kharma 3.2 & sub...

The sub did not add to the sonics in any positive way when I heard it.

Just an FYI on this thread,

I am quite certain that all the users with bad results with the sub, tried to splice it on too the 3.2 without cutting the low frequencies to the 3.2. (splicing= trying to get the sub woofer to match the 3.2's without contouring the 3.2 's low frequency response and simply bumping the subwoofers output into the 3.2's bass extension)

Incase its not already clear, that isn't going to work. I didn't realise (couldn't belive it really) that this is what people were talking about.

hopefully it is quite obvious that this is the wrong way to add a subwoofer to a ported two way speaker.

You need to cut the 3.2 off at about 70hz (+/- 10hz) depending on room and woofer placement (preferrably 2 subs and not left and right----mono subs.)

Once you do this stuff the port of the 3.2 with some socks? this will help the speaker a great deal and give you a complementary rolloff from the speaker to help keep deep bass from the 3.2 and improve its linearity under high output conditions.

Now this has increased the somewhat restricted dynamic output of the 3.2 by 10 fold. and now the sub can work over a wider bandwidth blending seemlessly with the K3.2 Satellites, room interaction will dictate the slopes, but bessel low Q filters are the best for being transparent but they can be more difficult to blend. Most of these following crossovers are very flexible and offer an almost overwhelming amount of solutions.

Crossovers from XTA (digital in digital out)
Lake Technology
or if your on a budget BSS Audio all work well.
Some people like DEQX also

The onboard EQ's can allow room correction and TIME ALIGNMENT with the woofers. Time alignment is more critical than almost any other setup parameter.

There's a little more to it, like sub selection but a speaker like the 3.2 is a minor challenge to add a subwoofer too because it simply does not play that loud. So you likely won't need a $10K subwoofer. Maybe 2 $2500 ones.

I have a CeSb in my system with Kharma Mini Exquisites and feel the sub only enhances the already glorious sound. The sub will "muddy" the midrange only if it is not set up properly.

MIXALIS THE SUB AS KHARMA REFERS ADDS INDEED BODY TO THE MUSICAL PRESENCE OF 3.2 CRM SPEAKERS.JUST PUT THE RIGHT SETTINGS TO THE REMOTE CONTROL OF THE SUB AND ALL RUNS...
IN FEW WORDS WHEN YOU TURN OFF THE SUB YOU FEEL ITS MUSICAL UBSENCE.THAT FOR ITS SELF IS ENOUGH TO CONSIDER ITS OBBLIGATORY ADDITION TO THE CRM 3.2 SPEAKERS.
THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION.
REGARDS COMARIS.

DAVIS, YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
THE APPROPRIATE SETTNGS OF CESB 1.0 DUE THE REMOTE CONTROL
ARE TOO IMPORTANT FOR THE GLORIOUS PLAYINF OF SUB BESIDE THE CRM 3.2F.
SO,TO ACHIEVE MAX PERFORMANCE FROM THE SYSTEM KHARMA CRM 3.2F-CESB 1.0 ,I CONSIDER THAT WE MIGHT CHANGE THE SETTINGS OF SUB EACH OTHER,WRITING ALSO THE DIMENSIONS OF THE LISTENINF ROOM.
ALSO DEPENDS FROM THE AMPS,FOR EG. I CHANGED MY DRIVERS TUBES OF CARY 211 AE 300B [CARY AUDIO DESIGN ]WITH THE WESTERN ELECTRIC 300B TUBES, AND I NOTED THAT THE BASS WAS FORTIFIED:SO I HAD TO REDUCT THE DB OF SUB,FROM -8 DB TO - 18 DB.WRITE ME YOUR SETTINGS , SO COMPARING WITH THE MINE ONES WE ACHIEVE THE BEST PERFORMANCE.I EXPECT YOUR SETTINGS....OF CESB 1.0