2. speakers
  3. 159915-139027

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? 


northman
audiokinesis
2,733 posts
 
Kenjit wrote:

" 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.

Duke
gdnrbob
4,442 posts
 
@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
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,760 posts
 
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.
tomic601's avatar
tomic601
12,884 posts
 
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.
cal3713's avatar
cal3713
1,421 posts
 
@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).
More to discover