Why don't established (non-ID) speaker manufacturers make better subwoofers?

[KEW]

I am not attempting to present factual information! This is largely my understanding of the subwoofer industry. Please correct me if I am not properly representing the facts! Thanks!

In the recent thread on Martin-Logan improving their Dynamo series of subwoofer, @BoredSysAdmin made the comment that they would be competitive if they get closed out at 50% discount:

I agree with his point, but that also led me to reflect on other established speaker manufacturers. While the Martin Logans may be over-priced compared to ID competition (and I am including SVS as ID even though they are now sold at BestBuy); they are almost unique in providing well-designed subwoofers (at least for HT)!

Klipsch and Polk both have a reputation for making poor subs (although the new-ish Klipsch 15" sub has a good reputation and is close to being price competitive).

And where is JBL/Harman Audio?

KEF makes some, but they don't seem to be taken seriously by most people here (maybe it is the 9"-10" sizes).

Paradigm makes some great subs once you are spending thousands of dollars.

I have always believed companies like KEF and JBL probably make good subs for music, but are somehow not that interested in the HT subwoofer business.

It seems like as HT was becoming a thing, and by the time the ID companies (and Velodyne) were starting to establish that a significant market does exist, the larger established companies with deeper pockets and experienced speaker/sound engineers would take action to at least give their established customers a competent option. As is, it almost seems like they decided to hand the HT subwoofer market to others.

Any ideas on how this came to be?

Also, where does Sunfire fall in all of this? I had assumed that they had closed shop (because I never hear their name),but their products have continued to be available on Accessories4Less?
https://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/category/spksubwoofer/speakers/powered-subwoofers/1.html?brand_f[]=SUNFIRE

Thanks!

 

[Irvrobinson]

I typically don't see subs in serious music systems. In the higher-end HT systems I've seen in homes over the past several years I mostly found Velodyne and JL Audio. I saw a largish Polk once. I don't remember seeing an ID sub in someone's home. A former manager of mine said he had an all-Genelec system, but I never heard it.

 

[KEW]

I typically don't see subs in serious music systems.

Are you an atypical data point behind that statement?
Is your Velodyne used with your Salon's in an all music system, or is it for HT also?
You have speakers I would consider true full-range. Why did you decide to add a subwoofer?

 

[Irvrobinson]

Are you an atypical data point behind that statement?
Is your Velodyne used with your Salon's in an all music system, or is it for HT also?
You have speakers would consider true full-range. Why did you decide to add a subwoofer?

In the serious music-only systems I've seen over the past three or four years, I'd say yes, I am atypical.

The Salon2/DD18 Plus system is strictly music-only. Our HT system doesn't use a sub.

For many years I never considered a sub for my music system. Of the systems I heard that included subs they sounded horrible. I finally relented and investigated subwoofers only because in 2005 I finally had the flexibility to place my speakers for best imaging and midrange smoothness in a large room, and in those positions the bass sucked with whatever full-range speakers I used. After about five years of dissatisfaction, the only answer seemed to be to figure out how to properly integrate one or more subs.

 

[shadyJ]

The reason why larger speaker manufacturers do not make serious subwoofers is because there isn't much money in it for them. Heavy-duty home theater subs will always be a niche product, and will likely always be the province of manufacture direct. SVS is sort of changing that, but even then I don't usually see their ported subs at Magnolia. Few people will tolerate a big, expensive black box that goes boom real loud. Low WAF means low sales, so no one is going to manufacture these things in quantities of tens of thousands. The only subs that sell in those kinds of quantities are going to be smaller. I don't know who the highest selling subwoofer manufacturer is, but I would guess it is Polk, followed perhaps by Klipsch.

Another thing is, whatever Klipsch's and Polks reputation for making subs, where is the detailed measurement sets of their subs? Just how bad are they if we are going to knock them? The only detailed measurement set I know of is from an old Klipsch SW-311 at Data-bass. I know Brent Butterworth tested R-115SW, and it didn't test so bad from the available data. You have to also remember that the MSRP is quite different from the street price of these subs, so it doesn't make sense to compare their MSRP to manufacture direct subwoofer MSRPs. I see people ripping in these subs from time to time, but they do so outside of reasonable context.

 

[yepimonfire]

I am not attempting to present factual information! This is largely my understanding of the subwoofer industry. Please correct me if I am not properly representing the facts! Thanks!

In the recent thread on Martin-Logan improving their Dynamo series of subwoofer, @BoredSysAdmin made the comment that they would be competitive if they get closed out at 50% discount:

I agree with his point, but that also led me to reflect on other established speaker manufacturers. While the Martin Logans may be over-priced compared to ID competition (and I am including SVS as ID even though they are now sold at BestBuy); they are almost unique in providing well-designed subwoofers (at least for HT)!

Klipsch and Polk both have a reputation for making poor subs (although the new-ish Klipsch 15" sub has a good reputation and is close to being price competitive).

