rickp

Absolutely agree. Some of us already have Nords that do the Nord-thing pretty well. I've always liked Yamahas for doing what I've considered the Yamaha-thing pretty well - producing some of the best sounds then-currently available along with some of the best keyboard mechanisms then-currently available with great connectivity of the two (and accepting in that bargain that the UI may not be the most advanced or intuitive and that the organs generally aren't usable).

The Piano section has a Layers category, which I would guess includes piano+strings, piano+pad, and such. True, but youre at their mercy as to which layers theyve created and the relative volumes theyve programmed; if you want the layer voice to be more dominant or more subtle, youre out of luck. The CP4 has a handy slider for that (as well as an equally handy layer on/off button). As Adan mentioned, the controls depth on the top requires leaving a good bit of space between the CP and a top board, and I always thought Yamaha was pretty thoughtful about reducing that space with the CP4s design; so that may be a design step backward in that regard. Someone may point out the Stage 3 has similar depth of controls covering its top, but with the organs on the Stage 3, many of us can get by fine without a top board - so its controls spread all over the top are a luxury instead of a problem.

From another thread, 41 and 28 pounds.

Could be, I noticed they included and specifically mention the S700 piano from the S90ES (not the best piano solo, but excellent in a mix), although this lacks the layering flexibility and options, arpeggios, aux outs and wealth of voices and customization the S90 series offers, which has caused me and probably many other S90 series owners to keep for sale signs in the drawer. But, its 20 pounds lighter and more compact than that series, and thats not insignificant. I see a lot of Nord Stage aspects in the sectional layout of these new CPs, albeit with Korg "category knobs" in each sound section. Since it doesn't have two panels like the Nord Stage though, I'm wondering how an upright bass could be split while also layering the piano with strings or a pad (something I do frequently with the CP4), as it looks like the extra voices all come out of one "sub" section. The sound section and effects on/off toggle switches look cool but also look fairly vulnerable to me in gig-world unless a hard case is used. Lots of interesting questions/answers ahead!

My K8.2s were purchased right after they became available, gigged on average 10 times a month plus rehearsals, zero issues. One factor though that may be key; they are stored and transported in the QSC bags designed for them - I can see how the control panel components could be vulnerable in transport otherwise.

And aftertouch! Something else that helps compensate for the unavailability of another hand. Yes indeed! I use it to change leslie speed; it's like having a third foot or hand . . . Yes, if you want a hammer action and are willing to go beyond my 30 lb weight limit, that changes things. Not exceeding 42 lbs, the Forte 7 is probably a strong choice, if you don't need the full 88... which is likely the case as LH bass makes the lowest 7 keys of an 88 not so necessary anyway. For lower weight and/or lower price (and a full 88 keys), I'd look at the Roland FA-08, but it is unfortunately almost 56" wide. I'd run the organ to the sub out and put it through a Vent, and wouldn't really miss the live drawbar controls since I wouldn't have a hand to operate them anyway. ETA: There's also the boards I mentioned in the OP... MOXF8, SP6, PX560, all of which are light and narrow for 88s. MOXF8 is a tremendously flexible board, lagging only in organ. I haven't played an SP6 but from what I can tell, it should be pretty well suited for this, and probably better than the PX560 at about the same price and weight. I suppose I'm in the camp of emulating 5 string bassists, so with an 88, I actually only have two extra keys. I brighten the very lowest freqs a tiny bit with eq to keep them from getting too muddy. 88 keys are also handy in a single board situation to throw in an octave-adjusted feature voice split on the top keys (harmonica part on Margaritaville, for example). Would love some of the lighter narrow boards you mentioned, but those are VERY hard to find with aux out for separate bass feed and - this is a personal quirk for sure - with internal power supply. Rapid stage changes can be murder for small cords and power warts. I carry extras for the SK1 and MX49 when I have those boards with me, but I'd sure like to know my main board's power supply is dependably durable after a stage scurry. As I mentioned, that's probably more of a personal quirk, but it's based on an episode when my R3's wart apparently got stomped during a stage change; I spent the last bit of time before downbeat retrieving and hooking up the spare rather than getting settled in and doing final adjustments of mic and pedal placements, taking time to get a good seal of IEMs, etc.; felt out of the game until about the third song. I guess I've accepted the notion that having the durability, feel and features I value and enjoy during a performance are worth dealing with a few extra pounds for a few minutes on each end of that performance. But, there are limits . . . 62 pounds for a Montage (and likely well over 80 with a suitable case) along with 58" length add up to a lot more inconvenience over the course of a year - makes it hard for the features and sound to flip the teeter-totter in a time when there are so many great boards available. Thanks for all your insights and for starting this topic; very informative.

