how to include the subwoofer?

looks like you already know the dd12 has a great interface allowing for some fantastic dialing in of the bottom end. if you take the time (many hours in my case), it can end up sounding pretty darn good.

i'm in an similar situation as you and chose the rca amp to dd12 route. didn't want to complicate/add stuff to the system/path of separates i just upgraded to. i actually tried to go without a pre altogether but my system sounds better with one. regardless... got the results i wanted while keeping it simple with the dd12.

i think the key here for me(us?) is the sub's background use and wanting to "round out the bottom octave". my 3 painstakingly customized pre-sets vary in volume from 16 too 22. this on a scale of 100 or 150 i believe, so i'm barely using the thing. just a little bottom end fill for the most part. i'm not using mine to "create" bottom end. just giving it a little bump instead.

Martykl: you're spot on regarding the 80-120 hot spots. mine was at about 85-100. set the dd12 x-over to 93 and it helped flatten it out fine (along with some other fine adjustments).

i'd try simple first and see how it goes. you can always add gear later. good luck.

cheers
Lev

Thanks Lev. Yes my volume settings on the DD12 are right where yours are. From a volume perspective it is "barely being used" but that little bit of volume does great things for the sound (after a lot of time getting the parameters tweaked properly).

Very good answers. The NHT X2 is surprisingly transparent for it's price and, in my case, cleaned up the crossover area. Beyond that, the difference it made was less than changing a single pair of cables.

Dgaylin,

If you're looking to maintain the "purity" of the main signal path,
what are your choices?

I can pretty much assure you that the high pass in the NHT is less audible
(and much more flexible) than the high pass in the SMS-1 as I have
extensively A-B'd the two. The Velo ain't terrible, but I knew it was there.
Also, the added flexibility of the NHT allowed for a better crossover function,
as I can high pass at my chosen turnover frequency and steeper slope than
the SMS allows. So, what can you do?

1) Use the active x-over of your choice (you might be more comfortable re:
transparency in the main path with Bryston or Marchand, but there's the $
issue) or

2) Run the Curves full range, bypassing the DD's high pass and try to
"snug up" the DD from below, using only it's internal high cut
filter. You might get a good x-over function, but you've blown the
opportunity to maximize the benefit of the DRC.

My point is: Cable adaptors won't improve "purity" in the main
path (DD's high cut ain't great) unless you forgo DRC (low x-over point). If
your question is: "Is DRC worth some slight (in my case, inaudible to me)
degradation of the main signal path?", my answer would be "Without
Question, Yes, Yes, Yes"

OTOH, YMMV.

Marty

Dgaylin,

Sorry I missed your intervening post re: the smooth bass response you're already getting from the Curves. My room makes such a result impossible. So, as Emily Litella once so aptly put it "Oh...never mind".

Marty