or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers? - Page 2

post #31 of 131
Just speaking for myself there was no way I could have spent 3500 per speaker so the Cat 12's were not an option. 2199 a speaker is still an insane amount of money but since I planned on just using my Pioneer Elite the total difference in price is:

LRC Cat 12's = 10,500
LRC Noesis = 6597

That is a huge difference - almost 4 grand, and enough of one that guys like me will spring for the Noesis.

As for testing out to see if having an amp makes a difference, I plan on getting a Cerwin Vega 5000 amp to run my DIY subs. Would that amp work fine to test out if there is a difference between powering the Noesis with a amp vs a receiver?

BTW, both companies are awesome, one makes my favorite subwoofer and the other my favorite speaker - so far!!
Edited by carp - 1/14/13 at 5:42am
post #32 of 131
Kain,

I've found that the best people to listen to regarding the answer to your question are folks who have directly compared both but aren't an owner of either. This helps remove as much bias as possible. An owner will be biased, and they can likely pick out their own speakers every time (even blind), so it's better to listen to someone with no "dog in the fight." Actually, it's better to just compare both yourself. biggrin.gif
post #33 of 131
Popularity is probably not the best thing to judge a speaker by.

There are many excellent speakers that do not have huge sales numbers.

On the other hand, the Vandersteen Model 2 speakers have sold more over a 30-year period than any other "high-end' speaker, and they have been acknowledged as excellent by virtually everyone who has ever tested or listened to them, so I guess they are pretty "popular"...lol.
post #34 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

Just speaking for myself there was no way I could have spent 3500 per speaker so the Cat 12's were not an option. 2199 a speaker is still an insane amount of money but since I planned on just using my Pioneer Elite the total difference in price is:

LRC Cat 12's = 10,500
LRC Noesis = 6597

That is a huge difference - almost 4 grand, and enough of one that guys like me will spring for the Noesis.

As for testing out to see if having an amp makes a difference, I plan on getting a Cerwin Vega 5000 amp to run my DIY subs. Would that amp work fine to test out if there is a difference between powering the Noesis with a amp vs a receiver?

BTW, both companies are awesome, one makes my favorite subwoofer and the other my favorite speaker - so far!!
For me it was straight money. I had already dropped 12K on a DefTech 9.2 Mythos system that turned out not to be what I wanted. I found the Cat12's b/c I bought a SubM HP. It took another month to stumble across JTR and when I did I realized that I could Sell my pair of Mythos ST's and a SCReference for what 3 T12's cost. I did and now DefTech is just an Expensive memory.
Since the Noesis is new it will be all the talk till the next great speaker comes out. I hope Seaton and JTR keep coming out with these offerings. Keeps things interesting and makes ID companies try harder. It also puts to bed old speaker myths.wink.gif
These are good times in audio.smile.gif
Chris

As for the amp question Carp you will have to try it out and tell us. I am done with the JTR/amp controversy.tongue.gif
Edited by countryWV - 1/14/13 at 7:33am
post #35 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kain View Post

Is it because of price? I am just wondering because the official JTR thread here on AVS is far more active than the Seaton Sound thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frohlich View Post

I think part of it is there is a core number of posters on the JTR thread that use it as a chat room (myself included). We talk about JTR speakers but we also use it to keep in touch and share info. Lots of the members have met each other at meets or demos and are friends. I don't think it has anything to do with popularity of the product as I am guessing there are more HP sub owners than JTR speaker owners.

I agree
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

I know this might sound silly but one of the reasons I scratched Seaton speakers off my list was because with the built in amps they're just priced too high for me. I don't know if its even possible but it would be nice to see some of his great speakers without the built in amps. I haven't been following Seaton for all that long, is there a reason why he really only offers his speakers with built in amps?

One of my primary reasons (not sold on the active speaker concept) ... But being powered theoretically you should be able to get the maximum performance from the components used.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Higher level of performance capability. when using an active crossover you do not lose as much power and the DSP allows Mark to customize the response of the speaker to the room.

