or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › NE Spring Speaker Shootout results thread - April 13, 2013
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NE Spring Speaker Shootout results thread - April 13, 2013 - Page 13

post #361 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post

KRKs
Heard these back in at Gorilla's October Subwoofer GTG. Honestly, at the time, all I remotely cared about was subs, so I didn't even give these a second look. It's like when you get in the mood for Mexican food and there just happens to be a Sushi spot right next to the Mexican restaurant. I love Dragon Rolls, but I was trying to get my Fajita fix man! Anyway, I had a chance to get to listen too, and appreciate, the KRK's this go around. It was near the end of the night and all of the heavy hitters had their turn, so the primary listening areas were available. I wanted to give these some real attention because Ben had given them rave reviews. Tell you what... I completely agree. I really liked these guys. Even after all of the ear rape I had endured, I was hearing things with the KRK's that I hadn't heard from any other offering all night. I want to say there was one or two clips where I had Ben play a track three of four times because I thought I was hearing the KRK's distort or play nasty sounds. Turns out it was the recordings themselves. Revealing, yes.... Maybe a bit too revealing? Ben opened them up for us full range too and was again impressed with what they were able to offer when called upon. Great at full range duties for sure. In fact, I bet they would have been one of the best in the full range group at the beginning of the day. I think I remember Ben mentioning that he is only about 6ft away from his MLP and his speakers, so Geez man... these KRK's up that close would be more than enough for just about anyone.

Questions Unanswered:
I'm good. Satisfied.
Buzz Factor: 4

Um, I totally ran them full range the whole time...... really wished I ran them back with all the other full rangers. But we decided to run the active speakers all at the end.
Very happy that you liked them, but man those Noesis, I have a major upgrade bug now.....
post #362 of 568
the single 8s will fit better on your desk Ben biggrin.gif
post #363 of 568
Yea but I don't have them on my desk..... its a proper HT setup, I just sit really close.

I would take a new photo, but I am traveling for work.



Basically, my new setup ditches that small monitor and has Samsungs 60" 2013 plasma flagship....
see this crappy cell phone pic:
*

Wish I had a larger space, but if I could get a pair of those noesis and a good amp..... whoa boy I would be in heaven.
post #364 of 568
sitting that close to the noesis would give a whole new meaning to the term "loafing" You would be using like half a watt at ref...haha
post #365 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by beastaudio View Post

sitting that close to the noesis would give a whole new meaning to the term "loafing" You would be using like half a watt at ref...haha

Who said I listen only at reference.... biggrin.gif
post #366 of 568
I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin' biggrin.gif
post #367 of 568
Thread Starter 
Popa - Nice review! I guess it was worth the wait. biggrin.gif

Ben - I agree, if you're going JTR, Noesis is the only logical choice. biggrin.gif
post #368 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla83 View Post

Popa - Nice review! I guess it was worth the wait. biggrin.gif

I ramble too damn much man... I know that even I wouldn't have the attention span to read my own posts sometimes...
tongue.gif
post #369 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post

Excuses

Fusion 8s
Adam did a crazy good job with the finish on these bad boys. Really spectacular. Finally having a chance to hear them I thought they sounded fantastic. Very good off axis response and overall clarity and imaging from as far as I could tell were as good as anything else that already been auditioned at this point. Kinda of a shocker when you consider these were literally the most cost effective option of the entire day. Excellent introduction of SEOS to the group! Seemed like it had everyone scratching their head as to what they could really accomplish with other SEOS designs that have come to fruition over the past year or so.

