Blackmesa

He also said "Those shopping for speakers for their desktop should look elsewhere" because its overkill in both price and somewhat.. sound quality. I mean, the thing is WAY better than a set of Promedia 2.1's. I used bigger RSX's for my PC and I love em. IMO, there is no way a pair of RSX-3's is overkill for me, but he was speaking in general. 400 for a 2 channel PC system is a lot more than any other mainstream 2.1 PC system, and its a lot more sound too, but I could not recommend it more!

Thanks, I have actually rewrote that review, fixed some spelling and grammar and structure but I have not uploaded the new version. But Andy did mention a possible problem with the iFi being used with a PC. High end soundcards like the audigy which have more voltage in their lineout could blow the input stage on the iFi. So as a solution, you should not turn the soundcard volume too high and simply let the iFi amp do most of the work. I have run the iFi off my PC with a Revo 7.1 and it sounded great. Currently its hooked up to a laptop and I can run the volume at 100% with no problems.

---------------- On 7/22/2005 5:25:57 PM Larry1 wrote: A lot of the early mag reviews and online opinions seem to steer any perspective buyer to the fact that this excellent 2.1 speaker system is only for iPod owners even though there is a line input on the sub. Is Klipsch marketing kinda shooting themselves in the foot by not addressing the fact that you could use this cool system as a near field desktop speaker system also? Think Versatility! IMHO I think their are a lot of perspective user's looking for a really good 2.1 speaker system compared to the competition. ---------------- yes, it can be, and there are not many competitors at its price range. What is interesting is that even the most expensive surround sound PC systems don't match the quality of sound offered by the iFi and most people who buy surround sound dont actually need it! They would be better off spending that same amount in a higher quality 2.1 system. That is exactly what the iFi is if you can accept the added iPod feature which does add some cost to the system, but relative to the amount you pay for the sound, Its really not that much. Most iPod speakers are doubled or tripled in cost for the little dock feature, Klipsch could sell the iFi without the dock for the same price and it would still be reasonable.

june of 99.. that was a while ago.

the 2.1 drivers are small, I don't he has to worry about sag.

sounds fun, good luck! here are some quick drawnings I did to help ya..

Its probably a difference crossover, the Yamaha may have used a first or second order crossover while the Klipschs is probably a much steeper cut off or simply a 100% halt altogether, its best to let the receiver to the crossover so you need to turn off the crossover on the subwoofer and set it up in your reciever.

Placebo

I'm not sure, but he wouldnt say it three times in a row.

Great story, but I hope it ends well. I feel bad for him too, but if he does end up with the Klipsch's... what an ending!

Look at the two pictures I posted. There are trademark's on both of them. I had no idea you could trademark photographs of your own products!!! hahahahha

---------------- On 7/12/2005 9:35:58 PM Zealot125 wrote: Ironically, we did that with my set of PMU 5.1's vs the Blose. You know exactly how the results came out. He actually turned red in the face when I asked him how much the system cost him after all of our comparisons. I think he popped a vein in his forehead when I told him what I paid for the PMU's. ---------------- HAHAHA PMU's vs that thing! That must have been a slaughter, much more so with the RF-7's. Honestly, I have am having a hard time seeing the RF-7's against that thing. Did you crank up the 7s full blast? My god

