Help me understand "the swarm" in the broader audiophile world
I'm still fairly new out here and am curious about this Swarm thing. I've never owned a subwoofer but I find reading about them--placement, room treatments, nodes, the crawl, etc--fascinating. I'm interested in the concept of the Swarm and the DEBRA systems, and I have a very specific question. The few times I've been in high-end, audiophile stores and asked about the concept of the Swarm, I've tended to get some eye-rolling. They're selling single or paired subwoofers that individually often cost more and sometimes much more than a quartet of inexpensive, modest subs. The same thing can be said for many speaker companies that make both speakers and subs; it's not like I see Vandersteen embracing the use of four Sub 3's.
My question is this: do in fact high-end stores embrace the concept of multiple, inexpensive subs? If not, cynicism aside, why not? Or why doesn't Vandersteen or JL or REL and so on design their own swarm? For those out here who love multiple subs, is it a niche thing? Is it a certain kind of sound that is appealing to certain ears? The true believers proselytize with such zeal that I find it intriguing and even convincing, and yet it's obviously a minority of listeners who do it, even those who have dedicated listening rooms. (I'm talking about the concept of four+ subs, mixed and matched, etc. I know plenty of folks who embrace two subs. And I may be wrong about all my assumptions here--really.)
Now, one favor, respectfully: I understand the concept and don't need to be convinced of why it's great. That's all over literally every post on this forum that mentions the word "sub." I'm really interested in why, as far as I can tell, stores and speaker companies (and maybe most audiophile review sites?) mostly don't go for it--and why, for that matter, many audiophiles don't either (putting aside the obvious reason of room limits). Other than room limitations, why would anyone buy a single JL or REL or Vandy sub when you could spend less and get ... the swarm?
It is very hard to overkill subwoofers. The larger the driver the lower the distortion all other parameters being equal. Certainly with more subwoofers you can get away with smaller drivers but still. The larger drivers require larger enclosures which may be a cosmetic problem. As Ralph implied the best place to put subwoofers is in a corner or against a wall for a number of reasons. The problem becomes timing them so that they are in phase with the satellites and the wavefront from the subs and satellites reaches you at the same time. This is not so easy. In trying to match satellites without a high pass filter ridiculously low cross out points are being used. It is easier to integrate a subwoofer with higher crossover points 100 to 125 Hz. It is much easier to hear when the drivers are in phase. This requires at least two subs and a 2 way crossover. I have not used random placement around the room so I really can not comment on that type of setup. My 4 subs are arranged symmetrically around the satellites. I use digital bass management and can change crossover points and delay on the run so I can hear the differences immediately which is a big help with setup. There are several units available now that do this. The result is that you can not tell there are subs in the system until a real low note comes along and I am matching subs to dipole ESLs As several people have mentioned on this forum, rolling off the satellites lowers distortion in them and increases head room by as much as 10 dB.
The " swarm" is actually and old term that was used to convince music lovers who were not happy with the sound of their system, in particular the midrange which was so lacking in most speakers. To deflect away from that they, the manufactures, focused on the bass, which as most of us know or should realize by now is so difficult to reproduce in a three way box without screwing up the overall sound. So now the swarm is a way of placating our type A male designer to have gut wrenching bass from a speaker. A conspiracy yes. Has it convinced anyone, yes it has. Does it make your system sound better, well perhaps, the bass may improve but you will still not have that rich and satisfying midrange which is where the music is.
I am not aware of the term "Swarm" being an "old term", as you claim. I began using it in 2006 as the name for my four-piece distributed multi-sub system. Were others using the term in this context before me?
"... that was used to convince music lovers who were not happy with the sound of their system, in particular the midrange which was so lacking in most speakers. To deflect away from that they, the manufacturers, focused on the bass... A conspiracy yes."
