Leaderboard

The 883 is a good way into HD. My 1988 883 Hugger was $100 down $100/month. Very small tank. Traded up to a 1990 FXSTC. Very large tank.

He is saying that believers in ABX would have no need for much of the gear they are touting in their systems. IN ABX testing, you quickly get to a cheap receiver instead of a $5000 McIntosh or BAT amplifier. He's challenging the hypocrisy of criticizing people for choosing a $300 wire, but owning a $10,000 stack of electronics, if you supposedly believe in ABX testing. You can't beat others over the head for the same excesses you commit. I understand the reasoning behind the original statement, but I disagree with the conclusions on two points: Btw, I thought we weren't going to make the comparisons based on price of the equipment? But price is often the resentful argument of the ABX crowd. Just read their posts about snake oil. It almost always includes references to "high prices." This is part of the hypocrisy. And we were talking about Dean's post, which is about hypocrisy. I would argue the hypocrisy goes both ways.... You have guys like ______ that delude themselves into thinking they hear a difference because of _____ . Feel free to fill in the blanks. I won't call out specific people or scenarios because there is a pride component that would dilute the point I'm trying to make. Let me sum it up like this....the hardcore subjectivists for some reason have this burning desire to be known as ones that can hear the difference. There is this sense of pride that even creates emotions of fear under certain circumstances. I know I've gotten nervous about listening tests at work and wondering how I stack up against those with proven hearing abilities. I would love to have my artistic impression influence the products we design at work. Btw, I'm not saying all subjectivists delude themselves either. I'm only pointing out that there are motivations / emotions that can bring that about. So what, really? So guys are proud. I don't get the resentment, Mike? You don't think these objectivists measuring their gears aren't proud? I think you are getting way off track into a kind of unnecessary personal arena. If you don't like people who are subjective about audio, don't engage them. Right? I noticed that MANY on the forum now are very resentful of subjective analysis. Their ugly posts are everywhere, making snarky remarks that anyone believing in subjective differences are snake oil and all the rest. It's so obvious it is painful. I would suggest that if you want to have a subjective discussion, you put the resentment behind and just have the discussion. I think you might be putting words in my mouth, or maybe missed my point. There is absolutely no resentment on my side. What I'm sharing is an observation that people (from both sides) are not consistent in their assessments. The value of consistent assessment is addressed below. But first I want to start with an experience I've had on several occasions: I've been to a few audiophile gatherings now where two pieces of equipment were being compared from a purely subjective perspective. "Screw the numbers, let's just hear how they sound and describe what we're hearing". One thing I've always found interesting is the need to know what is being listened to before making a comment - everyone does it, it's hilarious sitting back and watching as a bystander. But more interesting is what happens when the equipment is unknowingly flipped. So you have two pieces of gear, X and Y. When everyone knows what they're hearing, they always describe X with X language and Y with Y language. However, there have been times when I've swapped things on people just to see how consistent the comments are. Usually, the X language always follows what people think is X....so when it is flipped, X language is being used to describe Y equipment without their knowledge. However, there are occasions where X language always follows X equipment: regardless of what they think is X and Y ahead of time. This would be another example of what I would call a major/minor correlation. What's more interesting is to then add the complexity of not being told which is which - and then suddenly the comments get way less descriptive. What is the source of this disparity? How can Y be described with both X and Y language? The subjective viewpoint is that the non-audible factors (knowing what is being listened to) is affecting the reference frame of the listener who thinks he/she is describing audible qualities. Surely I'm not the only one that has observed this phenomenon? Both in myself and in others. We could certainly argue about the ramifications of the deceit behind such an experiment, but my point is that the purely subjective approach can be misleading. In fact, is it not an objective measure to identify which piece of gear is being listened to? The purely subjective viewpoint must conclude from this example that you can listen to equipment Y or X and have the same experience as long as you think it is always X. That's not a very enlightened assessment in my opinion. Btw, the same thing happens to your strawman objectivist. They use numbers to describe sounds and then argue that it must sound the same if the number is the same: like your low THD amplifiers with slew rate distortion. At the end of the day, we have finite resources and we construct methods for selecting the gear that end up in our systems. Whether it be purely a subjective endeavor, or entirely objective, my experience has been that people's methods are not accurate - and this is proven by the fact that people buy gear that they end up not liking - for whatever reason, it doesn't matter. The point is that the recipe is broken - randomly getting to a good result is not a path of enlightenment, nor a means of sharing wisdom. I think one of the glues to a strong community is the fact that we all share in a common goal - and although one's listening tastes may vary wildly from my own, it's not hard to share wisdom to help that individual achieve what they're looking for.

