Is the Rethm The Second a perfect speaker? That's a trick question, naturally. It very much depends on your idea of perfection. What the Rethm does well it does spectacularly well. Where it isn't exceptional -- low bass, for example -- it performs well enough to avoid telegraphing imbalances. Rather, its bass is perfectly adequate for most all acoustic music and will only miss the lowest left-handed keys on the piano.
Because it doesn't do 20Hz and, depending on room and setup, begins its roll-off somewhere between 55 and 45Hz, it doesn't fulfill typical American full-range expectations by its lonesome.
But then, low bass -- unless truly well done -- is often overrated and more of a liability than asset. Alas, if you've grown used useless? Then you will require a subwoofer on the Rethms to accept them unflinchingly on bottom-feeding fare. And while Jacob's single-driver religion might cringe at such sacrilege, I'm here to report that precisely because the Second is truly good well through the mid 40s and still shows signs of active life in the upper 30s band, it's a perfect candidate for subwoofing.
But make no mistake, said subwoofer better be lightning-fast and dynamic to not undermine what makes this speaker so special in the first place. Crossing it in somewhere between Hz and adjusting the sub attenuator just a few skoches up from mute warms up and fills out the presentation to probably make everybody happy.
Now, some audiophiles categorically write off backloaded horns as having ponderous, uncontrolled and behind-the-beat bass. What's clear regardless of stepping into these murky engineering waters? That bass with the Seconds is on the beat, articulate and bouncy rather than sluggish and only exhibits minor hollowness if not sited properly.