And where is JBL/Harman Audio?

KEF makes some, but they don't seem to be taken seriously by most people here (maybe it is the 9"-10" sizes).

Paradigm makes some great subs once you are spending thousands of dollars.

I have always believed companies like KEF and JBL probably make good subs for music, but are somehow not that interested in the HT subwoofer business.

It seems like as HT was becoming a thing, and by the time the ID companies (and Velodyne) were starting to establish that a significant market does exist, the larger established companies with deeper pockets and experienced speaker/sound engineers would take action to at least give their established customers a competent option. As is, it almost seems like they decided to hand the HT subwoofer market to others.

Any ideas on how this came to be?

Also, where does Sunfire fall in all of this? I had assumed that they had closed shop (because I never hear their name),but their products have continued to be available on Accessories4Less?
https://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/category/spksubwoofer/speakers/powered-subwoofers/1.html?brand_f[]=SUNFIRE

Thanks!

That's a really good question. Some brands have built some excellent subs in the past, like the klipsch 12hg. Polk seems to be more budget oriented. All of their speakers, including the inexpensive monitor II series sold on Newegg are excellent for the price, but most of their subs fail to extend below 40hz. Perhaps subs are an afterthought for manufacturers, and they spend very little in R&D.

Sent from my LGMP260 using Tapatalk

 

[lovinthehd]

I found it interesting that ML's best selling line was the Dynamo subs. I've always assumed the big manufacturers haven't gone after the highest performing subs for the pickiest of us home users simply because they don't need to, combination of lack of dealer demand and cost of distribution and manufacture of such....the numbers don't dictate the need.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

They are heavy, expensive (compared to a passive loudspeaker),and difficult to demo effectively. Heavy also means high shipping cost, which makes a direct-to-consumer sales model more attractive (pay expensive shipping once, not twice, for online sales. For bricks-and-mortar take-it-home retailers, the shipping cost is multiplied by the dealer margin, since they pay the shipping and it's simply part of dealer cost. Throw in the potential to price your product ex-shipping online and you are at a competitive disadvantage with your dealer network handling the sales).

They are also generally viewed as "ugly" by those that rule the living room, so a hard sell anyway you look at it.

50 years ago when M&K created the separate powered sub market, their products were big, heavy and expensive. Today, while virtually everything audio has become lighter and more compact (every pound and every inch shaved creates a lower MSRP),subs are big, heavy and expensive.

A company that specializes in SWs can make a go of it. Everybody else, maybe not so much.

They are also a product that no matter what, won't sound the same in two different rooms. Throw in the fact that a good HT sub may not be a good Music sub, and vice versa, and really you are only left with a subset of those who already own your products as potential buyers (some people want to "match" their systems in that way).

A "serious" audio company is going to want to make Music subs. The market wants to buy HT subs.

A true subwoofer that is suitable for a music oriented system is a niche market. The mass-market so-called "sub" is a compact, light easily hidden LF driver, not a genuine subwoofer, and voiced for HT use in any case.

With room interaction and other interface issues, a sub often brings more customer problems and complaints with it versus a "typical" loudspeaker system if marketed to the general public, something many companies and their dealers like to avoid where possible.

All in all it's much easier to make loudspeakers with good, if not ultimate, low frequency response and sell those instead, leaving the sub market to others that want it. Such as the approach taken by GoldenEar Technology. Martin-Logan makes panel speakers often with pretty decent conventional LF drivers incorporated. Their standalone subs are really only intended to buyers of their highest cost versions of ML systems, and so are priced and marketed accordingly via a dealer network. Not really the typical Audioholics customer.

 

[sterling shoote]

I could live without a sub for music and maybe movies too; but, the sub really is nice for dance music. I enjoy it especially on KM Dance videos I've discovered on YouTube. Thing is, most of my music does not have any content in the 40 to 20 Hz arena and my mains can easily produce down to 40 Hz. One exception is Kayne West's Love Lockdown, which for sure is more satisfying when my sub is engaged.

 

[Irvrobinson]

A "serious" audio company is going to want to make Music subs. The market wants to buy HT subs.

A true subwoofer that is suitable for a music oriented system is a niche market. The mass-market so-called "sub" is a compact, light easily hidden LF driver, not a genuine subwoofer, and voiced for HT use in any case.

What are you talking about? What do you think are the differences between a "music only" sub and an "HT" sub? Flat frequency response, high output, low distortion, low group delay... are you saying HT subs will be inferior in some way that makes them unsuitable for music?

What are examples of HT subs?

 

[lovinthehd]

What are you talking about? What do you think are the differences between a "music only" sub and an "HT" sub? Flat frequency response, high output, low distortion, low group delay... are you saying HT subs will be inferior in some way that makes them unsuitable for music?

What are examples of HT subs?

