The Ford Motor Company did a study some years ago, to determine what exactly was needed for really good bass. What they found is that below something like 80 Hz the bass on virtually all recordings is mono. I just got my Swarm-based distributed bass array up and running last night and so I can now say from factual actual experience there is nothing else like it. If you want really good bass you will use FOUR subs distributed around the room. Period. http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audiokinesis-swarm-subwoofer-system/ |
Hello millercarbon,
Congratulations on getting your custom 4-sub distributed bass array system built and operational! Are you planning on posting some kind of more extensive review of your dba results? How about a new thread devoted to how to build and deploy a custom dba?
Using an Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub dba myself for the past 4 yrs, I already knew your results would be spectacular but I think others really benefit by knowing how incredibly well this concept actually performs in virtually any room and with any pair of main speakers.
If you're anything like me, you're going to find it hard to resist posting about the dba concept as the ideal bass system on the many threads consistently started by members looking for better bass response in their rooms and systems.
However, I completely understand if you'd rather just enjoy your newly improved system for a few weeks, months, years or decades. The truth is that neither of us will ever need to buy another sub or bass system again.
I'm just still amazed the dba concept isn't more widely known and used, especially on a high-end audio site like Audiogon. The fact that it's so difficult to overstate how well these dba systems actually perform, whether a complete $2,800 complete dba bass kit like my AK Debra or a custom dba system such as yours, I hope you agree we have an obligation to spread the word to our A'gon brethren and beyond.
Enjoy,
Tim
|
millercarbon The Ford Motor Company did a study some years ago, to determine what exactly was needed for really good bass. What they found is that below something like 80 Hz the bass on virtually all recordings is mono. >>>>>The Ford Motor Company? I want to believe them. But did they really listen to virtually all recordings? Maybe the study was back when everything was still mono. Besides, Be that as it may I’m not sure The Ford Motor Company has much audiophile street cred. 😁 |
"The Ford Motor Company?" Ford hired Dr. Earl Geddes as a consultant. One of the questions he wanted to know the answer to was how common is it for CD's to have stereo bass content. He asked everyone in the department to bring in their CD's. After testing about a hundred CD's and not finding a single one with stereo content in the bass region, he stopped testing. So no Ford did not test virtually all recordings, but the sample size was large enough for Earl to reliably conclude that stereo bass on CD's is quite rare. Duke |
noble100
Hello millercarbon,
Congratulations on getting your custom 4-sub distributed bass array system built and operational! Are you planning on posting some kind of more extensive review of your dba results? How about a new thread devoted to how to build and deploy a custom dba?
Using an Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub dba myself for the past 4 yrs, I already knew your results would be spectacular but I think others really benefit by knowing how incredibly well this concept actually performs in virtually any room and with any pair of main speakers.
If you're anything like me, you're going to find it hard to resist posting about the dba concept as the ideal bass system on the many threads consistently started by members looking for better bass response in their rooms and systems.
However, I completely understand if you'd rather just enjoy your newly improved system for a few weeks, months, years or decades. The truth is that neither of us will ever need to buy another sub or bass system again.
I'm just still amazed the dba concept isn't more widely known and used, especially on a high-end audio site like Audiogon. The fact that it's so difficult to overstate how well these dba systems actually perform, whether a complete $2,800 complete dba bass kit like my AK Debra or a custom dba system such as yours, I hope you agree we have an obligation to spread the word to our A'gon brethren and beyond.
Enjoy,
Tim
Thanks and yes, definitely will be writing it up, might even be posted today. Not sure but thinking best fit will be technical. Definitely agree this is a game-changer everyone needs to know about. No one should suffer the anguish of trying to perform the impossible, not to mention the sound of what people pass off as good simply because they don't know and never had a chance to hear. All it takes is a few minutes with a distributed bass array to know it leaves the conventional approach in the dust. I mean its so much better you truly cannot believe it until you try it, and then its just about the most obviously better thing you are likely ever to hear. |
audiokinesis1,922 posts03-31-2019 1:00pm"The Ford Motor Company?" Ford hired Dr. Earl Geddes as a consultant. One of the questions he wanted to know the answer to was how common is it for CD's to have stereo bass content. He asked everyone in the department to bring in their CD's. After testing about a hundred CD's and not finding a single one with stereo content in the bass region, he stopped testing. So no Ford did not test virtually all recordings, but the sample size was large enough for Earl to reliably conclude that stereo bass on CD's is quite rare. Duke >>>>>I don’t believe it. No offense to you personally. |
"I don’t believe it. No offense to you personally." Could you clarify? What exactly do you not believe? And, no offense to you personally either.
|
I don’t believe that virtually all CDs have bass frequencies summed.
|
"I don’t believe that virtually all CDs have bass frequencies summed." That’s okay. I didn’t either and argued with Earl about it. I forget the details of what he said but he had been sufficiently thorough in his investigation to change my mind. It’s easy enough to do stereo bass anyway if you want to. Duke
|
Exactly! I’ll take the stereo bass. It sounds better. It’s like compression. I realize engineers compress the life out of CDs these days. I don’t listen to compressed CDs. |
What are considered "bass frequencies"? Below what frequency are the L and R channels summed to mono? One way to hear differences between L and R is to use the Dynaco Quadaptor; it uses the difference (out-of-phase) content in a recording to produce a L minus R signal. |
"I’ll take the stereo bass. It sounds better." If you would be willing to list some recordings that do have true stereo bass, I would appreciate it very much. I would really like to try some known-stereo-bass recordings on my system and see how they sound. What if you could get a realistic sense of immersion/envelopment from recordings that do not have true stereo bass, yet could easily adjust to take full advantage of true stereo bass, in about ten seconds? Might that have some utility? Duke |
Yeah I bet it would. Which is why I did it. Details posted just now in my Tech article. |
bstatmeister:
"
I really only have 1 place it could fit while still having acceptable WAF - in the corner of the room just to the right of the right main. Hopefully, that position will suffice."
Hello bstatmeister,
Placing a sub in a corner position usually results in a perceived bass boost in the room due to the close proximity of the 2 walls there that bass sound waves can reflect off.
The sub crawl is definitely the best method of attaining good bass response at your listening seat when utilizing only a single sub and room positioning options aren't so restricted.
I'd suggest positioning the sub as many inches as possible away from directly in the corner, given your limited space, will be less of a bass performance compromise. You should be able to clearly notice that the bass will sound more natural and accurate in 1 of the 2 positions.
lordrootman:
"
Your best bet to archive deep clean bass is missing subs together from 2-4 brand
im using SVS PC13 ultra with two klipsch SW-115
way better than using only one brand
also use both red and white outputs with Y adaptor don’t use only LFE."
Hello lordrootman,
While there are no reasons mixing different sub brands or even sub types would be detrimental, there are also no reasons I'm aware of that mixing sub brands or even types would be beneficial. Perhaps lordrootman could elaborate and enlighten us.
mijostyn:
"
For all you people planning subs on a limited budget just buy the first one and add another when you can. For point source speakers 2 subs will get you 90% there. For you panel jockeys, Magnapans and electrostats you are going to have to shoot for 4."
Hello mijostyn,
I think your idea, for people planning subs on a limited budget to just buy the first one and add another when they can, is a very good one.
I believe a good approach would be buying the Dayton SA1000 1K watt class AB sub amp for about $300 and buying or building a single passive sub with a 10" or 12" aluminum long-throw driver, in a stiff cabinet that is either sealed or ported with plugs for optional sealing and about a 1sqft footprint. This bass system could then be improved upon by adding up to 3 more subs as their budget allowed over time.
However, I disagree with your statement that using 2 subs with point source speakers will get you 90% of the bass response performance of using 4 subs in a dba system. If we agree with Duke's statement that 2 subs in a room provides twice the bass smoothness of 1 sub and 4 subs in a room provides twice the bass smoothness of 2 subs, this would mathematically result in an accurate statement being that "using 2 subs with point source speakers will get you 50% of the bass response performance of using 4 subs in a dba system, not 90%.
I also agree with your statement of "
For you panel jockeys, Magnapans and electrostats you are going to have to shoot for 4." Planar magnetic speakers like Magnepans and electrostatic speakers like Martin Logans and Sound Labs are considered fast speakers that are notoriously difficult to seamlessly match subs with. Single or dual subs, especially those with 12 or 15 inch drivers, are just not capable of matching the speed of these fast speakers and, as a result, the bass seems to lag behind, be poorly integrated and sound disconnected to the fast and nimble qualities these speakers consistently display. My experiences using Magnepan panels with the AK Debra dba system with 4 faster and more nimble 10" driver subs, is that there's a very seamless and quality to the reproduced sound that just seems like a very well integrated whole.
mijostyn:
"IMH experience the best performance comes from sealed, enclosed 12" subs Q @ 7 with Room control and a high powered class AB amp damping > 500, the higher the better. The only difficult variable is the enclosure itself which ideally should be infinitely stiff and heavy."
