Do you use subwoofers when listening in 2-channel?

[Carl08]

I'm trying to decide if audiophiles listen to 2 channel or 2.1 channel. What say you? I do prefer the "Pure Direct" mode setting on my amp.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Depends on the audiophile I guess. I use direct once in awhile. Just to remind myself why I love my subs! Lol. Jk. I do use direct/pure direct sometimes, but I don't prefer it. I listen mostly in 2.3, and sometimes PLIIx depending on content.

 

[Pogre]

Depends on the audiophile I guess. I use direct once in awhile. Just to remind myself why I love my subs! Lol. Jk.

I do that! I flip between large and small in my speaker settings for that exact reason.

The only time I use pure direct is when I want to remind myself why I love Audyssey. (no Jk )

 

[mx416]

I always listen in stereo 2ch. With a cross at 90 to my 2xSubs. I love me some bass

 

[lovinthehd]

Where's the third option for sometimes maybe? Can't listen to multi-ch audio in 2ch and be a purist anyways and even 2.0 recording is a compromise so not much pure about it. Then there's the matter of type of music and capabilities of the L/R speakers. What's the point of the poll? Not exactly a new concept or question....

 

[TLS Guy]

Main system does not need a sub. LFE is captured though. Downstairs is two channel but a couple of subs used to gently extend the response below 35 Hz.

At another residence the sub bass system is in the main speakers and cover the response below 90 Hz to the low 20s.

I think the point is that best practice designs the system as an integrated system and not a piecemeal system. A fully integrated system will not be designed to play properly with part of the system switched off.

In a good system switching off the sub is akin to disconnecting a crossover. No bass or sub system should ever detract from the overall sound from any source at any time. If it does then it needs revision. Once everything is properly set up and leveled it should never need tinkering with.

 

[MrBoat]

I started out here at audioholics as a 2 channel only listener. Fortunately for me, my older AVR allows me to listen in pure direct with the sub still active. Add a graphic EQ, separate amp/dsp for the sub and you can pretty much flavor it however you need to.

I'm also still a fan of chunky speakers with large woofers, even more so after having been forced to listen to bookshelf speakers for a spell. In spite of the current trends, the overbearing WAF being inflicted on audio due to aesthetics, of all things, I still like what I like. I've tried the other ways. This just ends up being a lot less fiddling and fuss, and a lot less $$.

On the other hand, I am glad I was talked into trying subwoofers. It adds another level of fine tuning that I am slowly but surely figuring out.

 

[Carl08]

Where's the third option for sometimes maybe? Can't listen to multi-ch audio in 2ch and be a purist anyways and even 2.0 recording is a compromise so not much pure about it. Then there's the matter of type of music and capabilities of the L/R speakers. What's the point of the poll? Not exactly a new concept or question....

The point was to see if people use 2.0 or 2.1. I'm sorry if I didn't mention multi-channel music or other fringe formats.

 

[Bucknekked]

I started out here at audioholics as a 2 channel only listener. Fortunately for me, my older AVR allows me to listen in pure direct with the sub still active. Add a graphic EQ, separate amp/dsp for the sub and you can pretty much flavor it however you need to.

I'm also still a fan of chunky speakers with large woofers, even more so after having been forced to listen to bookshelf speakers for a spell. In spite of the current trends, the overbearing WAF being inflicted on audio due to aesthetics, of all things, I still like what I like. I've tried the other ways. This just ends up being a lot less fiddling and fuss, and a lot less $$.

On the other hand, I am glad I was talked into trying subwoofers. It adds another level of fine tuning that I am slowly but surely figuring out.

We is on the same page. With my current setup, I use a sub to pair up to my front L/R's and can still run in Direct mode on my AVR. When my new Salk Songtowers arrive, I am hoping I can ditch the sub and just do it with front L/R. That doesn't mean I don't like subs, it just means in this particular setup, I'll be back to just front L/R. I'm only a purist when it comes to the sound: if the sound is right, then I'll stop tinkering. I agree with TLS Guy, when you get it right, you should try and leave it be and just listen to it.

 

[Verdinut]

In my system, I use one 15 inch subwoofer as the woofer in each of the 3 front three-way speaker cabinets. The crossover frequency between woofers and mid-woofers is set at 190 Hz with the use of active bi-amping.

That gives me an outstanding full frequency range performance of 20-27 KHz ±3dB.

Of course, when listening in the stereo format, the L & R speakers function as standard 3-way speaker systems.

