It's clear to the point of transparency that NHT products are Matt's and my budget/hi-end picks.
Their spec's state that their current line up of subs go down to 31Hz, 25Hz, and 21Hz respectively, while they rate the twin-10's in the VT-2.4's as capable of hitting 24Hz. That's not a bad neighborhood. Matt's SW2P hits 21, mine I don't know about. (Wife hide manual, man must find.)

I heard the VT-2.4's biamped sending only LF to the bottom binding posts and the result sounded great. Bass is non-directional below a certain frequency but when it came to lower-mid to low end frequencies I thought it was a definite attention-grabbing boost to have those ranges coming from the direction of the display. Forgetting the missing 3Hz this setup SMOKED my 'Pi/SupZero combo.

I see two slight drawbacks to the tower architecture.
1.) There could be SOME unwanted resonance transferred to the upper part of the cabinet, especially when biamped as described.
2.) the inability to waltze the sub/subs around the room to optimize placement.

In a world of compromise, some DON'T. (plagarism)
In the average den, we all DO.

Unless you have pretty substantial mains your speakers and sub are always interacting to "make up" missing frequencies. It's a hat trick that contrary to any manufacturer's ad copy IS being played on all sub/MINI-sat owners, and the less you tweek the more you miss out on. (We don't need no steeenking Shun Mook Mpingo Discs.)

You can count on one hand the number of times a sub just falls into place in room that was not purpose built. There's nearly always a doorway in the way, or some other prioritized space that it seems MUST be the place for the sofa or some other essential "den item".

The spot where my sub sits is "close" to where it wants to be, but it's not aesthetically pleasing.
I would have traded the 3Hz to get my sub out of the area. Problem was the 2.4 towers would have taken over - the room's not small, they just would have loomed a few inches ABOVE my mantlepiece as well as OVER my venerable direct view. (Though my siamese would have enjoyed the hiking trail.)

I also did not believe my SA-2 would have enough headroom to properly supply the two 10's, even though I've read about instances of one SA-2 powering two SW2Si's (the SW2Pi's speaker module.)

And so rather than upgrade my sub-amp and rearrange my whole den, I do my penance: When I get off my duff and do something about a proper dedicated room I'll have room to use towers AND at least one dedicated sub. (By that time they'll be giving away plasmas when you open a new account at the bank.)

WOW! Judging a speaker by it's color???? Now that sounds like a very smart way to evaluate subs! NOT!!!! Come on, what a ridiculous statement.

I'll certainly agree that the models you mention aren't exactly top performers, but making a blanket statement about color is a bit over the top, and totally non-relevant to the listening experience.

I never in my life thought I'd be running defense for someone with the moniker of "ECHOSLOB", not that the 'SLOB needs me to do it.

Steve13: You seem to have missed the point. We are all of us advising "slocko" to evaluate with his ears and not his eyes. I've been nudging him bring home what his ears tell him to buy, and possibly augment for aesthetics later (if ever).


Steve13: if ECHOSLOB is so over the top then YOU should be able to guide slocko to a fine silver sub. You might be able to find a few real high end speaker companies that offer custom finishes at a premium, (Like their speakers don't already come at a premium), but if you read close it sounds like slocko's on a bit of a budget and wants bang-4-buck.

Sheik-
Guiding Slocko to a silver sub would be in absolutely contrary to what I said. COLOR DOESN'T MATTER!!!!

Aesthetics sometimes DO matter. I bought a digital front projector, even though I knew the image wouldn't be as good as a CRT. The budget wasn't an issue but aesthetically, I didn't want a large 150 pound box on my ceiling being the dominating visual icon in my theater.

If he wants a silver sub or purple sub and can find one he likes, so be it.

Steve, I think you missed the Sheik's point, although you're actually agreeing with it. That is:

As far as "we" know, there aren't any high-quality subs that come in a silver finish. The color seems to be important to Slocko. The suggestion to compromise color to get good bass makes sense to most of us. To others, compromising sound to get a color that suits the decor makes sense.

To me, getting a good-sounding sub, then finding a way to make it look the way you want it to, is logical enough. To wit:

My own sister (in Va. Beach) went with a Bose micro-sound system because the little paired-cube modules were "so cute!" I begged her to at least go to one or two stores with me to listen, but she was adamant. Only after I installed the setup did she say to me, "Why doesn't it sound like your system?" (which you've heard). My only response?

*heavy sigh*

Larry
www.fineelectricco.com

Guys-
I don't want to turn this thread into an argument. Certainly my issue wasn't with Sheik at all. I just questioned Echo's statement about color being a defintive factor.

Larry, sorry to hear about your sister. As I said earlier, visual appeal can be a consideration. However, in her case it sounds like it was the primary consideration, which obviously is a bad thing in her case.

Let's get back on topic!!

And if you would have read each of the posts you would have realized that Slocko was very concerned with aesthtics and the Sheik and Echo were trying to convince him to purchase a good sub and if he felt it necessary too, then paint it, and not purchase one just because of its looks. Come on lets read these post before we reply to them!!

Can't we all just get along? GROUP HUG AT SLOCKO'S !! (Bring silver paint and we'll get illuminated.)

I hear Gold is the best....

No, no, no, Matt! Sheik said "illuminated", not "ventilated"! : - )

WOW!!! I just found this thread again. Obviously people that can think know exactly what I meant. The color itself has nothing to do with it. I am not aware of one company that makes a good silver sub. That is all I was saying as 99.99% of thinking people understood. As pointed out I did tell him to paint a good one his color.

Steve since your so in the "know" name one good sub that comes in silver? Educate the rest of us since you seem to look at things in a different light.

or color!!!

OHHH, now I see that Larry...HEH

for this particular room where i can't really optimize the sound that much because of the open area, the windows, etc, etc i might as well try to satisfy the decor requirement since it is so hard to get to perfection.

so i will continue listening to my subpar aiwa and keep an eye out for the best silver-sub i can find in this subpar category :)

i can't wait until next year when i begin building my real theater in the basement. my current setup sounds good to my untrained ears so I am looking forward to a stellar experience when I finally get it done right!

well just so you guys know i went with one of the suggestions above. the sony sa-wd200. got it $400 which is kind of expensive in my opinion, but only crutchfield seems to sell this individually.

sounds good to my ears which were used to lowly 60 watt aiwa. it looks beautiful. i'm surprised that in today's world where we are offer a myriad of choices, few seem to offer silver for subwoofers.

i turned the crossover frequency all the way up per the suggestion of the manual. is this correct?

thxs all for the suggestions.