# Tritrix competition?



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

I was recommended the Parts-Express Tritrix kit, but now I see that Kevin Haskins a new speaker for fairly cheap ($40 or so before importing cots, blah blah blah) called Anarchy, and it looks impressive. So, my question is, if I were to build a pair of towers, mtm, etc.. with the Anarchy, how would it compare to the Tritrix kit, While keeping the cost the same or below the Tritrix cost for a pair?? I don't know twetters very well, so what tweeter and crossover would needed for Kevin's speakers to make them comparable it to the Tritrix for the same or cheaper price??

Thanks for any help guys.


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Well while Kevin's new driver is awesome and I fully look forward to seeing it used in some designs its not really an apples to apples comparison. The Anarchy is $40, so to make an MTM you need 4 thats $120 right there, plus a pair of tweeters and cross over components.

Also there are no designs for the Anarchy yet so you'll either have to make your own, have some one make one for you or hope one of Kevin's initial designs is for an MTM.

Finally the Anarchy won't be out for another 2-3 months. So, if you're in no hurry and can afford to spend 20-50% more at least then you can wait around for an Anarchy design, or you could buy the Tritrix which is a very good deal, build them and enjoy them and then maybe make an Anarchy MTM next year and either sell your Tritrix or use them in another room, or make them into rear surrounds, or something.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Funny, I was thinking about the same thing. With the increased power handling and low distortion, wouldn't the anarchy be able to match up (or even surpass) as a MT vs the tritrix MTM? That would cut cost significantly and probably come in close in price to the kit, no? Of course, I don't have a clue if sound quality would necessarily be better throughout the range, but it would surely dig deeper. Any thoughts on this?


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Ironglen, I was just thinking the same thing also that you said. Strange huh.
Anyways, for 4 of the Anarchy's, it would be $160, not $120, right?

If I did decide to do the Anarchy towers, what tweeter would be good for them? And then comes the fun part of figuring out a crossover for them also. That's the only thing that it kinda holding me back on the Tritrix kit, is the fact that I would have to make the crossover, even though everything is there for it.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

The anarchies will likely run more than $160 since each weighs... 15lbs! So it will be more like $200 to your door for four. I'm guessing the same dayton tweeter will work fine as it can cross low enough, the differences in sound will rely on placement in the baffle, baffle shape/size, and crossover design.

Either way, you'll have to build the crossover using the parts specified by PE or Kevin. You can do that, no sweat, just a soldering iron and burnt fingers:rofl:

I haven't built my tritrix, yet.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

I can't count the number of times I've dropped hot solder on me. One piece of solder burned its way so deep I had to heat it back up to get it back out. That hurt...:crying: I'm more careful now haha.
Is it hard to assemble to crossover board? I watched the youtube video that PE had on their website, but it was still kinda confusing.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Haven't done this, but basically you want a stiff plate that you drill small holes in for the component leads, then connect them on the backside. First you'll draw it out (plan), then lay them out on the plate(nicely if that matters), then make your connections by soldering. Add some holes to use with zip ties for heavy parts like inductors and/or hot glue, epoxy for others to keep everything in place if you like. Finally test it before mounting securing inside/underneath depending on build. Voila! Now, if it's a complicated one, with many parts, then it may get interesting in the planning for layout and soldering...hope I didn't miss anything.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

It seems the assembly stage is easy enough, just knowing where to solder the wires would be kinda confusing unless I could see it or a picture of it.

What I'm getting at is, for about $180 or so extra over the Tritrix, would it be better to make an anarchy mtm? I am looking for quite a bit of clean tight bass, possibly not having to run my sub for music, and great mids and highs...


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

$180 over the cost of a pair of Tritrix is about $300, at that point you start opening youself up to quite a few designs. At that point you can start looking around and decide what you really want to build. Here are the last 4 years of DIY Iowa, complete with a list of all designs, average cost and rating by category. At which point you probably have over 10 or 15 solid designs you could conceivably build for $300. I think for $300 you can build a pair of Dayton Classic WMTMW which would probably push a fair amount of bass. Or build the Tritrix bookshelf with subs in the bases for a few more dollars. The more you're willing to spend the more choices you have, the more choices you have the harder it gets, but the more fun it gets too.

http://home.mchsi.com/~iowadiy2009/index.htm


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

I can't seem to find the Dayton WMTMW on PE. Is it not there any more, or is it just not a kit?

I did find a thread about one though:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1116865


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

No its not a kit, just something someone made.

Here is the most info on it as far as I know.