 

[lovinthehd]

The point was to see if people use 2.0 or 2.1. I'm sorry if I didn't mention multi-channel music or other fringe formats.

Just making a point. Wonder how "fringe" 2.0 would be without vinyl having limited the format in the first place?

 

[TLS Guy]

Just making a point. Wonder how "fringe" 2.0 would be without vinyl having limited the format in the first place?

Vinyl did not limit 2.0. You can get really good reproduction from vinyl and very good bass as well.

 

[Mark of Cenla]

I always listen in stereo. Now I am using my subs after several months of not using them. In the living room where our main system is, we almost always use the subs, although the mains sound OK without them. Peace and goodwill.

 

[lovinthehd]

Vinyl did not limit 2.0. You can get really good reproduction from vinyl and very good bass as well.

Meant more in the sense that the medium sort of dictated either mono or 2.0 and nothing else....

ps Okay, there was quad but it wasn't very good IMO.

 

[KenM10759]

My system is "dialed in" pretty smoothly to use the modest subwoofer together with the floorstanding speakers. For a large percentage of the music, the sub really does some nice work. On some music, it does very little and I can quickly switch to the receiver's "analog bypass" mode. That it really sounds the same is testament to being set correctly when the sub is engaged.

There are a couple recordings I have that are done so poorly I have to use the direct (analog bypass) mode because it just sounds annoying with far too much bass. (Lake Street Dive "Side Pony" album a great example.)

 

[TLS Guy]

Meant more in the sense that the medium sort of dictated either mono or 2.0 and nothing else....

ps Okay, there was quad but it wasn't very good IMO.

If you are talking about Quadraphonic discs I agree with you. Although the masters issued on SACD actually sound very good. Quad preamps are a different matter. These expertly designed units help to get the best from LPs. The problem with disc reproduction has always been ignorance, from improper equipment selection to set up. Most of my discs still have a silent surface, and I bet if you just walked in, you would think you were listening to a CD.

 

[lovinthehd]

If you are talking about Quadraphonic discs I agree with you. Although the masters issued on SACD actually sound very good. Quad preamps are a different matter. These expertly designed units help to get the best from LPs. The problem with disc reproduction has always been ignorance, from improper equipment selection to set up. Most of my discs still have a silent surface, and I bet if you just walked in, you would think you were listening to a CD.

Yes, the quad vinyl is what I was referring to. SACD/bluray discs are very nice, I very much prefer them to vinyl. I still use vinyl, too, and while some is quieter than others, generally I still prefer the utter quiet, let alone the convenience, of digital vs the inherent surface noise, and inconvenience, in vinyl playback; I have surprised friends who thought they were listening to cd when I get up to lift the stylus at the end of the record. Just saying that due to the way the home audio industry developed we have been in 2ch world largely as a result (well, since mono was pushed aside by 2.0 stereo), just the way it sorted out with technology/marketing. Nothing really that pure about it, more what we have been accustomed to dealing with. IMO YMMV and all that...

 

[everettT]

For a good amount of my recordings I need my subs. My mains go down to 38hz then drop rapidly in spl, so I need that integration of the sub with a 90hz crossover to free up the two 6.5 " midrange drivers to play well into reference levels. I wish I had a TL setup like TLS, I'm sure those 2 10" excel drivers in the long stop Sound awesome.

 

[killdozzer]

And then there's the other point of the extreme; is having stand-mounts 2.0 a purist approache and would you call yourself a purist while your favourite band literally goes into the studio and records an entire heap of low frequencies you're not hearing? What's purist about that? Wouldn't you say that, for comparison's sake, it is like deciding you don't really need red in all your movies? That's also just a frequency of visual light and in many movies it doesn't affect the content/message/topic or whatever. How did this decision to exclude a portion of your music ever came about? How about "pan&scan" a movie for old TV sets, is that in any way purist? I read here that tests show that the placing of the source of low frequencies is not the same for every room and should be found. In 2.0 systems it is fixed (given you have bass drivers).

There's a difference if you're adding subs to hear more bass than was intended and if you're adding subs to hear what the band or the artist wanted to record. In latter case you would be a purist WITH a sub. (this would also imply what @KenM10759 already said; on some recordings your sub probably rests and that's OK).

 

[jmalecki05]

WOW! The only one to vote for 2.0

Then again, my front speakers each have 2 8-inch subs

I do vary between 5 ch stereo when the mood strikes. But mostly, I like pure direct.