I agree with you in general but I know excellent performance can also come from 4 ported 10" subs powered by a high powered class AB or class D amp with a damping factor >500. The Debra/Swarm sub enclosures are very stiff and reasonably heavy.
From my perspective, the primary reason for the sota in-room bass response performance achieved through the use of dbas is still the fact that there are 4 fast and nimble subs producing bass sound waves from strategically varied positions in the room.
There are other important factors but having 4 well distributed sources of bass in any room is the crucial ingredient in creating this delicious psycho-acoustical cake.
Tim |
"If we agree with Duke's statement that 2 subs in a room provides twice the bass smoothness of 1 sub and 4 subs in a room provides twice the bass smoothness of 2 subs..." I was paraphrasing my mentor, Earl Geddes. Not only does the frequency response get smoother at a given location, but the frequency response variations from one location to another within the room also decrease (which follows from the first statement, but it may not be obvious). Duke |
audiokinesis: "If we agree with Duke's statement that 2 subs in a room provides twice the bass smoothness of 1 sub and 4 subs in a room provides twice the bass smoothness of 2 subs..." I was paraphrasing my mentor, Earl Geddes. Not only does the frequency response get smoother at a given location, but the frequency response variations from one location to another within the room also decrease (which follows from the first statement, but it may not be obvious). Duke"
Hello Duke, So to paraphrase my mentor, you, not only does an AK Swarm/Debra or custom 4-sub distributed bass array system's bass sound approximately twice as smooth at a given location than using 2-subs at a given location, but the bass will sound smoother from one location to another within the room, too. It was not initially obvious to me that smoother bass from one location to another within a given room follows from smoother bass at a given location within that room until you emphasized this. Based on my experiences using the AK Debra dba system within my own room, however, it was initially very obvious to me exactly how this bass smoothness manifested itself as sota bass performance not only at a given location within the room (my dedicated listening seat) but virtually my entire 23' x16' room. I have 6 seating positions in my room: a leather recliner centered on the rear 16' wall which is my dedicated listening sweet spot seat, a leather couch with 3 individually reclining seating positions along the right 23' wall and 2 large chairs straddling a 6' x 8' window along the left 23' wall. Of course, only my listening sweet spot seat is positioned for optimum stereo imaging and the other 5 seating positions have compromised stereo imaging of varying degrees. But, based on my own evaluations and the enthusiastic and very positive non-professional reviews from multiple family members and friends, the bass performance at all 6 seating positions in my room is perceived as state of the art for music and ht. I've even informally evaluated the bass response at all of the non-seating areas of my room between my main front speakers/hdtv and the back wall, and was unable to find a single spot at which the bass was not equally and consistently excellent. Perhaps you're thinking I'm too easily pleased or exaggerating, but I honestly can't think of of a single audible bass performance aspect that requires improvement. In the spirit of honesty, however, I believe I must make it clear there is a rather obvious and serious downside to using a dba system that has nothing to do with the virtually guaranteed excellent sound of the bass of these systems; it does require the use of 4 physical boxes in the room. There's no dismissing or ignoring this fact that, in my experience on audio forums describing the sonic virtues of dbas, can often be a deal killer for many potential adopters. I believe the subject of how to best accommodate 4 moderately sized wooden boxes (my AK Debra subs are 12x12x28 inches in size) in a domestic room environment is probably best addressed on a separate thread. So I'll refrain from discussing this and just refer those to my system pics for those curious. Tim |
I made my secondary subs coffee tables :) An inch thick piece of glass in top with a lamp and no one even knows they are speakers, the WAF went way up at that point.