It sounds to me like you are saying that I am trying to deflect attention away from inadequacy in the midrange and convince music lovers to focus on the bass. And that this is a "conspiracy" on my part. (Though you did not call me out by name, I don’t see how you could be talking about anyone but me, since I’m the only manufacturer who uses the term "swarm".)
If I have misunderstood you, please clarify. I’d like to reply to your post, but first want to make sure I’m not misunderstanding you.
as much as that which relates to added headroom;
performance gains at a similar SPL compared to a smaller/less powerful
system due to less cone movement and wattage put through the voice
coils, and therefore less distortion and cleaner bass.
One obvious advantage is that with four subs for a given volume as opposed to two, each driver will have less excursion.
The " swarm" is actually and old term that was used to convince music
lovers who were not happy with the sound of their system, in particular
the midrange which was so lacking in most speakers.
Hm. That's a *new* one on me, if you get my drift. That term was not in use during the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, or any of the 2000s until Duke came along and then he used it as a name rather than a term. When exactly was this term used as you imply??
I'm also interested in the 'conspiracy theory' that was proposed elsewhere in the same post of the quote above. Most conspiracy theories I've encountered recently are so much nonsense- 5G having something to do with Covid and so on... honestly, this theory about the swarm seems to be just as nutty!
sounds_real_audio: " The " swarm" is actually and old term that was used to convince music lovers who were not happy with the sound of their system, in particular the midrange which was so lacking in most speakers. To deflect away from that they, the manufactures, focused on the bass, which as most of us know or should realize by now is so difficult to reproduce in a three way box without screwing up the overall sound. So now the swarm is a way of placating our type A male designer to have gut wrenching bass from a speaker. A conspiracy yes. Has it convinced anyone, yes it has. Does it make your system sound better, well perhaps, the bass may improve but you will still not have that rich and satisfying midrange which is where the music is."
Hello sra, While we're awaiting your expected response to Duke's post requesting clarification, I just wanted to interject a few comments of my own, regarding your statements in your most recent post from 9/22, all based on my personal experiences utilizing a 4-sub DBA system (the AK Debra complete kit system) in combination with a pair of Magnepan 3.7i main speakers. The word "swarm" itself has likely been around, probably 1st in some ancient semitic form, about as long as humans developed language and continued to absentmindedly stumble across hives. The 1st time I recall encountering the word swarm, in reference to subs, was in 2015 when I read the Absolute Sound review of the Audio Kinesis Swarm distributed bass array (DBA) system linked to below: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audiokinesis-swarm-subwoofer-system/
In this context, Duke's recollection of selecting the word "Swarm" in 2006, to descriptively name his new four-piece distributed multi-sub system, seems to me to be the most sensible and logical origins of the term "swarm" in regards to sub usage, due to individuals subsequently and likely using the term "Swarm" to refer to the AK product specifically and the term"swarm" to refer to all four-piece distributed multi-sub systems in general. While I will take your word for it that it's very difficult to reproduce the bass in a three way box without screwing up the overall sound, even if a designer did manage to launch pristinely accurate bass, midrange and treble sound waves into a room from his ideal speaker creation, there's a high likelihood that these pristinely accurate sound waves will not be perceived as pristinely accurate bass, midrange and treble performance at the listening position due to two main factors:
1. The bass frequency sound waves are very long, have omnidirectional radiation patterns and behave very differently in any given room than the much shorter midrange and treble sound waves that have highly directional radiation patterns. 2. The bass, midrange and treble drivers are permanently attached in set positions in a typical three way box speaker cabinet and are incapable of being independently and separately positioned in the room, and in relation to the listening position, to optimize the perception of the complete audio spectrum along with good stereo imaging.
