polizzio

I have a sansa clip 4 gb, no comparison to the playback quality of my Cowens. The sansa was the first mp3 unit I ever purchased. Mostly used it while washing my car or out walking for exercise, or the gym. My first Cowen purchased is an S9, has software tone controls and an equalizer. It will playback mp3, wav, flac, and wma files too. 16 gb mem. Sansa was like $39 new. The S9 was $190 back in 12/2009.

Same thing my ex-wife said in our divorce proceedings

49ers beat us (Saints) in an exciting shootout just a couple weeks ago. 48-46. Our defense just could not stop the niners. Saints weakness is the def secondary/pass coverage. I hate to say it but the Saints will not win a superbowl this year. The offense is stout but the def secondary is just average. Great def line and LBRs.

Holy Moley!! Rewriting the record book before halftime. Joe Burrow passes for 403 yards and 7 TDs. LSU has 500+ yards total offense. I sure wish Burrow was a junior

Burrow and Jefferson picking em apart! +21 -- 3 minutes into the second quarter. Glad to see Clyde (22) playing today, he was questionable.

@MetropolisLakeOutfitters My Klipsch Heritage Cornwall poster arrived today. You folks didn't skip a beat due to the Christmas holidays. TY

I own 2 Cowen music players. My first purchased approx 10 years ago, and very recently purchased a second Cowen Plenue D high res player. The Plenue is smaller that a pack of cigarettes, will play mp3, alac, flac, wav, wma, and aaif file types. Has a 32 gb built in mem but will accept a micro sd card to expand. I have a 64 gb card in mine now, but you can use up to a 128gb micro sd card. No bluetooth, I use wired earbuds or input to my stereo receiver via a 3.5mm cable to aux. I record quite a bit of mp3 files @ 340kb/s (highest quality) ripped from youtube (my free try it out music source). I purchase both flac and wav music files/albums from HD Tracks occasionally on line. I also slowly rip my cd collection to either wav or mp3 high quality (just depends on my mood at the time) on my desktop pc. Then you can share as you wish to devices. The reason I went back to Cowen for my second purchase is my original digital player still works 100%, I just ran out of memory on it. The Plenue D is rated for 40-50 hours play time per charge. Very pleased over the years with Cowen products. Here is the Plenue D @ amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Cowon-Plenue-Resolution-Player-Silver/dp/B01A8NU5GM I caught it on sale @ amazon for $100 delivered, but its much more now. Maybe search the interwebs and ebay.

Yes for some, LF reproduction ceases @ 50 hz.

LSU and Oklahoma today @ 1500. Go Joe Burrow and the Tigers! Get er done!

You are right, if the OP is moving them frequently like working parties or weddings, making and adapting aluminum plates with the speakon terminations are the way to go as Islander outlined above. Maybe he plans to DJ with his equipment. You know those spade terminals and wire are going to get severely yanked at some point (not a matter of if, but when), terminating the show, much less wearing em out from repetitively connecting/disconnecting.

Your linked document states there are 3 different proposals in play for audio equipment testing, one for the US, one for Germany, and one for China. It then goes on to name four different actual testing methodologies for loudspeaker testing. Near field, far field, outside, and anecheoc room. Further substantiating my earlier claim there is no world wide agreed upon methodology. There isn't even a singular for the USA. "The fate of IEC 60268-5 will be decided after the above new standards are published." Everything in a state of flux, has been for 40 years that i am aware of. Manufacturers pick one methodology and run with it. I'm done with this topic here. We have collectively trampled the OP's original subject, and I concede I have been a major player in this.

Smart buy. Yes the new Cornwall IV don't seem to be flying off the shelves @ $6k a pair. I have yet to see anyone post here glowing about their new CW IV. Cory had a B stock set listed for ~ $4500 a pair, a nice deal. Hopefully one of these days we shall have some CW4 owners report on their purchase/impressions. Congrats on your new LS!

So neither his Mac 250 amp nor his Khorns are equipped with speakon teminations...........got it.

Oh yes, 12/2 SJO cable would be adequate for any single run under 50 foot length. But I was not aware Klipschorns came with Speakon terminals?

Can you post a link to this industry standard you speak of? Like a pdf from the regulating body, or an article documenting specific test procedures?

Agreed, as I mentioned early on in this specific discussion (first post) that there are no industry test standards or governing body that I am aware of. So any audio manufacturer's published performance data is based on their test procedures, their honesty. Be it loudspeakers, receivers, amps, or AVRs. The Peavey paper is informative, factors/procedures which can influence/manipulate test results. Never read that specific 4db room gain number anywhere from Klipsch or their spec sheets. Only since Dean mentioned it here yesterday.