Not sure about the active crossovers power loss differential confused.gif

But the rest of the statement is interesting. I wonder how many Catalysts have been customized to the owners space? That would require hiring Mark to come do that and that could be a very expensive proposition. I think what your really saying is they have been "voiced" for the best sound in an average room.
post #36 of 131
I think the premium is because Mark's systems are just that...systems. They're engineered to be ruler-flat via DSP. Then you're only responsible for taming your room's effect on the sound. Whereas with JTR's passive speakers you have to combat both the room and inherently peaky response of their high-efficiency drivers.

Although that would be an awesome value-add if a customer could provide Mark (or any active speaker manufacturer) with sweeps of his room's FR and they tailor the DSP accordingly biggrin.gif
post #37 of 131
SeatonSound & JTR Speakers are more like sibling companies than they are competition. One is 100% active and the other is 100% passive with a few powered subs. They have alot more in common than differences. Both are built to last a lifetime while reproducing all source material accurate and distortion free. They produce massive SPL with crystal clear playback. They each key in on thier own little corner of the audio or HT market. In order for one to be declared a winner the other would be the loser by default and anyone who owns the Noesis, Cat12, T12, Cat 8, or T8 is clearly a winner.
So why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers? They are not they are equal if anything when it comes to popularity. The correct choice will always give way to the individual's situation and goals. The main one being Active vs Passive.
Last of my 2 cents
Chris
post #38 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Avarice_ View Post

I think the premium is because Mark's systems are just that...systems. They're engineered to be ruler-flat via DSP. Then you're only responsible for taming your room's effect on the sound. Whereas with JTR's passive speakers you have to combat both the room and inherently peaky response of their high-efficiency drivers.

Although that would be an awesome value-add if a customer could provide Mark (or any active speaker manufacturer) with sweeps of his room's FR and they tailor the DSP accordingly biggrin.gif

Flattening the response is a function of the crossover. In the past I believe JTR's were voiced based upon user in room feedback and to address the native issues of the drivers used (ex. HF roll off). With the more current models (specifically the Noesis), the crossovers are designed to give a ruler flat response. The primary advantage of DSP is it's tweakability but I wonder how many are actually being tweaked.

Net net is you still have to EQ the speakers to the room to get the best response. That is very dependent upon methodology, the type of content played and the taste of the listener.
Edited by RMK! - 1/14/13 at 9:21am
post #39 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post


Net net is you still have to EQ the speakers to the room to get the best response. That is very dependent upon methodology, the type of content played and the taste of the listener.
+1. The flattest speaker in the world isn't flat anymore when you put it in a room, and every room is different, so what's perfect in one won't be in another. Flat response was the Holy Grail of the audio Dark Ages, when we didn't have the ability to EQ. Today it's not an undesirable trait, but not a necessary one either.
post #40 of 131
Hi guys,

I'll leave most of the back and forth to all of you, with the obvious reminder that price thresholds and perceived value always comes into play, but a few quick corrections/confirmations:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post

I know this might sound silly but one of the reasons I scratched Seaton speakers off my list was because with the built in amps they're just priced too high for me. I don't know if its even possible but it would be nice to see some of his great speakers without the built in amps. I haven't been following Seaton for all that long, is there a reason why he really only offers his speakers with built in amps?

One of my primary reasons (not sold on the active speaker concept) ... But being powered theoretically you should be able to get the maximum performance from the components used.

Indeed, powered speakers have never been the most popular choice of enthusiasts as they are less conventional from what we are used to and regardless of the total cost being similar or not, it's easier to stomach a few smaller purchases vs. one larger expense. It was a choice I knew would limit sales, but delivered a superior product. There are aspects of the crossover alignment and integration which cannot be executed as well passively. Delays and precise, narrow EQ are simply not practical with passive crossovers. The active crossovers also make it easier to execute the very low crossover to the woofers I use in the Catalysts of <250Hz helping the in-room and off-axis response variations. The active solution is a more expensive path, just as the smooth cabinet face with large edge bevels and premium sealed woofers I employ all add to the expense. They are also key parts of what provide the resulting performance. I would never suggest that I wouldn't design and offer a passive speaker, but that's not what I wanted to found and anchor my company with.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Higher level of performance capability. when using an active crossover you do not lose as much power and the DSP allows Mark to customize the response of the speaker to the room.