I've enjoyed the two-board approach you've mentioned too for LH bass (and by "enjoyed," meaning primarily because two is much simpler than three!), and although I used a S03 on top as a dedicated bass board for several years, after the SK1 was introduced, I've approached it in the opposite way, i.e., putting the split board on the bottom rather than the top. Part of that approach is due to the bottom board usually being the bigger board with more real estate for splitting (and generally, at least in the past, being the boards with more aux out options), and partly because in addition to occasionally using the top board standalone, I've generally midi'd the bottom board out to the top and used a control pedal to bring the top board (such as an SK1, kicked up an octave) in and out as a layer - or by using ring and little finger of right hand for organ chording and rest of right hand for piano comps, modulating the organ volume with the control pedal (I know, that sounds awkward, but it can work). Which brings me to what I think is essential for LH bass players if they are trying to make the most of their RH as well, and that is making full use of a full array of pedals to keep both hands on the keys as much as possible. I share some of your skepticism of the Stage 3 as an ideal choice for a LH bass board, but it DOES offer a footswitch for Leslie speed, two control pedals that allow one to be used to control organ volume/presence plus another control pedal to control another layer's volume/presence or wah or morphing sound or other parameters (and what's up with only one control pedal, Kronos?) an up AND down program change footswitch function (and the changes are seamless if you've level matched the programs well - this function alone can make the RH much more versatile and useful within a song), and, with the triple pedal unit, a sustain pedal, soft pedal for added dynamic control, and a sostenuto pedal for selectively sustaining. All of that of course means nothing if a board can't be effectively programmed to take full advantage of those options, and I'm finding the Stage 3 to be fairly easy to do just that, largely because it is so easy to tweak live - just make the adjustments you would make live if you had the hand (and perhaps time) availability, and then save it to a program. Use the song menu function to group the programs where needed to effectively use the up/down program footswitch during a song, and you're all set. BUT, for a LH bassist (and I suspect that's what many of us have become) trying to make full use of their right hand as well, the lack of a user definable bass split point is irritating, particularly if playing walking bass parts that can consume three octaves (songs like All of Me or A-Train in a trio that plays some standards); you should be able to define a bass cutoff precisely at the very top of the range needed to maximize the range reserved for the right hand (and the cross-fade is great maybe for subtle layering but I'm finding it suboptimal for bass use). The ability to easily shift the octaves for RH parts programming helps - but can result in some mental gymnastics if the right hand ends up playing with octave shifts to compensate for an ill-placed split point. So the Stage 3 suffers there. And true, bass using up the synth slot on one panel (I put it on panel B, with a supplemental volume control for it assigned to the mod wheel just in case my preprogrammed volumes are off a bit - that way, everything I'm wanting to do with RH or on full keyboard when splits are off is always visible on panel A) leaves only one synth, but I think I can live with that ok - there is compromise though in which panel A voices will utilize the effects and it's all for one and one for all as far as reverb and compression are concerned. And true, the live performance orientation compromises some of the depth of programming available - but it so far seems to be in areas acceptable for those compromises. So I share your skepticism of the Stage 3 and other aspects of it are not so gently nagging as well - and yet I'm still thinking that it's currently the best all around choice for a one-board solution with LH bass (in fairness though, part of that is based on its form factor - 42 pounds and short enough to fit in most rear car seats - Forte is a VERY close contender though in all respects, including this one).

