Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Silas Pradetto" data-source="post: 57042" data-attributes="member: 34">Re: Shootout: KF650e vs DX1565Hi Peter,I was using the high-pass specified by EAW for integration with their own SB series subwoofers, so I would argue that it was being measured exactly as the manufacturer intended it to be used. Regardless of the high pass, the MF/HF ran out of gas considerably before the LF did, so lowering or raising the high pass would not have affected anything.I completely agree that triamping this box and applying Gunness Focusing would likely increase MF/HF output by a bit, but by how much? I was already hitting the MF/HF with 1250 watts, and ignoring losses in the passive crossover, that&#039;s quite a bit of power. Is a real-world user going to hit that MF or HF with any more power than that?And &#039;throw&#039; doesn&#039;t exist. With the exception of a proper line source, the inverse-square law applies: what is louder at the source will be louder far away. Period.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Silas Pradetto, post: 57042, member: 34"] Re: Shootout: KF650e vs DX1565 Hi Peter, I was using the high-pass specified by EAW for integration with their own SB series subwoofers, so I would argue that it was being measured exactly as the manufacturer intended it to be used. Regardless of the high pass, the MF/HF ran out of gas considerably before the LF did, so lowering or raising the high pass would not have affected anything. I completely agree that triamping this box and applying Gunness Focusing would likely increase MF/HF output by a bit, but by how much? I was already hitting the MF/HF with 1250 watts, and ignoring losses in the passive crossover, that's quite a bit of power. Is a real-world user going to hit that MF or HF with any more power than that? And 'throw' doesn't exist. With the exception of a proper line source, the inverse-square law applies: what is louder at the source will be louder far away. Period. [/QUOTE]

Verification