Not sure about the active crossovers power loss differential confused.gif

But the rest of the statement is interesting. I wonder how many Catalysts have been customized to the owners space? That would require hiring Mark to come do that and that could be a very expensive proposition. I think what your really saying is they have been "voiced" for the best sound in an average room.

The mention of power loss is related to the passive crossover components. Passive crossovers reduce efficiency at intended frequencies and ranges to achieve the desired response and have internal losses and non-linearities of their own. An active crossover doesn't re-direct or absorb the amplifier's power, but rather adjusts the level coming from the amplifier. As evidence by many great passive speakers, this is not a fatal flaw, but rather a compromise which can be minimized, particularly in high efficiency designs and with quality component choices. Of course and active solution eliminates the issue.

There are only 2 DSP settings which have ever shipped or reside at a customer's home. The first being the same as what fugueness has had in his speakers since the beginning, and the second being a recent addition of a subtle baffle wall compensation (at lower frequencies) for those building their Catalysts flush in a baffle wall behind a screen. I continue to experiment with options for user EQ, but such options have to allow the same capabilities of the current design, be practical to set up and use, and also be superior in some way to the many room correction systems currently available.
post #41 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

Hi guys,

I'll leave most of the back and forth to all of you, with the obvious reminder that price thresholds and perceived value always comes into play, but a few quick corrections/confirmations:
Indeed, powered speakers have never been the most popular choice of enthusiasts as they are less conventional from what we are used to and regardless of the total cost being similar or not, it's easier to stomach a few smaller purchases vs. one larger expense. It was a choice I knew would limit sales, but delivered a superior product. There are aspects of the crossover alignment and integration which cannot be executed as well passively. Delays and precise, narrow EQ are simply not practical with passive crossovers. The active crossovers also make it easier to execute the very low crossover to the woofers I use in the Catalysts of <250Hz helping the in-room and off-axis response variations. The active solution is a more expensive path, just as the smooth cabinet face with large edge bevels and premium sealed woofers I employ all add to the expense. They are also key parts of what provide the resulting performance. I would never suggest that I wouldn't design and offer a passive speaker, but that's not what I wanted to found and anchor my company with.
The mention of power loss is related to the passive crossover components. Passive crossovers reduce efficiency at intended frequencies and ranges to achieve the desired response and have internal losses and non-linearities of their own. An active crossover doesn't re-direct or absorb the amplifier's power, but rather adjusts the level coming from the amplifier. As evidence by many great passive speakers, this is not a fatal flaw, but rather a compromise which can be minimized, particularly in high efficiency designs and with quality component choices. Of course and active solution eliminates the issue.

There are only 2 DSP settings which have ever shipped or reside at a customer's home. The first being the same as what fugueness has had in his speakers since the beginning, and the second being a recent addition of a subtle baffle wall compensation (at lower frequencies) for those building their Catalysts flush in a baffle wall behind a screen. I continue to experiment with options for user EQ, but such options have to allow the same capabilities of the current design, be practical to set up and use, and also be superior in some way to the many room correction systems currently available.

Thank you for the corrections and clarifications Mark. Your engineering prowess and communications skills are why your products are such great performers and why you have such a loyal following. I have never heard a Seaton product that didn't sound great and I believe I've heard them all. smile.gif
post #42 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Thank you for the corrections and clarifications Mark. Your engineering prowess and communications skills are why your products are such great performers and why you have such a loyal following. I have never heard a Seaton product that didn't sound great and I believe I've heard them all. smile.gif

Don't listen to Mark!!!! If he knew what he was talking about he would start his own company .... sell world class subwoofers and speakers....design them... oh wait...never mind tongue.gif
post #43 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

It's time for someone to put together a JTR Noesis vs Seaton Catalyst shootout. wink.gif I think both speakers will be present at the NE GTG, but that's not until April, plus a bazillion other speakers will be present. I think these two specifically need to be compared.

I know we will have Cat 8's and likely the Noesis at the GTG. I have yet to hear the Cat 12's and they would probably be the most appropriate to compare to the JTRs.

