Subs

I don't mix with a sub. I found it really messed me up more than without it. I think too many folks actually try to get too much low end in their mixes. Most "deep" low end these days is actually psychoacoustic, being made up by harmonics in the upper ranges.

Read up on "missing fundamental" mixing.

Subs are tricky to get to work properly. Honestly, if you have a great power amp you Proac's don't need a sub. It's probably causing more problems then it's worth. I have never regretted ditching my sub!

If I want subs I will get a bigger 3way system in my new space.

Just my humble .02.

I hated a sub setup the normal way with the typical crossover point. I find it useful when I let the monitors do all they can and then base the crossover on their deficiency. In my case, I have the sub crossed at 50hz. I realize it may seem weird, however, it seems to be working great.

Reid Shippen told me he runs his Proacs full range w/ a sub. That's what I've been doing. as well.

Full-range monitoring is critically important. I've heard so many mixes with waaaay too much low end, simply because the mixer was compensating for what his own monitors wouldn't show. Besides the artistic part, subs will help you hear traffic, mic-handling issues and other noises in the room. Adding subs will accentuate the problems you might have with room modes. So before adding subs, treat the room. Spending a few Franklins on some Aurolex or other solutions (bass traps, diffusion, etc) will make a bigger difference than spending more on monitors.

But assuming your room is under control, a decent well-calibrated sub is important. You need to be able to get down to 30Hz or so. I don't think there's much that's musically useful down there (organ music excepted) but there's a possible world of hurt that you need to deal with. You can always grab a pair of NS-10s or some old Horrortones to see how well the mix translates.

I was one of the first people I know to adopt subs in the mid 1970s. I played with every configuration imaginable for twenty years ending up with the placement of dual sealed subs directly under the speakers aligned with several different flavors of measurement tools including time delay spectrography.

Then I got my Duntech Sovereigns which go down to 27 Hz. for the mastering facility in San Francisco that never got built. The difference in translation put my jaw on the floor. In hindsight, I think when full range speakers aren't available, headphones are a better way to find out and fix what's going on below 50 than a sub is. My mentor in motion picture post had the same experience trying to mix films using subs or even worse, "bass management" rather than full range speakers.

I had nothing to contribute to this thread until I realized that before speakers got so good in the headroom dept, you could find out where your mix was too hot by just cranking the volume on your monitors. Whether is was Altec 604's or JBL 4310's or 4311's, when mixing, you could just crank the level 'till something folded, then you knew if the bass was too heavy, or the top end. When the whole speaker folded across the spectrum, the mix was balanced. At least for the end user!

Amended to say the treble in my experience was never the question. It was ALWAYS about how much bass you had, and could support with the speakers. And the speakers would tell you, when it got loud. When the mix was balanced, the speakers distorted when you pushed them but it was still musical, in an 80's car stereo/boombox/carnival/ghetto sense.

Just because speakers are expensive doesn't automagically make them good.

Did you mean to say "there is a whole industry predicated on the idea that they do....."