lpv said:
About 3 meters away plus minus. At seating position to sub.
Never gave the sub location much thought but sounded natural to me.
As i said the sub sounded much better than mine
About 3 meters away plus minus. At seating position to sub.
Never gave the sub location much thought but sounded natural to me.
As i said the sub sounded much better than mine
lpv, you have not answered my question.lpv said:
It's OK if you think pre-amps are less important than crossovers, even though you haven't - as far as we know - done comparative listening tests (of any sort: sighted or unsighted) of representatives from each of the 4 main genres of pre-amps.
You are welcome to think what you like.
Have you done any listening on passive vs active crossovers on the same speakers? Have you ever listened to the same speakers with an active crossover and with a passive crossover? If so, which speakers and what were the results to your ears with your test tracks
And, seeing as you bought up the EV vs AVI bake-off again. It became clear to me that the EV's could be played a few dbs quieter than the AVI's and the basic differences between the 2 systems would still remain. I know which system I would prefer listening to even if one was played with peaks hitting 84 dbs and the other 89. I won't bother asking you which system you thought sounded better - as in more realistic - at the bake-off as I've already asked you that question a few times on this forum and you've never answered it.
no, I havent done the testing you've mentioned.. why preamp? the least important audio jewelery component I had was atc £1500 preamp into atc active 40s.. it wasnt any different than schitt passive pre or auralic aries mini I had at the same time.. digital source could be on the same list of least important components.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram