Hello and Welcome to HiFiVision.com - an online community for the home entertainment and tech enthusiasts!
If you would like to ask a question, participate in a discussion and view attachments please Register yourself.
Thanks for the info.
I mainly play instrumental,pop and vocal,film soundtracks etc.
No heavy metal/hard rock.
Went through Onkyo 606 manual and found that even for Stereo setting the 2 fronts and sub is active.
Well I have observed that in my DIamond 9.2 and when a bassy instrument is being played the clarity of other string instruments becomes" hazy ".
"I would suggest to add a decent 10 inch sub"-is the WF150 a 10 inch sub? I guess they formed a set with Diamond9.2. Thats why prefer them.
I have a different viewpoint from what has been discussed so far. I will try to explain technically. Sonically, I myself have felt the difference. But, since I have not done any serious A/B comparison I will leave commenting more on the sonic differences.
When you are driving a 2.0 speaker set, the amplification load of the entire frequency range falls on the amplifier (whether stereo or AVR). Now, the power requirement to amplify a 60Hz signal to a certain dB level is different from the power required to amplify a 2KHz signal to the same level. It has been proven (I don't have the reference right now) that sub-80Hz takes much more power for amplification that the high frequency signals (some multiples, not very sure but something like 4 times). So if you are putting in 10W of power, majority of it goes into the amplification of low frequency signals.
The result of this difference in power distribution results in the mids and the highs getting muddier with some amps. This is more noticeable in low-end AVRs which are actually designed to rely on sub-woofer power for amplification of LF signals. In such cases, adding a "powered" sub-woofer takes off the load of amplifying the sub-80Hz signal from the amplifier and you hear a cleaner mid and high range signal. However, this may not be true with stereo amps which are designed to work without sub-woofers.
This technical reasoning is sound enough (pun intended ) for me to explain the differences that I hear with AVRs.
However, feel free to differ from my opinion.
Any speaker design takes care of this difference in sensitivity in the crossover by attenuating the tweeter.
Very interesting thread. Lots of things to learn from here.
But for the OP, my thoughts are that as time goes on if you are into critical music listening or even long term listening, the subwoofer may not be preferable. Pure 2 channel is bliss. It gets to you in a way that the sub - despite all its chest thumping (pun intended) - does not.
By the way I have what I consider to be one of the most musical subs at around the 30K price range - the EPOS ELS Sub. I still find that after the initial rush wore off I prefer listening to music (all kinds) without the sub than with it. Especially if I want to listen long term.
1. I never said or implied you were ignorant, so I'd be grateful if you retract that statement.
2. I'm still waiting for sources for your statements on
Besides the f113s' deep-bass response, what made the biggest impression on me was how two f113s deepened and widened the soundstage, greatly enhancing the Quads' imaging and portrayal of space. The Fathoms enabled the Quads to reveal instruments I hadn't heard before, such as the acoustic guitar that Emmylou Harris softly plays on the last track of Spyboy