For some reason I have run into the mind-set that Kevin has seen - a perception that having more than one sub is more trouble than it's worth and that they have a fixation on low frequency response flatness. News flash! The low frequency response in any real world listening room is going to be frought with significant peaks and dips in response and they will be different depending on where you listen. Depending on the room, two subs can even these out or make them worse. The only way is to evaluate your room and if it has the potential to be a "problem room" - for instance if it is a perfect cube, don't even bother with one sub! If the room has more "ideal" ratios of height x width x depth and/or if it is irregular in shape, two subs can help with flattening the response.

All I can say in conclusion is that firstly, my room is more "ideal" than not - it was purpose-built to be a listening room. Secondly, each time I double the number of active subs - going from one to two and from two to four - the low end gets more subjectively "solid" (and yes, I am compensating for the volume increase with the subwoofer's amplifier). So unquestionably - in my room each doubling of the number of subs presents a very audible benefit in subjective quality - the response measures and sounds flatter and the extension of the low frequencies (playing my organ demo CD for instance) is undoubtedly improved. The lowest notes get obviously more authoritative.

right now i have 1 subwoofer for lfe. i have 2 others that i use for the lows for my fronts, but not for lfe directly. this doesnt count built-in subs that are in some of my speakers.

as with everyone it is primarily a budget reason why I have only one subwoofer for lfe, but not entirely. if i thought more was worth the money, i would have more, but i dont, so i havent wasted my money.

i have at times used more subwoofers total, and more for the lfe (while I had some on loan :-)), but came to the conclusion that i was crazy for trying to convince myself that i was making anything better.

as i have said numerous times, i would rather have one really nice sub, than any number of average ones. i dont ever strive for simply more noise or higher db, what i want is clear, articulate sound that will shake stuff off the wall if i need it to :-).

i do not think that "better" sound is achieved by two subs of lesser quality, rather than one of 2x better quality. realistically everyone has budget constraints (rather they be actual or sane limits), so if you are asking yourself, how can i get "better" bass?, the answer is not by getting more subs, instead it is by getting better a better sub, or perhaps 2 better subs.

i dont feel it necessary to argue the fine points of science or mathematics to determine what is what, i can simply hear for myself. i have heard many kinds/combination/quality of subwoofers and i could not get much better than what i have now with any amount of money that i would ever spend on home audio. value is what draws people to outlaw audio, and value is what most people consider when making a purchase. if a sub is 2x as good and 2x as expensive as another, then it is a good value. having two subs that are half as good, will never be as good as another that is 2x as good. and if you had 1000x of them, they would still not be as good as that 1 that is 2x better.

anyway, i think i have stated and restated my point enough. and before anyone quips that i have 3 subs, i only have the other two because i have bookshelf mains and dont want to loose any lowend (particularly for music), and i got to keep them (had to give the others back that i was "borrowing") for free. if i would have had to buy them, i wouldnt have, because they dont make nearly enough difference, but since i have them for free... why not utilize them...

------------------
[b]This post has been brought to you by curegeorg, thanks for reading.

You have three subs.

Yep...it's three alright.

Three plus the others built into speakers.

If he hasn't crossed them over. 3 for sure though.

But the question is, are they 3 subs that are 1/3rd as good as a single normal one or three good subs that by themselves are 3 times better than a single great one instead of three mediocre ones. I guess if they were three that were 1/3rd as good, it would add up to one really good one.....but then again, if they are in stereo, or 3 channel stereo, it would still devide by three and be equal to the ratio of 3:2 which would equal....boy am I confused....

Time to stop....I just laughed beer out my nose

SH, why not eleventybillion stereo? Like in your system. Do you think threeve is a good amount for most people?

[This message has been edited by JT Clark (edited August 26, 2004).]

Like curegeorg, I also don't feel it's necessary to understand the fine points of science or mathematics to determine what is what. Objectivity is just so overrated!