Beat me to it. Hate that good for music only thing (unless they're extension limited where it might make some sense)

 

[shadyJ]

What are you talking about? What do you think are the differences between a "music only" sub and an "HT" sub? Flat frequency response, high output, low distortion, low group delay... are you saying HT subs will be inferior in some way that makes them unsuitable for music?

What are examples of HT subs?

Sounds to me like he is talking about manufacturers of higher-end speakers that just throw together a small over-priced sub and calls it "fast" or "articulate" and generally have a hard time below 40 Hz. A sub like that might do fine with conventional music but not a whole lot else.

 

[mattlach]

I typically don't see subs in serious music systems.

I don't see a lot of systems, so I can't comment on that, but I do get the sense that "serious audiophiles" look down on subs as somehow ruining the perfect balanced sound.

I can see where this might result in the high end established expensive speaker brands not focusing on subs very much.

 

[mattlach]

Beat me to it. Hate that good for music only thing (unless they're extension limited where it might make some sense)

I think that's exactly it. There is no reason a good "HT sub" can't also be a "good music sub", but for HT applications people are looking for solid extension down to about 16hz. Otherwise you don't get the butt shakes. (The butt shakes are very important ) Many of the smaller subs that are generally considered "musical" don't go down that deep.

 

[mattlach]

Heavy-duty home theater subs will always be a niche product, and will likely always be the province of manufacture direct. SVS is sort of changing that, but even then I don't usually see their ported subs at Magnolia. Few people will tolerate a big, expensive black box that goes boom real loud. Low WAF means low sales, so no one is going to manufacture these things in quantities of tens of thousands. The only subs that sell in those kinds of quantities are going to be smaller. I don't know who the highest selling subwoofer manufacturer is, but I would guess it is Polk, followed perhaps by Klipsch.

Ah yes, the WAF. I considered this when putting a couple of large subs in my livingroom for the HT. For this reason I wound up going with two SVS PC13-Ultra round tube subs. They were much easier to fit unobtrusively in the corners of the room than a big black box. (they are also tunable by blocking off ports, which I have done to get 16hz extension)

 

[mattlach]

Our HT system doesn't use a sub.

I was just a bout to ask who the hell doesn't use a SUB on their HT system, as I don't think I've ever seen a subless HT system (once people get a surround receiver they almost always add a sub in my experience) but I guess now I know

I'm guessing you have some large full range towers then? Usually a good set of towers can get you down to the 35hz range, but so much of the LFE in home theater hits below that...

 

[Irvrobinson]

Sounds to me like he is talking about manufacturers of higher-end speakers that just throw together a small over-priced sub and calls it "fast" or "articulate" and generally have a hard time below 40 Hz. A sub like that might do fine with conventional music but not a whole lot else.

Mostly I think it's just BS.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I don't see a lot of systems, so I can't comment on that, but I do get the sense that "serious audiophiles" look down on subs as somehow ruining the perfect balanced sound.

I can see where this might result in the high end established expensive speaker brands not focusing on subs very much.

I will say this, it is difficult to integrate subwoofers with the large towers many audiophiles use, like I do, if you're looking for accuracy rather than exaggerated bass. It took me quite a bit of effort and experimentation to get it right. High-end speaker manufacturers put a lot of their product cost into deep bass response, so I suppose advocating the use of subwoofers is akin to saying you don't really need the expensive deep bass response from towers, which is also like saying you can spend less on the mains and allocate a bunch of cost to one or more subs.

What I've found is that if you want to place your mains for best midrange and about smoothness and best stereo imaging in a large room, you really need one or more subs that you can place for best and smoothest bass. I also advocate parametric equalization for tuning the bass frequencies, which is not a good idea IMO for the midrange and above. So I'm sold on sub use in music systems even though I have full-range mains, and wouldn't be without a sub again.

Or you could be like ADTG and just use five large, adjustable bass sources.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I was just a bout to ask who the hell doesn't use a SUB on their HT system, as I don't think I've ever seen a subless HT system (once people get a surround receiver they almost always add a sub in my experience) but I guess now I know

I'm guessing you have some large full range towers then? Usually a good set of towers can get you down to the 35hz range, but so much of the LFE in home theater hits below that...

I use inexpensive Klipsch RF62IIs in our HT system, which is only two channel, and they provide very good output in our small 16x14x10 HT room to nearly 32Hz. We typically don't watch action or fantasy movies, so sub-32Hz bass in movies is a non-factor for us. But I don't even feel any sense of loss watching the Jurassic Park series on that system.

 

[everettT]

I was just a bout to ask who the hell doesn't use a SUB on their HT system, as I don't think I've ever seen a subless HT system (once people get a surround receiver they almost always add a sub in my experience) but I guess now I know

I'm guessing you have some large full range towers then? Usually a good set of towers can get you down to the 35hz range, but so much of the LFE in home theater hits below that...

When these are in you HT, no sub necessary
http://jtrspeakers.com/noesis-215rt.html
https://data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=132