I play LH bass in three groups, and although my views, methods and equipment provision keep evolving, once the LH bass gig count started consistently exceeding 6-10 times per month, the focus shifted more toward simplification. One constant though, since the 70s using a FenderRhodes Piano Bass, has been to treat the bass feed exactly as a bass guitarist would, with bass amps and with a dedicated bass DI feed to FOH, and I think that's especially necessary when bandmembers increasingly mix their own IEM or monitor feeds and/or if recording or broadcasting is involved and/or if dealing with venue soundguys whom are accustomed to handling and routing a dedicated bass signal. One exception/trick I've discovered as part of the simplification process is when playing an event with extensive piano focus but in a venue where a bass amp alone produces sufficient bass (i.e., no significant bass presence required in FOH and/or overall volume level is low to moderate - applies for us often in churches or hotel lounges) is to run my CP4 (my preferred "extensive piano focus" board) into our Soundcraft Ui mixer and run a monitor out feed from the mixer to the bass amp; using filters and eq shelving, I can effectively route the CP4's split bass to the bass amp and mix the bass volume via the split slider on the keyboard in combo with the bass amp's gain settings and/or the monitor out volume feed. Then, the CP4's pianos and layers are running in full stereo but with a separate bass "signal" and control, almost as if the keyboard had an aux out for the bass. I mentioned the simplification focus, and for 90% of my LH bass playing these days, I use a single board that has aux outs for the bass, generally a S90ES but increasingly a Stage3 88. In addition to simplification, I think the one board LH bass solution also promotes a better connection with the audience - there's a lot less of a physical barrier and it allows the audience to watch the player's hands better. With sufficient thought and preparation, I don't think a lot of functionality is lost using one instead of three boards, and although some sounds might suffer to varying extents, there are usually some solutions that minimize the extent (such as installing B's Knees for organs in the S90ES, or layering two EPs in the Stage3 instead of using just one, etc.). Weaknesses in the bass patches are a more difficult issue, but I've found that onboard tweaking of patch EQ, compression, and the type and extent of reverb can go a long way, with the final bit of remedy (and some very noticeable de-digitization) provided by using a customizable bass D.I., such as the Tech 21 VT Bass D.I.; that D.I. allows for a lot of tone shaping plus it provides a footswitch to quickly switch between settings. Still, there are times when the little compromises involved in using a single board add up to too many compromises (such as when recording or broadcasting is involved, or an event with more critical listeners or elevated stakes), and a three keyboard setup is almost unavoidable. For a three keyboard setup, I've used the 90 degree L-shape positioning mentioned in the original post, but gradually worked into a 45ish degree slant position that allows the bass keyboard (using a MX49, sometimes a Korg R3) to slant across and above the lower couple octaves of the bottom board and have its right end slightly under the top board. This allows for very comfortable playing from a seated position and allows easy eyesight focus of both hands without looking like a spectator at a tennis match. I used a modified Gibraltar GEM stand (modified to have a slightly wider horizontal bar and also to provide two mic quick-release mounts, which were used for mounting two mini iPads) for this purpose for many years with various two tier keyboard stands, but then settled on using a modified and reinforced K&M "laptop holder" attached to an Omega stand with 2nd tier stackers to create a simpler 3 board rig that had more consistent precise keyboard placement and that could easily be moved when quick on and off stage drills were required. The GEM stand is also handy when fortunate enough to have a venue with a real grand piano mic'd into service; can still put a SK1 above the piano's keyboard and then essentially have the same familiar three keyboard positioning and surface.

The wifi problem is permanently solved by buying a $50 router and not broadcasting the network name, which keeps every phone in the venue from trying to mate with your network. We've encountered this problem particularly in hotels and convention centers that have WiFi repeaters sprinkled throughout the facility, resulting in such a strong presence that the main FOH wireless iPad and all of the band's monitor-mix iPad's are essentially "beckoned," for lack of a better word, to join the stronger, more enveloping network's signal. The remedy is to utilize the "Forget This Network" option in each device's WiFi settings.