I believe most individuals position their main speakers in the room, and in relation to the listening position, in order to optimize their perception of midrange and treble performance as well as stereo imaging performance. Due to factor#2 above, however, bass performance is typically unable to also be optimized and, as a result, individuals need to settle for compromized bass performance. In my opinion. the resolution of this non-optimization of bass performance at the listening position is the main justification for the intelligent positioning and configuration of one or more subs in the system and room. I believe a single sub is capable of achieving good bass perception performance at a single designated listening position but the addition of more subs makes this achievement not only progressively easier, based on my knowledge and personal experience, but also progressively better in quality; better bass power, dynamics, speed, smoothness, detail and integration with the main speakers. I perceive the bass performance of my current Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub DBA system as being near state of the art. It's definitely the best sub bass system I've used to date in my room and system, however, I don't claim it's the absolute best bass system because I'm fairly certain a custom 4-sub DBA system, consisting of larger and even higher quality subs (either self-amplified or passive driven by a separate high quality sub amp and active crossover network), would significantly outperform it. Of course, this type of custom 4-sub DBA would also be significantly more expensive than a $3,000 AK Swarm or Debra complete 4-sub DBA kit. I've also never auditioned a properly positioned and configured multi-sub line bass array (LBA?) or a multi-open baffle sub line or distributed bass array system which could possibly outperform the AK DBAs.
To those who are critical of the use of one sub over several, or none, I had 2 Vandy 2wqs in my 11 x 16 room, and I like the sound much better with one. Anyway, once you add all the gear, a wall of records, bookcases, and a computer desk, there isn't a lot room for sub placement either. So one works just fine.
While I hesitate to add to this "hornet's nest" of a discussion, I will say this. I've been an audio hobbyist since the mid-60s when I put together my first stereo system building Dynakits. That included reading Audio, Stereo Review, and High Fidelity, popular print magazines of the day. I don't recall seeing the term "swarm" relating to anything in audio until I read Duke's site decades later. And then, while applying the term, he credited the concept to design engineer Earl Geddes.
There was another insect-related application of the word more than 20 years ago in San Diego. There someone started an informal car club called "The Yellow Swarm". That invited owners of yellow cars to meet up for weekend tours, all makes welcome from Fiats to Ferraris.
But unfortunately here things have gone far off track from answering the OP's original question of why there has not been broader adoption of the Swarm concept? That answer seems obvious. General consumer interest (not the dedicated few) has diminished for multi-channel and large speaker set ups. Even shoe box size is too large. Tiny cubes and even wireless seems to be in demand. It's no wonder that two main speakers and four subs are not of interest except for the dedicated few. ;^)
It’s no wonder that two main speakers and four subs are not of interest except for the dedicated few. ;^)
I just bought an M&K sub for my bedroom system. I found it on craigslist for $150.00 which seemed fine to me and it works well. But its nearly three times the size of one of Duke’s Swarm subs. One of my rules of the bedroom system is that it be entirely on the cheap but if I were to be using the Swarm in there it would actually be easier. This is because my room has plenty of places to place Duke’s subs as they are meant to be against the wall, and they can go places I can’t put that M&K.
Its a matter of time; what we are seeing here is that the science is well ahead of the tradition, and tradition is a rather slow-moving beast. But if a thinking person sees that tradition is that way solely out of tradition, they will instantly see the advantages that the science offers. This is really demonstrated in spades with the Swarm.