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=32615


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

How would this work out? This Dayton (http://www.parts-express.com/pe/sho... &FTR=295-310&CFID=2180026&CFTOKEN=90518871) , an Anarchy, whatever twetter is good, an Anarchy, and then the Dayton again? Would that be accomplishing anything over just the Anarchy's and a tweeter? Or, would the two different woofers not sound good together? 

I'm just thinking out of the box right now, as the Dayton's are fairly cheap anyways...


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

A WMTMW "Woofer, Mid, Tweeter, Mid, Woofer" using the Dayton Classic 8" eh? Well I really have no idea because I'm not a full fledged speaker designer, you'd have to have someone design the crossover for you.

Seeing as how the Anarchy is a high quality driver and I believe has more swept volume than the Dayton Classic 8" it would probably outclass the 8" and make the thing fairly redundant. The Dayton classic 8" could help bolster low end displacement a bit and cut down distortion on the Anarchy but would be somewhat redundant. 

Could be an interesting design but I would be inclined to get somthing nice for the big woofer, like a Peerless or Dayton Reference 8" or larger for the big driver. I know the Dayton Classic drivers are cheap but I think you would be better served by either just making an Anarchy MTM and a sub or pair of subs or something.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Hmmm, ok.

Do you mean this Dayton Reference 8"?

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=295-456

Or just a woofer and not the sub version?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Well there is the Dayton Reference 8" Subwoofer
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=295-456&AID=10624738&PID=2777698

And the Dayton Reference 8" Woofer
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=295-366

I kind of meant the woofer. You could try using the subwoofer but that would be more expensive, probably harder to integrate and would probably need a larger box.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

So, those 8" woofers would be in seperate box right? Maybe I could build an Anarchy MTM and have those 8's in a seperately confined box. It would still be in the main box, I could just have it boxed in, seperate from the other speakers...
Or, woul you just have the 8's sharing the box? haha sorry for so many questions...


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

You could have the 8s in a spearate box. There is a project that is very similar to that idea that uses a 2way in 1 box with a separate box below it for an 8. Tho there is no reason the 2 separate boxes couldn't be 2 parts of 1 big box. Here is a link to the design.

http://rjbaudio.com/Daedalus/daedalus.html


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Would this be a good tweeter to match the Anarchy's?

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=275-130


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Just a thought; how about a MMMTM with 2.5 xover. That would be (4)anarchy per speaker, with the bottom two in a separate ported box, crossed over lower than the top two anarchies (as true mids). More costly xover though, but I think Kevin would say a pair of those anarchies can produce the lows with proper tuning. I think Zaph has a design like this.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

sub_junkie said:


> Would this be a good tweeter to match the Anarchy's?
> 
> http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=275-130


I think you could spend less, but the tweeter will have to match the mids well-the designer of the mid will know this better than anyone. Kevin will be working out some designs, I think, and so you can likely sit on the tweeter choice for now as I don't think they influence box design much.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

ironglen said:


> Just a thought; how about a MMMTM with 2.5 xover. That would be (4)anarchy per speaker, with the bottom two in a separate ported box, crossed over lower than the top two anarchies (as true mids). More costly xover though, but I think Kevin would say a pair of those anarchies can produce the lows with proper tuning. I think Zaph has a design like this.


I would definitely go with that, but I think it will be too expensive...at least for me...haha. Maybe I could just go with a MTM with the Anarchy, then add the other two at the bottom later? Or, would it be too hard to modify the crossover to accomplish that? Or, could I just build a seperate crossover for those speakers if I decide to add them later?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

It would most likely call for a complete redesign. You would be better off making bassbins as stands and just putting the Anarchy MTM on top of them.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Really, I could be way off on this, but if this driver is as good as everyone expects, an MTM would probably sound really good AND meet spl desires. I'd forget the extra drivers if it were me and just build it to suit full extension as Kevin recommends. I think he had is listed on his anarchy release thread; just double the recommended volume for the MTM box, use one of the forthcoming recommended tweeters and someone on here will likely have a nice xover to match. I'd do exactly that, except I have two 12" ED subs that I got a good deal on, along with a couple cheap sonotube cylinders that I'm trying to integrate with a MTM or MT setup. I haven't seen a sonospeaker like this idea I have, so I might follow it...but I think an MTM anarchy would be sweet. You could build the boxes in the next couple months and be ready for when they arrive...


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Would I need something else besides my receiver to power the Anarchy MTM's? My receiver puts 105w or so into each channel


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

That should be enough.

More never hurts tho.

