Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Evan Kirkendall" data-source="post: 43809" data-attributes="member: 5">Re: Yorkville UCS1pI&#039;d disagree. Every time I&#039;ve used the TX9, I&#039;ve been very underwhelmed. The 4 USC1&#039;s I used to own would out run a pair of Peavey QW218&#039;s, which are very comparable to the TX9. A single UCS1 is not that impressive, but a block of 3-4 will really move some air. They are very tight sounding subs, with a good amount of output. For the $$, you really can&#039;t do better. I used to run 2-3 per side of an MA5k, and it did the trick. The UCS1P should be even better, since it has a larger mouth. <img src="http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/HarfordSound/UCS1-2.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /><img src="http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/HarfordSound/UCS1-1.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />Evan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Evan Kirkendall, post: 43809, member: 5"] Re: Yorkville UCS1p I'd disagree. Every time I've used the TX9, I've been very underwhelmed. The 4 USC1's I used to own would out run a pair of Peavey QW218's, which are very comparable to the TX9. A single UCS1 is not that impressive, but a block of 3-4 will really move some air. They are very tight sounding subs, with a good amount of output. For the $$, you really can't do better. I used to run 2-3 per side of an MA5k, and it did the trick. The UCS1P should be even better, since it has a larger mouth. [IMG]http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/HarfordSound/UCS1-2.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/HarfordSound/UCS1-1.jpg[/IMG] Evan [/QUOTE]

Verification