or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Klipsch owner thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Klipsch owner thread - Page 840

post #25171 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys View Post

Do Amps matter? I have not followed this thread but check it out.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1472180/do-amps-matter-kansas-city-blind-amp-comparison-gtg

I see others are starting to side track the thread with inappropriate comments and won't address them except to say this topic has been discussed here and everyone has their opinion...I suggest you ask a question in the thread or start your own if you really want to delve into the subject.
post #25172 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys View Post

Cornwall pair for $400 just shows up.
http://dallas.craigslist.org/ndf/ele/4011536051.html

DARN I just purchased a Yamaha A1000 Integrated SS Amp and pre/amp for my TT and analog tape recording ........... like Fastslappy said these won't last long. mad.gif I missed another pair of Heritage I could have purchased and played with and sold for a profit or used them when I remodel my two car garage for my music room. Great price, I bet they are GONE tonight. DFW area............ oh yeah, large population. .
post #25173 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys View Post

Do Amps matter? I have not followed this thread but check it out.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1472180/do-amps-matter-kansas-city-blind-amp-comparison-gtg


Because sometimes it's what you don't Hear

Double Blind Testing
Written by Mark Deneen. Formerly of Juicy Music Audio and Paragon Audio: Used with permission.


The Flawed Idea Behind Any Form of AB Testing

The premise behind all forms of audio AB testing is that the memory is the measuring instrument that provides output data to the experiment. You listen to a sample, followed by listening to another sample, and you then must compare your memory of one or more samples to the current experience. You repeat this serially. This is using the human memory as a measuring instrument to provide output data. That represents a flawed premise for the entire experiment which is rarely debated.

When DBT is used in say, pharmaceutical trials, most of the output data is provided by specific, calibrated and reliable instruments like X-Ray machines, MRI, blood gas analysis, chemical assay and so on. This provides the concept of repeatability - any other researcher should be able to confirm or duplicate the results, because the instruments and measures are standards.

In audio, the instrument is human memory. Here's a few very significant factors to be considered about memory:

1. Memories are constructions made in accordance with present needs, desires, influences, etc.
2. Memories are often accompanied by feelings and emotions.
3. Memory usually involves awareness of the memory.

In this model any memory has a dynamic, instantaneous value in relation to the sum total of all sensory inputs, current emotions, and state of being of the "machine" (person) storing the memory. Strike a bell at this moment, and the memory will be different than striking the bell at some other moment. Same bell, different universal circumstances, and therefore different memory. That's roughly equivalent in reliability to a volt meter which zeroes itself to some random voltage before you make each measurement.

What we know about AB testing is that when A is grossly different than B, people easily pass the test. As you shrink the difference between A and B, more and more people fail the test. When you reach the useful "resolution" of an AB memory test, most people fail. This is where the technicians trip over their feet. They assume the failure means: "people have reached the limit of differences they can hear." That's not the meaning of the results at all. The meaning is: "We have reached the limits of resolution for using human memory as the measuring instrument in an AB test."

You can measure a lot of things with a wooden yardstick - very useful tool. You can't reliably measure the thickness of paper though. The tool doesn't have the necessary resolution at that small dimension. Now you need a caliper or something similar to that.

Referring to items 1, 2 and 3 above, you simply can not extract the intention of the subject from the act of listening. All listening experiences contain their intent, the subject and the object as an indivisible whole. This is why bias can never be eliminated - because even intent of the subject is a bias.

The problem is the reliance on memory, period. I fail to see how DBT solves the "unreliable memory" problem in any way at all. To the contrary, it is wholly based on memory for the entire test.

I think the people promoting DBT show a lot of misunderstanding of neuroscience, memory, and perception. Short term, long term, makes no difference. It is not an instrument for measurement and comparison for such fine resolution. Sure if A is an apple, and B is a banana, it works fine. When A is a Pioneer and B is a Mark Levinson, that's not going to work the same way.