I have no doubt a single sub can provide good bass response performance and integration with the main speakers, at a single designated listening seat, provided the single sub is precisely and optimally positioned in the room and in relation to the designated listening seat, the single sub is of sufficiently high quality, has the necessary three controls for level, crossover frequency and continuously variable phase and that all three controls are properly set. I know this with certainty because I’ve previously used a high quality single sub in my room and system with good results. My main intent of this post is to state with clarity for the benefit of readers of this thread, and not primarily for yourself, that based on my experience there are typically distinct advantages gained from utilizing 2 or more subs in most rooms. Two of the usual advantages perceived, beginning with the utilization of 2 subs, are more powerful and realistic bass power and bass dynamics. This is due to bass being cumulative in a room and doubling the subs not only increases the overall bass power and impact along with increased reserve power for realistic bass dynamics, it also improves the perceived quality and sense of ease of the bass since both subs are operating well below their limits and at low distortion. Other usual advantages perceived through the use of 2 or more subs are increased bass accuracy, smoothness, speed, detail and integration with the main speakers. I don’t completely understand why you didn’t perceive these usual bass performance advantages of utilizing 2 subs as opposed to a single sub in your room and system. However, I think it’s important to note that just because you were unable to perceive these typical performance advantages of utilizing multiple subs in your room and system, this has very little relevance in regards to whether others will be able to perceive these advantages in their rooms and systems. My belief is that many will perceive the advantages as obvious and significant. My suggestion is that those interested should try both a single and a pair of subs in their systems and decide for themselves. I do understand the more practical concerns of a smaller room, WAF and a lack of space for 2 or more subs. Based on my personal experience being able to accommodate 4 (1’x1’x28") subs in my 23’x16’ room, I no longer consider such concerns, that I also initially shared, as deal breakers. I think it’s more a matter of priorities, having the will for better bass performance and being sufficiently creative with room decor solutions. I can also state with certainty that it’s well worth the effort if you decide to give it a try and make it work.
I’ve waited three days for @sounds_real_audio to clarify his post above, and I think that’s long enough. So I’m going to reply to some of the things he said:
“The "swarm" is actually an old term that was used to convince music lovers who were not happy with the sound of their system, in particular the midrange which was so lacking in most speakers. To deflect away from that they, the manufacturers, focused on the bass”
I do no think "swarm" is an "old term" in this context. To the best of my knowledge, I am the first person to use the term “swarm” to describe a distributed multi-sub system, dating from the spring of 2006 when I named my four-piece subwoofer system “the Swarm”.
To the best of my knowledge I am still the ONLY manufacturer who uses the word “swarm” to refer to his product, so I assume your post is directed at me.
And I have NEVER said or even implied that bass matters more than midrange. Show me ONE post where I have. If I have written about bass in threads about subwoofers, that’s because bass was the topic at hand.
"A conspiracy yes.”
FALSE, and I’m being charitable to use that word instead of another. Show me ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that I have engaged in ANY conspiracy. The word "conspiracy" implies deception and dishonesty. I do not appreciate the accusation. Can you back it up? Of course not.
“Does it make your system sound better, well perhaps, the bass may improve but you will still not have that rich and satisfying midrange which is where the music is.”
Again you are implying that I’m ignoring the midrange. Obviously I don’t talk about the rest of the spectrum in threads about bass and subwoofers. If this is your main objection, it’s really weak. And if you ACTUALLY ARE open to learning something about how to get the rest of the spectrum right, start a thread about it and I’ll post.
And if we "improve the bass" it DOES NOT FOLLOW that we "will still not have that rich and satisfying midrange which is where the music is". The one DOES NOT not preclude the other.
One obvious advantage is that with four subs for a given volume as opposed to two, each driver will have less excursion.
All things being equal, yes, but my advocacy with pairs of subs (or even more of them) is using very large subs - i.e.: no less than 15" drivers for horns and +18" multiples for direct radiator designs, in either case dictating very large enclosures. Initially, before deciding on a pair of 15"-loaded tapped horn subs, I did consider 4 smaller (but not ’small’ by any means) tapped horns with 10" drivers for a DBA set-up, but different circumstances (like lack of availability of proper drivers for the given TH design) had me choose my current 2 x 20 cubic feet TH configuration, with the option to build two more of them in a future scenario - crazy it may seem; remember, a 15" tapped horn loaded sub roughly translates into something like 2 x 18" direct radiators, and with just two such subs the driver cones rarely get to move more than a few mm’s even at close to war volume. In fact 2 x 18" units in a DR design move visible more than a single 15" in a tapped horn for a perceived similar SPL, and less cone movement for a given SPL is what we want. I guess what I’m saying is that with bass capacity of this magnitude even pairs will give the advantage of prodigious headroom.
