Roj

This is going to be fun: "I'm not putting words in anyones mouth. Instead I'm trying to shed some light on these fruitless comments and expose you for the biased fraud you are. You did type the following tidbit didn't you? " You'll have to get up really early in the morning to do that one, as they say. "there is no horn-loaded speaker in existence that can accurately reproduce silky highs and a detailed and well-imaged soundstage. Horns, even the hybrid horns that Klipsch chose to use in their satellites, shoot sound at you with all the finesse of a rocket launcher" "If that wasn't an outright condemnation of horns in general I don't know what is." And you saw from my example with the RB-5s vs. the Tablettes that I'm spot on. Next... Of course you immediately waffled and said that I was going too upscale in a comparison with the Tablettes but I expected that - when confronted with evidence, some folks do have a tendency to run for cover. "Apparently your sole basis for this argument is merely auditions limited to the horn loaded Promedia's and reference series, and internet propaganda." Nooo, not quite. You see, I auditioned the original Klipschorns years ago and that's what formed my original opinion. They were up against a set of KEF 105s and a set of Maggies and they couldn't measure up. "As they say in the audio world if you haven't heard it your opinion don't mean **** . " Thus you eat your own words... "in the face of Martin Logan and even ProAc, Klipsch's home line doesn't fare too well when drawing a detailed jazz soundstage. As an example, go listen to a set of RB-5 IIs playing Miles Davis or Boney James and then listen to the same track on one of the ProAc Tablette series - the difference in placement is unmistakable." "Lets try to keep a level playing field. You're making comparisons to much more upscale products. Taken for what they are the RB5's image very well. " Now we get to the beginning of the waffling I mentioned above, namely the ProAc Tablette series. Heck, Polk does a better job when it comes to that. "As I'll reiterate for the final time (because apparently yourself and Gluegun are suffering from a bout of amnesia), I've heard most of the Monsoon line (505, 702, 1000, 2000) under conditions as ideal as they're going to get in a department store, and was less than thrilled with the final result. " Therein lies the tale - a department store. I could say that folks who base their opinions of a system on the butchered environment in a department store and then attempt to pontificate on that drawbacks of that line thereafter are at best foolish and at worst absurd or fraudulent but that would be resorting to your tactics. "The crossover isn't smooth. I was able to localize lower midrange and upper/midbass from the sub. This wasn't so obvious when keeping everything on the same shelf, but the loss of bass imaging was. When the subwoofer was placed on the floor the changeover was disparaging. The sats sounded spaced out and thin, lending an exaggerated image to everything. The 702, 1000, and 2000's midrange was dreadful - sharp and wiry. " First, placement matters and you obviously didn't do a good job. How can I say this? Other listeners (dvdvideo, Mr. ears, dvisic, Brad Estes, etc.) don't experience what you're climing to have heard. In fact, Audio-guru hears that same "one-noteyness" on the Klipsch 4.1s. When that many disparate people (I'm not even including myself in the mix) differ with you on all points, it's pretty obvious that either a) you did something wrong in the placement or you're blowing smoke. Since you say you've heard them and the that forms the basis of your allegations, I must conclude a). "Even some of those pricy Martin Logans have trouble integrating the cone box woofers with their electrostatic transducers! I have nothing personally against Monsoon, I'm only describing what I hear. " And I'm describing what many others hear, as are they. "Frankly I'm not impressed with the musical performance of any PC speaker I've heard (note this doesn't include Videologic's or Swans). To incessantly rag on the Klipsch's flaws and turn a blind eye to the others is narrow minded and immature. " To paint a given set of products as superior where they are average at best is misleading and spurious. "The fact that you sit a few feet away makes a transparent soundstagesound stage impossible." In a word: Nonsense!" "You're living in a bubble if you think you'll get realistic imaging in a desktop environment. First off the speakers are too close to the wall, decreasing soundstage depth. Second the close proximity of the speakers to each other diminishes soundstage width. Ideal placement is at least 6 feet apart - try doing that on your computer desk. Then you literally sit on top of the damn things cheating yourself of holographic imaging that floats beyond the speakers and into the room itself. " If you'd set up the Monsoon correctly you'd see where your nice theories fall down. What they've done is create a localized imaging space that engineered to fit in a desktop environment. Now I can understand why you say that being a Klipsch fan - that line clearly fell on its *** in its attempt to do that - but other vendors have managed a considerably greater degree of success. Either way, try as you will to say otherwise, far too many actual users have experienced the contrary and and thus have debunked your statements. You find them on 3DSS and Neoseekers and even Usenet - just do a search and you'll see what I mean. They're the ones who've experienced the Pro Media line and have discarded it because they DO want imaging and clarity, they DO want a detailed soundstage and a rich midrange and they DON'T want a front-row-center aprroach to sound. Try as you will, you can't erase or debunk the testimony those people have put in print. You can of course choose to ignore it and that's your right but you can't make it go away. That will always put your comments in the perspective they merit. Thus you can say what you will here on this site where you are in the company of fellow Pro Media owners and that's OK, but of course when you stray out into the real world domain and do that, all I'll have to do is what I've always done: simply point folks to the contrary information, have them audition for themselves and expose the ersatz for what it is. I've found it most effective in shedding clear light on a given issue. On that note, 'nuff said and I'm out of this thread. ------------------ "Faith manages." jms This message has been edited by Roj on 05-16-2002 at 10:33 AM