We are beating a dead horse... bose sucks, and we all know it. They focus on market control with phony trademarks and patents to make consumers believe they are "special" They divert much more cost into advertising than R&D. I would guess 10-100 times more. They sell you cheap parts and inflated prices. Retail stores like it because they get HUGE markup (much more so than Klipsch for example) so they are happy to try to sell bose to anyone. Technology is always improving and Bose uses this market known concept to market there speakers. Like microprocessors. Bose claims that speakers are also improving as time progresses, and like microchips, speakers are able to be smaller and better. In the demo at any bose store, they start off with a brief history of sound. They start with mono then stereo... They have 2 huge speakers that appear to be from the 1950's. They play sound and then all of a sudden the guy lifts off one of the speakers and its really not a speaker, its just a fake box on top of a bose cube! (100th the size) The audience is impressed because it really made the little bose speaker sound like that big old "hunk of junk". Bose plays off this theme and it works well in the market. Most people dont know anything about speakers and this plays right into bose's hands. You should see the user reviews on apple.com for the bose sounddock. I would say 1 in 4 got it as a gift. Bose uses this gift idea to make it seem like its ok to spend 300-500 dollars on someone for a quality audio product from "Bose." The gift idea works well and thousands of people buy these low grade expensive products for their friends and family. The receiver of the gift knows even less about sound and they just love their new free bose product. Without comparing it to a single other speaker system, many of these people write up a review "10/10 stars," "oh my god this is so amazing and loud," "fills my room," "bose is the best." Etc.. etc. In one case a father gave his daughter a bose sounddock. She continued on to explain how her father owned many bose products and raved about them to his family. It honestly made me sorry for this poor girl who will ultimately one day, meet a young man like myself and he will explain how misguided her dad is.

---------------- On 7/9/2005 9:35:03 PM DizRotus wrote: I'm aware that most passive radiators have no voice coil. My question concerns the ability to use an active radiator as a passive radiator and tune it by varying the load across its voice coil. ---------------- yes, by changing the mass, you change the resonate frequency of the moving cone.

I think for fun you should buy a set of 150 dollar promedia 2.1's and do a blind test.

---------------- On 7/12/2005 2:27:17 PM Guido_Badaduchi wrote: To all, I have two questions. 1. Do the Bose lovers know about physics? 2. Why are the Bose lovers on the Klipsch forum? ---------------- 1. No, but they do believe that bose defies it! 2. They are jealous because they don't have one. (You can imagine why they don't --they need to keep people hidden from the truth and message boards are a collection of information.)

---------------- On 6/25/2005 7:55:14 PM Zealot125 wrote: OK, some friends and I were having arguements over quality of Bo$e in comparison with others. So, the reasonable steps we took were to take some of our own respective stuff and to compare them all. So we got one guy's Bo$e acoustic wave system, my pair of RF-7's, a pair of paradigm monitor 11's. The Bo$e guy started all of this with his claim that his little 1.5 x 1.5 x 2 foot box put out bigger better quality sound than me or my frineds paradigms. So we put all of these in my HT room and hooked em up with each of our own recievers (mine is a Denon AVR-3805, paradigms were with Denon 2805, but also tried them with my 3805) and set them to each of our respective preferences and listened. Now, we each had our own opinions, mine being that the Paradigm and RF-7's sounded fantastic, but I just didnt like the Bo$e. Its just wasnt quite as powerful or commanding as the RF-7 or Paradigms. Of course this Bo$e guy was loving his Acoustic wave system and kept saying " Its smaller but sounds just as good as your big Floorstanders. I'm just looking for some technical ammo to back up my opinions when I see him next. I dunno, in my mind, there wassnt even competition, but I have nothing to argue with him about except with my opinions. Can anyone give me some technical dirt on Bo$e?? ---------------- The debate should really end with stereo separation. The bose gives you NONE. its pretty much mono. You can spread the other speakers out as much as you want the capture the stereo effects of songs. Use some newer music to take advantage of that and you will see how bad the bose is for stereo. You can end the debate with FQ response. Just hook up a PC with a free download sinwave tester and run a sin wave in a loop from 20 hz on up to 20,000 hz and watch the bose crumble from both ends. Play is linearly so you see how much TIME passes as the FQ goes from 10k to 20k. The Paradigms and Klipsch will continue to play while the bose just sits silently. Beyond that, I owned a wave radio, and I took it apart for fun. Its made with very cheap drivers that you can find online for about 5 bucks. BTW, just so everyone knows, this is the product he is talking bout The system retails for 1,079, and you can add on a 5 disc cd changer for ONLY another 300 dollars.

the KSW 10 should easily best the output on the 621's so my guess is the receiver is not giving out enough input to the subwoofer. Make sure the crossover is at about 100hz. If that still doest work, rewire the front speaker write to pass into the subwoofer first using the binding posts, then back to your front speakers. You can borrow the speaker wires from the rears to accomplish this. Turn off the crossover and see if you can at least get loud bass to make sure the sub is not broken.