1. We DO NOT RECORD all input! And just in that fact alone, the use of memory should be tossed out the window. We only store essential patterns, partial inputs, enough to make the recall. If we were storing ALL sensate input in full bandwwidth, our brains would have to be the size of Texas. (EX: If you drove an hour on the freeway tonight to get home, can you recall the license # of each car that passed you? The year, make and model of each car? Description of all the occupants? Obviously not---but you "saw" it all with your eyes. If you tried to store all the sound you heard in a few minutes at something like CD resolution, your brain would explode.)

2. A "memory" of a sound is not a recording of the soundwaves! Nor is it a digital representation, nor is it necessarily even stored in a contiguous brain space. Electrical impulses from the ear system are "mixed" (yeah, like a 16 track mixer) along with visual inputs, other sense inputs, emotional content, other similar patterns from previous events, and wellness stimulus. Point being, there is no discrete memory object of "just the sound" that was heard when A was played or when B was played. Proponents of this are pretending that the brain functions like a tape recorder. Ain't so.

3. DBT depends on this real time analysis: A past memory must be compared to a current stream of conscious perception and a determination for differential must be made. Well, hang on, these are two vastly different brain processes. You might as well try to compare volt meter readings to the direction a weathervane is blowing. It's nonsense. That's why it only works with "Apple and Banana" level comparisons.

There's just absolutely no science behind using DBT in audio. All the assumptions are flawed.


The Null Hypothesis or How I Batted .650 in The Audio League

ABX testing sets out with a common goal: to disprove the Null Hypothesis. In the beginning, looking at A and B, it is hypothesized that no difference exists between A and B. This is referred to as the "null hypothesis." It is the starting point of all ABX testing in audio. "A and B have no sonic difference."

The object for the Subject of the test is to disprove the null hypothesis. This is done by accepting a number of challenges to measure an unknown (X) against the known A and B, and correctly declare X to be A or B. The results are tallied, and using statistical techniques, it is determined if the Subject "disproved" the null hypothesis or not. If he did not disprove it, he failed. Then further, all the subjects, and all the results are tallied to compute the result of whether the null hypothesis was disproved for the entire test.

Let's assume each Subject is given 20 challenges. In order to disprove the null hypothesis they must be correct on more than half of the challenges. How many more than half is established by what confidence level is desired in the test. The confidence level describes how certain you want to be that the right answers were not caused by luck or accident. The higher the confidence level, the more right answers are required, and the higher is the confidence that the result is not due to luck or accident. To achieve the typical 95% confidence level with 20 challenges, the Subject must be right 14 times out of his 20 challenges.

Subjects with 13 correct identifications then, "fail" the test. And of course, subjects with 10 correct are assumed to have the same percentage as anyone simply "guessing" their way through the test by flipping a coin. They are dubbed "fail" also - even though half the time they were (potentially) right. (And also, you could simply guess 15 right answers and pass the test.)

So, if you hear that 60 people took the test and they all failed, you can assume that more than half of all the challenges were met with the RIGHT ANSWER - meaning the Subject correctly identified X as being either A or B.

Now, this ABX testing is a statistical exercise, not empirical. It's conclusions are drawn through computation, not observation and direct experience. People who made honest effort and got 13 right only to fail, are computed in with those who guessed and got 15 right which is a PASS. There is no discrimination as to how the actual test was experienced for each subject. A field might consist of all guessers or all experts and the results might be the same.

Statistics, in order to work its own significance, has to assume that 13 right answers is the result of an accident, or pure guessing, and thus a "fails to disprove the null hypothesis". But empirically, we could ask the Subject if they were guessing, and the Subject might say no. In other words, his 13 right answers were a direct experience, empirical observation he made, along with his 7 wrong ones, and on this basis, you could say, "The Subject had 13 hits in 20 at bats and is hitting .650!" Not bad for such a difficult task.

I'll take a .650 batting average to the stock market, or to Vegas, or to the racetrack any day.

Now it could be that he was guessing, and lying, and that's what the statistical model seeks to neutralize. But to be sure, it's just a computation not direct experience.

