I fail to understand how people can have an universal recipe for a subwoofer system ignoring the brand and model of the mains stereo speaker.
Most speaker designers, including those four in the TAS interview refer how critical is the integration of bass in high quality speaker systems.
IMH opinion and small experience of subwoofers, the only really good systems I listened to with Martin Logans used Martin Logan Descent subs. When you switched the subs the whole soundstage increased significantly , there was more air and presence and bass was felt but not heard. All other systems had more bass, nothing else.
One point is mandatory for me - I would always ask for the advice of the speaker manufacturer before adding a sub.
I did not take your comments as pessimistic but, rather, as realistic and as sensible advice.
For one thing, inevitably, and probably very reasonably and correctly, statement speaker designers feel that no third-party subwoofer system could compete with the dedicated, tower system they designed specifically and synergistically for their midrange/tweeter transducer. And that certainly makes sense. I cannot imagine any third-party subwoofer system integrating as seamlessly with Genesis midrange/tweeter panels as Gary's dedicated woofer towers.
That theory suggests that no subwoofer would work with Wilson speakers as well as the Thor's Hammer, but, in the case of the Thor's Hammer, which is in some ways a dated design, that theory quite possibly, if not quite likely, does not apply. And two Thor's Hammers, no matter how you look at it, has a severe cost/benefit problem. (But I have to believe the phenolic composite Thor's Hammer cabinet is more inert and resonance-free than any of the other subwoofers which use MDF construction.)
All else being equal I agree it would make sense to deploy Martin-Logan subwoofers with Martin-Logan panels. But when you compare, for example, the ML BalancedForce 212 with the REL Gibraltar 1 they seem pretty similar (same size driver, same specs, same size and weight enclosure) except that the ML uses two 12" woofers back-to-back and has built-in EQ, and the REL uses a smaller, but Class AB, amplifier.
But, microstrip, do you really think you would be able to hear any material difference between a pair of ML 212s or REL G1s on the same system? I really do not think so. I do not see why, with so many similar design parameters, the ML 212 would sound better with, say, the CLX than would the REL G1.
What do you think would be the ideal subwoofer system for ML Neoliths? Four BalancedForce 212 subwoofers (eight 12" drivers in total, but only 22" tall) spread around the listening room or two tall subwoofer towers each composed of two, vertically stacked modules of pairs of dual-opposed 15" Seaton drivers (eight 15" drivers in total)?