One thing to consider is if the Anarchy MTM would be 8ohms average or lower, some receivers have trouble with nominal impedence below 8 ohms.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

I know that my receiver can run into 4ohms no problem, at least for a little bit. My current speakers say that they are rated at 8ohm, so I don't think that the Anarchy's will be a problem. How would I tell if the receiver was having trouble below 8ohms?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Usually look at the back and see if it says "8 Ohms Minimum" or something. Either that or hook up some 4 ohm speakers and see if it goes into protect mode and shuts off.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

I was only able to get into protect mode while playing Bass I Love You by Bassotronics. I had no HPF on, and it was near full power. I tested it with my Mal-X sub :bigsmile: I had a filter to keep anything but the bass out too. So no highs were going to the sub then.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Good point. A MT will will likely be 8ohms, but I think an MTM will be 4-6ohms.

Guys, I modeled the anarchy and looked at the dual mids from the tritrix- and the anarchy looked like it had a lot less output for a given amount of input power. I know it is designed to go much deeper, so I figure it makes sense to be less efficient, but I was looking at a huge difference, say 2-3x more input needed to match output (this is using the driver as a mid crossed at 80hz to a sub, rather than woofer). I would likely have 100w/ch available for the MT, so I'm wondering if this driver would be too much fin a 2-way that I was going to cross to a sub anyway. I dunno. The price is tempting, but it seems it would be too much for my application.

Now, for a full range 2-way, it looks awesome, capable of handling strong input and providing real bass from a bookshelf speaker- makes me start thinking I should get a set of them for a complete system build next year...a couple MTM's for front mains (4ohm capable amp), center, a couple MT's for surround...~$50 ea to the door x 8=$400 + 5 tweeters~$125 + passive or even _active_ crossovers ~$250-300 + build stuff = perhaps $1000 complete...that's a lot of money:unbelievable:-Guess I better start selling stuff and saving!:rofl2:


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

So, right now, according to your graph with the 105w or so input power, the Tritrix walks all over the Anarchy MTM?

Edit:

Also, would there be much of a difference when going from just an MT to an MTM? I would like to keep the box as small as possible, without sacrificing performance...


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Keep in mind that this is using the driver for freqs above 80hz, and with 60w input power, the tritrix dual 5.25 max input. The dayton 5.25's reach xmax while the anarchy is loafing, but the output is higher for the dayton's, at least on winisd. I think because the spl for the dayton's is 88.8 while the anarchy is 85.3...double the efficiency, yes? Now, if you don't use the driver below 80hz, well, I think the anarchy is kinda overkill because of the lost efficiency and unused exploitation? of its capability as the anarchy can handle gobs of power over a much wider (deeper) range. I'm not a driver guru, so maybe confirmation/denial of my finding is in order.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Wow. I didn't see that the Tritrix only was rated for 60w. Thanks for pointing that out for me :T
Well now. I have an option to keep the front speakers set as "Large" on my receiver, which means that even though I have the sub Xover on, the fronts would be getting all of the frequencies also, even below the 70hz xover I have the sub channel set at right now. So in that case the Anarchy's would be much better, right??


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

The MTM may have a few differences, like output more bass if you didn't use it with a sub; maybe cleaner at very high outputs; become 4ohm instead of 8ohm, which would enable greater power from a capable amp; greater cost for driver/crossover perhaps; coolness factor. Judging from Kevin's Kepler 2way, using this driver in a 2way would be very, very nice. Look up Kepler loudspeaker-this driver is really just an improvement on the earlier one he used.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

sub_junkie said:


> Wow. I didn't see that the Tritrix only was rated for 60w. Thanks for pointing that out for me :T
> Well now. I have an option to keep the front speakers set as "Large" on my receiver, which means that even though I have the sub Xover on, the fronts would be getting all of the frequencies also, even below the 70hz xover I have the sub channel set at right now. So in that case the Anarchy's would be much better, right??


The tritrix kit is good for ~100w, while the dual mids are ~60w together as I understand. The only time you'd be wary of using the large setting is with content that goes really low, like in movies, which would destroy your mids-really, it would if it's a ported design ~30hz without a hpf, otherwise, for most all music you should be fine.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Ok. So with 105w or so, the Anarchy's would need a HPF (of course for really low fc's. I just meant for sub 20hz stuff or something) ? I could always just cross them at 40hz :rofl2: and leave them set as small ;P haha. But I bet I would be loosing too much from 80hz or so and down. Who knows with the Anarchy though. I haven't had time to put the numbers in WinISD yet to see.