Perhaps Mark can chime in? Maybe he wants to bring a pair of 12's out?? biggrin.gifbiggrin.gif
post #44 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla83 View Post



Perhaps Mark can chime in? Maybe he wants to bring a pair of 12's out?? biggrin.gifbiggrin.gif
Now we're talkin'! biggrin.gif
post #45 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Now we're talkin'! biggrin.gif

And talk is cheap ... tongue.gif

As Chris mentioned above and having heard both speakers being discussed, I think these speakers will have similar capabilities and will be more alike than different. With a "bazillion" speakers present, the GTG should be a lot of fun but it does not seem like the venue for any substantive comparisons.

The more interesting comparo was the Iowa GTG with the blind test of the Salks and Noesis. As I recall, the Salks were the Packers and the Noesis the 49ers ...

Ouch .. did I just say that ... tongue.gif J/K Nuance ... wink.gif
post #46 of 131
If I had the finances, I would own speakers and subs from both companies.
post #47 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla83 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

It's time for someone to put together a JTR Noesis vs Seaton Catalyst shootout. wink.gif I think both speakers will be present at the NE GTG, but that's not until April, plus a bazillion other speakers will be present. I think these two specifically need to be compared.

I know we will have Cat 8's and likely the Noesis at the GTG. I have yet to hear the Cat 12's and they would probably be the most appropriate to compare to the JTRs.

Perhaps Mark can chime in? Maybe he wants to bring a pair of 12's out?? biggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

Being 3 months away it's a little early to commit to specific speakers yet, as that can depend on parts availability as we've barely kept ahead of sales on the 12C. I am hopeful to have the 12C or something comparable available, and of course the 8C's will be there. Hopefully the many treatments Gorrilla83 added should help even out the sound in the room as there were some pretty huge variations with depth in the room at the subwoofer meet.
post #48 of 131
I think those 2 speakers are perfect for a blind comparison. With the Noesis and Salks it wasn't as good because people could tell what they were listening to (everyone that guessed which speaker was which was correct) and then of course, bias can come back into play. With the Cat 12's and Noesis, there are similar dynamic capabilities so the chances of everyone knowing which was which is not going to happen.

I think I would be ok this time to be part of a blind test. I was scared to do that in Iowa because I didn't want to have to deal with the fact that if I liked the Salks better I would have put the Noesis up for sale and buy some Salks. However, after the GTG started I realized that it didn't matter if I was blind or not, either way if i liked the Salks better I was going to make a switch.

I think I'm over that fear. If I like another speaker better, so be it and I'll figure out a way to make a change. In this case if it's the Cat 12's, I would save up the difference it would take between selling the Noesis and buying the Cat's and then go from there. However, it would have to be a clear cut difference and preference to the Cat 12's across the board, similar to how much more I liked the Noesis than any speaker I had ever heard. With the Noesis I liked them so much it was like I was compelled/forced to buy them. eek.gif It would have to be the same kind of feeling to do that again.

I don't know how much better it can get though, I already have a hard time turning off the system at night to go to bed and I'm getting goose bumps and chills all the time... smile.gif
post #49 of 131
I know something else that stopped me from looking at Seaton speakers was that I would have to build my system around Seaton speakers, meaning my theater was already prewired for standard style speakers without the built in amps and I would also have to swap out my receiver. But with JTR's all I would have to do in integrate the speakers into my system with the equippment that I already have. Seaton speakers are pretty amazing though from everything that I've read.
post #50 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

Being 3 months away it's a little early to commit to specific speakers yet, as that can depend on parts availability as we've barely kept ahead of sales on the 12C. I am hopeful to have the 12C or something comparable available, and of course the 8C's will be there. Hopefully the many treatments Gorrilla83 added should help even out the sound in the room as there were some pretty huge variations with depth in the room at the subwoofer meet.

Mark - Understand. I have no doubt Seaton sound will be well represented one way or another. tongue.gif Is this your way of telling us there is a new speaker design in the works? biggrin.gif JK.

If it would be helpful and for those interested, we could do extensive comparisons comparing a couple of speakers (blind or sighted) on Friday night? I'm pushing to have free reign of the house Friday-Sunday morning which I don't think will be a problem. biggrin.gif I know there are a lot of guys traveling in on Friday so if schedules align that would buy us some extra time to for some more in depth 1 on 1 comparisons to whatever the group wants to hear. Thoughts?

