ZolaIII
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2019
- Messages
- 4,195
- Likes
- 2,475
Physics are physics and it scales with size primary. There are measurements you know of T5 (their sub) and they where not good to say at least. Same goes for crossovers on various models, they got a bit better on newer models with digital one's but still far from reality good. It doesn't make much of a difference for you who just trow the speakers in room and that's it. When you do treatment and correction then you hear the difference very well. As that's the best they have to offer so far 2.1 system with that sub make conclusions on your own. They never had a goal to create something really good just better from similar Logitec offerings and for less money and they achieved that goal alright.Perhaps not the best option by one metric or another, but that comment is just pretentious. Given OP is still defining the use criteria, I will ask: have you ( @ZolaIII ) implemented this model of speaker in a room similar to OP’s?
Recall, there is more to doing a hifi setup methodologically than picking a favored biggest driver in a box, @ZolaIII . Am I missing something you intended to be clearer?
Edit: my current system is 2.2 in small half treated room and intense proper DSP optimisation and with ISO 226 2003. Contains of Yamaha A-S 700, QA Q3030i (port's plugged) and pair of Wharfedale WH-D10 sub's in minimal phase (close to wall behind) arrangement while DSP part is done on desktop PC (JRiver and Z SE card have also retired A-E5 Plus).
So show me your in room response and I will show you my entire ISO 226 2003 plot including waterfalls.
Edit: I also have retired R-N402D as well it doesn't fit my needs and used it as amplifier only (for obvious integration and DSP purposes).
Last edited: