speakers (36Hz-20kHz+-3dB, each w/ 2 12” woofers). I would make them my mains and move the 20s to the surround position.

In no way do I have “professional” knowledge, ear, or budget. I actually love the sound that this mixture makes. But I do know that the 30s should be quite an addition. . . .

I ask the original question because I am likely to sell the subwoofer, depending on the cumulative responses.

Really would appreciate your collective insights, and thanks to all!

[Youthman]

I believe every system benefits from a quality subwoofer. You might consider upgrading your sub since a single 10" will struggle to hang with (4) 12" woofers. Welcome to the forums

[Sancho Panza]

Welcome, Jim to the Klipsch Forums!

[RRR]

Nobody needs a subwoofer but once you have one (a good one anyways) its hard to go without.

If it sounds good to your ears keep it if not an upgrade would not be out of line.

The KSW 10 may add a little low end but it more than likely just mudds things up more than it helps.

Its your ears, better if you decide what sounds better to you.

[tigerwoodKhorns]

It is necessary.

[willland]

JiminSTL,

Welcome to the forum.

For HT, definitely yes. For music, that depends. For HT/music combo, yes again.

A sub CAN make a good sounding 2-channel rig sound better. It can also make it sound worse. Subwoofer quality and implementation/blending are key.

The KSW10 would most likely not enhance either a stereo rig or HT rig or a combo rig.

Bill

[Schu]

^agreed... for home theater it is essential, for 2 channel music, not so much on many recordings.

Many newer recordings do include very low frequencies in them... so a sub is critical there. In other recordings, it fills out the bottomend nicely as long as it is blended correctly and not bloated and overwhelming.

[holtrp]

A powerful sub is "must have" imho

[Youthman]

You should only notice your sub when you turn it off.

[minermark]

If I had the room id dam sure have two of those huge big bad boys posted in the other forum, you know the HUGE Mitsubishi.

And on the other hand, think how those big bad boys would make for an Alarm system from heII.

Edited February 5, 2014 by minermark

[Mallette]

Nobody needs a subwoofer but once you have one (a good one anyways) its hard to go without.

Really? What about the entire octave that even Klipschorns don't handle. I've a number of recordings with material at 16.5 Hz. Hard to call it "high fidelity" if you aren't hearing the low "C" at all.

Definitely depends on one's musical interests, IMHO.

Dave

[Turbox]

Sub is a must have. i could never live without one now...

[derrickdj1]

Welcome Jim to the forum. A sub is a must for a HT and in your case a couple of subs is most likely needed.

[RRR]

Nobody needs a subwoofer but once you have one (a good one anyways) its hard to go without.

Really? What about the entire octave that even Klipschorns don't handle. I've a number of recordings with material at 16.5 Hz. Hard to call it "high fidelity" if you aren't hearing the low "C" at all.

Definitely depends on one's musical interests, IMHO.

Dave

I have heard many systems that sound great without a subwoofer & many systems that have a sub that sound like crap.

Its all about personal taste.

I use a sub with my LaScala's because i think it needs one. My Chorus II's i feel dont need it but i can always add one if i feel like it.

Just because you miss some low end content on a sound system dosen't mean it won't sound good.

I have nothing against those who prefer not running a subwoofer but i feel a properly integrated subwoofer can definitely add to ones listening experience.

[Heritage_Head]

Nobody needs a subwoofer but once you have one (a good one anyways) its hard to go without.

Really? What about the entire octave that even Klipschorns don't handle. I've a number of recordings with material at 16.5 Hz. Hard to call it "high fidelity" if you aren't hearing the low "C" at all.

Definitely depends on one's musical interests, IMHO.

Dave

I have heard many systems that sound great without a subwoofer & many systems that have a sub that sound like crap.

Its all about personal taste.

I use a sub with my LaScala's because i think it needs one. My Chorus II's i feel dont need it but i can always add one if i feel like it.

Just because you miss some low end content on a sound system dosen't mean it won't sound good.

I have nothing against those who prefer not running a subwoofer but i feel a properly integrated subwoofer can definitely add to ones listening experience.

It would have been hard to agree with this before i got cornwalls. I run my cornwalls in a 2.0 set up (with movies its blu ray with the newest codecs). Even being use to three big svs subs in the ht. I'm still impressed by the bass that comes out of the 2.0 set up. Its not as low or as powerful but the output is still pretty awesome. Most speakers won't have this size of bass by them self. So i think in most cases the sub is pretty important in a ht.

Edited February 5, 2014 by reference_head

[Youthman]

Just because you add a sub doesn't necessarily mean it will automatically sound better. All subs are not created equal. You can have a high end sub and have it cranked up way too high and it not sound good because it's not blended. To me, the goal of a sub is to provide effortless support of the bottom end but do it seamlessly to where it does not draw attention to itself unless you turn it off. When calibrated right, I think they help any system, no matter how large the speakers are.

[ClaudeJ1]

It is necessary.

You have no idea how much bass your are missing without it. All speakers roll off ("run out of steam") near the edge of their reponse band which is usually 40 hz. Modern electric basses with 5, 6, 7 strings can hit 31 hz. without detuning or sub bass synthesizers. You won't know it's there without a sub, even with Khorns.

[ClaudeJ1]

Nobody needs a subwoofer but once you have one (a good one anyways) its hard to go without.

Really? What about the entire octave that even Klipschorns don't handle. I've a number of recordings with material at 16.5 Hz. Hard to call it "high fidelity" if you aren't hearing the low "C" at all.

Definitely depends on one's musical interests, IMHO.

Dave

I have heard many systems that sound great without a subwoofer & many systems that have a sub that sound like crap.

Its all about personal taste.

I use a sub with my LaScala's because i think it needs one. My Chorus II's i feel dont need it but i can always add one if i feel like it.

Just because you miss some low end content on a sound system dosen't mean it won't sound good.

I have nothing against those who prefer not running a subwoofer but i feel a properly integrated subwoofer can definitely add to ones listening experience.

I second that motion.

[Quiet_Hollow]

The argument in favor of the addition of a subwoofer is, more often than not, content driven.

However, the single most reason I use a component subwoofer is because of the acoustic problems it solves when correctly deployed.

[muel]

For HT: It just doesn't sound right without a sub. For music: Two, properly set up or none at all.