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Its very possible that the Tritrix could handle more than 60 watts with an 80hz high pass filter on. But yeah the Anarchy seems like it would be more suited to a 2way MT bookshelf or something where you needed more extension in an MTM. Using them with a sub seems a bit redundant and yeah less efficient. Maybe just make a tall floor standing Anarchy MT, tho going MTM does increase the efficiency of the woofers so if there is a large efficiency difference between the tweeter and the woofer going MTM can be helpful in that regard.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Why would using the Anarchy's with a sub be less efficient? Do you just mean that they are overkill to be crossed that high? I would like to cross my sub as low as possible and give the front speakers the tight bass, depending on if they would provide enough of it. If not, I would just raise the xover.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

evilskillit said:


> Its very possible that the Tritrix could handle more than 60 watts with an 80hz high pass filter on. But yeah the Anarchy seems like it would be more suited to a 2way MT bookshelf or something where you needed more extension in an MTM. Using them with a sub seems a bit redundant and yeah less efficient. Maybe just make a tall floor standing Anarchy MT, tho going MTM does increase the efficiency of the woofers so if there is a large efficiency difference between the tweeter and the woofer going MTM can be helpful in that regard.


Hey Matt, so far it looks like most tweeters are going to be much more efficient than the anarchy in an MT. What do you think about my last two posts in the anarchy thread, especially regarding an MTM?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Yes by less efficient I mean that a lot of their capability would be wasted playing that high and also that they are not terribly efficient speakers compared to some other speakers that are more efficient (more decibels per watt) but don't play as low.

Yeah if you made a floor standing Anarchy MT or MTM you could probably get away with crossing your subs at 40hz or so pretty solidly. You might be surprised how much bass a floor standing Anarchy MT ported or transmission line could produce. I think 1 anarchy probably has way more linear swept volume than a pair of the Tritrix woofers, tho I would have to check. When I get home tonight if the wife and kids will let me play around with WinISD and Unibox maybe I can throw some numbers around. Tho you may need a receiver with more than 100wpc to really get the most out of an Anarchy Mt or MTM. I'll know if and when I model it.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Hopefully 100w would be somewhat sufficient. 

I'm kinda in a toss-up right now. I am looking at the Velodyne SMS-1 or something similar to it, as it seems everyone says it makes a huge difference in your sub, but it's slightly more expensive than an MTM. But, the new mains would be good also...


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Ok I modeled an vented Anarchy TM, vented MTM and a sealed MTM. I'll post a link to the pictures at the bottom. It seems like with Subs the vented anarchy TM would be good, the MTM doesn't seem to net you really any more low extension tho it does make it a bit louder, but a single woofer should be plenty loud. The sealed MTM is interesting because it plays low enough to mate with subs, with an F3 of around 50hz or so with room gain, and the driver has enough excursion that you could EQ it up a bit. The advantage with that is that you avoid some of the group delay that is introduced when playing around the tuning frequency of a speaker. All speakers were modeled at 100 watts.

Pics are here


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Ok thank you a lot for the graphs. It helps a lot. Maybe I will just do a vented TM, and keep them as bookshelf speakers. What is the cu.ft and tuning fc that you used to model the MTM and TM?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Doh, I forgot to include the box size and tuning in one of the pictures. I thought I did but all 3 are of the input power, thats dumb of me.

Actually as I'm modeling it again I'm noticing that to be tuned low you'll start running into port resonance issues very early. Either that or you'll have to use a very small diameter port, which will start hooting and chuffing at high output. Your best bet might be to go to the Anarchy thread in the Exodus Audio forum and ask Kevin. Even with a 2" port, which is really too small for high volume at low frequencies you run into port resonances as low as 650hz. Maybe a passive radiator or a sealed alignment would be better when not using this thing as a small sub.

I tried the thing with the Partsexpress 8" passive radiator, it didn't do too bad, and one PR is only $15, but if you do 2 PR thats $30 and takes up a bunch of space on the front of the cabinet. At that point you might be better off just getting another driver and going MTM.

