[DaveBSC]

 
Quote:

What makes the difference is the balance and weight from the bass which adds gravitas to the music. It's always going to be a bigger sound than what you will get from a bookshelf or desktop sized enclosure. No matter how loud you play or how much you pay.
 
That's why the OP's (& I suspect that of many other audiophiles atm) central dilemna is less about which particular brands to buy but a choice between a traditional full range floorstander system or a combination of  mini monitors and a sub woofer.

I don't agree. There's a lot more that depends on the music being listened to, and many other factors that contribute to overall sound quality that have little to nothing to do with frequency range. Yes filling in that bottom end makes a difference but I've found that as I continue to listen to more and more components and systems and refine my tastes further and further, I find that 20-40Hz range to be of less and less consequence as to whether I like the sound of a system or not.
 
The prime attributes that really move me these days are imaging and soundstaging, the sense of "air" around instruments and performers, and most importantly, detail. Given the choice between a two-way monitor with a state of the art ribbon, ring radiator or diamond dome tweeter paired with a top quality 5 - 7" woofer and a range of 45Hz and up or a floorstander with an average soft dome and 3 or 4 bass drivers that goes down to 25Hz, I'll take the monitor in a heart beat. It's nice if the deep bass is there, but if that's all the system has to offer I'll be bored with it in a second. On the other hand, if a system produces a soundstage that seems to extend beyond the walls of the listening space, if it sounds like the like speakers have disappeared and I'm listening to live performers, and I'm hearing every last drop of recorded detail, and yet the system is all out of ideas at 50Hz, I'll be happy to listen for days. 
 

 

[noinimod]

DaveBSC: I totally agree with what you said. Thing is, when a sub is well-integrated into a stereo setup, it more often than not creates an illusion of a more expansive and immersive sound-stage.. for whatever reason, lol.
 
i crossover my rythmik f12 @ 50hz. There's surprisingly a healthy dose of bass information in the 30-40+ Hz region (not so much the 20+, though it is there for those rare, few songs). Since most bookshelves that are meant for near field usage do not extend to 40hz, there's quite a bit of bass info one can be missing out on w/o a sub. Unfortunately, good subs never come cheap =\

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

Great observation DaveBSC. 
 
I achieved SQ and balance with my Merlin TSM-MXe's and my Manley Stingray running in triode mode (<20w/ch), that was on par with my buddy's Lamm 1.1 Reference monoblocks and Meridian setup. System synergy and component matching are key parameters when creating a great sounding system. 
 
 
Quote:

 

Sound pressure level and sound quality are two entirely different things. It takes a hell of a lot more than a big amp and some big drivers to achieve truly great sound. A 30W pure Class A amp paired with some efficient speakers could sound superb. If you're talking just deep bass than yes, you need a strong amp and a large driver, multiple drivers, or some engineering tricks like a transmission line enclosure, there's no getting around that.
 
However, once you get above 40Hz which is where the vast majority of musical information is, how big your woofer is and how much amp you've got is largely irrelevant. Quality is far more important than quantity. I can't count the number of two-way monitors that will send big 5-driver floor standers home crying (except when asked to reproduce 25Hz from a synthesizer).
 
Matching the speaker to the room is also critical. In smaller spaces, stand-mounted two-way monitors will outperform floorstanders that are out of their element pretty much every time.

 

[3X0]

 
Quote:

I don't agree. There's a lot more that depends on the music being listened to, and many other factors that contribute to overall sound quality that have little to nothing to do with frequency range. Yes filling in that bottom end makes a difference but I've found that as I continue to listen to more and more components and systems and refine my tastes further and further, I find that 20-40Hz range to be of less and less consequence as to whether I like the sound of a system or not.  
The prime attributes that really move me these days are imaging and soundstaging, the sense of "air" around instruments and performers, and most importantly, detail. Given the choice between a two-way monitor with a state of the art ribbon, ring radiator or diamond dome tweeter paired with a top quality 5 - 7" woofer and a range of 45Hz and up or a floorstander with an average soft dome and 3 or 4 bass drivers that goes down to 25Hz, I'll take the monitor in a heart beat. It's nice if the deep bass is there, but if that's all the system has to offer I'll be bored with it in a second. On the other hand, if a system produces a soundstage that seems to extend beyond the walls of the listening space, if it sounds like the like speakers have disappeared and I'm listening to live performers, and I'm hearing every last drop of recorded detail, and yet the system is all out of ideas at 50Hz, I'll be happy to listen for days. 
 