Iron Butterfly Deep Purple Johnny Winter

No Dean, it wasn't cool, and you have every right for calling me out on it. I was being petty and antagonistic. I'm tired of seeing every thread with which Mark participated degenerate into a faux-intellectualism debate over insignificant details just for the sake of arguing. He then cries "victim!" when called out on it and resorts to sniping comments and character attacks. I'll exercise my privilege as forum participant to no longer engage him further, as well as happily submit to any censorship and penalties the mods see as necessary. With all sincerity, thanks for the gut check.

Sunset Playa Hermosa , Costa Rica

Love the parking spot!

Please tell us more.... Mc Donalds sucks...

It all started with your comment regarding country music in another thread... lol

That along with a footrub and a nice cup of hot tea would make it so much easier to accept. My bunions are killing me.

Thanks dtel! Yes, the lens has image stabilization. I won't bother shooting without it - it's well worth the extra money to me. This is my favorite pic I've taken with it. I'm still amazed by how detailed it is for a "bargain" lens at 300mm. Not the best ever, but definitely enough for my purposes.

An acquaintance of mine contacted me asking if I knew anyone that might be interested in purchasing a pair of RT-10D. I've never owned any of the RT Series and have only heard one demo a LONG time ago. I want to see how they compare to my RSW-15 so I decided to buy them. My schedule has been crazy busy lately but as soon as I have some time, I will do some comparisons between Dual RT10D and a Single RSW15. Do you think that would be a fair comparison? To me, it's hard to tell because you have (1) Active 15" & (1) Passive 15" in the RSW-15 vs (2) Active 10" & (4) Passive 10" in the RT-10D. What are your thoughts on which might come out on top? RSW-15 Specs: 600 RMS / 2400 Peak Down to 19Hz 121dB Surface Area: 352 RT-10D Specs: 700 RMS / 1600 Peak Down to 22Hz 119dB with Single RT-10D 122dB with Dual RT-10D Surface Area of single RT-10D: 235.5 Surface Area of Dual RT-10D: 471 The RT-10D is designed to be in a corner so I'm thinking about leaving my RSW-15 behind the bottom right door of the False Wall and placing the RT-10D behind the false wall in the corners. Here is my prediction.....the RSW-15 will beat a single RT-10D but Dual RT-10D will beat RSW-15. Now when I say beat, I'm probably just talking shear impact. The RSW-15 is very musical but I've heard the same about the RT-10D series as well. Guess that's part of the fun finding out through experimentation. Visually, the finish on the RT-10D is absolutely gorgeous! Very deep, dark cherry wood color. Although they have a small profile, they are quite heavy for their size. The foam surrounds are very tight and thick. Unfortunately, everyone is in bed so I'll have to wait till tomorrow night to fire them up! This should be a fun comparison! Below are some pics for your enjoyment.

OK, so let's listen more and talk less. I've put up two recordings of the Chopin "Waltz in C# Minor" on my blog site. You can listen directly or download as you wish. Listen, and comment. Should be fun... Blog link is in my signature line. Dave

Great lookin ride and dam sure easier to polish than my dog, three hours polishing for a one day ride. I swear to god my dog cleans the road as I ride, static I bet. Nice Softtail, my neighbors wife had one just like it in black. One of my favorites.

I have ridden both as well, here are some links to ponder over. http://www.hdforums.com/forum/sportster-models/453899-sportster-883-vs-1200-a-2.html http://xlforum.net/vbportal/forums/showthread.php?t=21513 For instance, put a 411 geared 340 Dodge Dart against a 323 geared 383 big block Dart, who do you think will win the 1/8 mile or 1/4 mile for that matter. The taller gear will give much better performance off the line because of torque multiplication, its that simple. If they were geared the same the bigger higher horsepower engine always wins.

I'm going to try that malt now. I've been listening to the youtube on my Promedia 5.1, and am very happy. I am heading upstairs right now to pour some Scapa. edit: I'm going to have to pass of the Lagavulin for now. I just found out the shipping alone is $49.14. I will see if it is carried at my local ABC store. They do have quite an extensive offering. BevMo and TotalWine here in Calif, Lagavulin is . as they say 'Peaty' to the taste, $60 to $80 per bottle is a good price. I tell everyone I hand a shot to, "Remember standing around a campfire burning Oak ? yeah, well your about to drink it. Update, just last night the wife came into the cave, between us we killed half bottle, jumping around youtube videos and of course cranking it. it seemed to get louder with every two drinks. im sure my neighbors heard Ricky Nelson like they never heard it before. If it get's the wife into it and you had fun, then the loudness was just about perfect.

