TheEAR Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 ---------------- On 4/26/2004 8:08:00 PM chops wrote: ---------------- On 4/26/2004 1:59:52 PM SoundBroker wrote: ---------------- On 4/25/2004 9:14:17 PM chops wrote: ---------------- On 4/25/2004 9:01:24 PM Tweek wrote: nice sub! it can probably run right beside that $19k sub for a sliver of the price ---------------- Thanks! I bet it can hold its own pretty well against that monster. ---------------- Output wise...yes. Overall...probably not. This beast has the lowest group delay, the lowest distortion level, the highest linearity, highest efficiency and the most control of amplitude and phase of any sub ever measured. If anybody is familiar with Tom Holman's "The Hollywood Edge" test disc series and the infamous "boinker" tests which are just about the most brutal tests for a subwoofer imaginable...this is the sub that that disc was developed with and the only one that passes the tests perfectly. It was developed using an entirely new method of acoustical enclosure design called Parametric Acoustic Modeling (PAM). Here is a link to a brief description by Tom Holman of what PAM does... http://www.whise.com.au/popups/popup_tech_tom.pdf The sub will output 125db at any of the passband frequencies from 16 hz to 150hz with absolute linearity. We've had some pretty over the top designs, both home built and commercial, and nothing approaches this beast for overall performance. Yah, it is big and expensive, but it is the best. Cheers, Kevin The Sound Broker ---------------- Please, please, don't get me wrong. I'm not bashing you or that sub at all. I'm just looking at it from a price to performance ratio. However, claims of it having the lowest group delay, the lowest distortion level, and the highest linearity may or may not be totally accurate. Sure, maybe at it's MAX output. But who plays it that loud all the time? Take my DIPOLE subs for instance..... They have vertually "ZERO" group delay at any level or frequency because they are not in an enclosure of any kind, just a large open baffle. The distrortion level is lower than most because they are so efficient, (I think somewhere around 106dB @ 1 watt/1 meter). Even at the highest volumes that I've played them, with any type of bass material, the drivers barely move and the amplifier barely gets warm over several hours of constant use. Linearity? With my Dipole subs, I can have my system playing at whisper levels late at night, or playing full blast in the middle of the day, and the bass quality and quantity sounds exactly the same, just louder. Plus, I have yet to hear a subwoofer system other than mine to be able to tell the minute differences between bass instruments. Anyway, both systems are good, I just feel mine would be the better bang for the buck, at any price. ---------------- Hard to argue with price performance ratio of dipole subs.No audible compression,superb definition and when used in numbers and large drivers are used you get near limitless output and true subsonic might. I wish I would sacrifice some time and build one myself,using a few Tumult woofers and finally put to use some of my spare power amps. Maybe one day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 You should seriously consider building some dipoles. They really are the greatest sounding subwoofers I have ever heard. However, if you decide to use those Tumult drivers, you'll have to do some serious EQ'ing to get them to sound right in an infinant baffle design. My drivers on the other hand, are an almost perfect match for dipoles, and require very very little EQ.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
space_cowboy Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 LMAO, I could care less about the subs you guys claim to have, but it's funny as hell to read you talk about them. Anyone can read specs,,,,,,,,,,EAR is the only credible person here,,,,,,,,,,,some newb with a Mini avatar who is/was a pro car installer can't possibly know ka ka about home audio............... This is great............almost like a Batman episode........... KAAblooey wow SHAZZAMM POW Edit: I'll listen to what SoundBroker says... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
space_cowboy Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Sorry tweek and sorry room. My Dad had emergency surgery last night and lost part of his insides (I'll leave it at that),,,,,,,,just angry I guess, sorry I was stupid here and reacted in the room the way I did. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Well, just to let you know, I don't have to "claim" about having anything. I can easily prove it, and here's the proof! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damonrpayne Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 Come on guys, there have been so many personal attacks let it be. I've met enough forum members in real life to know 99% of the people here have the stuff they say they have. Very nice setup chops! As for "who would buy this" blah blah, I view that stuff like a Ferrari: worth drooling over and discussing and understood no work a day person is going to afford one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoggy Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 SoundBroker, I for one find it very interseting. I always wondered but never searched to find out about these monsters. Thanks for the info. hoggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooting_monkey Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 I wonder what the Krell MR would do against that 19K sub... They are both really wicked subs and would prbably give somebody a bowel movent from the vibration if they got too close... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 ---------------- On 4/26/2004 10:03:35 PM chops wrote: Well, just to let you know, I don't have to "claim" about having anything. I can easily prove it, and here's the proof! http://chops.tzo.com/DSCN4372.jpg" border="0"> ---------------- Great show Come on people no personal attacks on new forum members.The more members the forum has,the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damonrpayne Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 BTW chops, you must not have kids in the house? I've got to keep my stuff locked down like Ft. Knox! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted April 26, 2004 Share Posted April 26, 2004 I for one do not care about personal attacts on me. It would take alot more than that to get rid of me! And the only kids I have are the 4 legged ones with lots of hair (fur). No wife either!!! Just four kittie-cats roaming around the house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted April 27, 2004 Share Posted April 27, 2004 Which explains the unsightly cover around the bottom of the audio rack...to keep the naughty kitties out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted April 27, 2004 Share Posted April 27, 2004 ---------------- On 4/26/2004 5:36:12 PM SoundBroker wrote: It has the pedigree, the test results (which don't lie) and the guys behind it have the credentials, the AES papers and the experience to back up the claims. ---------------- Just curious if you have the AES paper numbers (or copies) which discuss the Parametric Acoustic Modeling (PAM) and how it compares to Theil/Small's parameters? Without having seen them, I'm assuming that it attempts to address the non-linearity in the drivers' performance esp below the Fs of the and also as the driver approaches it's maximum excursion. I'm curious if it's truly a new mathematical model or just a rehash of an existing one. Given that you could patent pretty much anything now, patents have become pretty meaningless. Just wondering... Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tankhokie Posted April 27, 2004 Share Posted April 27, 2004 lol chops, i was thinking to myself as i checked out your system, "that is probably what my setup would look like if i wasn't married" the kitty-proofing w/masking tape is nice. i am lucky my 2 cats don't mess with the components much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 ---------------- On 4/27/2004 9:37:46 PM tankhokie wrote: lol chops, i was thinking to myself as i checked out your system, "that is probably what my setup would look like if i wasn't married" the kitty-proofing w/masking tape is nice. i am lucky my 2 cats don't mess with the components much. ---------------- Well trust me, I don't like having that thing taped up there. We have four cats, but only one of them goes back there. Say, do you want another cat?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avman Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 thanks for the info,soundbroker and others. wheather it is practical/affordable to some or none,it is still good info. avman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardsweb Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 ---------------- On 4/25/2004 11:30:36 PM michael hurd wrote: Here is a picture of the b-one form bassmaxx. ---------------- Here is what two look like in a home theater setup. I run the McCauley 6174 Super-Sub in these. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tankhokie Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 no more cats!!! i am toilet training them currently...one is done, the other...well i makes me wonder if this training is worth it or not. Wardsweb, are they the 2 black boxes in the lower corners underneath the wood and black monolithic structures??? looks like a setup from the cia in the 70's with the tape reels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardsweb Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 You are correct sir. The subs are laying flat in the corners. The "monoliths" are Martin Logan CLS electrostats. The boxes on legs in front are 1961 JBL C38 speakers used for 2-channel audio listening. As for the R2R, I can not confirm nor deny any affiliation with certain "no-name" companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweek Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 holy crap!! i'm hoping you dont have neighbors, if you do i hope you are very good friends with them dont you find the audio to be some what over powering for your TV? i mean damn thats alot of bass for such a small screen... well its not that small, looks about 36" but the audio to visual ratio just looks way off in that picture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.