I'd be interested in answers to this question. Also, if you use a sub, are you playing LH bass? Are you using a sub when there's a bass player? Are you using a sub in larger group (5, 6, or more players)? In small clubs or large venues? An old law professor was fond of saying "'It depends' is almost always a correct answer;" I think it applies to all of your questions. As for the LH bass question: I use bass amp instead of a sub playing LH bass, but depending on the setting, LH bass will usually be played on a board dedicated to bass or from a board split with aux outs for the bass, so the bass feed and amplification is wholly independent of keys fed to the SS3 - so SS3 alone is fine for the RH keys. When LH bass is being played from a single board setup with no aux outs (like a CP4), I'm using a bass amp from the SS3's sub-out instead of a sub, and the freqs seem to naturally crossover well. As for when there is a bass player, if keys are running into FOH and circumstances aren't allowing me a stereo IEM feed, I'm using the SS3 onstage with a stereo keys feed to FOH (for me, staying out of the bass player's way avoids freqs that challenge the SS3 at volume and it handles everything just fine on its own) and plugging the SS3 sub-out jack with a simple 1/4 to RCA adapter plug to prevent it from farting. If keys are running through FOH and I can have a stereo IEM feed, I'm not using any onstage amplification at all (unless the mains are so high and/or wide that I feel like some near/center fill is needed - then may use the SS3 or 2 K8s depending on how much volume is needed). And this all applies regardless of size of group or venue. Playing solo AP is when I always think I need a supplement to the SS3, and prefer a bass amp to a sub in that setting. Tweaking the EQ on the bass amp results in nice crossover between the units. As good as the SS3 is for keyboard use, my very favorite SS3 usage is in a church or acoustic setting, using the SS3 center-front stage, tilted up and rear-firing back at the group with the FOH stereo feed (sans bass) . . . it's pure magic.

Huge fan of Ludovic's recordings; he's a great source of keys solo ideas.

You can also shorten the back leg to increase tilt/stability; remove the rubber tip, cut as needed with a hacksaw, replace tip.

You can get a stereo feed from the . This mixer does not have a 'Control out' It has R/L out to mains, an Earphone out, and an RCA R/L Aux out. To answer your original question, yes, you can - using a Y adapter with a TRS male that splits to 2 TS female jacks. I've used that kind of Y adapter on a FOH mixer to send the same mix as the FOH mains to the SS3 for use as a single rear-firing monitor with good results. You could also use your RCA outs to feed the SS3 with either RCA to 1/4 TS cables or RCA/1/4 TS female adapter to allow use of standard 1/4 to 1/4 TS instrument cables. The mixer's main R/L outs would then go to FOH (and if the main outs support TRS, you could use 1/4 TRS to XLR adapter plugs to run balanced XLR cables to the FOH mixer). With your mixer as described, an advantage for you using the headphone jack to feed the SS3 would be having local volume control of the SS3 independent of the FOH send, similar to what MathOfInsects suggested for Control Room Outs found on some mixers.

Aspen was involved in the SFX. Check out the beginning of this thread. Yes, that's where I got the info. My implied question was: Why didn't that amp get the same reception that the SS is getting? Any of you check that amp out at the time? I don't think it got the same reception for several reasons, especially its size and weight and expense relative to the time, but the primary one for me was sound. It just never seemed to me that Fender became serious enough about keyboard amps to develop or use speakers and amp circuitry more attuned to keyboards rather than guitar. I played a FenderRhodes 73 through a Fender Super Reverb and Fender Vibratone for several years and that combo worked great for that, but as keyboards with APs and stereo patches appeared and advanced, that combo starting falling a bit flat for anything other than EPs, and the SFX didn't seem appreciably better to me at the time it came out. It's development might have very well suffered primarily from the lack of abundant stereo boards (and therefore lack of demand) and lack of quality patches to show its stuff as much as anything. To my thinking in hindsight, ironically, it was probably so far ahead of its time that it wasn't/couldn't be fully appreciated - so it was dropped before it could benefit from being developed further and upgraded along the way. And it didn't seem very powerful either. At the time I looked at it, I ended up buying two USA made Fender Princeton Chorus amps based on the guitar guys' raves about them, put 2 10" JBL D110s in each and had an amp tech change out caps, etc., in the circuitry to expand its capacity beyond guitar frequency biases, and love everything about those little guys except their weight. Still use them sometimes for outdoor stuff (the metal cones make me feel nostalgic). But their weight plus stage area and hauling space requirements make them impractical for frequent use. The SS3, as opposed to the SFX, is designed with a very manageable size and weight (actually remarkably light given its components) with speakers, amp designs and crossover points optimal for modern keyboards, and is debuting with a reasonable price at a time when there is an abundance of keyboards and voices to take full advantage of and show off its capabilities, which creates a stir, which in turn creates a demand - all of which the SFX lacked. And, the SS3 is much more versatile. In addition to using it as a keyboard amp, I've used it as a rear-firing monitor for a trio setup using stereo mains (one monitor is all that's needed with it, plus the surround effect bleeds into the audience), and as near-center sound reinforcement (positioned front-center stage, facing audience, running stereo between stereo QSC K system). Some of the guys here have used it as a PA. The SFX couldn't have suitably served those additional functions. Anyway, in answer to your question, those are my impressions re the SFX vs. SS3 for what they're worth. Some of the tech guys may have far better answers.

