Vandersteen 2b to not to be?

[02audionoob]

Anyone have any thoughts on the Vandersteen 2b? It looks like the sensitivity of the 2 series is around 86 dB, so I guess maybe I'd need to turn up the volume a little...but any thoughts on whether these are a good match for a 125-watt Marantz receiver from the 70's? I like to use this system to listen to classical symphonies, jazz, etc. with the volume dial about half-way up...which is pretty darn loud at times.

[Mr Peabody]

Have you heard Vandies before? In myopinion they are the most coloring speaker on the market. They have that sock over the top thing that is supposed to give them a more open sound but they sound like they have a blanket over them, rather muted. Of all the music I've heard through them Classical does fare the best. Vifa did make their midrange drivers which color as well but I have to admit it does it in a pleasing way. It could be that I just haven't heard Vandies with the right rig but them and Klipsch are on the bottom of my speaker ranking.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

One speaker, two opinions. I found the sound quality of the speaker to be quite good. It is not the sock that provides the open sounds(oh brother) its the fact that the speakers are baffle less, or the drivers are suspended in space, which prevents spurious early reflections from smearing the sound. The speakers have a pretty flat frequency response over most of its range. Its sound takes some getting use to, because most of us are use to drivers inset within the front baffle, which has a quite different sound.

Vandersteen has one of the best performance to value ratios in the business. I say give them an audition before you decide.

[02audionoob]

Answering the question above...I have not actually heard Vandy speakers. The seller is local, so I was wondering if it was worth my time and effort to go listen. Sounds like maybe it is. I do think I will value flat response, but I don't know for sure...thus agreeing with both of you that I'll have to listen to know. I'm not a fan of the big boomy speakers...more a fan of clarity and realism, in case that helps. I don't have anything with larger than an 8-inch woofer...even including my home-theater sub.

[Mr Peabody]

Maybe I need to explain things more clearly for you Terry, or you have a comprehension problem or intensionally misread to cause issues. I never said the open sound came from the sock, I assumed that the poster and anyone else coming to a thread about Vandersteen would be some what familiar with them and understand they use the sock instead of a cabinet. The lack of a top cabinet has more to do with disspersion and sound stage. There isn't anything to get used to, they are no more special than Maggies or any other speaker without a cabnet. Maggies aren't my thing but they do sound good for the money. Vandersteen on the other hand suck. Anyone that appreciates a flat response and clarity will also hate Vandersteen. They sound like listening to a speaker with your grandma's quilt thrown over the front, they are muted and I can't see how they could even come close to a flat response with their sound. The bass was even muddy.

I find your opinion some what suspect as you listen to horns which I'm sure you'll claim is flat where Vandies are polar opposites to horns. They are also not a good value as they are not cheap and for the money they cost you can buy speakers that kill them.

[bobsticks]

Answering the question above...I have not actually heard Vandy speakers. The seller is local, so I was wondering if it was worth my time and effort to go listed


Absolutely it's worth your time to go and listen. Anytime you can go and actually listen to a system it's worth it. All of us around this waterin' hole will have an opinion but rarely will there be a complete description of the accompanying equipment and room.

It's worth noting that Vandersteen is particularly polarizing, so we may be in store for quite a show. In any case, yeah, go have a listen...and then tell us what you think. I'd like to read it.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Maybe I need to explain things more clearly for you Terry, or you have a comprehension problem or intensionally misread to cause issues. I never said the open sound came from the sock, I assumed that the poster and anyone else coming to a thread about Vandersteen would be some what familiar with them and understand they use the sock instead of a cabinet. The lack of a top cabinet has more to do with disspersion and sound stage.

Well , Peahead lets get first things first. I am not Terry, and you should never assume anything. That has never been my name, and will never be. So this ought to be clear next time you bring up this name, or make some lame azz attempt to insult me. This is as clear as it gets, do you get it?

Secondly, your ability to communicate what you mean is stunted, not my comprehension.
This IS what you said.


They have that sock over the top thing that is supposed to give them a more open sound but they sound like they have a blanket over them, rather muted. Of all the music I've heard through them Classical does fare the best.

Your wording sucks if you meant something else. It would be better to reference the baffleless design as a reason for the openess without mentioning anything about the sock, its only a asthetic consideration and that is it. It quite frankly creates some confusion as to what you are saying. :rolleyes5:



There isn't anything to get used to, they are no more special than Maggies or any other speaker without a cabnet. Maggies aren't my thing but they do sound good for the money. Vandersteen on the other hand suck. Anyone that appreciates a flat response and clarity will also hate Vandersteen. They sound like listening to a speaker with your grandma's quilt thrown over the front, they are muted and I can't see how they could even come close to a flat response with their sound. The bass was even muddy.

Maggies (a ribbon based loudspeaker) sounds quite different than a baffleless cone driven speaker. So the comparison is just a bit lame, (though par for the course for you). I suspect that you didn't hear these speakers under ideal conditions, cause anyone who has would say that your ears have a sock in them, or your hearing has a rolled off top end(which by the way, does come with age). Basically the 2 series of Vandersteens speakers are basically the same, with some driver and crossover refinements that are defined by the letter. However, here is a stereophile review of the 2C which is basically the same speaker.

http://stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/914/

No mention of any veiled quality, or dull sound.



