Bigger speaker without sub or smaller with sub?

I need a pair of speakers for a living room and I don’t know exactly what I’ll get. I don’t want passive speakers because of the complexity of having them, I want something simple that I can plug at the TV and that’s it, no extra cables, equipment, or controllers.

Along these lines, I’m in doubt of getting an 8-inch studio monitor like the Kali/JBL/Mackie or maybe a smaller one like the Kali LP-6 with a sub like the Yamaha HS 8S that is able to play down to 22hz. What do you guys think about this? In the end, they may be at a similar price point.

On the 8-inch monitor side, is a 3-way design worth the double cost? I think the IN-8 is almost twice the cost of the Adam T8V.

If you want reaally low bass it’s way easier to get it with a sub, only crazy stuff like buchardts would be considered full range from what I know, that said I have a pair of edifier s2000s pro connected to my tv and they get low enough to shake the floor and windows, I imagine something larger would even more, depends on how big is your room too…

Buy the speakers that sound best to you. If they happen to be lacking bass, add a sub.

Sorry but there are no easy, simple answers. Depends on your listening preferences, the room you’re in and, the speakers themselves.


All else being equal, more components means more chances of getting it tuned wrong and/or more components that can fail long-term (but usually all else is not equal, i.e. a 3-way costs more because it’s harder to make work well). If I went the 3-way route I’d get as big as possible a 2.0 system, like towers maybe, and forget the sub. (Bass management in the room is also way easier with 2 sources of sub-bass vs. just 1.) But if you must have one separate subwoofer, the 2-way mains are probably the better price/performance solution, with fewer things that can fail (like 3 crossover filters instead of 5).

I say, get the biggest speakers you’re willing to cope with and afford. Then consider a sub later on.

The speakers will play 90% of what you’re going to hear, and bass from them is important even if you get a sub later on. The sub is there to add to the fullness of the bass and hit the low sub-bass.

But I’ll say, if you’re worried about bass, don’t go for studio monitors. Maybe the Kali could push more as they’re one of the few that allow you to EQ the bass a touch more. Swans of Edifier would be good.

Also consider how you’ll control volume. Either your TV or whatever you’re running from to the speakers–do they have volume control from the output? Or do you need monitors with a remote?

Movies SFX film score is going reveal the limits of a speakers range (least on the cheap stuff) under $500. No mention of price so i say go with chifi amp effcient towers and sub.

Option 2: Chifi amp effcient 6in or larger bookshelves and sub with highpass filter.

I prefer bigger speakers without a subwoofer. You can get speakers with a subwoofer output if you want to add one later on down the line.

1 Like

This is the question audiophiles ask when gazing into the abyss of the heavens.

To sub or not to sub that is the question.

Having recently changed from largish floorstanders to small monitors with subs I’d have to say the latter are quite an improvement but (and it’s a very big but) it does require getting the subs properly integrated and time aligned and ideally you need a digital x-over and high and low pass filters so there is a lot to get wrong so if your amp etc. doesn’t allow those features then floorstanders are the way to go.

1 Like

Now you got the towers and the thought creeps in what if i add subs and crossover L/R ?