Questions Unanswered:
On par with almost all other offerings at nominal volumes. How about at reference?
How deep could these dig without a sub?
Buzz Factor: 4.2 (Nursing it)

[.

thanks man glad you liked them

they do sound pretty great really loud but really do need a sub, they roll off around 60hz

the fusion 12s which you didn't list play just about as low as Andrews Sentinels. they extend down to 20ish or so in room
post #370 of 568
i thought i read in here someone asking if someone snapped a pic of the noesis and cats and yorks together. i did not but have this one of my friend Scott standing next to the yorks. hes 6"4'

post #371 of 568
Thanks for the review Austin! Much better late than never!

carp and I have been talking about amping our Noesis with some series power and seeing if they sound different at levels we would normally listen to in our rooms. We might need to hook up my Crown XLS-5000 or his CV-5000 to test this little theory out. My Onkyo TX-NR1007 shouldn't be any sort of slouch though. It has the same power plant as the Onkyo SR-805 and the SR-805 was tested as putting out 270 watts per channel in 4 ohm. The Onkyo 805 was legendary in that regard, and that same amp section was passed onto the next couple generations. With full channel operation that number significantly fades though because the power is shared between the channels - so in a 7.1 or even 9.1 track that the Onkyo is capable of - each speaker would get significantly less.

I bought a used Emotiva XPA-3 just this week too to see if there's any difference there. If not I can sell it off for about what I bought it for.

I've got an Inuke DSP3000, and a crown XLS-202. For what it's worth I the crown and the Onkyo sounded pretty much identical - so I dropped the Crown XLS-202 out of the mix and went back to AVR power for L and R.
post #372 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

carp and I have been talking about amping our Noesis with some series power and seeing if they sound different at levels we would normally listen to in our rooms. We might need to hook up my Crown XLS-5000 or his CV-5000 to test this little theory out.

And what precisely would that level be? Something akin to "my eardrums just exploded!" perhaps? eek.gif
post #373 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sibuna View Post

i thought i read in here someone asking if someone snapped a pic of the noesis and cats and yorks together. i did not but have this one of my friend Scott standing next to the yorks. hes 6"4'


Didn't I see him in Underworld: Awakening?
post #374 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by rush2049 View Post

Um, I totally ran them full range the whole time...... really wished I ran them back with all the other full rangers. But we decided to run the active speakers all at the end.
Very happy that you liked them, but man those Noesis, I have a major upgrade bug now.....

Of course... The S2's were packed up by then. Might need to edit my post to clarify. Just meant that they had good extension even when you were pushing them hard. Better than was expecting for sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sibuna View Post

thanks man glad you liked them

they do sound pretty great really loud but really do need a sub, they roll off around 60hz

the fusion 12s which you didn't list play just about as low as Andrews Sentinels. they extend down to 20ish or so in room

Nice. Since the Sentinels and Fusions 12's have the same CD, I imagine that there would practically be no audible difference if crossed to a sub.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sibuna View Post

i thought i read in here someone asking if someone snapped a pic of the noesis and cats and yorks together. i did not but have this one of my friend Scott standing next to the yorks. hes 6'4'.

I posted that inquiry.

Andrew, I would keep Scott away from your gear bro. Looks like he was about to have his way with the point source...
tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Thanks for the review Austin! Much better late than never!

carp and I have been talking about amping our Noesis with some series power and seeing if they sound different at levels we would normally listen to in our rooms. We might need to hook up my Crown XLS-5000 or his CV-5000 to test this little theory out. My Onkyo TX-NR1007 shouldn't be any sort of slouch though. It has the same power plant as the Onkyo SR-805 and the SR-805 was tested as putting out 270 watts per channel in 4 ohm. The Onkyo 805 was legendary in that regard, and that same amp section was passed onto the next couple generations. With full channel operation that number significantly fades though because the power is shared between the channels - so in a 7.1 or even 9.1 track that the Onkyo is capable of - each speaker would get significantly less.

I bought a used Emotiva XPA-3 just this week too to see if there's any difference there. If not I can sell it off for about what I bought it for.

I've got an Inuke DSP3000, and a crown XLS-202. For what it's worth I the crown and the Onkyo sounded pretty much identical - so I dropped the Crown XLS-202 out of the mix and went back to AVR power for L and R.

Wow Jon, your Onkyo benched at 270watts per channel in stereo? That's incredible! Is there a location or thread where I can check this out? Hell, is there a consolidated thread with other AVR's on the bench? I'd love to see what my SC-57 was capable of in Stereo mode... I totally gave up on manufacturers power specs way back my car audio days... So I take my 140wpc with a grain of salt for sure.

So if your Onkyo benched at 270watts in Stereo, what more are you expecting out of the XPA-3? Might be time to break out the iNuke 3000 just for the hell of it. When you guys decide on what amp you want to use, would this type of test be possible:
  1. Throw an amp in the mix
  2. Amp one channel and leave the other on the AVR
  3. Send a mono signal to the L/R
  4. Level match between the amp/no amp speakers
  5. Increase volume to see if you can perceive any audible differences and/or do some type of AB switching between the two?

Sorry for the side track. Sounds like a potentially cool test in theory, but I'm not sure how practical it would be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Didn't I see him in Underworld: Awakening?

Hahaha...
Edited by popalock - 4/26/13 at 4:44am
post #375 of 568
sound and vision does pretty good reviews where they measure power outoput, might have been there
post #376 of 568
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post


I bought a used Emotiva XPA-3 just this week too to see if there's any difference there. If not I can sell it off for about what I bought it for.

It will be interesting to see if you hear any differences below references. At or above reference I don't think the power difference here is significant enough from your beast of a receiver for anything substantial, but we shall see. Would love to hear about the XLS5K hooked up though - I will be doing the same soon. biggrin.gif
post #377 of 568
Popalock, my android spell checker changes your handle to lipstick. I just thought you should know. Maybe we can keep that fact on the lowdown...

;p


Anywho...

Here's the bench test on the onkyo sr805

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_14_3/onkyo-tx-sr805-receiver-9-2006-part-5.html

I don't think the emotiva will help at all for stereo listening but it might help for movie watching or all channel because an AVR's power is shared between the channels. With all 7 or even 9 channels driven by my onkyo tx-nr 1007 AVR, there isn't near as much power to go round. Maybe like 50 or 60 watts per channel by the time you are feeding 7 channels. By using the emotiva I'm still giving the front three a dedicated 300 watts each at four ohm and increasing the available watts in the AVR's power pool for the rear four speakers.
At least that's how I understand it...

Good idea on doing the channel testing. I've just been experimenting a bit with amps lately. Trying to see what sound differences, if any, there may be.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1457284/onkyo-tx-nr1007-avr-vs-crown-xls-202-vs-behringer-inuke-dsp-3000-in-room-omnimic-frequency-response-graph-comparison

That was my first go round. Subjectively I couldn't tell a difference between the crown and onkyo, but I thought I could tell a difference with the stock inuke dsp. It had more treble and a bit more electronic harsh sound IMO. I've not tried to engage the dsp to flatten my in room response yet on the inuke with my mains, but I do need to try that as well.

Class D amps shouldn't be ruled out for mains, as that's the tech behind the ICE amps that Seaton uses, and you witnessed first hand how impressive they sounded. I have as well at the Wisconsin meet.
Edited by Archaea - 4/26/13 at 5:28am
post #378 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post

Good idea on doing the channel testing. I've just been experimenting a bit with amps lately. Trying to see what sound differences, if any, there may be.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1457284/onkyo-tx-nr1007-avr-vs-crown-xls-202-vs-behringer-inuke-dsp-3000-in-room-omnimic-frequency-response-graph-comparison

lol... Of course you already had a thread on it...

What was I thinking.
post #379 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post

Excuses
I was all over the place at the GTG. I wish I would have made the time to sit patiently, focus on three or four specific areas of the demo material and take extensive notes on every offering. Something came up last minute and I had to leave my laptop at home, so the preparation I had done before the meet to set myself up for some easy note taking, Omnimic measuring, etc... had kinda been tossed out of the window. Alas, I had about three different note sheets going throughout the day, but my absent minded a$$ could barely remember where I set my beer down much less keep track of a pen and note sheet. I attempted to help out with gear swapping, so I never seemed to be in any one place for a prolonged period of time.

For a guy who claims to not have taken extensive notes you sure posted a lot of info! Definitely one of the most entertaining reviews. Guess we'll have to invite you again, eh? biggrin.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post

Noesis Revisited
I'm not exactly sure how it came about, but the determination was made that the Noesis deserved some real power, so accommodations were made to fire up the EP4000.

Not sure how it came about??? Some guy named Austin was nagging everyone to add more power!

Maybe you should up your Buzz rating to about 7 or 8 for the Revisited section... tongue.gif
post #380 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post

Excuses

Arx A5
First of the offerings with subs. Ryan owns a set of these and brought them with him to the Oct Sub GTG. They were overshadowed by the Noesis then and this time overshadowed by the introduction of the S2's. Damn, Ryan and the Arx can't get a break! I made it a point to give these a good listen out of respect for Ryan and the Arx. I was liking what I was hearing, but nothing was really standing out to me. The off axis response was noticeable and very apparent, but not as dramatic (IMO) as what I experienced with the Legacy's. By this time I was starting to develop a bit of a buzz and found the urge to be that little devil on Ryan's shoulder telling him to pull the alpha card, take the remote and crank them. After the initial 23min listening session, Ryan requested to play a few tracks at higher levels. Yesssss.... Finally! Ok, once these were cranked it was easier for me to pick out strengths and weaknesses. I did not take note the AVR level when they Arx's were cranked, but I want to say it was somewhere around -7db or so? (can anyone confirm). At this point I started to hear a bit of distress. I think these would be great for a smaller space for those with a closer LP than 15ft and aren't interested in high level playback.

Questions Unanswered:
I think I was satisfied for the most part, but would have like to hear what they were capable of when playing full range.
Could these outperform the Ascends when running full range duties?
Buzz Factor: 4


Final thoughts
This is my first "speaker" GTG. While I enjoyed every aspect of it, I found myself (and seemed to note several others) getting distracted during the earlier auditions. While I think the approach we took made the most logistical sense, it was clear that 90% of the people were there to hear the heavy hitters and didn't put as much stock into giving every offering a thorough review (yes including myself *note my somewhat hollow reviews). How can we mitigate this? IMHO, less contenders, more time with each offering and I think next time we do this we should make it blind to take out any potential bias.

Austin, first off: you are awesome, and I greatly appreciate the respect you showed me by giving the A5s a good listen. Also love the buzz factor on your write-up; I would have included one as well but I can't pretend to know what level of buzzed I was for most of the day... I think I dug into more variety of beers than anyone else biggrin.gif

I stated this before in my feedback, but I really think the A5s sound a whole lot better than we heard at the GTG... I am not delusional and won't begin to claim that they can play at super loud volumes in giant spaces like Andrew's man cave, but I have them in a fairly large space and crank them quite often without the "distress" you mentioned. I am also kicking myself for not playing these guys full-range at some point... I am fairly certain the amount of bass from the relatively small, triple 5.25 XBL midwoofers would really shock a lot of people and would hold up very well against the Ascend Sierra Towers with RAAL tweeters, which cost 3.6x more than the ridiculously priced A5s <$750/pair>... (Rob from NJ, keep me honest here....)

I unfortunately did not get to hear the Ascends myself, and want to be clarify that from everything I've read, believe the Ascend towers are great speakers... I just think that from a sound quality perspective the A5s could be very close compared to (perhaps even slightly better) the Ascends, whether running in full range or with sub(s). Of course this is purely subjective and speculation at that, so take it with a grain of salt...

Again, I would like to extend the offer of hearing the A5s to anybody in or visiting the Boston area... I believe they are an amazing value and don't get the credit they deserve....

Oh, and Andrew, when's the next GTG? rolleyes.gif
post #381 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryansboston View Post

I stated this before in my feedback, but I really think the A5s sound a whole lot better than we heard at the GTG... I am not delusional and won't begin to claim that they can play at super loud volumes in giant spaces like Andrew's man cave, but I have them in a fairly large space and crank them quite often without the "distress" you mentioned. I am also kicking myself for not playing these guys full-range at some point... I am fairly certain the amount of bass from the relatively small, triple 5.25 XBL midwoofers would really shock a lot of people and would hold up very well against the Ascend Sierra Towers with RAAL tweeters, which cost 3.6x more than the ridiculously priced A5s <$750/pair>... (Rob from NJ, keep me honest here....)

I was the one who decided they should be run with subs, and I did that because the room struck me as a bit large for them to be cranked and not have the reinforcement on the bottom end. You need to put Austins review in perspective as well; this is a man who has sixteen 18" subwoofers in a room half the size of Andrews. That's to say he likes things LOUD. tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryansboston View Post

I think I dug into more variety of beers than anyone else biggrin.gif

You probably did. I was close behind - because I was having a blast digging through the fridge in Andrews shop - but I do believe you beat me. wink.gif
Edited by JimWilson - 4/26/13 at 3:15pm
post #382 of 568
I was actually wondering about that...

Some of the speakers that were ran at full range, like the Ascend Sierra for instance, were said to have somewhat harsh highs, or sounded a little distressed, when pushed hard.

Would have crossing them over to subs have helped with this? Obviously the subs would help with the bottom end, but does it help the speaker to manage the highs as well?
post #383 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goride View Post

I was actually wondering about that...

Some of the speakers that were ran at full range, like the Ascend Sierra for instance, were said to have somewhat harsh highs, or sounded a little distressed, when pushed hard.

Would have crossing them over to subs have helped with this? Obviously the subs would help with the bottom end, but does it help the speaker to manage the highs as well?
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I would think that this would only help if lack of amplifier power is what caused the harshness.
post #384 of 568
Awesome thread!!
I enjoyed reading all the posts and seem like a lot of fun for sure!!

From what I gathered, the JTR Single 8's looks like a winner!!

Love to try some in the near future to see how they perform in my HT room smile.gif

Thanks for everyone posting / sharing their thoughts on each speaker. I really gives me a good idea what to expect when or if I ever get to hear or own any of these speakers in the near future biggrin.gif
post #385 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedirun View Post

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I would think that this would only help if lack of amplifier power is what caused the harshness.

Which is a good bet if a relatively inefficient speaker is driven to reference on an AVR's power.
post #386 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goride View Post

I was actually wondering about that...

Some of the speakers that were ran at full range, like the Ascend Sierra for instance, were said to have somewhat harsh highs, or sounded a little distressed, when pushed hard.

Would have crossing them over to subs have helped with this? Obviously the subs would help with the bottom end, but does it help the speaker to manage the highs as well?

An observation from Papalock of which I also observed about a point where a high sounded harsh on a number of speakers: "It was early in the day and at one point I thought I heard the RAAL start to break-up slightly in highest frequencies. I don't have my notes in front of me, but I do remember paying attention in the later auditions and noted that other speakers had similar break-up during that particular material, so I have to blame it on the actual recording itself."

I brought the Sierras to the GTG and yes, along with all the full range speakers playing, crossing over to a sub would have helped the overall performance of the speaker, as well as, extra amplification. Can't speak for all Sierra owners however many tend to use a sub with the Sierras and cross over at 60Hz - 80Hz. I'm sure some owners cross over at different frequencies. Consider these factors at the GTG:
- Large room
- Very well dampened room
- Certain speakers playing full range
- No external amplification (all driven from a Denon 4311)
- SPL averaging an estimated 85db - 90db
- Music sweep was complex - very low bass to very high frequency
- Type of music geared toward strengths of certain speakers (a point made by a fellow attendee in this thread)

In summary, yes, the full range speakers including the Sierras were pushed to their limits and I would never play the Sierras or a number of the other full rangers without a sub. These conditions affected the performance of the speaker - bass and high frequencies.
post #387 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob from NJ View Post

An observation from Papalock of which I also observed about a point where a high sounded harsh on a number of speakers: "It was early in the day and at one point I thought I heard the RAAL start to break-up slightly in highest frequencies. I don't have my notes in front of me, but I do remember paying attention in the later auditions and noted that other speakers had similar break-up during that particular material, so I have to blame it on the actual recording itself."

