Prana-Bindu

Try this link: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/tweaks.html I'd like to build the granite/marble version of the component rack, but have you ever looked into the cost of granite/marble cut to specs? Yikes! Good luck. ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

But there is no crossover after the amp in a bi- or duo-amp situation.... Please excuse any ignorance I may be displaying (just a newbie to this technical nightmare that is audiophilia), but isn't the point of a bi-wireable speaker the removal of the crossover (read: its quantitative and qualitative effects) from the powering of the work being done by the speakers? If JWMORGAN's struggle with bi-amping and duo-amping was hosted by a pair of Klipsch RF-3's (the speakers I currently use), I would certainly understand why he could never quite get the sound right; and that he would prefer the sound of either the Wrights or the Mac driving the full range. The RF-3's crossover at 1975hz (I believe) -- that's at the upper end of the upper midrange!! The whole benefit of the low-powered SET (especially the 2A3's) is what it does to the midrange; it's the midrange people describe as magical and the extreme ends of the frequency range that are sometimes complained of as weak. This is where my ignorance shines through: Doesn't the division between the two sets of posts on a bi-wireable speaker provide a division, at the spec'd crossover frequency, that the amp driving either set cannot cross? So that when the Wright 2A3's are attached to the HF set of posts on the RF-3's, aren't those beautiful monoblocks driving significantly mostly the treble and the top octave? And the solid state would be driving the remainder of the frequency range.... Isn't the sweet 2A3 midrange robbed of it's work whether you use an active crossover prior to the amp or not? I am not familiar with the crossover spec' of JWMORGAN's khorns, but if they are anything like the RF-3's, I can understand the cycle of dissatisfaction with the two-amp set-ups he described. Following this line of reasoning, an electronic crossover prior to the LF amp that only allowed frequency below 1000hz to be amplified by the bottom amp would deprive the listener of the upper midrange of the music. Is this the source of JWMORGAN's struggle with the electronic crossover? It sounds absurd to me, but I've never had the opportunity to play with such distinct amps (or more than any singular amp, god help me) at the same time. And, I AM under the impression (the veracity of which I am entirely uncertain) that the crossover specified for a speaker is a hard drop between the two ranges in a bi-wireable configuration, or that only insufficiently constructive parts of the roll-off ranges are co-extensive between the two ranges. Are there any phase differences between the LF and the HF of each speaker that would encourage a very short crossover roll-of range? Am I misunderstanding the role of the bi-wirable configuration? I have learned very much from this thread, and I am very grateful to all it's participants. Now please help me figure out which bits of learnin' are right and which are wrong.... My limited vocabulary has lead me to the impression that there is yet one undecided issue of critical importance still on the table: Does a limitation of the frequency range being fed to an amplifier (electronic crossover before the amp) allow the amp to dedicate more work to the range supplied than it would if it had to dedicate some work to the remainder of the full range? Does that extra dedication subtract from the total work of the amplifier that can be allocated to any part of the frequency range? If it does, then what is so unnatural about the work that otherwise would be used to power one portion of the frequency range to be done at the other portion of the frequency range in addition to the work that it would otherwise do anyway? I'm vomiting diction.... I was always under the impression that certain frequencies demanded more power than others; this would explain why a SET 2A3 amp like the Wright monoblocks would be found to be a little weak in the bass, especially the deep bass. I certainly hope the weakness is not significant, because I have an eye on them to drive my RF-3's and, maybe by August, to drive the higher-efficiency RF-7's. By the way, if anyone is in the know about the expected impedence range of the RF-7's, I would be much obliged to learn. Someone please address the question of frequency range and its relation to power consumption. Please!! And don't forget the bi-wire crossover point issue as well.... Thank you. ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

The closed-loop idea sounds exciting, but I foresee marketing problems. I suspect that a substantial portion of audio customers play the upgrade game: do the speakers now, when you have the money, and upgrade the amp later, when you have the money or after you've had a chance to audition. Would the benefits of a closed-loop design be compromised by allowing for other components? Even if they weren't compromised, I suspect the cost would be prohibitive. Perhaps the closed-loop idea is better suited for the pro audio market? Myself, I can't wait to audition the new RF-7's. An earlier release of information regarding the impedance range of the speakers would be much appreciated.... ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Monitor problem: I have seen fax machines cause the discoloration problems mentioned above. For some reason, the proximity of the fax machine is bad for the display. At work, a fax machine four feet away from a monitor caused such a discoloration on the lower left corner of a computer monitor. Maybe you guys have some kind of machine nearby that's causing this kind of interference. Good luck. ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Ray: I never got an answer on that other thread regarding the impedence range of the RF-7 and RF-5. Would you have any dirt on that? How low will they go? I'm planning on getting the Wright 3.5wpc monoblocks to drive my RF-3's, but I'd like to upgrade the speakers before August to take advantage of the full trade-in value. I know the RF-3's are supposed to go pretty low on the impedence, so it would be some nice encouragement to know that the RF-7 would be a little more dynamic. Thanks! ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Thanks Bob! I'm planning on going the way of the low-powered single ended triode amp, so I wanted to know if I was gonna get a little more juice out of the RF-7 than out of my lovely RF-3's. Looks like the new spiks will hit over the 100 mark. I can't wait!!!! Any idea how low the impedance will go on the RF-7 and RF-5? ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Any word on the expected efficiency rating of the RF-7 and RF-5? Anyone care? ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Two questions: 1) Where did these rumors about the $2200 price tag for the RF-7 come from? 2) Anybody know what the efficiency rating is of the RF-7's? Must know!!! ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Tony: The answers to two of your questions (1st & 3rd) depends on what content you'll be burning. If you're just gonna make music cd's (not mp3 cd's), any copying software will do; the software that comes with your burner should be more than adequate. If you're gonna be copying (sorry, backing up) software or Playstation games, you'll need software that will allow you to ignore read errors and maybe burn raw data (as opposed to user data). For purposes of backing stuff up, any of the software that comes with burners that support buffer underrun protection (Burn Proof technology) should do just fine -- Plextor Plexwriter, TDK VeloCD. I don't think the brand of media matters that much, but I've seen many recommendations for the use of the same brand media as the brand of your burner. Speed: music -- fastest speed you have; regular data -- fastest speed you have; copyprotected material -- the slower the burn, the less likely you'll end up with another coaster. If you want to rip and burn mp3's, use and encoder that uses the Fraunhaufer encoder. You can download the code for the Fraunhaufer off the web for free, but you'll have to couple it to a front-end application (GUI), such as Blade. Otherwise, Cool Edit 2000 uses that encoder. Have fun! ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Mixmaster: The most recent issue of MaximumPC gave the Iwill KA266-R a good solid rating. The only thing holding it back from a kick-*** rating was the on-board audio (and some other inconsequential spec). It did not out-perform the KT7A-R, but it's been touted to be quite overclockable. Nevertheless, I would stick with the Abit (knowing Iwill's past performance). The QDR RAM shouldn't be out for quite some time now. Also, the PC 150 combined with the pc100 RAM should run at the speed of the slowest RAM in use. Therefore, a stick of pc150 next to a stick of pc100 should both run at pc100 speeds. I was disappointed too when I got pc133 and i wanted to add it to the pc100 I already had. Too bad.... I had no idea DDR RAM was so damn cheap! ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

That is an issue with Win 95, 98, 98se and ME. A two-minute to one-hour time loss can occur every day. There are two known causes: 1) Advanced Power Management settings in your BIOS could cause problems with the motherboard's internal battery and Window's ability to read the clock. Make sure APM is enabled in your BIOS to allow windows to read the time. 2) Anti-virus apps, system utilities and screen savers can change your time settings. Try disabling such software for a day (one at a time) to determine which is the offending app. You may also have a bad system clock in need of replacement: another call to Dell.... I installed AtomTime98 v. 2.1 on my work computer to resolve the problem: the program periodically resets your clock according to the time issued by some atomic clock somewhere. Nifty! Good luck. ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

What speakers are you using? I've got the RF-3's and I'm considering the Decware Zen 5wpc SET amp. Any problems in SET mode with really dynamic passages for your SET? ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

If you like that, you may also enjoy the Zen: www.decware.com ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....

Seb: If you're gonna play a lot of first-person-shooters, stay away from the optical mouse. The laser has a hard time registering quick, jerky movements (the pointer/crosshair ends up in random locations), and when you need to bring the mouse back into the working area of the mouse pad, you have to lift it above three inches to prevent the laser from reading your return. I just got the Boomslang 2000 for the holidays, and I am totally impressed: incredible tracking and precision! Have fun building the system! ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way....