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.
Duke
“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.
Duke