I've noticed some people (especially on judgmental AVS) look down on full range systems, especially without subs and yet I've read research that suggests it's FAR better to have say seven speakers producing full range bass in a room than just one in terms of room modes (the more the merrier). Now that's a generality and things can be tuned with just two subs pretty well, I'm sure, but the idea is sound. Perhaps they're not the ideal spot, but with 7+ subs in the room, I'm betting it starts to even out anyway. Of course, that could be material dependent (i.e. if you sent all of them the LFE signal it would help for sure, but if bass is only in some of the speakers, less so). But give me a room with 7.0.4 using Def Tech towers with built-in powered subs and I'd bet it'd hold its own against some subwoofer based systems with some pretty pricey stuff and at LEAST two subs. And more importantly, it'd do it without all the guess work and checking settings trying to integrate multiple subs (since you have no choice; they have to go where they have to go). But they screamed bloody murder at AVS when I suggested such a heresy....
I'm not saying either way is "best" but I hate this notion only one thing "can" work. I'm only running ONE subwoofer in a 12x24 room now (I do leave the rear X1T towers down to 40Hz since they're so far from the sub) and the curve I get isn't perfect for everyone (6 seats, 3 rows in a 3x2x1 config). I get +/- 2.5dB for bass at the MLP, but even the worst seat (actually right front) is +/-7.5 dB (mostly in the PLUS direction as in MORE bass and the person that normally sits there LOVES that so they don't want me screwing with it; they're a bass addict I think). All the rest are less than +/- 5dB.
Now you can look at that negatively and say that's a 10dB swing there (at normal frequencies, that's almost a full 1/2 or double volume difference), but at bass frequencies it's less than that to the ear due to its insensitivity and when you figure MOST speakers aim for +/- 3dB in an anechoic chamber (let alone a REAL ROOM), I don't think it's that terrible. Given I have 1-3 people using the theater at most 90% of the time, I haven't been in a real hurry to get a second sub. But people who want to win arguments had a FIT at those forums how I should keep my opinions to myself when I can't even admit I *BADLY* need at LEAST one more sub, if not maybe 4 more just to be sure....
(yeah I"m covered; my seat gets +/- 2.5db).
Honestly, I think getting EVEN volume levels is more of an issue (i.e. it's like 7dB quieter in the back of the room than the front and 4dB down at the second row so I have to either crank it 4dB higher or split the difference. I can't make sound not lose energy as it crosses the room. If you sit in the front row vs back row in a real cinema, you can expect to notice a volume difference too. But it's certainly LISTENABLE (I've heard FAR FAR worse from sound bars, let alone TV speakers most of the world listens to) as the volume drops pretty even across the spectrum for the most part.
Oh, the screen appears considerably smaller from the back of the room too (24' away from the 92" screen). It still looks larger than my upstairs wall plasma from the only row). I watched the Super Bowl from the back row (I might as well take the smallest view seat) and thought it still looked big compared to upstairs. Surround sound is very interesting from the back (sounds like a sound tornado in some of the demos since most things are all over the place in front of you, high and low and all over the place).
