pablum

The two year gang to the rescue. From 0-60 in 8 seconds.

mr. mdeneen, I suggest you dont assume I was talking to you when I: a. Said dont believe everything you read in this forum b. Do some reading OUTSIDE this forum. I was answering the guy with the ORIGINAL question, suggesting HE DO some reading outside the narrow confines of this forum. The ONLY thing in that post referenced to you was the idea that monoblocks are a fashion statement, which is absurd and overblown. Most would not find it economically feasible weight wise or design wise to house ALL this one one chassis. This is not to mention the benefit of housing the amps nearer the speakers facilitating shorter hookup between amp and speaker. I would not pretend to instruct you on electrical matters even though you have flip flopped dramitically in here regarding parts, wire, feedback, and other matters. Lurking here and in the archives can be educational. edit: painful, dont ask mr, mdeneen what he said about "integrated" amps in the past by sheer definition. at that time, an integrated amp, by definition, was inferior to separates. Let's just pass the same mumbo jumbo that you can make an integrated amp with ALL the separate parts, each with a dedicated power supply and sepearate chassis compartments ad infinitum. This has also been done. Is it common? NO. But I do agree, and DID SAY, that monoblocks do not necessarily make an amp better. Which was missed again by mr. mdeneen.

Monoblocks have no inherent advantage? Not in my experience. Dont always believe everything in here even if stated with cool authority. I will agree that stereo amplifiers can sound very good but I have also preferred monoblocks with certain designs. It's not the "fashion" statement either just like tubes on top. They are distinct reasons for this including individual power supplies and filtration dedicated to each amplifier/channel. Do some more reading outside this forum. You CAN have everything in one box but more often than not it ends up sharing one power transformer. But having monoblocks does not guarantee a great amp but claiming it's nothing but a fashion statement is not on the mark either, in my opinion.

too(2) much

What came first, the chicken or the egg? For sure Webster was one of the first to come up with a general mathematical expression for the propagation of waves in a flared horn (I think he came up with this around 1919). http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~dpberner/icmc94/node2.html Doesn't every horn designer (Voigt, Klipsch, Edgar, LeCleach, etc.) owe him something? LeCleach developed a numerical model based on Webster's equation using a distinct element methodology. An Excel spreadsheet might be found here. http://perso.club-internet.fr/ndaviden/pavillon/lecleach.htm#ancre68820 Bruce Edgar seems to be a very nice guy by the way. I don't see why all the animosity here. We have enough of this PP vs SET or tube vs SS or Heritage vs Type X around here. I don't think we need a "who's the real horn genius" contest, too. That is what is so painful about company forums. This "Klipsch or DIE" mentality is short sighted and myopic. AK4, can I join your club?

Obfuscate with a wink while missing the point with an elbow to the ribs.

oils are rolled off, lousy, inferior, poor measuring, leaking devices that are unfit for high fidelity audio. Right? Surely. Again, we must go with the machine for it does not lie. Remember, test twice, listen once; two out of three isnt bad, right? presumptions loosely based on supposed science are MORE harmful to learning and progress than the other way around for it stops the open mind. Nice post showing a good combination.

Not even corned?

Please reread my posts above. Tbrennan is the one that asserted that tube amplifiers were colored. I simply said stating that tube amplification is "colored" was a tired and cliche argument that does not hold water with my experience. Secondly, my 1985 comment was in jest at your assumption that a contest between tbrennan and I is the only way to ascertain whether tbrennan can hear his way out of a paper bag. It seemed a fitting comment for 1985(or 2004 for that matter). thirdly, I defy you to find any amplification device that is not "colored" in some way. What an archaic term (as is this accuracy stance). SS amplification is colored as well. All reproduction has coloration in the chain. Lastly, your statement, either it's accurately reproduced or isnt is a gross simplification of the entire chain from creation to final product. I dont agree with any of your assumptions based on my experience as they are too narrow to define this whole process, either artistically or scientifically.

bec, how 1985 of you to reduce that comment to a contest with a winner and loser. I was just "busting tbrennan's chops" as he would say. The "tubes are coloration" argument is wornout like a moth-eaten French beret. A hearing contest was not implied nor mentioned. youre not looking for an excuse to use your widow maker are you?

tbrennan- you like going against the grain and you appear to be a classic character on the forums, the kind you would like to sit down with in an old irish pub and debate history and frontier trivia. you also seem to have some good horn knowledge. but i am not sure you could hear your way out of a paper bag despite this. nothing wrong with that, but one must take this into account just as assessing the foundation of a building when contemplating that big addition.

