Idddddd
Don’t want to go off topic, but I might take issue with that statement. Why is it a requirement? This is a matter of personal choice related to whether one wants the extra base. Not everyone likes it, a small room or speaker positioning may already be giving you plenty, or you may be thinking of neighbours or partners. Why £3000? If you’re a bass fiend I can think of speakers above that value which would benefit from a sub.
I didn't make myself very clear, sorry about that.
Yes, speakers over the $3,000 price could benefit from a subwoofer depending on what you like to listen to, but in some types of music and movies where sub-frequencies are not being generated, there is no real benefit to a subwoofer.
Here is an example of what I'm trying to communicate. In 1994 I bought a pair of JBL L7 speakers, which have a 12-inch side woofer, and a subwoofer, the brand I can't recall. When they were hooked up I played all sorts of music and a sci-fi movie, I could not even tell the subwoofer was working! Speed up about 4 years ago I decided to try another subwoofer and bought a Klipsch, now with certain Sci-Fi movies and certain metal music I like to listen to I can hear the sub working, but if I go back to my usual classic rock you can't hear the sub doing anything.
So it depends on what a person likes to listen to. A more expensive speaker will have a powerful bass response and that may be all the person needs, but when you buy less expensive speakers you will need a subwoofer because the bass response coming from modern speakers is more on the level of mid-base response.
,