@audiokinesis Hi Duke, I finally got to see what you look like in a YouTube video for RMAF from some years ago. Its clear you are very passionate and fascinated about what you do. I enjoyed watching you speak. Im enjoying your setup and I’m hoping you might be able to help with my questions:
Using your setup with 2 SA1000 sub amps instead of the standard 1 amp, can you please explain how to set phasing and provide an explanation of the theory behind it? Should all 4 of the sub satellites be in phase? Since I’m using 2 amps (instead of the standard 1amp setup) Is it beneficial to wire a front left sub to the right rear side amplifier and a right and a right rear sub wired to the front left? Or maybe have just one of the subs out of phase?
When dialed-in correctly can this phasing affect the width and height of the soundstage?
When treating a room which has your sub setup, does it need the same amount and types of room treatment as a room using 1 or 2 subs?
Is it advisable to use something other than the standard sub enclosure rubber feet in rooms with hardwood floor on a raised foundation, or best to leave them as is?
I thought we were all familiar with Duke, no need to look for him on Youtube You can see him here asking Bruce Willis if he wants to buy 4 or 6 subs.
https://filmdaily.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ianholm-07.jpg Full disclosure I am a happy owner of Duke's DBA (swarm) and his Azel speakers and in my case there was no need to use the gun, he just played a few tracks at RMAF98 and that convinced me.
I've tried JBL 2245H 18" drivers, in B460 cabinets, 2 of em, using active xover and class d crowns, then used those drivers in another box configuration along with a pair of 2235H 15" drivers, on and on, etc., and sure the bass goes low, and hard if need be, but just did not integrate smoothly. I have an average sized room not a huge rec room. Great for the earthquake show though. I've also heard dual REL's behind the mains and it seemed to me it's just a pressurizing effect really. Room treatments for me are not effective (much) below about ~100hz, and yes it was thick, but the low end started to sound dry or uninteresting, and there's still the standing wave peak null issue, no matter what I did, which I think also affected the mains full range, just my theory. But the DBA approach solved those issues for me, and I'm still tweaking it but at least it's working. BTW I don't sit and listen. I need a huge sweet spot.
" If you are nothing but a fellow DBA advocate, why is it that you are the only one whose name pops up everytime DBA is mentioned on this forum? Why do you have the right to claim ownership of the DBA concept by using a proprietary name like swarm?’
I decline to engage with Kenjit.
However if anyone else is interested in reading an answer to Kenjit’s question, let me know and I will respond.
@stringreen , Yes, Vandy subs are expensive, but how many subs can last 30 years or more? My pair of 2w's worked as they should and were over 30 years old. My pair of 2wq's are over 10 years old and work as they should, as well. I'll be buying a pair of Sub 3 subs, and be set for the remainder of my days. And, they integrate seamlessly, and without fussy setup issues. Bob
Why do you have the right to claim ownership of the DBA concept by using a proprietary name like swarm?’
I decline to engage with Kenjit.
No worries- he tends to troll this forum (or did until recently). A couple of threads of his got pulled down on that account. However, to answer the question the ’Swarm’ has been the most successful (in fact only) application of a distributed bass array. In that regard the Swarm name is in danger of becoming intimately associated with the dba concept, such that its likely to be used even when the subs being used are not made by Audiokinesis, much in the same way that Kleenex has come to be associated with all facial tissue.
My hope is that Duke continues to do well with it helping people enjoy music more :-) I also have been involved in Audio since 1976 and prior to Duke’s use of swarm never heard usage of that term. As for the K-Troll, ignore him.
@erik_squires Erik, you make many valuable contributions to the site, but this approach where you actively work to stir up controversy is contributing to the negative tone of this site and that aspect is driving away many long-time valuable contributers.
As I've said elsewhere, if only everyone simply believed in education and experience sharing without attacks or the need for everyone to agree on various opinions/perspectives the site would be a lot more useful (and sustainable).