Dark, I know it was 1:30am in Atlanta, but I wouldnt be too wound up about mr. stig and the 430 since Stig made that observation in February of 2003, over 16 months ago.

Not too long ago, many here would have placed tubes in their BS folder.

ho hum

the forum has its own way of satire and acknowledgment of balderdash, either blatant or innuendo. I think it was handled a bit heavy handed. Some things should be said, and if done with humor and skill, all the more reason. In a world of smiley faces and thumbs up leaders, the slight nod is lost. punish the thinking while the "attaboys" grow stronger. still it's only a forum and not a edict of council.

Will you be doing mods anytime soon? ClarkeMOD Inc sounds good!

clarke, I took you as one of the good ones. oh well.

how many different ways can you bring up the topic: "I make amplifiers for people" indirectly? ping. email. lost address. urgent question. now shipping! Wife saw package. you have mail! and all disguised as something else. as I noted elsewhere, this forum has the most hidden agendas of any place I have ever visited. next, "my sick dog was lying near a package - it was an amp kit that was the best amp I have ever heard that I built. It's all done "insert forum member here' so send me your address!" at least the klipsch 2 channel business association is usually identified: Juicyaudio, nosamps, deancrossovers, forumscottcase, becsolder, _____________ new name for forum: 2 channel business association LLC

tbrennan, it appears you are one of the old school "man visit man" variety. I have evolved to the "I would rather see man in binary digits before seeing his visage at my door" variety. I would double this effort if human from internet forums, where the idea of email and DELETE can be used at convenience. it is hard to delete a 250 lb forum anthropoid staring vacantly on your doorstep.

I am still at a mystery why people would actually check this place before their own email? This is the only place I have ever seen that tells someone to check their own email while everyone gets to watch.

You forgot lie #11: Most People in forums know of what they speak

I think they have a definable beauty to them as sculpture but would not fit in most mobile homes and ranch houses so things look dim here. Shag carpeting and Lowes imitation wood panel would be tricky. Also, there is little horizontal space to place ceramic clowns, frogs, figurines, and stuffed animals that many seem to prefer. Here we have the distinct advantage of the Heritage and co as placement of plastic bassett hound figures and Olan Mills photos of family can take place of stature. Plus, where would the big sub go?

Mr. Dave, I wasnt even remotely talking about your PR comment, which obviously meant Pacific Rim since you said as much. I was answering Audible Nectar's post above mine where he used PC in plain sight, in reference to "politically correct." I love being quoted and paraphrased in the Klipsch Forum; it's what gives lurking a good name.

Who's talking PC? It was a biased absurd statement. Substitute the word AMERICAN where you see Japanese than see how moronic it sounds. Besides, it's just plain WRONG. Perhaps THIS Japanese guy said that. But the Japanese are the vanguard of low watt amplifiers, far before the Americans or French. The Japanese were loving high efficiency horns when Americans were going with big brute solid state amps driving inefficient speakers. The idea of a Japanese wanting a BIGGER amp is contrary to most of what the Japanese audio nut goes for. The Japanese appreciated low power and simplicity in amp design while America was going BIGGER. How ironic for Steve Hoffman to talk of the Japanese wanting BIGGER when it's the AMERICANS that want BIG BIG BIG with amps of all types, tube or solid state. As for the 275, it's one of the most famous of the MAC amps which also accounts for the collector side of the equation. But this BIG comment? I for one believe the MC-30s are probably far sweeter sounding amps. I am not arguing this point. I just think his take on "Japanese audiophiles" is both naive and slightly ignorant sounding, Steve Hoffman or not.

Steve Hoffman's stock with me just went down 60 points with that imbecilic Japanese reference. The Japanese tube crowd is far smarter than this and took their heads out of the A**es quite a few years before most of the US of A audio world.