So all of this is to clarify that the claims of ABX tests, such as "everyone failed to identify the Pioneer from the Mark Levinson" leaves a lot of information off the table.

If you are going to gamble $200M of your company's capital on a new drug, the statistical virtues of DBT and the Null Hypothesis makes a lot of sense. You can run many tests, and invest the money when you get the highest statistical confidence level, right? That makes perfect business sense, and the DBT is a valuable tool in the toolbox. But, is that how you do your hobby? You might be perfectly happy to correctly pick the right amp for you using a .650 batting average! Is that a "FAIL"?

Imagine trying to judge camera lenses the same way we do AB testing in audio. Here's an experiment to consider the problem.

Using two makes of high quality 50mm lenses, two photographs are taken of the same scene filled with a lot of detail and contrast. The two nominally identical photos are given to a subject who is asked to find the differences that exist, if any.

Now, to be clear, the lenses are physically very different in construction. Number of lens elements, arrangement of elements, glass composition, and so on. They only have in common their specifications as to aperture and focal length so that the picture will be the same in terms of exposure, field of view and content. Light passing through a lens and being refocused into a plane behind is one of the most complex engineering feats. It involves many compromises even in the finest lenses ever made. The two lenses are different because their design invokes different sets of compromise.

Back to our subject. The subject will usually take both photos and lay them side to side and study them together as two whole, inclusive entities. Using full parallel perceptual processing the photos are examined in detail. Casual review may reveal "no difference" for some subjects but, a more studied review, particularly by someone with expertise and or training, will reveal small differences in sharpness, spherical distortions near the edges, coma, color aberrations, and so on. For those subjects who see the difference, some judgment can be made about which is better. Ok---easy enough.

But now suppose the subjects weren't given both photos simultaneously to compare side by side? Suppose it worked like this: One photo is labeled "A" and the other is "B". They will be viewed using a special technique that creates a serial memory presentation. The "A" photo is loaded into a "roller box" with a horizontal slit measuring perhaps 1/4" high by 8 inches wide - (the width of the photo). The photo is rolled past the viewing slit at the rate of 1-inch per second. In 12 seconds the entire photo is rolled through the box with the subject viewing it as it moves past the slit. The entire photo is viewed, but not all at once.

Now, the "B" photo is loaded and rolled past the slit in the same 12-seconds.

The subject is asked to identify whether there is a difference between "A" and "B" by guessing each time which photo went past the slit. How well would even the best photography experts do on this test?

That is essentially what an AB test is like in audio. A song or musical piece, is a serial stream of aural sensations just like the photo is a stream of light sensations rolling past the slit. You can't ever hear the audio stream as a "whole" the way you can view a whole picture all at once. And you sure can't hear TWO streams of audio simultaneously in the way you can examine two photographs at the same time.

In the photo AB testing, it would be doubtful that many subjects could correctly identify "A" from "B". And testers would exclaim, "See, there IS NO DIFFERENCE, and we scientifically proved it!" And yet, a person could be handed the two lenses, and assuming they knew anything about optics they would understand immediately that light will pass differently through these two very different constructs. Well, there's no deep paradox here, it is obvious the contrived photographic "slit test" was meaningless as a method of discriminating differences between lenses.

Likewise with audio, AB/X testing is the bulwark that is used by all those who like to prove "no differences" in wire, cable, amplifiers, cd players and so on. They make a false assumption from the start that the test is valid, when it's obviously not - because the human memory is not a scientifically valid instrument for such a comparison. The principle of taking my memory of event "A" and comparing it for differences to my other memory of event "B" is flawed from the start. Yes, gross differences can be remembered, but in this area of extremely subtle differences between "A" and "B", memory isn't useful.
post #25174 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn View Post

Ok. I just wanted to clear that up because some people could read the comments and not be aware that is has an impact. Personally, I would use an external amp with RF-7. But my feelings on amps and receivers are simple: you need to replace an AVR every 5-7 years or so anyway because of technology changes (codecs like HD audio, connections like HDMI, etc) while an amp lasts for decades. So separate them: buy an amp for the mains and buy the lowest power AVR that still has the features you want and save money.

