white_shadow
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by white_shadow
-
-
I think they fit nicely as RVX series floorstanders, taking the place of synergy. I never understood the synergy line. But these look like they would fit good in that category, that is the best speaker line that Best Buy sells, aimed at the mass market with a better budget.
These pics were from the Indy posts (links at bottom of pic), I wish I went.
-
They look like the RVX-54's.
These look more like the new reference line maybe RF7 replacements.
-
Thanks Will and Warren. I should have read Will's post fully, but I was tired. Regardless, I went over and read the replies and have a few thoughts. Tell me what you think.
How does mounting (physical) the PR at 90 degrees relative to the active driver work. I've seen rear loaded PR's, no front or side loaders (that I know of.) What if the enclosure was a pyramid or wedge. The only connection between the PR and AD (active driver) is the air between them. Thus the PR would always have a 180 degree phase difference?
In terms of driver mass, does the AD work harder to move the mass of the PR. Or is this a benefit of PR designs that allows an AD to work as a single driver but have qualities of mulitple drivers, such as larger surface area*excursion=volume. Does a PR design eliminate the characteristics of enclosures, like standing waves, resonance, port design, and in general the enclosure design.
Has anyone designed their own PR sub. This topic came to mind because of the picture of the acrylic RSW15. I think those are PR designs.
-
I've half a$$ read Gils long reply, but I think you can understand. I just dont think it seems right.
For instance "2) radiators smaller than half a wavelength don't work very well"
Well, according to Gil, this qualifies 99.99999999% of all drivers in production. I tend to discredit this type of information. Its an incredible reply, but I'm looking for more information like Warren.
-
Why do we use passive drivers? It seems like there used specifically for bass.
-
Calm Down John, you might blow a blood vessel or something.
Bi-amping does not "require" pre amplifier stage electronic crossovers. Sure we would like to filter and amplify, rahter than amplify and filter, but it's not that much inefficient as you would believe (amplifiers don't necessarily work like we think they do)
Previously when I stated that bi-amping off of an A/B switch can be considered bi-amping, well it sort of depends on the design. If a channel of amplification has maybe four output transistors, the A && B switch as well as a setting to "bi-wire" within the amplifier may divide the amplication channels. Dedicating half of the output transistors to one channel, and the other half to the new. We don't really know how most amplifiers are designed so we can't assume that using A && B is simply a loading circuit.
-
lynnm, John Albright stated that "it WON'T work," it does work.
Hook up two sets of speakers or two speaker bi-wired to the A/B with A && B setting on. They do work, but are not necessarily bi-amped. Whether or not that configuration can be deemed bi-amped is arguable. But the setup does work.
-
radiob,
"My $900.00 Bi-wire cable, yes it does have directional arrows. Notice high and low marked on the wire. This particular cable sounds incredible. It has articulation and insturment seperation like no other cable I have heard. I do not use this with Klipsch Speakers."
I didn't see any directional arrows. Or any +/- markings. I did see high/low output. But does that refer to what the wire is putting out or what it should be connected to? Anyways, sounds like a problem for the people at Bose to figure out.
By the way anyone ever heard of a "shotgun" wire. I heard it is a term used for reverse bi-wire. I am most likely misinformed.
-
John Albright,
"Actually, it WON'T work.
The A-channel and B-channel connections are NOT seperate amplifiers, but 2 connections to the same amp. You will not be bi-amping, but actually bi-wiring. Some say bi-wiring has its benefits. To Bi-amp requires 2 seperate amps and a crossover between the pre-amp and power amps that divides the signal into frequency bands."
WRONG!!! It does work, but not in the manner we think it should. Do you think we believe that our amps have reserve amplifiers for the rarely used B's! And somehow that magicallythe A && B, A OR B switch turns on our reserve amplifiers waiting for us to use it. That A && B or A OR B switch changes the loading of the amps, the circuitry, and some might argue the whether or not they become two separate amps.
And by the way Bi-amp does not infer any filters of any sort nor at any stage. It only infers multiple amps, used in conjunction with of a "natural" filtering process. Not to say that filers are not neded.
-
He must have one of those Klipsch Ultra keyboards
-
SOLD!
They'll be a perfect compliment to my Bose 901's
-
This might help clarify some thing regarding bi-wiring. I took an electromagnetic field and waves course a while back. It was a while ago and we didn't get to in depth with signal transmission, so I may have some things mixed up.
High frequency signals tend to migrate towards the skin of a conductor. Almost to the extent that the signal is carried on the surface entirely with the exception of a slight skin depth. This would be for a single strand of a conductor.
Low frequencies do the opposite, they become centralized within the core of the conductor.
In a single strand conductor, the high frequencies would be "forced" to the surface while the low frequency occpies the core.
Now the question is, what happens when we have 1000 strands of a conductor grouped in 10, paired with another group of 10, and wound in a spiral double-helix. Would the high frequencies treat the multiple strand spiraled wire as a single conductor, or would all the skin effects be additive.
You might conclude from this that different conductors (types) should be used for the high and low frequencies, for instance single strand copper for the low and multiple strand spiraled for the highs. I guess this is where wire manufacturers begin to argue.
You also should conclude that some sort of interaction has to occur between the highs and lows in the same conductor. How long they interact and how much area they occupy is what I wonder about in bi-wiring. Bi-wires usually only has the connector (amp-side) for this process to occur. You'd think a thick solid conductor wrapped in a multistranded spiraled thin conductor that become separted just before the speaker would be an optimal speaker wire for a 2-way system.
Another thing to ponder is, what is considered high and low when this signal interaction occurs. How does this "cutoff" frequency match my crossovers and drivers.
By the way I tried some "wire" experiments before. I used residential 12ga solid conductors. There was a difference.
-
It should work.
I have some bi-wire/bi-amp questions myself.
Are the crossovers in bi-wire speakers such as the Reference series by-passed when bi-wired, or do they become separate hi-pass and low-pass crossovers? What would the impedance become?
Are there any specialized amplifiers for bi-wire/bi-amping? I've never seen any. If bi-wiring improves performance and sound how come we don't see amplifiers in the same range (mid-upper) with bi-amping capabilites. Such as a 14.1 receiver instead of a 7.1 or a 14 channel amp instead of a 7 channel amp.
On a side note for those that went to Indiana, did you guys notice whether or not Klipsch bi-wired/bi-amped their speakers?
-
I'd try the HK 630. I think its under a grand. Or whichever Denon model which is under a grand. Members here seem to prefer these brands.
I'm curious what do you mean by sounds okay, but missing something. I'm curious because I'm looking at getting an Onkyo or rather an Integra receiver. I don't have the RF7's but the 5's. If your missing something, then I should be missing more. So can you be a little more specific than okay and missing something.
Some say the Onkyo's are on the bright side, and I can attest that bright is not a good match for the Klipsch reference line.
-
Anyone use the Onkyo Integra line of receivers. I going to get an entry level receiver for a small 5.1 setup. How do Integras sound with the reference line.
-
Sounds like an issue with your sound card drivers or a configuration problem.
-
Let me get this right, HK has no 800#. Thats HORSEDUNG!
-
A few questions, first to clarify the dilemma.
You mentioned $560, is that the price of a specific system you had in mind. Or is it the amount of finances you have available. And to the second question, the new rig is intended for personal use such as a bedroom or office (upstairs) rather than downstairs with the Bose. Lastly, what source do you plan on using for this rig, computer, DVD player, PS2, or combinatorial sourcing.
For low budgets such as yours, some members believe that used is a great way to attain quality gear. It won't be the most up to date, but I don't think you need to be. So here are some things to look at.
(not in any specific order)
1) Refurb Klipsch Ultra 5.1 ($250) plus additional DD decoder (100)
You should think about the reliability of the Ultra's which is an issue. But if you get them from Klipsch, you get a warrranty.
2) Refurb HK 130 ($200) or Onkyo 501 ($150), Dayton sub ($130), Klipsch rs-3ii (or equivalent newer R's) as mains ($200-300). It may be odd to use surrounds as mains but, they disperse sound very well in a small room. In addition you can mount them on the wall (off the floor) if you're limited in floor space. When you save another $560 or more then you could buy the center and main, "demoting" the RS3's to surround duty.
3) HTIB
Oh by the way,
"Do not worry with your problems with mathematics, ..............
I can assure you that mine are still greater" A.E.
-
Do you mind me asking what program you used and by which methods you attained your frequency response plot.
-
I thought about its THX certification regarding horn orientation, but I dont think that is the issue or reason for the design. I think this because of the surround design. These are bipolar, I believe. That would cut short many arguments for vertical (or horizontal, with regards to imaging) horn dispersion. Unless certain speakers are designated specifically only as surrounds or mains.
The THX ultra2's are 7.2?
-
I would guesstimate a few things.
The throat of the wave guide or horn plays more of a role than does horn facia.
The wave must propagate along the wave guide, meaning that the longer distance the wave must travel, the frequency must compensate by increasing, and vice versa. I think this propels the wave forward, rather than disperse up and down. This is probably wrong, so someone explain this to me.
I noticed that my square horns are also shaped in a vertical, rectangular manner. Meaning more tall than wide. The top and bottom of the throat is also angled rather than straight, like the sides.
-
Whatever happened to realistic. I'm curious. Were they related to Radio Shack? A friend of mine had one (an amp) donated by a soon to be father in law, and it rocks. It came with a set of Pioneer bookshelf speakers. We replaced the woofers in the speakers with new ones we had on hand and were amazed, at both the amp and speakers.
On the amp side, it looked to be 30-40 years old. I know its not from the 80's, because the 80's produced nothing but junk. For example Yugos, mullets, INXS, beta, Video Disc, and David Hasselhof.
-
You guys are sick! I've heard of all kinds of fetishes, but audiophile porn. I can't even begin to wonder how you would classify this as. Is it A, B or A/B porn.
-
I haven't heard too much of the new R-series if that is what you are referring to.
RF-35 Upgrade
in Home Theater
Posted
I would go with the sub also. I have a similar system, but without the floorstanders (and older R-line). What I'm missing is a sub, to be specific an RSW 15. But with that in mind, I'm also missing the funds to get an RSW 15.
I would depend on what you listen to. I'm busy and currently listen to music only. For me that means I need smooth, deep, and controlled bass. I know the RF7 would give me that, but I'd rather get a little more (RSW 15)