Neat contraption, thanks! I've been using the SS3 a lot lately as a single monitor firing back at the trio; works great and the surround effect seems to still seep into the audience. A good bit of tilt-back is needed, and the best solution was cutting the small section of an old shower curtain rod to length, with stool leg rubber tips from the hardware store on each end, used as a prop against the top edge of the back of the SS3. Tilts back just the right amount now (and I believe that kind of tilt firing back to ceiling and wall areas behind the trio also contributes to the spaciousness of sound) and stays secure on any surface. The rod is lightweight and easily fits in cord bag. re: the big tipper - I'd think if you're running ss3 alone, you might want LF coupling to the floor (depending on surface, of course), this seems to intentionally isolate sound from the floor if I read it correctly. and i'm 95% sure the ss3 owner manual cautions against taking it in the shower with you Yes indeed, totally agree, when running it alone - but in this case, it is a monitor firing back at a trio, K8s or K10s are firing forward along with a bass amp and sometimes a sub, so LFs aren't needed in the SS3 in this config. (Seems a bit of key info about the front-firing stuff was omitted from the original post, eh?) Man, your shower advice is definitely well taken, but it sounds so good in the shower, I'd hate to give that up . . . plus it's no doubt the cleanest SS3 in the country

Neat contraption, thanks! I've been using the SS3 a lot lately as a single monitor firing back at the trio; works great and the surround effect seems to still seep into the audience. A good bit of tilt-back is needed, and the best solution was cutting the small section of an old shower curtain rod to length, with stool leg rubber tips from the hardware store on each end, used as a prop against the top edge of the back of the SS3. Tilts back just the right amount now (and I believe that kind of tilt firing back to ceiling and wall areas behind the trio also contributes to the spaciousness of sound) and stays secure on any surface. The rod is lightweight and easily fits in cord bag.

Slats8, here's Aspen's post regarding his mixer recommendation from a few months ago:

Marital amnesia

I play heavy left-hand bass as well, usually with a separate dedicated board routed to bass amp and FOH independent of main keyboards, but have had good results playing heavy acoustic bass in a single-board set-up from a split CP4 running R/L 1/4's into a SS3 with a GK MB210 (2 neo 10's and a horn, 350w@8/500w@4ohms, 33lbs.) connected via the SSv3's sub-out, with the GK eq'd high and high-mid off. Also have had good results in large outdoor settings running an Ampeg SVT410HLF/SVT4 from the SS3 instead of the GK, with the XLR's from the CP4 running to FOH and having the FOH crossovers pull the bass into subs. Even though the FOH guys don't have a separate bass feed for volume control that way, they've told me they still essentially had separate bass volume control by controlling the sub volume. There is no crossover in the SS3, but there is a nice gradual roll-off for low freqs that I think works extremely well when paired with a bass amp - there are no abrupt changes in signal direction as you move up and down the keyboard, and the SS3 does its thing while seeming to ignore the low-end heavy stuff as the low-end juice is bumped up.

That is always a hard sell. :idk

I play left hand bass in three groups and often in pick-up or fill-in gigs, and have the same qualms you have with crossovers and crossover setups as well as with the sound of subs only (without bass amps). If you don't have a separate bass keyboard or a keyboard with aux outs for routing of dedicated bass (I usually use a Korg R3 loaded with bass patches through a Tech 21 VT Bass DI to FOH and bass amp, and believe a separate bass setup is best when very loud P-bass or similar bass is needed and/or when FOH wants a separate bass feed), below is what I posted earlier about using a CP4 with split bass and a few people noted later that they had similar experiences using a bass amp with the SSv3 without introducing any crossovers: I think pairing the SS with a quality small bass amp works great without a crossover. For one thing, I think overall sound benefits from the SS's 8" and a small bass amp's 10" or 12" overlapping and having excursions into each other's freq ranges - and the result is a smooth gradual and blended transition from one to the other as you move up and down the keyboard, without abrupt changes due to a crossover's fixed point of directing signal feed. And, the "rolloff" Aspen built into the SS as freqs lower totally leaves the SS's higher region unmolested to my ears if/when a small bass amp is attached via the SS3's sub-out, even when the left hand is split to acoustic bass at aggressive volumes. If/when a small bass amp is attached, the SS seems to me to ignore the low stuff more than it does with nothing attached, and with the lows seemingly grabbed by the bass amp, the SS3 pumps out the higher stuff just as nicely as playing the right hand alone (I've experimented with this extensively since I play LH bass most of the time and wanted to be able to do it when necessary with a split CP4 running directly into the SS3 with no separate bass amp feed). Since that post, I have used the CP4 frequently that way with XLR outs to FOH with subs and the 1/4 outs to the SSv3 with a bass amp running from its sub-out, and the CP4's acoustic bass split voice has sounded very realistic and dynamic without impacting the AP's or other voices - so I've become even more sold on the setup. Another option is hard-panning the bass voices left and hard-panning all other voices right and then running separate bass and mono key feeds; but if you're in the stereo FOH feed and/or stereo SSv3 keys camp though as I and many others here are, that's not a desirable option; if you normally run mono to FOH as many others here do, then that could work great - but since you're asking about playing bass while using a SSv3, it sounds like you're looking to have stereo keys.

Very interesting report, thanks for sharing that! . . . I also agree it could be useful as a monitor...although I have never considered it for that task...for the simple fact that it's Omni character might be less likely to feed back. Point source directional monitors have been the norm for years, but if you move away from their axis you lose them, and if you move into their hot spot, watch out...feedback! . . . I may try that myself sometime soon...you may be on to something here Rickyp! Thanks! We did it again Wednesday evening, actually cranked the SSv3 up a bit louder - and, your thought of being less likely to feedback than traditional monitors seems right on the money to me; initially had the volume way too high during sound check, the lack of feedback tricked me into initially dialing it up too high. It works beyond great as a rear-firing monitor, very easy to hear every aspect clearly and accurately (running the FOH mix through it so we can all "self-adjust" our vocal intensity/mic distance as needed and instrument volume levels), the monitor sound seems surrounding and everything is clear and crisp - inspiring. And, one box is all that is needed for the entire stage. Your idea of stacking another SSv3 firing forward sounds great to me. That would not only reduce equipment lug and setup (eliminate K10s, but keep bass amp), it would also push surround sound out front (I'm imagining making two full-depth&width wedges to tilt the bottom rear-firing SSv3 up and another one on top of the bottom unit to give the top unit a level platform) . . . if the audience gets the sound that is coming back at us, would be hard to beat!

Played three gospel events Sunday using CP4 (with fulltime LH acoustic bass split) along with a dual mic'd acoustic guitarist and a female vocalist; frequent 3 part harmony and some pretty punchy volume in 200-400 seat venues, running through K10's with KSub and GK MB210. Decided to use the SSv3 as the sole monitor, placed about 15' in front of and firing back at group, tilted upward with wide dialed at 2o'clock since no reflective surfaces were nearby. Stage front looked totally clean with the SSv3 down on audience floor level, angled upward for its sound to clear the 4 or 5 steps running across the church stages. It handled full FOH mix at potent volumes - and even being closer than considered optimum for "bloom," the monitor mix had an omnidirectional surround effect - and insiders in the audience reported feeling surrounded by the sound even though the SSv3 was pointed away from the audience. Perhaps the side-firing speaker did its thing in conjunction with the K10's to produce the SSv3 effect - will certainly be using this configuration again. We're usually writing in this thread about the SSv3 firing out toward the audience, just wanted to report that the SSv3 is killer as a rear-firing sole monitor if you get the opportunity to try it in that mode.

The B1 bomber of sound . . .

I was about to ask if anyone else has noticed what seems to be speaker "break-in" - the overall sound and transients seeming more smooth and rich after the SS3 is used several hours - but decided to research it a bit first to be sure it wasn't just a matter of ear conditioning; found this: EMINENCE SPEAKER BREAK-IN INFORMATION Speaker break-in is described on the Eminence site as "significant," primarily for these reasons: "As the speaker is used, the spider and cone surround begin losing some of their initial stiffness. The sonic results you will hear are an increase in overall warmth, slightly deeper/fatter lows, and warmer/smoother highs." So if you think the SS3 keeps sounding better and better, it's probably not imagined: those amazing Eminence speakers become even more amazing with time. [and - any new owners considering returning or selling the SS3 (like 16251's friend above) may want to play it several hours first].