I agree with many above, four subs is the way to go, independently powered and signal driven through a mini DSP gives you flexibility to add room correction through room measurement via Room EQ Wizard (REW) in conjunction with Multi Sub Optimizer (MSO). My mains are passive subs running off of a Pass Labs X-250 and the secondary subs are SVS SB-16 Ultras which have their own amps built in. All are connected via balanced connections. The bass is accurate, powerful, and adds so much to music and movies. I add a little bass in my movie setting and had friends jump out of the couch a few times during a recent action movie. Pure fun. |
Hello hifidreams,
You're obviously well acquainted with the benefits of 4-sub dbas through personal experience. What exactly does your sub system consist of? 4 SVS SB-16 Ultras, a mini DSP with REW and a Multi Sub Optimizer?
Your post makes me think of a couple other points worth mentioning:
1. No one using a 4-sub dba, or anyone who has just personally experienced the excellent bass performance of a 4-sub dba for even a short demo, needs any further convincing of how amazingly well this concept works in practical terms, at this point you're just preaching to the choir. The icing on the cake is that it works equally well in virtually any room and the sota bass response integrates equally seamlessly with virtually any pair of main speakers.
2. Once you completely understand how well the dba concept works and you'd like to spread the word to others of this fact, I've discovered that writing or speaking about the virtues of dbas is likely the least effective means of convincing others since it sounds too good to be true and people remain skeptical. I think the most effective method is definitely just sitting down in a room with a decent dba system for a good audition. A good dba demo is worth at least 1,000 words
I understand the skepticism about 4-sub dbas very well because I initially also thought it sounded too good to be true and I remained skeptical for many months before a free 30-day in-home trial period offer convinced me to give the AK Debra dba a try.
I had dba skepticism because I had no experience with, or even knowledge of, the concept. Now that I do, I've been transformed into a complete dba fan and promoter.
Tim, |
Hi Tim,
I have two Kinergetics SW-800s (each has five 10” Seas drivers in their own enclosures wired in parallel) driven by a Pass Labs X-250 and two SVS SB-16 Ultras in my room. I have an active set up using a Mac Mini maxed out with SSD drives using JRiver playing lossless FLAC to my mini DSP via optical out. The mini DSP is processing 24/96 with 8 balanced outputs with 12 biquad filters on each channel which were created using REW and MSO. My main speakers (Magnepan 20.1’s) run full range. Highs/Lows of each Maggie have their own channels (4) and each sub has its own channel (4).
To tackle the Herculean task of attaining perfect base I have spent almost as much money on my subs as my 20.1s. That is how much I believe it is important to get this aspect of the system correct. Proper base is essential to all music, I want a tympani to sound like it and make my chest reverb with a strike as it did when I played in an orchestra. Lower octave listening, even the vibrations you can’t hear but feel are foundational to the live experience. Those waves are dissipated in a concert hall but build up in a room and bloat the sound unless it’s done right. I’ve heard a lot of excellent systems and many top of the line speakers will not tread near 16Hz because they know it will be a mess in most rooms.
While i get that many people will not go to my extreme to get perfect base having 4 subs of reasonable quality disbursed in the room can really make a system sound complete. When properly set up the bass is tight and integrates seamlessly into the system.
The most common statement upon seeing my set up is, “I bet you could blow out the window with that! Why do you have so many big speakers?” “It’s for accuracy,” I say and then ask to play their favorite piece of music. The first impression in listening to my system from non audiophiles is how “clear” the music is and that has everything to do with proper bass integration and room correction. I can turn up the volume to concert levels and it doesn’t seem “loud.” Yet when watching a movie where a tank rolls by the ground shakes, your gut gets a strange felling and stomach makes a flip just as you would if you were standing next to it; shots hit you in the chest and make you jump.
I agree with you. I can talk all day about how important it is but hearing is believing. All of this is not that hard to set up either. I followed a tutorial on REW and made some measurements. Did another tutorial in MSO when I was learning and plugged in my own data after seeing how it worked using the tutorial files. Spent a day having fun adding and refining it. It’s so exciting to experience how big a difference is realized when room correction is done right with an integrated sub system.
My last piece of my system will be BACCH for Mac. . . Saving up my coins now!
Happy Listening,
Steve
|
@millercarbon -- The Ford Motor Company did a study some years ago, to determine what exactly was needed for really good bass. What they found is that below something like 80 Hz the bass on virtually all recordings is mono.
