LFM-1 compared to Rel Acoustics

I have a front-firing Rel Q-201 which has a very tight bass and is great for music. However, it doesn't have the LFE impact of even a cheap DCM sub I used to own. The problem with the DCM was that it was horribly muddy for music.

I paid nearly twice (for the Rel) of what a new LFM-1 would cost, but wonder if I would be better off either selling the Rel and using an LFM-1 for both high level and LFE or just keeping the Rel for high level input and using the LFM-1 for LFE. If I were to use the LFM-1 for both, do you think I would notice a lot less tightness in bass for music reproduction from what I now have with the Rel.

I've found my lfm to be excellent for the thumping bass you'd find in the movie "Gladiator" but also good for the low 5th string notes that the bassist sometimes uses on Steely Dan records. One can clearly deliniate the different pitches, even below the normal "E" on a typical four string bass guitar. I'd say the lfm by itself is a good bet.

Jay

In my system, I've found the LFM-1 to be very good for music listening. It is not muddy or boomy. It would definitely be worth a look if you are in the market for a new subwoofer, and would probably take care of you for both music and movie (LFE) listening.

------------------
gonk -- 950 Review | LFM-1 Review | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | Saloon Links