Quote:

i crossover my rythmik f12 @ 50hz. There's surprisingly a healthy dose of bass information in the 30-40+ Hz region (not so much the 20+, though it is there for those rare, few songs). Since most bookshelves that are meant for near field usage do not extend to 40hz, there's quite a bit of bass info one can be missing out on w/o a sub. Unfortunately, good subs never come cheap =\

These are both good points that I agree with. Bass Mekanik makes the bassiest music I play when testing systems and his tracks very rarely peak below 30Hz. As you approach and descend below 20Hz you are entering home theater territory. Yet adding a sub did add something to the perceived atmosphere, especially with recordings of live performances.

 

[Aiml3ss]

Quote:

DaveBSC: I totally agree with what you said. Thing is, when a sub is well-integrated into a stereo setup, it more often than not creates an illusion of a more expansive and immersive sound-stage.. for whatever reason, lol.
 
i crossover my rythmik f12 @ 50hz. There's surprisingly a healthy dose of bass information in the 30-40+ Hz region (not so much the 20+, though it is there for those rare, few songs). Since most bookshelves that are meant for near field usage do not extend to 40hz, there's quite a bit of bass info one can be missing out on w/o a sub. Unfortunately, good subs never come cheap =\

How do you like your Rythmik F12 sub? I am debating between an SVS, REL and MA. How does it compare with those?
 
Sorry to hijack your guys discussion. Wish I understood more of what you are all talking about.

 
Its quite entertaining though.

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

It's amazing what a good sub will do to open up the midrange, expand the soundstage. 
 
Quote:

 
These are both good points that I agree with. Bass Mekanik makes the bassiest music I play when testing systems and his tracks very rarely peak below 30Hz. As you approach and descend below 20Hz you are entering home theater territory. Yet adding a sub did add something to the perceived atmosphere, especially with recordings of live performances.

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

DaveBSC: I totally agree with what you said. Thing is, when a sub is well-integrated into a stereo setup, it more often than not creates an illusion of a more expansive and immersive sound-stage.. for whatever reason, lol.

That is true, but the key is getting it right which can be extremely difficult. When the sub blends perfectly, it sounds as if it's transparent extension of the main channel's response which can considerably improve performance. When it doesn't blend perfectly, you have a box in the corner shouting attention to itself and ruining the experience.

 

[RonaldDumsfeld]

Dave. I am quite sure what you say is true for yourself and many other people besides.
 
In this particular case the OP wanted something that improved on his Dad's old system. In every regard.
 
Since I figure that the AudioEngine's would already be pretty close, if not already superior, to the mid and high frequency ranges in his Dad's system then what the critical ingredient might well be is the extra bass extension. So.  If he bought a system that only lowered his bottom end by 10Hz he might find himself having spent a lot of money and being disappointed.
 
Hopefully you will be proved correct and he won't miss the bottom and still be able to enjoy the cleaner top end. I suspect he will want a sub. I hope he tells us.
 
The reason I am interested in this thread is because I am in a very similar position to the OP.
 
Current FoH system is very similar to the OP's Dad. A classic Japanese receiver Kenwood KR-V7040 which dumps up to 120W a side into a pair of TDL RTL 3s. This is a transmission line design from the early 9Ts with twin woofers. Effortlessly fills a 7mx5mx2m room. All day and night. With up to 30 people dancing.
 