And Gary, 101 db is such a strong result as it is. I cannot think of another speaker brand off the top of my head that i have read or researched over the years with that high of a sensitivity result. From a perspective of input power efficiency, clearly Klipsch Heritage line totally dominates the market. Especially the Khorns and LS models. For 70 years and counting. After thinking about this off and on overnight, I can sort of envision where this Klipsch procedure began. The original Khorn was so dependent on positioning in a corner for its true musical delivery (LF). Corner loading to complete the cabinet design as PWK envisioned and engineered. So as the years roll on, and this became the Klipsch standard for data collection. As I said before, there is no industry standard, there is no industry governing body (that I am aware of), and Klipsch is free to publish their specs as they deem. I can respect that. It surely doesn't hurt their marketing strategies/sales literature that their published sensitivity data is head and heels above any other home loudspeaker manufacturer. (with the tiny footnote denoting "typical room gain")

Listen to a one million dollar hi-fi system over my $180 a pair Elac Debut 6.2 bookshelf speakers @ my desktop pc........................priceless!

Oh brother, here we go I was reading a McIntosh owner's manual just a while ago (MA6600 Stereo integrated amp) pushing 200 wpc and Mac recommends 14 AWG for any run < 50 feet, 8 ohm load. 12 AWG using a 4 ohm speaker, < 50 feet. McIntosh Labs, the king of high quality American amplifiers since 1949, a legend around the world. Here is a link to the manual in pdf, in case anybody wishes to read it for themselves, on page nine: http://www.berners.ch/McIntosh/Downloads/MA6600_own_c.pdf

It is deceptive. Measuring your speaker sensitivity readings under lab conditions then arbitrarily adding 4 db to the reading. How come other manufacturers just report their speaker sensitivity readings as they are measured? Try to find any home loudspeaker offered at any price (other than Klipsch) proclaiming a sensitivity level @ 1 watt of 105 db. Anywhere on earth. When magazines or audiophiles conduct loudspeaker sensitivity readings they usually measure outside in a field or empty parking lot to remove any room gain or reflections. Because they do not have access to an anechoic chamber. When Josh Ricci @ databass.com measures subwoofer output, do they arbitrarily add 4db to the readings after the measurements? Nope. They want a fair and consistent measurement standard/test conditions. For all brand subs or DIY boxes. Why doesn't Klipsch just report the data as measured, like every other loudspeaker manufacturer in the world? Oh I know why, because it makes their speakers appear hyper efficient, superior to all others and not even close. Klipsch doesn't need to add 4 db. The horn design/compression drivers are so efficient they would still be dominant. Look i realize my view isn't popular here, but I prefer truth versus inflated claims.

You are welcome, sir.

As mentioned above by Dean, the 4 db added to their sensitivity measurements after testing @ 1 watt input (2.83 volt) @ a distance of 1 meter. Most manufacturer loudspeaker testing is done in a anechoic test room. So Klipsch adds 4 db of generated sound pressure level to account for the end user's room gain. Seems rather arbitrary to me, not every user's room is the same size, flooring surface, dampening qualities. But it does make their (Klipsch) published sensitivity data appear really impressive. For example, a 10 db gain from X level equates to a doubling of the sound pressure level. For example 100 db to 110 db. Huge difference between playing your LaScalas @ 2.83 volt input in a 12x12' bedroom (door closed) with a tile floor, versus say a 30x30' LR with wall to wall carpeting and many sound dampening furnishings and/or an open floor plan. Actual distance to the listener's ears from the transducer is a big factor too. The room gains for each room in my analogy are quite different. So to test your product (loudspeaker) for sensitivity and add a 4 db room gain arbitrarily on top of the actual test result seems disingenuous to me. Just my opinion. Kipsch sensitivity data is on another level compared to other home loudspeakers. Also as I mentioned above, numbers that second party testing can never realize (such as audiophile websites/testing/review data). Or in the old days published audiophile magazines. Most home loudspeaker sensitivity numbers are usually 84 to 95 db @ 1 watt input . Try to find any other loudspeaker brand/manufacturer @ any cost equaling 104 db sensitivity in their published data. Hopefully I made myself clear above. Dean has way more expertise than I.

Well that explains it. 4 db is pretty huge.

40C = 104F. As people in India enter the middle class, they are re-thinking AC for home comfort. Not to mention the humidity reduction with AC operation, as you said good for all electronic equipment.

So I have heard a couple guys here make that same assertion. But short of independent bench testing, how can one confidently state the AVR manufacturers are lying about their power output? Clearly Denon and Yamaha publish their performance figures based on a 2 channel output (stereo mode), not 5, 7, or 9 channels driven for their AVRs. It's is the "specs section" of the each product owner's manual and on their respective web site/pages. Short of precision secondary testing how can one make the statement they are lying about their perf data? Same goes for Klipsch, known for their very high speaker sensitivity data. No magazine or on line testing I have ever read or seen has equaled Klipsch's claims of individual Heritage speaker sensitivity data @ 2.83 volts (1 watt), one meter distance testing. Is Klipsch lying too? I have read at least one longtime member here on the forum who alluded the Klipsch sensitivity data is false or exaggerated. I do remember when audio magazines would do actual bench testing for a stereo receiver or AVR, for max power output and noise levels. I have not seen this done in many years (over 10+). And even then there wasn't an industry standard for testing, the same methodology employed by all manufacturers. In order to have a standard, you have to have a governing board, and to my knowledge that never happened in the consumer audio industry in 40 years. Like SAE for example. Would enjoy reading input or comments from any of the old hands here on the forum on this topic too. I know there are guys here with way more experience and knowledge than I.