how ever loud my lovely mrs.beeker allows. aint much usually. i caught a reading on my meter with my chorus ii the other day at 116db and was crystal clear. it is very very loud at about 7ft from the speakers. really tho it depends on what im listening too. about 85 db average i would say

I don't know of one professional recording engineer that views that as a summary of his job title. What you are describing is the process of documentation. My point is that a recording engineer is just as much a part of the art as the musicians. The recorded medium, no matter how hard you try, is different than the live event. It must be. I've never heard a system/recording that brought me back to the actual live acoustic space. I've heard several systems that bring me to a different "space" - sometimes even similar to the live event, but more often it is a space that cannot even exist in the acoustic / non-electronic world. Having experienced several live events - even in spaces considered to have excellent acoustics - I gotta say I prefer the "unnatural" spaces. The live event isn't even close to the epitome of music enjoyment in my world. Obviously we all have different tastes in music and preference and all that, but the vast majority of the music listening population isn't trying to hear some abstract representation of some live event. There is a different entity to modern music that can only exist within the mediums on which it is created and played back. It takes an artist (several artists) to create that entity - however it needs to be defined. It's one thing to say you don't prefer that sound. It's another to imply ignorance of the entire audio industry. Please pardon my defensiveness on this subject, but this really strikes home as I absolutely consider my own mixing to be a very artistic expression. In fact, I might even say I express myself best when behind a sound board mixing for a band that I love.

For example, if I'm looking for the RF-7 vs RF-7ii vs RF-83 Comparison thread and I try searching RF-7 vs RF-7II vs RF-83 or even without the hyphens RF7 vs RF7II vs RF83, the thread is nowhere to be found. In the previous forum, the titles were searchable so if you remembered what your title was, it would pull up in the results.

Got it. If you click on the little cog "gear?" looking icon to the right of the search bar, you can search under "titles only". Performing that type of search just now brought up only the post you were looking for.

I ran an RSW15 for many years on a shared 15 amp circuit and never had an issue with the breaker getting tripped. I ran it hard plenty of times and no issues, the bash amp finally gave up and so I got a replacement, but never had an issue tripping the breaker. You will destroy the bash amp first, unless you have basic electrical issues.

Welcome to another newbie. I second the comment on Heresy. I've had a couple of pairs and they do a terrific job. Best of luck.

Uh huh huh huh uh

What was this thread about now?

What's the problem with solid state? I'm using a Luxman unit that sounds better than several tube amps I've used/heard. So, if he buys a tube amp, moves some things around, hangs some poofy things on the walls, covers the top of his Klipschorns, etc., this problem will go away? I hope he tries all of these things - I'm curious to see how it works out.

Meanwhile, if you want to, go to the garage sale section of forum and enter something like> WTB.. Klipsch Bookshelf Speakers, or other size. and then your narrative. You will maybe get some results. Welcome to the forum and Good Fortune

Gorgeous pics youth. Looking forward to a review. I loved my single rt-10d just to addicted to trying new things to hang on to it.

I haven't heard any of the newer Klipsch subs but you do wonder why they went away from the RSW-15 and RT Series and why they are not offering other finishes besides Black (unless you want to jump up to the Palladium Series). My guess is maybe the vast majority order black because it's easier to work with any decor?

I always have loved the Cherry finish but there is something about the deeper, redish tint of these that make them even more beautiful than the finish on my RF-83's. Very, very classy IMO.

I agree with you there. Just not sure the RT-10D will perform that well being out in the wide open. Typically when you remove a sub from near any wall, you get a greatly reduced amount of bass. These were designed to fit in a corner. One day, I will redesign my false wall and maybe not even have a false wall. My original desire was to hide everything but I do miss seeing them so for the past several months, I have had my RF-83's right where they are shown and have really enjoyed the sound of them there. That's what I'm thinking too Dynamic. Someone check my math on the Surface Area. I am not known for having the best math calculating skills Yeah, I'm not sure how much difference that will make. The top end of the amp is a lot more on the RSW-15 compared to the RT-10D (1600 Peak vs 2600 Peak). Because I can't type. I meant to add a 3dB gain. I believe I remember correctly that when you add a second sub, you yield a 3dB gain. If you stack them, you yield a 6dB gain. Can't stack these (probably wouldn't want to due to the LCD panel on top).

Hi and thanks ) the photos is a little bit old, there's no wharfedale rears already, and a new projector mounted for 1 year already. But i didnt make a new one because of lack of camera

Welcom Mr. Diego and very nice HT.

Hi to all of you, friends, from Mother Russia, St.Petersburg I want to show you my cinema system based on Klipsch Klipsch RF-82 Klipsch RC-64 (on photo old RC-52, need new photos ofc) Klipsch RS-7 rear Cerwin-Vega XLS-15s sub Integra 70.2 avr Draper Luma HCG 110" screen + EPSON EH-TW8100 projector PS3 + media based HTPC with PLEX (14TB storage)

I will go with the dual subs. Not that it is better than the 15, just better coverage. I think the 3 subs would work great together, hint, hint.