As I've said elsewhere, if only everyone simply believed in education and experience sharing without attacks or the need for everyone to agree on various opinions/perspectives the site would be a lot more useful (and sustainable).
Imagine there's no Heaven. Its easy if you try. No hell below us, above us only sky. Imagine all the people living for today.
My wish for you is to audition and experience the Swarm. Possibly Duke or James Romeyn could arrange it? Or, you're welcome to stop by my house if you're near Indy. You could then state your objective, apropos thoughts on the Swarm. Perhaps say your piece and move on? I know I'd find it very interesting.
My wish for you is to audition and experience the Swarm.
Possibly Duke or James Romeyn could arrange it? Or, you're welcome to
stop by my house if you're near Indy. You could then state your
objective, apropos thoughts on the Swarm. Perhaps say your piece and
move on? I know I'd find it very interesting.
Thanks. I have no problem with the technology. Just the interactions and people who've gotten in my grill. As a result of that, you all go swarming all you want to, wherever you want to, for as long as you want to, and let me not.
erik_squires: "
Thanks. I have no problem with the technology. Just the interactions and people who've gotten in my grill. As a result of that, you all go swarming all you want to, wherever you want to, for as long as you want to, and let me not."
Hello Erik,
Rejecting swarming out of hand, without first-hand experiencing it, without maintaining an objective and open mind toward home audio solutions that are based on well understood acoustic and physics principles that have been validated and documented as being highly effective utilizing emprical scientific methods and research? And all because you perceive swarm users enthusiastically extolling its virtues as getting in your grill? Based on my recollection of reading your thoughtful, interesting and informative Audiogon threads and posts over many years, that I consistently perceived as commendably openminded and objective, I consider your responses to swarming and its adherents to be surprisingly out of character. Your reluctance to auditioning and experiencing the numerous benefits of a multi-sub swarm type distributed bass array system in your system and room, ultimately of course, will only be to your own detriment. I'm just a bit surprised and disappointed that you're not more interested in giving the concept a try, evaluating the results honestly and objectively and sharing your thoughts and always interesting perspective with us all. I'm certain you'd be pleasantly surprised.
Does the swarm system work equally as well for home theater and music listening? I am 90% HT use and powerful, room shaking, chest pounding bass is what I’m looking for. I currently have a single Seaton Submersive with dual opposed 15” drivers. I have no room treatments, but use EQ via Dirac Live. I am very intrigued with the thought of trying this system.
Mine is used for both. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 As impressive as it is with music, where it provides truly superb quality bass, its maybe even more impressive with movies because they tend to have a lot more powerful earth-shattering deep bass. Either way its not like you do anything different one for the other. Set it up for one, perfect for the other.
Its important to keep in mind that while there is a Swarm subwoofer system sold by Audiokinesis, in many cases what people (like me just now) mean is the generic Distributed Bass Array or DBA. That's what I have, a 5 sub DBA.
Since you already have one sub you are almost exactly where I was 2 years ago when I decided to build my DBA. All you do is add subs! The more the better, and the more powerful the better. But the vast majority of what you get comes more from having multiple subs than from what any of those subs happen to be. The more and more powerful they are simply allows you to run each one at a lower level, giving you greater headroom and extension. You could for example add three Tekton 4-10s and have as much room shaking chest pounding bass as you can handle.
"Does the swarm system work equally as well for home theater and music listening? I am 90% HT use and powerful, room shaking, chest pounding bass is what I’m looking for. I currently have a single Seaton Submersive with dual opposed 15” drivers."
One characteristic of the distributed multi-sub approach which is beneficial for home theater is that the improved bass smoothness extends throughout the listening area, so the bass is essentially the same for all seats.
That being said, I don’t think my standard Swarm system (consisting of four small subwoofers with 10" drivers) has the output capability of your single massive Seaton Submersive.
