"Anyone who cannot be bothered to point out his problem with a response and just points to generic articles (on "small rooms" no less which wasn't part of the subwoofer myth article) without so much as giving me a clue WTF his point is in the first place (since he couldn't be bothered to state anything at all) and then rates posts dumb deserves the same in return, IMO. Frankly, Gene, I expected better from you by your reputation. Call me disappointed."\nMJP: Sorry you feel that way, hopefully I've been more clear in my own response.\n\n"I'll cover all my major points anyway (as clearly I don't mind discussing something instead of pointing to yet more articles, most on your own site at that):\n\n-Ask Jim Thiel or any of his customers over the years what they think about time coherent audio. Even a subwoofer needs its early wave arrivals to align as closely as possible to the main speakers for the primary listening location."\nMJP: Show the science. While I actually think time coherence matters to some extent, the literature doesn't strongly support this. Just Phase coherence. What Thiel or his customers think is of little consequence. That's not how you argue a point. Appeal to the bandwagon? \nhttps:\/\/audioxpress.com\/article\/zero-phase-in-studio-monitors\nThis doesn't really give much hope for the importance of zero phase systems. I agree with Putzey myself, it might not make a huge difference, but it makes enough to do it when you can. Theil's way is too compromised, those speakers are only zero phase in a very narrow window. Compromised in other ways because of it. \n\nAs for subs, the point of the article, there is no issue with making phase coherent systems in the bass, and even time coherence isn't that hard. I have a special technique for this which I've presented on at AXPONA. \n\n"-I could point to numerous sources on the many advantages of near-field subwoofer placement (removing the room from the equation for smoother frequency responise and more tactile feel with far less power needed to energize the MLP space as well, giving a pants shaking feel without the danger of ear splitting levels needed to achieve it further away). I don't have to justify that statement in the slightest. Some people love it. Its limitation is placement hazards and limited to one or two seats for optimal listening, making it a poor option for a large room with multiple rows of seating. It's also a subjective experience, not a myth as your writer claims.\n\nIt's not missing realistic reflections in that the recording (if it's a real space) already has them. Most of the reflections (reverb) you're likely to actually hear in any kind of "ambient" manner are probably not being produced by the subwoofer, but the other speakers reproducing higher harmonics. Adding subwoofer level "reverb" is more than likely going to muddle the original sound waves (more interference from your room, not the one of the original recording and thus not actually in the recording itself). Look at low damping factor setups and see how good extra waves sound when they keep going after the signal has stopped.\n\nThus, adding room reflections to the ones already present in a recording is also well known to blur the original acoustic atmosphere. What's the point in multi-channel immersive audio like Auro-3D whose sole goal with music is to recreate the actual environment of the room the music is being recorded in (dual quad microphones that reproduce the ACTUAL reflections of the real environment of the recording across 8+ speakers) if you can just bounce your sound off the living room walls and call it a day as your writer implies?"\n\nMJP: I already responded to this. Feel free to cite your scientific literature with explanation of the psychoacoustic benefits and how it relates to accurate sound reproduction. You are mixing up issues by adding Auro. surround sound doesn't need reflections in the room at mid to high frequencies, but Auro does nothing to eliminate reflections or a reverberant low frequency field. What I cited earlier still holds true. Reflections at low frequencies are how we percieve spaciousness. \n\n"-Subwoofer "speed" is a non-starter in that driver action is just a basic function of mechanical motion controlled by basic physics. Larger drivers need more power and a larger magnet to control them adequately. A small subwoofer with a small amp and a small motor can perform far worse than a large sub with a large motor and a negative feedback control system. Choosing a smaller subwoofer purely on its driver size without considering the rest of the specs isn't a myth. It's dumb."\nMJP: The myth is that people think small subwoofers sound faster. I feel like we agree on this but somehow you are disagreeing. Are you saying people don't claim that small subwoofers are faster than large ones? \n\n"-Do bass traps no longer function in the real world and are they not easier to set up for a beginner than phase-aligned dual subwoofers and also a lot cheaper to boot? Shouldn't they be done first before trying to make multiple subs work so you have less issues to deal with? What's "dumb" about that? Your writer ignored that aspect entirely in favor of pushing multiple subwoofers. But my post is dumb for pointing out easier alternatives to try first or in addition to multiple subwoofers? OK...."\nMJP: Can you provide proof of bass traps working below 100hz as effectively and cheaply, in a room, as multiple subwoofers? I'd like to see that. It's not cheaper or easier. They don't work. Bass traps need to be large and cover large areas. You disagree? Provide your proof with a cost comparison. I've been doing this for long enough and setup rooms both ways. I use bass traps and I believe in them, but they are not nearly as effective as multiple subwoofers below the rooms transition frequency. Not even close. This is pretty well excepted. \n\n"-I also think removing features from a site because of some rating Google uses is rather sad. You're letting a giant corporation dictate the features of your web site? If you keep putting the absolute dollar above integrity and you'll soon find you no longer have any of the latter left. \n\nHave a nice day."\n\nMJP: If you actually understood what you were talking about. This isn't just about the dollar. The articles were being delisted. They couldn't even be searched for. It was as if they didn't exist anymore unless someone already went to our website. It dropped traffic. We can't fight this, Google has a lot of power and we have to play along. We don't spend all our time and money just to make you happy. We have to make this work for the masses.