That is the best explanation for what we see. Nice observation. Cannot be klipsch

I also had the idea that it may be a mated top and a subwoofer. Most 18" pro stuff are subs.

I also thought the same thing that it was round. Ya know i can only compare it between the jbl with the aray of the 3 speakers or a cerwin vega model with the slot such as it has. Im taking a liking to some cerwin models although would not imagine cerwins hanging on an imax ceiling in a city made of money. I wonder if they are actually jbl and they are specifically pro/theater. another thought i believe the jbl we have looked at was a 15 and this model may have an 18. man that thing looks just like that jbl

I find volume is proportional to alcohol consumed. More than 3 hours outside with the grill going normally leads to a visit from the local law enforcement. I wish I was joking.

ESPECIALLY during McRib season.

Please tell us more.... Mc Donalds sucks... Even during McRib season?

I have fallen off of one

Just part of the evolving internet guys. Company sponsored forums (as opposed to a forum created by an individual for XYZ topic) are now a marketing tool and as a result must be carefully moderated to protect the image and interests of the company. maybe some self-censorship, a slight pause before clicking "submit", and a bit of spreading out the snark and combative comments will help reduce the thread locks. Think of this place as a dinner party, where basic social constructs exist to ensure that everyone can have a pleasant evening. To that end, I'm a huge thread crapping offender and I'll work on less snark and useless comments whose sole purpose is to stir the pot.

You guys are going to reduce me to tears with no music involved at all... Dave

I love my vinyl music rig. I have had it since the early 70's. I also like other input sources that can reproduce sound on my system. I have a preamp and can select CD/DVD - FM tuner - cassette tape - TV - and Phono inputs. I have a laptop PC connected to my flat screen via HDMI and the TV connected to the preamp via RCA. So I can listen to these files on Dave's Blog site with very little fuss. It just pops up in my Windows Media Player. I know this is a rudimentary hook-up but it works for me. There is a lot of content on the internet that has sound output. My LaScala center channel loudspeaker makes a great TV stand,

x

I've said this earlier........... music has become far too accessible. Too much of any good thing - makes it commonplace. Music has become 'tunes' 100% playable anywhere and anytime. The hypothesis being purported here is that this should make better sounding systems more desirable. The problem there is simple. The lower cost systems are good enough for most people. They're not crackly ancient transistor radio's limited to a few AM or FM stations. They're not cassette players or even CD players. They are autonomous musical libraries that can be sourced on their own speakers, to headphones or to base devices. If we had these when we were younger we too may have found ourselves satisfied with their limited quality of the reproduction. Too much music, too easily accessed on systems that do not suck enough. Maybe when someone gets $$$$$$ to burn they'll seriously upgrade their audio - after the cars, the houses, the smart systems, et cetera. My idea? Higher end manufacturers are going to need to seed some field marketing fronts. These level of systems need to be heard to gain any level of appreciation and potential sales. Plug someones Ipod into a pair of Wilson Watt Puppies and I suspect they'll notice a difference. That's how most of us got started. We heard equipment at some outlet, or somewhere and set our goals. These kids need to get audio goals. I think Klipsch should field market their product in every theater outlet that uses Klipsch product. That venue should be a marketing no-brainer.

After a great visit with Rusty and my SVS's gone i could move the other two in and put in the amp and everything and get them going. This is the final resting spot for them. my front stage is complete in this house for sure!

Another shot.

Here's a shot of the current HT room, kitchen, master bedroom, closet, storage area and daughters bedroom, all in one!! Alas, no bathroom.

This is my parents HT I designed in 1992. It was at the time very ahead of itself with an 8 ft screen, a nice sony projector, and M&K speakers with a velodyne 15" sub. M&k speakers were also in the ceiling. (Which I never liked too.) The room was finished using CELOTEX to dead the sound after drywall and about 4 inches of insulation that seemed to work well on the outside of the studs and to the outside above ceilings too. What started out with Laser discs, went to DVD's, and the Yamaha 2070 with the extra effects speakers up front too. What was nice about this setup is the other two 25" TV's on the sides... for the sports fanatic this is a home run. I really liked the idea of the scrim to hide the speakers. (I plan to do that in my own house too.) The screen is a Stewart screen, and as you can see dropped back about 12 " too. This was "cool." boxing it in some like our local movie theater does. I will miss this room when my mom leaves.. I have a lot of sports games, parties, and movies with friends as memories in there!