I just got my Swarm-based distributed bass array up and running last night and so I can now say from factual actual experience there is nothing else like it. If you want really good bass you will use FOUR subs distributed around the room. Period. Why try and make a case with a limited number of CD’s (what genre, age of mix, etc.?) to conclude that there’s virtually no recorded true-stereo bass? It’s the problem of induction all over again, and a neatly sought closure to support an argument that may know full well the problematic issue of playing stereo information from sound sources (i.e.: subs) that aren’t placed symmetrically to the mains, insofar they’re crossed high enough for it to matter (which, I’d wager, could be an issue even if crossed below the rigidly fixed 80Hz). So, mono is the solution, preferably crossed rather low for the 4-sub approach to make the best of it, timing with the mains being the lesser concern and not drawing on the potential benefit of high-passing the mains (from ~80Hz or so on up to make the most of it). At times this even boarders on the scent of a subwoofer inquisition that calls heresy on anyone who’d dare not to see the divine light of multiple subs. Fore sure, multiple sub sources scattered throughout the listening room in mono can sound absolutely great - the latest of which I’ve heard comprised no less that 6 Front Loaded Horns each fitted with a 15" driver tuned at ~25Hz (20 cubic feet cabinet volume per horn), and it was a blast both in quality and quantity (that is, 4 of them were placed front center from the ceiling in a cluster with all mouths facing each other to form a single mouth, while the last 2 of them were placed along the rear wall, so essentially this wasn’t a multiple sub approach as advocated here). What really annoys me though is a prevalence to factualize a sub-approach (i.e.: the 4-sub mono one) as the one and only high quality solution, when there are other viable solutions like a 2-sub approach - in stereo, crossed significantly above 50Hz, and placed symmetrically to the mains. If mono-bass is your thing, or certainly the argument of it, then a pair of stereo-coupled subs will still play a mono signal as such, but if classical material or electronica in particular should muster up a stereo signal here for an intended effect or to support a spatial element, then true stereo-coupled subs placed properly (to the mains) will grant you this aspect of the music additionally. Further I’d suggest being open to other principles than direct radiating subs, which are by far - dare I say exclusively - the bass principle of choice around here and audiophilia in general, perhaps even blindly. Horn subs aren’t really sold commercially other than from pro vendors, and while also being quite large it’s understandable many mayn’t have been exposed to their traits in a home setting, but this is also the problem: most simply don’t know how horn subs sound, and because of this (and their being used in pro-sector applications) likely make assumptions on their sound that are far removed from their actual imprinting. Quality horn subs, which are mostly available via DIY-solutions, to my ears sport a level of refinement, ease, smoothness and enveloping presence that no direct radiating solution that I’ve heard can equal, and this is obvious whether a multiple sub approach, 2 of them or even singles is used. While you would think first and foremost that a horn sub (some 30Hz extension minimum requirement for it to be called a ’sub’ and not just a bass bin) to be perhaps more of a more brutal, chest-slamming experience than a smaller DR solution (which it can be at elevated levels), you’re likely oblivious to the traits mentioned above that are prevalent at more normal listening levels as well (i.e.: 60-90dB’s, whatever floats your boat) - traits that should be considered and pursued by every audiophile. So then, it’s not my intention to bash the multiple sub approach, which I know can sound great, but for some to ease up a bit on this being the only proper way to implement subs in your home setup. EDIT: one could of course combine a true stereo 2-sub setup with 2 additional subs in mono placed more "freely" in relation to the mains. |
@phusis wrote, about the distributed multi-sub approach: "... not drawing on the potential benefit of high-passing the mains (from ~80Hz or so on up to make the most of it." The distributed multi-sub approach has nothing to do with whether or not the mains are highpassed. Those are two separate decisions. I’m probably the one who caused the confusion because I’m a distributed multi-sub advocate but not an advocate of automatically high-passing the mains in every situation. I think it depends on the specifics. "...it’s not my intention to bash the multiple sub approach, which I know can sound great, but for some to ease up a bit on this being the only proper way to implement subs in your home setup." The distributed multi-sub approach apparently works well in many situations, but is not the only approach that works well, and in some situations it would not be the approach I'd choose. It depends on the specific situation. Duke |
phusis:
"
Why try and make a case with a limited number of CD’s (what genre, age of mix, etc.?) to conclude that there’s virtually no recorded true-stereo bass?"
Hello phusis,
I don't believe it was millercarbon who tried to make a case that there's virtually no recorded true-stereo bass content. I think it was Audiokinesis/Duke who mentioned the rarity of recordings with stereo bass earlier on this thread.