That was nearly twenty years ago and frankly it needs to be more than ticking over to come alive. It's now just too much sometimes. So I bought myself a pair of ADAM A3X to sit on my desktop between the PC and the mixer.
 
These are frankly remarkable for the money (~£350). Especially when you consider they use the same X-ART tweeter as the most expensive model in the entire range and you get 4 quiet 25W amplifiers and an active crossover thrown in for free. In fact they are so good they are sometimes bad. Worn vinyl, overcompressed or low bitrate MP3s,   Any imperfection in the source in fact. You are aware of it. Good source? Cannot imagine anything significantly better atm.
 
So you see the dilemna? My tiny desktop monitors are now the easily the best sound on the premises. Except for the low end. So do I bin the old system and get a Sub? Or what? Hopefully the OP himself will soon be able to shed some light?
 
 

 

[Aiml3ss]

Quote:

Since I figure that the AudioEngine's would already be pretty close, if not already superior, to the mid and high frequency ranges in his Dad's system then what the critical ingredient might well be is the extra bass extension. So.  If he bought a system that only lowered his bottom end by 10Hz he might find himself having spent a lot of money and being disappointed.
 
 

Actually, the A5's sound very equalized and "veiled" compared to my dads system. I don't really know how to explain it better but everything from the highs to the lows just sound cleaner, more natural and not as cold as the A5's. The Luxman and Polks create a nice warm but not overly warm sound. Its fantastic.
 
I plan on attaining a sub soon. I just ordered the Audio-GD DAC19-MKII and the Onix Ref 1 MKII speakers today.

I cannot wait until they delivered. What I plan on doing as soon as the speakers come, is to hook them up right beside my dads Polk and connect them to his Luxman. I know the Polks will beat the lower but I want to compare the mids, and highs.
 
When I get my MF A3 amp and sub (haven't decided on a specific one yet) I will PM you and let you know how I like the pairing.
 
If you are looking for recommendations for a system with passive speakers and such, I highly recommend you ask Dave or anyone else in this thread. They seem to have wealths of knowledge in this category and I cannot thank them enough (specifically Dave) for pointing me in the right direction thus far.

 

[noinimod]

Quote:

How do you like your Rythmik F12 sub? I am debating between an SVS, REL and MA. How does it compare with those?
 
Sorry to hijack your guys discussion. Wish I understood more of what you are all talking about.

 
Its quite entertaining though.

 
The Rythmik's extremely good for music. No boom, no excessive overhang. Just clean, fast and articulate bass. I must say though, if you're looking for a sub to tear your house down with >130 dB SPL levels, the Rythmik F12's probably not for you. That's not to say it can't handle HT. It can, but you shouldn't expect as much output from it as you would from a 12" ported svs/hsu. I have heard various models of the 12" svs and hsu, and they aren't as musical as the rythmik.
 
Plenty of people will disagree with me, but to my ears, a sealed sub always sounded more musical than a ported. That said, you tend to lose extension and output with a sealed design, so if you're a HT guy, you should be looking at ported subs. But we're all here in headfi so i guess that's a moot point.
 
There are some charts/measurements floating around if you bother to google, martin logan and sunfire subs don't measure all that well, with quite a fair bit of distortion. Same goes for velodyne, which is IMO pretty overpriced for the quality you get.
 
I think that the ID companies offer the best value, including but not limited to: SVS, Hsu, elemental designs, epik, rythmik, seaton sound. If you're looking for a musical sub, get one of their sealed designs and you should be set.

 
Quote:

So you see the dilemna? My tiny desktop monitors are now the easily the best sound on the premises. Except for the low end. So do I bin the old system and get a Sub? Or what? Hopefully the OP himself will soon be able to shed some light?
 
 

Get a sub for your setup, you won't regret it. I crossover my rythmik @ 50hz with my dynaudio bm5a and i'm loving the low end on this one.
 