I brought the Sierras to the GTG and yes, along with all the full range speakers playing, crossing over to a sub would have helped the overall performance of the speaker, as well as, extra amplification. Can't speak for all Sierra owners however many tend to use a sub with the Sierras and cross over at 60Hz - 80Hz. I'm sure some owners cross over at different frequencies. Consider these factors at the GTG:
- Large room
- Very well dampened room
- Certain speakers playing full range
- No external amplification (all driven from a Denon 4311)
- SPL averaging an estimated 85db - 90db
- Music sweep was complex - very low bass to very high frequency
- Type of music geared toward strengths of certain speakers (a point made by a fellow attendee in this thread)

In summary, yes, the full range speakers including the Sierras were pushed to their limits and I would never play the Sierras or a number of the other full rangers without a sub. These conditions affected the performance of the speaker - bass and high frequencies.

From what I have read of this GTG, the spl averaging was done at about 18 feet back from the speakers and the room itself is 40 feet long (wow!). With the speakers that were being run full range all having sensitivity ratings of about 89/90dB efficiency, allowing for only 10dB of headroom, the Denon 4311 (at only 140 watts of power) would have had to deliver 180 watts, which it is not capable of. Attempting to go any bit louder, and things start to get even worse.

Please don't misunderstand me here, I am not taking credit away from ANY of the speakers, but If you read the comments and compare sensitivity ratings, the higher the speaker's sensitivity (in general) the better it performed. With the Noesis and self-powered Cat's stealing the show.

The (3) lowest sensitivity speakers were all reported as having somewhat harsh highs, only with the Legacy SE did things start to sound "smoother". For good reason, the Legacy, with 96dB sensitivity, requires 1/4 the power from the receiver. Fact, the Denon receiver used is not capable of providing enough power to stress the RAAL 70-20 and considering the same source material sounded OK on the higher efficiency speakers, I really must stress that what people were hearing with the first 3 speakers was likely a struggling / clipping receiver -- which absolutely would account for harsh highs and problematic lows (compressed dynamics). This really must be taken into account by anyone comparing the results.

I believe we now move more 70-20's than any other company and we have never received a comment regarding harsh sounding highs. Detailed, smooth, relaxed -- yes, but never harsh -- even at 110dB measured at ~12 ft distance in our well damped demo room, but of course, being run off a dedicated amp.

For future listening sessions like this, I suggest someone scope the output of the amplification device to make sure it is not struggling. Otherwise, comparing so many different types of speakers with such huge sensitivity swings is extremely problematic, especially in an environment that requires so much output.

Weekend time!!!!
post #388 of 568
As was mentioned briefly above....and I have mentioned...the Single 8's were great but the SEOS builds were .025 percent behind (imo)...and the cost delta is large. Of course everything with all caveats previously mentioned...and I need to hear the again..

But given cost I think there are better alternatives out there... Just my .02 of course.
post #389 of 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

For a guy who claims to not have taken extensive notes you sure posted a lot of info! Definitely one of the most entertaining reviews. Guess we'll have to invite you again, eh? biggrin.gif
Not sure how it came about??? Some guy named Austin was nagging everyone to add more power!

Maybe you should up your Buzz rating to about 7 or 8 for the Revisited section... tongue.gif

Haha, my pleasure. Hope others find it helpful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

I was the one who decided they should be run with subs, and I did that because the room struck me as a bit large for them to be cranked and not have the reinforcement on the bottom end. You need to put Austins review in perspective as well; this is a man who has sixteen 18" subwoofers in a room half the size of Andrews. That's to say he likes things LOUD. tongue.gif

Yeah, all should keep my bias in mind when analyzing my comments... I might be in the small minority that thought all of the offerings sounded good with the nuances at 90db not even worth trying to subjectively pinpoint. I also believe that if one was to incorporate an external DSP in the mix, with some tweaking one could get pretty much any speaker to sound the way that you want it too at said nominal listening volumes. However, the closer to the limits you get, the weaknesses become more apparent...

That's just me though. I mean, I brush my teeth above reference...
post #390 of 568
For any of you guys that are curious (I know I would be) here is the thread on dlbeck's Iowa GTG that just happened yesterday. Many of the same speakers were there, it was a blast - got home today just before 5 AM.

The link skips to the actual event.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1460712/central-iowa-spring-audio-gtg-jtr-bamberg-seaton-salk-gr-research/150#post_23251706
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › NE Spring Speaker Shootout results thread - April 13, 2013