"The fact that you sit a few feet away makes a transparent soundstage impossible." In a word: Nonsense! It doesn't appear that you've experienced too many multimedia systems then. How can I say this? Because I own one of the proofs that what you're saying isn't at all the case (the Monsoon MH-505s). Go out and actually properly audition some of the other alternatives and you'll have some first hand experience to work with. Yes there are compromises made - however other vendors have managed to achieve a very great deal of what you're claiming isn't possible. ------------------ "Faith manages." jms This message has been edited by Roj on 05-14-2002 at 04:34 PM

"There's no reasoning with these guys (Roj). They hear one Horn speaker and they feel qualified to grossly generalize on all horn speakers." I'd be careful of taking potshots at people - you never know who might be listening. As it is, let me caution you to NOT put words in my mouth. While I certainly am no fan at all of the Pro Media horn implementation (if you can call it that), I'll give the Klipsch home line credit. I'll also say that in the face of Martin Logan and even ProAc, Klipsch's home line doesn't fare too well when drawing a detailed jazz soundstage. As an example, go listen to a set of RB-5 IIs playing Miles Davis or Boney James and then listen to the same track on one of the ProAc Tablette series - the difference in placement is unmistakable. I'll maintain that while horns are good for many things, that kind of detailed music is where they tend to fall down in comparison to either a dome tweeter or flat panel implementation (in this particular example Martin Logan and ProAc). Now getting back to the Pro Media lineup and PC multimedia, those horns really display lesser spatial placement capabilities when compared to companies like Monsoon and (I'm told since I haven't experienced them first hand) VideoLogic or Swan. Anyone saying otherwise is either deaf or in denial: it's rather obvious to anyone auditioning. If you listen to Miles Davis (I'd recommend any selection from "******* Brew") and can't hear the difference then I submit that a set of tin cans and string would do as well for you. Whether you *like* the difference is another matter and completely irrelevant to the discussion - the fact that a difference exists *is*. Now, the PM line does very well for stuff like alternative, metal, dance and the like - in fact any kind of music where subtlety, detail and spatial imaging aren't a prerequisite. You wanna rock Nine Inch Nails? Get a set of PM4.1s (or rather *don't* - the Logitechs have far better value). You wanna watch the Matrix? A set of PM 5.1s is a very credible option. You wanna blast The Crystal Method or Marilyn Manson? Buy Klipsch. You wanna listen to Boney James, Enya, Sade, Mary J. or Erykah Badu? Go Elsewhere. Your uses dictate your purchase and in fact I have a joint article with Audio-guru to that effect on Hardware Avenue: http://www.hardavenue.com/reviews/multimedia1.shtml This should clarify things. ------------------ "Faith manages." jms This message has been edited by Roj on 05-14-2002 at 04:39 PM

"Don't worry guys, if you wanna talk to Roj or argue with him, I'll pull him back here, kicking and screaming if I have to..." Not bloody likely... ------------------ "Faith manages." jms

Hello Mr. Ears "Welcome to the great Klipsch BB,as you can see Justin is the resident TAD(Text Answering Device)." LOL! "Your input about all things PC speakers would be great here,as I have little tome for the PM section(busy at the Subwoofer secrion)." This was just a brief sojourn - I'm afraid I shall not tarry long on these shores... ------------------ "Faith manages." jms

"i own every single promedia every created, every model that is, and boomy bass no. there is a difference between boomy bass and the muffle that comes when you have too much bass on the promedia 4.1, v2.400 and 2.1. port noise is different than boomy bass, and it is port noise that the 5.1's really don't have." I have heard every single Pro Media ever created and with the exception of the PM 5.1, boomy bass YES. The port noise is one thing but boomy and overdone bass is another thing altogether and you can dress it up any way you like but you can't change how it sounds. Bass should be tight and punchy - if you've ever heard the Monsoon MM-2000 subwoofer you'll understand what I mean - and when it ISN'T tight and punchy it's (yes, you can see it coming) Boomy. Aparrently despite what you say Klipsch thought so too because they kept trying new designs until they got it right and the result is that the 5.1 sub finally isn't boomy or suffering from port noise. Now all they have to do is work on their satellites but given that there have been three iterations now and they still image flat, I'm not particularly holding my breath. ------------------ "Faith manages." jms

"you have it wrong on the promedia 4.1, boomy bass?! the whole point of getting a promedia over teh z-560 is that the promedia's DON'T have boomy bass." I'm sorry but I have to say I thoroughly disagree. There is only ONE Klipsch multimedia sub that doesn't produce boomy bass and that's the excellent 5.1 sub (The rest of the system leaves me lukewarm for detail and soundstage, as does the Pro Media line in general, but that's another story entirely). The Logitech sub is almost on par with that particular sub and definitely more detailed and less boomy than the 2.400, 2.1 and 4.1 subs. Also, it doesn't rattle and roar at high volumes, something the PM4.1 sub is prone to do. We won't get into a discussion on the Pro Media 4.1 or 5.1 sats and their various shortcoming vis a vis imaging, soundstage and detail other than to say that their "front row center" approach to imaging and soundstage (read: "flatter and more 2D in comparison to some of their lesser priced competitors") precludes me owning a set. This is not a new thing: the Pro Media line has had this characteristic since its inauguration by design. I just require a speaker system to have a great deal more of those qualities at that price point. And finally I'd have to say that in the face of the Logitech Z-560s there is now no reason to spend money on the Pro Media line below the 5.1 level. ------------------ "Faith manages." jms