What is your room size, if you don’t mind? I might have an idea.
duke, thanks for your interest in helping. My room is an open basement with dimensions of 17’-6” wide x 32’ long, with 9’ ceiling. My theater is an area at the front of the basement with dimensions of 17’ 6” x 14’ . Pretty big space.
Thank you, jdlynch. That’s a big space. Imo you can probably get good results with three subs, since the space is so large.
Okay, here’s what comes to mind:
Add two more subs, which probably need not be as big and as capable as the Submersive, and spread the three as far apart, asymmetrically, as you reasonably can. Bonus points if you can elevate one so that it’s closer to the ceiling than to the floor. You might find that having a significantly different phase control setting for one of the subs is helpful. Perhaps the one farthest from the screen.
Since Duke hasn’t yet replied, I thought I’d give you my input and advice. I use the Audio Kinesis Debra 4-sub DBA in my system and room for about 40% 2-ch music listening and for about 60% 5.4 home theater surround sound audio. My main goal is for very high quality bass for both and the 4-sub DBA concept definitely provides this to near state of the art levels in my system and room. You’ve stated your basement system, however, will be used about 90% for HT and your main goal for a bass system is more about providing powerful, room shaking and chest pounding bass. Duke, knowing the 4-sub DBA concept’s main attribute is its high quality bass, provided the good advice that a better solution for the higher amplitude bass you prefer would be to add 2 larger and more powerful subs to your system and create a custom 3-sub DBA system as he described, although the 2 additional subs do not have to be as large or powerful as your existing Submersive sub. You would gain more bottom end power, impact and more powerful dynamics by adding 2 slightly smaller and less powerful subs while also gaining some DBA benefits such as increased bass detail, lower distortion and more seamless integration of the bass with your main speakers. In giving his advice that you needn’t add 2 more subs as powerful or as large as your existing Seaton Submersive sub, I believe Duke was referencing Dr. Earl Geddes, the inventor of the 4-sub DBA concept, and his subsequent research and claims that 3 subs in a distributed array can be as effective as 4 subs in a distributed array in some rooms. I completely trust both of these men’s advice but I have no experience utilizing 3-sub DBAs, only 4-sub ones, and I’m therefore hesitant to offer advice on 3-sub DBA usage. I can tell you that I’ve adjusted the level of my 4 subs but I’ve never adjusted, or even felt the need to adjust, their delay settings. Volume, crossover frequency and phase are the only required settings on an AK Swarm or Debra 4-sub DBA, I seriously doubt it would be different on a custom 3-sub DBA. You may be interested in utilizing a $200 Mini DSP unit, however, which requires a single pair of L+R channel inputs and allows the connection and advanced control settings of up to 4 subs. I believe it would be very useful on custom 3 or 4 sub DBAs but unnecessary on AK Swarm and Debra 4-sub complete kit DBAs.
@jdlynch wrote: "
Duke, will I need to get some device to set delays and levels for each individual sub? This is where I would get lost.
"
First, apologies for being so slow to reply. I hadn't checked in on this thread in a while and didn't realize there was a question waiting for me.
Imo setting delays individually would not be necessary, as the Swarm obviously gets away without them, and I don't think 3 subs instead of 4 would be any different in that regard.
If you are using individually powered subs then setting the level of each should be easy with the controls. You might need the Submersive to be a bit louder than the other two since it's the only one that goes real deep, but then again you might not either... trial & error.
Imo it might very well be beneficial to be able to adjust the phase of the other two subs. As a starting point I'd suggest setting one of them (perhaps the one farthest from the main speakers) to a very different phase setting than the other subs, like maybe even 180 degrees. You might want the out-of-phase sub to be at a different volume level from the others (maybe a bit lower), and then again you might not.
Thanks for all the feedback and suggestions. I have an old Velodyne FSR-15 that I may put into the system. I'll look on Craigslist to see if I can pick up a third subwoofer. You guys have me very interested in this type of system and I am excited to try it!
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