If it would help we could do this upstairs in a much more open area with hopefully less reflections, although I do think the downstairs setup is significantly improved now. I will leave it up to you guys.
Edited by Gorilla83 - 1/14/13 at 12:46pm
post #51 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I think those 2 speakers are perfect for a blind comparison. With the Noesis and Salks it wasn't as good because people could tell what they were listening to (everyone that guessed which speaker was which was correct) and then of course, bias can come back into play. smile.gif
You are mistaking bias for Good Taste.wink.gif
Chris
post #52 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post


I think I'm over that fear. If I like another speaker better, so be it and I'll figure out a way to make a change.

I've only owned like 9 sets of loudspeakers in the last 10 years and each move has been carefully calculated and strategic with an amazing level increase in my enjoyment of music and movies as the result. And each time I sent the prior manufacturer flowers and candy as an expression of gratitude. You youngsters just don't understand brand loyalty and that makes me sad :-(.
post #53 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I've only owned like 9 sets of loudspeakers in the last 10 years and each move has been carefully calculated and strategic with an amazing level increase in my enjoyment of music and movies as the result. And each time I sent the prior manufacturer flowers and candy as an expression of gratitude. You youngsters just don't understand brand loyalty and that makes me sad :-(.
Carp just has not built the confidence that comes with owning Big Badass speakers.wink.gif He has the Noesis but talks like he is still rocking the ED12's.tongue.gif I sure hope Those DIY projects make a confident man out of him.smile.gif When someone tells me my speakers are great I say " I know that is why I bought them."
J/K Carp
Chris
Edited by countryWV - 1/14/13 at 1:50pm
post #54 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I've only owned like 9 sets of loudspeakers in the last 10 years and each move has been carefully calculated and strategic with an amazing level increase in my enjoyment of music and movies as the result. And each time I sent the prior manufacturer flowers and candy as an expression of gratitude. You youngsters just don't understand brand loyalty and that makes me sad :-(.

Waaaait a second? Doesn't brand loyality mean sticking with a brand?

And wouldn't flowers and candy kind of be insulting? Like, "Don't be sad that your product wasn't good enough for me. Here are some flowers to make you feel better."
post #55 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

And talk is cheap ... tongue.gif

As Chris mentioned above and having heard both speakers being discussed, I think these speakers will have similar capabilities and will be more alike than different. With a "bazillion" speakers present, the GTG should be a lot of fun but it does not seem like the venue for any substantive comparisons.

The more interesting comparo was the Iowa GTG with the blind test of the Salks and Noesis. As I recall, the Salks were the Packers and the Noesis the 49ers ...

Ouch .. did I just say that ... tongue.gif J/K Nuance ... wink.gif

Oh come now, you weren't kidding. How rude. smile.gif Are you a 49'ers fan?

By the way, the Noesis only beat the Salk's by one person in the music section; we all know the JTR's are better for HT, so that was nothing knew. The GTG was also highly biased, being dominated by high efficiency design lovers and/or owners, so of course they picked the JTR's as the better speakers. DUH! smile.gif Even blind it would have been easy to do, as stated by some of the attendees. And lets not forget the speakers weren't moved to the same location while listening, so the room effect on each was different. wink.gif Regardless, in that event it was JTR 7, Salk 6. The Packer score was much worse, and I can make no excuses for them. redface.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

I think those 2 speakers are perfect for a blind comparison. With the Noesis and Salks it wasn't as good because people could tell what they were listening to (everyone that guessed which speaker was which was correct) and then of course, bias can come back into play. With the Cat 12's and Noesis, there are similar dynamic capabilities so the chances of everyone knowing which was which is not going to happen.

^ This. wink.gif
post #56 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post

Waaaait a second? Doesn't brand loyality mean sticking with a brand?

And wouldn't flowers and candy kind of be insulting? Like, "Don't be sad that your product wasn't good enough for me. Here are some flowers to make you feel better."

Humm, good point on the brand loyalty thing ...

As for the flowers/candy, it's all about intent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Oh come now, you weren't kidding. How rude. smile.gif Are you a 49'ers fan?