---------------- On 6/29/2005 11:24:44 PM thxsubwoofers wrote: Hey I just got my RW-12 and I have notice that the new Klipsch Synergy subwoofer is running 300 rms and a total of 600 watts. The RW-12 subwoofer is running 340 rms and 600 total watts. I was woundering which is a better buy. Also I have one more question for the Sub-12 model what is the woofer cone made out of. ---------------- sub-12 is a better buy imo, but the rw-12 has a deep tuning FQ, a better cone material, and nicer looking finish. I think the sub-12 undermines the rw-12 a bit, but I'm not complaining.

np, i apologize

Jay, please dont start ****, I was being facetious and you take things too literally.

---------------- On 7/10/2005 11:06:53 PM Jay481985 wrote: surprised that no one created a dimpled port or even rifled port so far with all the snakeoil floating around. ---------------- b&w has been doing it for a while http://www.bwspeakers.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/products.techfeatures/ObjectID/3A7554F4-4779-11D4-A67F00D0B7473B37

---------------- On 7/9/2005 12:34:04 PM Jay481985 wrote: ---------------- On 7/9/2005 4:33:49 AM bytor33 wrote: If you're comparing boxes to boxes, yes. A tube however would not need as dense of material because it has to endure much less stress than a box because of it's cylindrical design. ---------------- How would it endure less stress, a cylinder? Umm 50 pascals is still 50 pascals in a cylinder tube. The shape is what makes a tube more rigid without more material. Since the radius of a circle is equidistant from the center to the side. A circle's side recieves even pressue. Thus no need for bracing. Since a corner of the box is 1/2 the hypothenus of rectangle (squares are rectangles to) the distance from the center of the box to the midpoint of a side is closer. (A squared times B squared = C squared) Thus the sides need bracing since they are first to recieve pressure (flexing). Also the corners need no bracing since they are theorectically braced by the other side. But since the corner has to deal with the mass of the sides, they are thus weaker. Again they recieve stress in three dimensions. L X W X H but since a circle has no corners it is not weaker. Also that is a short reason why circles are stronger then boxes but that is not it. But simply stated, which holds more volume per give space? A box, since a cylinder volume is pi*r(squared)* height. But a cylinder recieves equal amounts of pressure as with a box but the cylinder recieves equal pressure per surface while a box does not. ---------------- why did i read that....... Jay, If i read something like this agiain, I will beat you up. ;p

I think DrWho just started a flame war, lol. I dont like to compare DIY vs. Stock because you cant account for labor. Seriously, It would take me all day to assemble that kit for my first time and I dont make minimum wage. Sure its fun, but if you want to factor in the cost for your own labor, then add that up too! It really comes down to this: If you want to build it yourself, get a kit. I consider that more of a hobby like building a model car or plane. If you just want a subwoofer, buy a stock one! Saving money is irrelevant.

I used to own the pb12-isd which for all intensive purposes is about the same as the 29-39PCi. I ended up returning the subwoofer because it did not give me the kick I wanted. However, the thing was BRUTAL for low frequency reproduction. I think the SVS is a better subwoofer, but its far more expensive once you account for shipping. Thats 650 bucks vs. less than 500 for the sub-12. Best buy was offering it for 450 not that long ago and you can already find it on ebay for 400 or less. I think a more fair comparison would be the PB10 against the Sub-12, but again, they are very different subwoofers with very different goals. I think the sub-12 will give more output above 25hrz than any of the SVS ISD's except the dual driver combo. I have not heard the Sub-12 in a correct environment, but I was impressed with what it did in a crappy one,so I would speculate its got some real potential. Just to give you lose idea of what it can do. The sub-12 driver has a 0.75" xmax and the ISD-12 driver is closer to 0.6. Granted that says nothing about cabinet construction and if I had say in that, the SVS wins hands down. The PB12-isd is literally twice the weight of the Sub-12, but the sub-12 still moves more air, and its 5" flared port should give you some indication of that. Hope that helps. I think if I was you, I would buy the sub-12, and if you dont like it, take it back and order the SVS.