There is nothing wrong with your philosophy and I agree with a lower end AVR, one might want to drive their RF-7s with an external amp. That said, I purchased a discontinued Denon AVR-4311ci for $1299 and it has alot of features that a lower end AVR does not and covers the impedance dips of my speakers at Reference Volume. smile.gif
post #25175 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

I see others are starting to side track the thread with inappropriate comments and won't address them except to say this topic has been discussed here and everyone has their opinion...I suggest you ask a question in the thread or start your own if you really want to delve into the subject.
Zen , your not a mod & this is the Klipsch owners thread , if we feel it's a related to a Klipsch owners system I say let the discussion continue .
post #25176 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

I see others are starting to side track the thread with inappropriate comments and won't address them except to say this topic has been discussed here and everyone has their opinion...I suggest you ask a question in the thread or start your own if you really want to delve into the subject.

How many times and ways can Klipsch be discussed? I realize the forum is going in a direction that does not always relate to your equipment and that deflates your ego.

Why not start your own thread about yourself.
post #25177 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

There is nothing wrong with your philosophy and I agree with a lower end AVR, one might want to drive their RF-7s with an external amp. That said, I purchased a discontinued Denon AVR-4311ci for $1299 and it has alot of features that a lower end AVR does not and covers the impedance dips of my speakers at Reference Volume. smile.gif

Hey Zen, you are almost making my point for me! $1299 for an AVR is a lot to me. I paid $250 for a refurb HK AVR-254!
Its room EQ is not good enough for me to use, so there's that. But aside from that it does the job. I use a miniDSP to EQ my sub separately.
post #25178 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

How many times and ways can Klipsch be discussed? I realize the forum is going in a direction that does not always relate to your equipment and that deflates your ego.

Why not start your own thread about yourself.

Now now... let's keep it civil! wink.gif
post #25179 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

Because sometimes it's what you don't Hear

Double Blind Testing
Written by Mark Deneen. Formerly of Juicy Music Audio and Paragon Audio: Used with permission.


The Flawed Idea Behind Any Form of AB Testing

The premise behind all forms of audio AB testing is that the memory is the measuring instrument that provides output data to the experiment. You listen to a sample, followed by listening to another sample, and you then must compare your memory of one or more samples to the current experience. You repeat this serially. This is using the human memory as a measuring instrument to provide output data. That represents a flawed premise for the entire experiment which is rarely debated.

I have debated Mark on many a subject and he is brilliant, but something to keep in mind is that he was a Tube Amp designer and used to sell those products and he and Dean use this argument when others question their products...I am not saying it's not a legitimate argument, but it also can go against them saying their products were an improvement over what they already had...For the record, what you just posted is explaining why pschoacoustic IS as important as science when folks make a decision in their Audio related purchase--Nothing wrong with that because it's about our individual enjoyment. smile.gif
post #25180 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by jconjason View Post

This question was answered when you asked it in the 4311 thread. Were you not happy with the responses?

I wanted more opinions. smile.gif

Thanks everyone.
post #25181 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

Zen , your not a mod & this is the Klipsch owners thread , if we feel it's a related to a Klipsch owners system I say let the discussion continue .
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

How many times and ways can Klipsch be discussed? I realize the forum is going in a direction that does not always relate to your equipment and that deflates your ego.

Why not start your own thread about yourself.

Wow! I am NOT a mod, but both of these comments seem like a personal attack and that is not allowed on this forum. This will be my last comment in regard to this subject because evidently I frustrate you and admit I can't say anything more that will make you feel any better. That said, I really doubt you guys are going to add anything new to the discussion.

Edit: This is what I thought also was uncalled for and you see the word "psychoaccoustics" and intrepret that word as "Pyscho Acoustic Babble " and that is not what the word means:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

some who have a flagship AVR will not want to hear that !
Pyscho Acoustic Babble works in two directions : one can convince themselves that a amp would make no difference in SQ even when a amp is tried with their flagship AVR & a full set of HT speakers . They are already convinced they are right no matter what .

Edited by Zen Traveler - 8/19/13 at 2:01pm
post #25182 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post


Wow! I am NOT a mod, but both of these comments seem like a personal attack and that is not allowed on this forum. This will be my last comment in regard to this subject because evidently I frustrate you and admit I can't say anything more that will make you feel any better. That said, I really doubt you guys are going to add anything new to the discussion.
how you got my post as a attack on you is beyond me
post #25183 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrindor View Post

I wanted more opinions. smile.gif

Thanks everyone.
Your welcome and ask on as many threads as you like . That's your choice and were all here to help you and give our opinions smile.gif
I personally thought it was a wise choice inquiring on not only a AVR thread that you own but also on a speaker thread that you also own cool.gif
post #25184 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

how you got my post as a attack on you is beyond me
I see its another Days Of Our Lives on the Klipsch thread again LOL! Maybe we should call it Klipsch Speakers Of Our Lives and the feud between AVR's and External amps?
post #25185 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

how you got my post as a attack on you is beyond me

See my edit above and providing the link to the definition of Psychoaccoustics will be my last response--If you didn't mean anything by your comments, I will accept that as written...No hard feelings and no-worries because I am not the type that goes to the Moderator. smile.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoacoustics
post #25186 of 35218
Anyone watch any new movies with there Klipsch setup and really enjoyed it ? I've watched Olympus Has Fallen and Oblivion on blu . Great sound tracks and fun movies and I think there something you'll really enjoy threw your Klipsch HT as I did .
post #25187 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by cchunter View Post

I see its another Days Of Our Lives on the Klipsch thread again LOL! Maybe we should call it Klipsch Speakers Of Our Lives and the feud between AVR's and External amps?
We can call it Days of Our Klipsch tongue.gifbiggrin.gif
post #25188 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFactor View Post

Anyone watch any new movies with there Klipsch setup and really enjoyed it ? I've watched Olympus Has Fallen and Oblivion on blu . Great sound tracks and fun movies and I think there something you'll really enjoy threw your Klipsch HT as I did .
I haven't rented those YET !
I find I've got soo much on my DVR now that I want the exhaust it all 1st , but next time Redbox throws me a free rental coupon my way , Both of those are on my next "to rent" list.
post #25189 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFactor View Post

Your welcome and ask on as many threads as you like . That's your choice and were all here to help you and give our opinions smile.gif
I personally thought it was a wise choice inquiring on not only a AVR thread that you own but also on a speaker thread that you also own cool.gif

+1
post #25190 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn View Post

Hey Zen, you are almost making my point for me! $1299 for an AVR is a lot to me. I paid $250 for a refurb HK AVR-254!
Its room EQ is not good enough for me to use, so there's that. But aside from that it does the job. I use a miniDSP to EQ my sub separately.

Hey Peter--I am not trying to change your mind. smile.gif

Otoh, If you had lower impedance dips in your speakers you may not be able to get away with a lower end unit like others are reporting. wink.gif You still need to include the cost of the amp and miniDSP...With Audyssey MultEQ XT 32 I can EQ both of my subs to each other and then to the rest of the speakers which is cool (among other Bells and Whistles that are useful)...I also have 4 years of warranty and I get to enjoy these features until then or until I feel the need to upgrade.

For the record, I am not trying to talk anyone out of buying an amp or going about it the way that you are...
post #25191 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFactor View Post

Anyone watch any new movies with there Klipsch setup and really enjoyed it ? I've watched Olympus Has Fallen and Oblivion on blu . Great sound tracks and fun movies and I think there something you'll really enjoy threw your Klipsch HT as I did .

jack the giant slayer and gi joe 2 are both great movies with amazing sound.

oblivion has great sound but i did not care for the movie (i blind bought it too frown.gif
post #25192 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn View Post

Hey Zen, you are almost making my point for me! $1299 for an AVR is a lot to me. I paid $250 for a refurb HK AVR-254!
Its room EQ is not good enough for me to use, so there's that. But aside from that it does the job. I use a miniDSP to EQ my sub separately.