 

[3X0]

Quote:

Get a sub for your setup, you won't regret it. I crossover my rythmik @ 50hz with my dynaudio bm5a and i'm loving the low end on this one.
 

Do you employ a high-pass filter to the Dynaudios or do you let them run their full range? I have heard mixed opinions between strict hardware-implemented bass management between monitors and subwoofer and "by ear" tweaking of subwoofer crossovers to blend well, the latter allowing for some overlap between the sub and monitors.

 

[DaveBSC]

 
Quote:

There are some charts/measurements floating around if you bother to google, martin logan and sunfire subs don't measure all that well, with quite a fair bit of distortion. Same goes for velodyne, which is IMO pretty overpriced for the quality you get.
 
I think that the ID companies offer the best value, including but not limited to: SVS, Hsu, elemental designs, epik, rythmik, seaton sound. If you're looking for a musical sub, get one of their sealed designs and you should be set.

If there's anything worse than the ML subs, it's the Sunfires. Small woofers in tiny boxes that throw half a foot forward and back will never sound good. The lower-end Velodynes aren't anything special, but I like the Optimum and DD series. They are overpriced, but as used buys they aren't bad.
 
Sealed designs have gentler roll-off than ported designs, and many will actually have more deep bass extension as ported subs tend to drop off a cliff when they get a bit below their port tuned frequency. They certainly can sound quicker and more musical than a mediocre ported sub, but when properly designed, ported subs can be superb. Indeed many reference grade subs such as the REL Studio III are ported designs.

 

[3X0]

Quote:

If there's anything worse than the ML subs, it's the Sunfires. Small woofers in tiny boxes that throw half a foot forward and back will never sound good. The lower-end Velodynes aren't anything special, but I like the Optimum and DD series. They are overpriced, but as used buys they aren't bad.  
Sealed designs have gentler roll-off than ported designs, and many will actually have more deep bass extension as ported subs tend to drop off a cliff when they get a bit below their port tuned frequency. They certainly can sound quicker and more musical than a mediocre ported sub, but when properly designed, ported subs can be superb. Indeed many reference grade subs such as the REL Studio III are ported designs.

I do find it odd that the True and True Signature (EQ) series command very high resale values (relative to the market) and are in quite a bit of demand.
 
I think that "musicality" in subwoofers is just a buzz word. I'm of the opinion that a subwoofer which focuses on such a narrow (albeit critical) frequency range can't possibly impart an impression of musicality like full-range speakers or headphones can. On the contrary, I feel it is the elements of speed, dynamics, and accuracy that make a subwoofer good for music (not necessarily musical). And yes, ported designs are just as capable as sealed designs of producing bass that is authoritative without losing definition or speed. The compromise is a (generally) MUCH larger cabinet size. The benefit is requiring less wattage to accomplish the task and consequently being more efficient.
 
Though I can't think of a decent (worth considering) ported subwoofer that doesn't hit lower than a comparably decent sealed sub (on a per-price-range basis). Usually the extension on the ported is at least 4Hz lower, if not more. But this doesn't really matter for music anyway. I do believe that sealed designs are generally better for music when it comes to the sub-$1000 range (used market inclusive).

 

[DaveBSC]

People want small and practical, and I guess if all you're interested in is watching Transformers on Blu-ray, a Sunfire sub is probably fine. Ask one to reproduce an upright bass though, and ugh.
 
You may have a point about sealed subs. I certainly haven't heard even close to everything that's out there, but most of the subs I've been most impressed with have been sealed designs. I also prefer stereo subs over one, every time.

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

I like paired DD Velodyne's best. They are sealed and very tuneful even with full-range Revel Salons. And they mated very well with my TSM-MXe's, which can sometimes be difficult to mate. When properly set up, the only impression of their presence is improved extension and support, especially with organ, synthesizer, etc, and the other benefits of a good quality sub-woofer. Never tried a Rel, but hear good things about 'em. 
 
EDIT: DD series...