realworld experience: Kharma subwoofer + 3.2 CRM

I think the sub with the 3.2’s is the ultimate in a sub/sat system. Contrary to what jtinn wrote I heard just the opposite--a big beautiful soundstage. Also at the show the sub did not get turned off so how someone could say it “shrinks” the soundstage is beyond my comprehension. I agree that in show conditions and during the break-in at the show it was a bit boomy at times but hearing it at GTT Audio after break-in it expanded the soundstage depth by at least 2x and did not hurt the top end at all. I feel properly set-up it integrated better than the Midi’s but hey that was the room I heard it in!

Thanks to the Kharma personnel, I was able to hear the 3.2s at the show with and without the sub working. In my opinion, and those that were with me, the sub did NOT in any way shrink the soundstage of the 3.2s.

In fact, the addition of the sub very seamlessly completed the low end, and if anything, increased the sense of depth in the soundstage.

I was truly impressed at how the sub could be so finely adjusted to complement the 3.2s, and yet not overload such a small room like the one at the NY show (I would guess 12 x 18).

IMHO, this is one of the most effective sub/speaker marriages I have experienced.

Tpsonic, what do you mean by your comment;

"the 75K Kharmas are much harder to drive in the bass (unusual impedence load)."

????....maybe i have miss-interpreted your comment.

i assume you are referring to the Kharma Exquisite 1D's....which i own. my experience (and the impedence curve) are in conflict with your statement. in fact, they are a particularly easy load for a full frequency speaker.

i am not commenting on the Kharma Subwoofer; which i have not heard.

Mike,i think he is referring to Midi Exq. Diamond.

Yes,Audio 999,that is what I am talking anout.Two pairs of Lamm ML2.1s were used on these speakers and they ran out of gas.Ditto for the Tenor OTLs and the Tenor HPs didn't sound as good.TAS review is upcoming.