Which subwoofer...

[wfl]

Hi, I have all Reference 3 (RF-3) series speakers for my surround system. The one exception is my subwoofer which is

the Synergy KSW-10. The system is used primarily for movies. I have found a used RW-8 sub for a terrific price.

If the subs were the same size, this would be a

no brainer. My question is: Is this a no brainer anyway?

Thanks for your help. ps.. my listening area is 14x20.

wfl

[jlukins]

My vote - keep the ksw-10. Both are good subs and I would rather have the size than a supposedly better smaller sub. If yours was a sony or something that might be a different story but the sub you have is already a nice speaker. And you might already know this but the sub does not need to be series matched like the rest of your speakers.

[Colin]

That is a difficult choice because this is one area where the specs should help, but they dont! Sub makers are no different from other loudspeakers makers: they should all publish frequency response and impedance charts for their products. That would tell you where the hump in the RW frequency response is compared to where it is in the KSW; otherwise, the two are vary similar. The RW is less efficient, so it handles more power and has greater output, but the 50 more watts may not be noticeable. Frequency response and weight is the same also, so the big difference is front firing versus down firing. I say try them against each other and then decide. Neither might nor be a big difference. Of Course, two would be best: one up front and one across the room!

[DrWho]

----------------

On 6/24/2005 7:50:18 AM wfl wrote:

Hi, I have all Reference 3 (RF-3) series speakers for my surround system. The one exception is my subwoofer which is

the Synergy KSW-10. The system is used primarily for movies. I have found a used RW-8 sub for a terrific price.

If the subs were the same size, this would be a

no brainer. My question is: Is this a no brainer anyway?

Thanks for your help. ps.. my listening area is 14x20.

wfl

----------------

Well I personally don't think either sub will do your RF-3's any justice. At best the RW-8 would be a lateral if not backward direction. Why take the risk and spend all that time on something that won't perform much better? I'd say save your money and down the road get one of the new Synergy Sub-12's, or get an RW-12, perhaps even look at svs or the DIY world.

I just can't understand the logic behind purchasing a subwoofer that has less cone surface area than the mains. Less surface area means less efficiency which usually means more distortion. The RF-3's are good into the 30's so I would only consider subs that are going to outperform them.

[meuge]

I agree. Neither sub would add anything but boom to the RF-3s. I have a pair of RF-3IIs and I use the Dayton Titanic III 15" sub ($650) that can be built from a partsexpress.com kit in a couple of hours (no woodworking required). I had an HSU VTF-2, which is a better subwoofer than either a KSW-10 or an RW-8, but I found it inadequate. I would say that if you really wanted to get some impact in movies, you should be looking at the SVS PB12, the Titanic III 15", or at least an RW-12... all for about $600-$700. Out of those 3, the Titanic would give you the biggest punch and probably the most output 25Hz and up, while the SVS would reach deeper than either of the other subs.

[wfl]

Thanks everyone...you were a big help.

I am keeping my KSW 10 and saving money.

Thanks, again.

[Blackmesa]

good call, i also recomend the sub-10/12 or rw-12