Out of all of the things Harman does right on their AVRs.....the auto EZ setup or whatever it's called is a major fail. I don't use it on my Harman either
post #25193 of 35218
WOW you guys were spot on about the big difference in the new RF-7s I just got to replace the RF-82s. And even more right about moving the 82s over to the side surrounds was a massive positive improvement. It's hard to explain but is as if I'm fully submerged in beautiful sound all over in me. I cannot even pinpoint where the sound is coming from its just everywhere.

I think I know what some of you were talking about when you say the RF-7s may need more power (atleast in my case). There is very little extension and bass from the 7s. In fact the 82s move much more and produce more bass than the 7s. Now that being said I have not actually added an external amp to test the difference.
post #25194 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

A Denon owner is unlikely to admit that his AVR is low on power. Many, many Onkyo owners refuse to admit that Onkyo has too many failures.
My point: owners aren't likely to admit faults with their products.

I agree....probably because said owners haven't had any problems...I have an Onkyo 507 that I've been using daily in my bedroom for about 3 years now....My parents have a daily used 605 thats going on 5 years old...no problems out of either...so we may not realize the QC just like Denon folks may not realize they are low on power because it just works for them.....Now if this were an Xbox thread I as an owner would complain again about the QC.....my xbox and the xboxes of friends have been repaired numerous times in this 5 yea period.....so owners will admit faults IMO if they find them....a pros and cons type of thing
post #25195 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastslappy View Post

I haven't rented those YET !
I find I've got soo much on my DVR now that I want the exhaust it all 1st , but next time Redbox throws me a free rental coupon my way , Both of those are on my next "to rent" list.
I know what your saying my Dvr is ready to explode and to make things worse I now have Netflix lol.
post #25196 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reference_head View Post

+1
Great minds think a like biggrin.gif
post #25197 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by jugger View Post

WOW you guys were spot on about the big difference in the new RF-7s I just got to replace the RF-82s. And even more right about moving the 82s over to the side surrounds was a massive positive improvement. It's hard to explain but is as if I'm fully submerged in beautiful sound all over in me. I cannot even pinpoint where the sound is coming from its just everywhere.

I think I know what some of you were talking about when you say the RF-7s may need more power (atleast in my case). There is very little extension and bass from the 7s. In fact the 82s move much more and produce more bass than the 7s. Now that being said I have not actually added an external amp to test the difference.
Great news glad your happy! Yes a nice quality high powered amp will make your 7s hit hard . At least that was my experience like I mentioned in a previous post wink.gif
post #25198 of 35218
Those miniDSP units are the wave of the future , once the tech matures anyone will have a very powerful software at their finger tips that will have simple graphs that will allow one to test your own room & do a accurate EQ
that will let users to do EQ that is simple ,effective & most importantly NOT dependent on a logarithm owned by a room correction company .
post #25199 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reference_head View Post

jack the giant slayer and gi joe 2 are both great movies with amazing sound.

oblivion has great sound but i did not care for the movie (i blind bought it too frown.gif
I have Joe and Jack also , loved them both also ! I like Oblivion to Though tongue.gif
If I didnt already own Oblivion I would of bought it from you !
post #25200 of 35218
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjennings2510 View Post

I agree....probably because said owners haven't had any problems...I have an Onkyo 507 that I've been using daily in my bedroom for about 3 years now....My parents have a daily used 605 thats going on 5 years old...no problems out of either...so we may not realize the QC just like Denon folks may not realize they are low on power because it just works for them.....Now if this were an Xbox thread I as an owner would complain again about the QC.....my xbox and the xboxes of friends have been repaired numerous times in this 5 yea period.....so owners will admit faults IMO if they find them....a pros and cons type of thing

Great point i agree. I have owned a few top avrs in the 2k range (even my current avr retail is 1600). Was very happy with the power of all of them. When i got a power amp in the mix it was another level. Can miss what you dont have.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Klipsch owner thread