By the way, the Noesis only beat the Salk's by one person in the music section; we all know the JTR's are better for HT, so that was nothing knew. The GTG was also highly biased, being dominated by high efficiency design lovers and/or owners, so of course they picked the JTR's as the better speakers. DUH! smile.gif Even blind it would have been easy to do, as stated by some of the attendees. And lets not forget the speakers weren't moved to the same location while listening, so the room effect on each was different. wink.gif Regardless, in that event it was JTR 7, Salk 6. The Packer score was much worse, and I can make no excuses for them. redface.gif
^ This. wink.gif

Again, it's all about intent and I intended to be rude so ... in the immortal words of 43, Mission Accomplished ... smile.gif

As to the rest blah blah blah Salk, blah blah blah biased. smile.gif
post #57 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

I've only owned like 9 sets of loudspeakers in the last 10 years and each move has been carefully calculated and strategic with an amazing level increase in my enjoyment of music and movies as the result. And each time I sent the prior manufacturer flowers and candy as an expression of gratitude. You youngsters just don't understand brand loyalty and that makes me sad :-(.

Jeff is great and I'm a huge fan of him and his company. His new Noesis speakers are incredible, the best of both worlds IMO. They are amazing for movies obviously, since they are a high efficiency design, but at the same time they excel at music and that's an understatement. I've never heard anything that comes close.

I also love this hobby and hearing speakers I've never heard before. If someday I hear speakers I like a lot better (I have my doubts that will happen) I should stay loyal to a brand instead of making a change? I'm more loyal to my ears than a brand.

When you say, "each move has been carefully calculated and strategic with an amazing level increase in enjoyment..." are you implying that I don't do any of that and just blindly buy new speakers? In the last 10 years I've owned 5 sets of speakers and this last time I had the speakers in my own room for a week before buying. True, I knew right away after hearing them in the park that I wanted them, but that speaks more to how impressed I was than to how impulsive I am with buying speakers.

The reality is I will probably have these speakers for the rest of my life.
post #58 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post

Jeff is great and I'm a huge fan of him and his company. His new Noesis speakers are incredible, the best of both worlds IMO. They are amazing for movies obviously, since they are a high efficiency design, but at the same time they excel at music and that's an understatement. I've never heard anything that comes close.

I also love this hobby and hearing speakers I've never heard before. If someday I hear speakers I like a lot better (I have my doubts that will happen) I should stay loyal to a brand instead of making a change? I'm more loyal to my ears than a brand.

When you say, "each move has been carefully calculated and strategic with an amazing level increase in enjoyment..." are you implying that I don't do any of that and just blindly buy new speakers? In the last 10 years I've owned 5 sets of speakers and this last time I had the speakers in my own room for a week before buying. True, I knew right away after hearing them in the park that I wanted them, but that speaks more to how impressed I was than to how impulsive I am with buying speakers.

The reality is I will probably have these speakers for the rest of my life.

Yes Carp, I'm afraid I have you correctly sized up as an impulsive and irresponsible speaker buyer with little or no brand loyalty... just like me ... smile.gif

Of course, you might not agree and that would make me sad too ... :-(

As a disclaimer, I am under the influence of cold meds and they have the unfortunate side effect of making me think I am funny ...
post #59 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Yes Carp, I'm afraid I have you correctly sized up as an impulsive and irresponsible speaker buyer with little or no brand loyalty... just like me ... smile.gif

Of course, you might not agree and that would make me sad too ... :-(

As a disclaimer, I am under the influence of cold meds and they have the unfortunate side effect of making me think I am funny ...

Ha, irresponsible for sure, especially according to my wife - "you spent how much on speakers???" eek.gif
post #60 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Humm, good point on the brand loyalty thing ...
Again, it's all about intent and I intended to be rude so ... in the immortal words of 43, Mission Accomplished ... smile.gif

As to the rest blah blah blah Salk, blah blah blah biased. smile.gif

Yes, clearly you intended to be rude, because put simply you're a rude individual who intentionally goes on attack when challenged, even when you're wrong. You should be ashamed of yourself.

As to the rest blah blah blah, blinded by JTR bias, blah blah blah, can't argue the facts so resorts to: blah blah blah. smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Why are JTR speakers more popular than Seaton Sound speakers?