Yeah I got it to model quite nicely with 2 PE 8" PRs but that is another $30 added to the cost of the speaker, and you'd have to find a place to put 2" drivers. You could put them on the side of the cabinet... anyways.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Thanks Matt. Interesting about the port resonance- I know Kevin had the Kepler ported, so I'm curious how he did it...I'm making a list of possible things I can sell in addition to saving to get into these drivers for full 5.0, perhaps next year. As I have an amp of 100w/165w into 8 or 4 ohms respectively, I'd like to use the 4 ohm capability into MTM's if possible. Plus some time will have passed for other hts'ers to get a project or two done beforehand.
I've got to read up on group delay, as I know little about it, but I believe it has to do with those who prefer the sound of sealed over ported-accuracy, I think. Could a bfd 1124 be used to eq a couple of these built sealed as mains?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Yeah I went to Kevin's post in the Anarchy thread, I noticed he ported his. When I modeled mine with the same cabinet size and tuning as his the port had to be huge in order for the air speed to not be way over the limit. When I made it that big the port resonances got real low, like 200hz, and every time you doulble the frequency there is another port resonance so as far as I know that thing should be all over the place in tonality. Now Kevin doesn't mention his port size but judging by his air speed either its way big or WinISD is way off. I'm not disputing Kevin's results. I'm sure he's forgotten more about speakers than I may ever know, and his software is probably way better than what I'm using to. I'm just saying what I'm getting. Either way it would be good to know how those port resonances sound and what can be done about port resonances if you are going to build a ported design for this thing.

As for using the BFD to add gain, I believe you can but I don't own one, that would be a question for someone who does.

As for group delay if it is or is not noticeable is debated but my understanding is it is the amount of time in miliseconds between when the signal is generated and when it actually leaves the speaker, or something to that effect. You may think a hand full of miliseconds isn't that long, but how long does a kickdrum note last? I don't know but when someone is wailing on the drums really fast having a high group delay may cause some of those notes to loose their definition. That is however just my theory, if you can get someone who really knows whats going on dragged into this thread I'm sure they could contribute more than me :dontknow:


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

I thought I saw him post that the port he used in the PE .5 box needed a single hole from a 3 1/4" hole saw, so I'm guessing 3" port: pretty big for a lone 6.5" driver.

I had my plan to build a couple sonotubes, then thought I could integrate a MT or MTM into the tube, now I'm thinking I should scrap it all and save to build a full set using these anarchies:unbelievable: I've got to get a plan soon as I'm going :dumbcrazy:


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Yeah according to WinISD a 3" port will get your air speed way down into acceptable levels. It will however need to be 20" long in a 0.75 cu ft box, which is pretty long in a box that small. Also the first port resonance is at 327hz. What exactly does that mean? I've been googling try to find out but I believe it is when the air resonantes inside the port causing that tone to be amplified, kind of like blowing across the top of an empty bottle or something. I think what happens is you get a hump in your frequency response at that frequency, and possibly at other frequencies which are factors of that frequency also. I'm not sure. Either way if you're trying to make a nice tight acoustically even speaker that would be a problem. But maybe there is something you can do.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

:blink: I don't know. I guess we'll see what Kevin comes up with...I'll revisit the review of the kepler to see if it sheds light, but I'm sure his port in .5 ft^3 was shorter to fit in the PE box.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

The kepler port looks to be a 3" port as the hole diameter was 3.75", when accounting for the flared end. It looked like it was about 10" long, flared on outside only if that will help modeling. Maybe tuned to ~45hz, for a F3 ~38hz? This is assuming the kepler driver is the same, which is wasn't, but maybe close.


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Ok well that port isn't unusably long tho a .5 cu ft box isn't going to be 10" from front to back will it? You'd either have to put a 90 degree bend in the port, or port it out the top or bottom. Or use a slot port with a bend in it. Either way that is no big deal.

Anyways yeah a 3" port that is 10" long will still have its first resonance pretty low, below 300 or 400hz so that is the main issue. Figure out how that affects the sound negatively and what can be done about it. If some stuffing can mitigate it or if you put it in the back of the speaker maybe its not that noticeable? I don't know maybe we need to make a post about port resonances and see what people say.


----------



## sub_junkie (Apr 14, 2009)

Hmm. Some interesting last couple of posts. What I would like to do with the Anarchy mains, is be able to play music, with not using my sub. So, would I need the MTM for that, or could just a MT be crossed low enough to suffice?


----------



## evilskillit (Oct 7, 2008)

Either will work. Them MTM will play louder and with less distortion. But it'll take more design work and it'll cost $80 more for the 2 extra drivers, plus more crossover parts, plus a bigger box. So it kind of depends on what your budget is and what your size goals are.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Yeah, an MTM will likely cost more than $80/speaker altogether (I'd actually rethink it to use a MTM pair, for mains only). The reasons I'm considering it are I like to fill the house with music from 2 channel, and presently can't; if I build a set of 5.0, I don't want to wish I'd built MTM mains trying to skimp; and I believe to play RnR at a good clip in a huge room (house) without subs something larger than a pair of 6.5" or 8" drivers will be needed- my opinion of course. I'm looking at spending a lot of time and money to do this, if it actually gets done. This would likely be my 'dream system'


----------