I know that his AK Swarm and Debra distributed bass array systems, with the addition of a 2nd Dayton sub amp, is capable of being positioned in a manner that would successfully reproduce stereo bass.
If I recall correctly, however, Duke stated he wasn't aware of any content containing true-stereo bass and asked if anyone else knew of any content recorded with true-stereo bass. I'm not aware of any and apparently no one else reading this thread is, either.
You seemed a bit offended when you mistakenly thought millercarbon had tried to make a case that there was just a 'limited' number of cds containing true-stereo bass when there appears to be none.
Are you aware of any recorded content with true-stereo bass?
Just to be clear, I know it's very possible to attain very good bass response at a single sweet spot location using 2 good subs. My point is that it will be very good mono bass, not true-stereo bass.
Tim
|
@audiokinesis --
The distributed multi-sub approach has nothing to do with whether or not the mains are highpassed. Those are two separate decisions. I’m probably the one who caused the confusion because I’m a distributed multi-sub advocate but not an advocate of automatically high-passing the mains in every situation. I think it depends on the specifics.
I know, Duke re: multi-sub approach and high-passing mains, but I brought this into the mix, so to speak, because it's my impression the general gist with multi-sub use is to cross fairly low to the mains (i.e.: without high-passing them), not least taking into account the directionality at higher frequencies and how this could be seen as an issue with subs scattered throughout the room around the listener. I did refer to high-passing the mains as a "potential benefit," which is also a way of saying that I side with your view on how it "depends on the specifics."
The distributed multi-sub approach apparently works well in many situations, but is not the only approach that works well, and in some situations it would not be the approach I'd choose. It depends on the specific situation.
I believe this has always come across rather consistently from your writings, certainly implicitly, contrary to other advocates here of the 4-sub approach who seem quite adamant of it being the only true quality solution, so much indeed that considering otherwise is "not getting it." Again, I've heard great 4-sub setups, no contention here, but I believe a symmetrically placed 2-sub setup can make wonders as well.
|
phusis you are right. A point source system can be wonderful with two subs set up correctly. A line source requires four subs in most rooms (wall up to 16 feet). Now I am going to make some people mad. Distributing the subs through out the room makes no sense. Once the subs are more than 5 to 10 feet apart depending on cross over point they act as two completely separate drivers with 2 separate interference patterns in the room. At 10 feet you would have to cross over below 40 Hz. Systems benefit greatly from high pass filters. It relieves the main amp from having to produce low frequency transients which require a lot of power. They also eliminate Doppler distortion from the satellite low frequency drivers cleaning them up. You get more improvement the higher you cross (but not too high). But with distributed woofers you can't cross above 80 Hz or you screw up the image (some would say lower). If you want the most benefit from multiple woofers, the lowest distortion from your satellites,
A great image and absolute thundering bass with the lowest room interference, set up the four woofers along one wall right up against it symmetrically in regards to the satellites right and left channels. The far woofers should go right in the corners, the near just to the inside of the satellites. Cross over between 100 and 130 Hz 12 to 24 db/octave and use high pass filters. Don't believe me. Try it for yourself if you have the equipment. I do have the equipment and I have been using multiple subs since 1979 and have set them up in every configuration you can think of using every conceivable cross over. Experience is always the best teacher. Aside from listening to music this is where the fun is in this hobby, playing around with your system. Once you have the equipment you can play around with the configuration room constraints allowing. As long as you are a good listener you are in business. Back to Stravinsky!
|
Hello hifidream,
Congratulations on creating your own custom distributed bass array system for your Magnepan20.1 speakers. I know the 20.1s have very good bass performance in stock form with 2 large planar-magnetic bass panels in each speaker that all output down to 25 Hz. Not full extension to 20 Hz like many good subs but close and very respectable.
Counting each pair of bass panels as a sub, I would suggest you're actually using a total of 6 subs in your room/system. While 2 aren't outputting bass that's fully extended, they're both outputting the exceptionally fast, articulate and smooth bass provided by planar-magnetic panels down to a deep bass level of 25 Hz.
Since we've both experienced the amazing seamless integration with even fast planar-magnetic panel speakers (whether mid-level models like mine or top of the line models like yours) and the high quality bass produced using 4-sub dba systems, I think it's safe to assume you'd agree that the dba concept works exceptionally well.
Tim
|