I find your opinion some what suspect as you listen to horns which I'm sure you'll claim is flat where Vandies are polar opposites to horns. They are also not a good value as they are not cheap and for the money they cost you can buy speakers that kill them.

I find your opinion suspect as well, and your hearing too. My speakers have nothing to do with this, and obviously you are trying to deflect from the issue at hand by mentioning them(is this what they mean by keep spinning?). Have you ever measured ANY Vandersteen speaker? I would say no, so your opinion of their measured response is null and void. You kinda have to measure them to say they are not flat. If you have measured them, then can you post it. I would like to see this non flat measurement. If you cannot, then perhaps you should refrain from mentioning something you cannot support.

[Worf101]

Munch, munch.. Tex!!! Pass that queso dip ya hawg!!!!! Munch, munch...

Hey, (burp) can I call you "Terry" too? LOL, just kidding. While you folks might not know it. I'm actually learning a great deal from this errr... discussion. I've only heard Vandy's and Maggies at the local Twitters before it went buh bye. You guys really have me itching to do a listen at someone's home who has it set up "right".

Da Worfster

[Mr Peabody]

Well , Peahead lets get first things first. I am not Terry, and you should never assume anything. That has never been my name, and will never be. So this ought to be clear next time you bring up this name, or make some lame azz attempt to insult me. This is as clear as it gets, do you get it?

* If Terry isn't your name then why did you answer? Me? I tried to insult you? If that's as clear as it gets then you should forget it.

Secondly, your ability to communicate what you mean is stunted, not my comprehension.
This IS what you said.
Your wording sucks if you meant something else. It would be better to reference the baffleless design as a reason for the openess without mentioning anything about the sock, its only a asthetic consideration and that is it. It quite frankly creates some confusion as to what you are saying. :rolleyes5:

Only to you and only you would look at things bassackwards. As I stated, you only do so to stir up a new flame war being the Troll that you are. The fact that I posted here is the only reason you came in any way and it probably took you a bit of Googling before you even knew what a Vandersteen was. If you ever heard one at all you'd know their sound is quite unique from any other speaker and it really hasn't much to do with the cabinet design or lack there of.

Maggies (a ribbon based loudspeaker) sounds quite different than a baffleless cone driven speaker. So the comparison is just a bit lame, (though par for the course for you). I suspect that you didn't hear these speakers under ideal conditions, cause anyone who has would say that your ears have a sock in them, or your hearing has a rolled off top end(which by the way, does come with age). Basically the 2 series of Vandersteens speakers are basically the same, with some driver and crossover refinements that are defined by the letter. However, here is a stereophile review of the 2C which is basically the same speaker.

http://stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/914/

No mention of any veiled quality, or dull sound.

* You can find a favorable review on most anything and there is even a reviewer who uses Vandies as his reference speaker but it don't change the fact that they suck. The only thing that is lame is your attempt to portray Vandies as an ordinary speaker with a typical sound, and flat at that. Terry it's so cute the way that you think you are the youngest person on the forum. You have kids that graduated college so you ain't no spring chicken and you are a bit older than me though you don't act like it. So you got called out for talking the crap you always do, get over it. You should be used to it by now. You are a immature wanna be.

I find your opinion suspect as well, and your hearing too. My speakers have nothing to do with this, and obviously you are trying to deflect from the issue at hand by mentioning them(is this what they mean by keep spinning?). Have you ever measured ANY Vandersteen speaker? I would say no, so your opinion of their measured response is null and void. You kinda have to measure them to say they are not flat. If you have measured them, then can you post it. I would like to see this non flat measurement. If you cannot, then perhaps you should refrain from mentioning something you cannot support.

* Have you ever measured Vandies? If so, show me your flat response. You are the one that made the claim of them being flat. So you back yours up Sir Mouth. Uh, you can't void an opinion. As you admitted when I say Vandersteens aren't flat it is just my opinion. I have enough experience hearing quality speakers to know what one is supposed to sound like. And, in my opinion, Vandersteen is not a quality speaker. They sound nothing like real life music. This is something your lack of knowledge and Googling isn't going to tell you. Vandersteen's are as colored and far away from neutral as a speaker can get. Your ignorance shows and your real character shines through as you try to convey the sound. Let's get right to the point, first, have you ever heard a single pair of Vandersteen's? And, if you have, what was the "right" set up? What gear and what , if any, special set up was done? Would you say they sounded just like your horns?

[Woochifer]

Vandys are about as polarizing and enigmatic a speaker as there is -- people either love 'em or hate 'em. I'm not a fan of the Vandys, but plenty of very knowledgeable audio reviewers use Vandys as their reference speaker, and Vandersteen owners are just about the most devoted group that I've seen (only Magnepan owners might be as fanatical about their speakers).

The Vandersteen approach places maximum priority on phase and time coherency. They use a first-order crossover, which is a very different design from the steeper crossover slopes most other speakers use. The only other speakers I'm aware of that use a similar phase and time coherent design are/were made by Dunlavy and Thiel. The Vandys also use a "boxless" design in which the drivers are mounted within a floating frame to minimize box diffraction.

To Vandy owners, it's their speakers that are the accurate ones, and people who claim that they're colored are simply used to the tonal characteristics of other speaker designs. I don't necessarily agree with this view, but I will say that the Vandys' imaging is about as accurate and spot-on as any speaker I've ever heard. And in a 5.1 alignment, their coaxial center speaker provides the best timbre match I've heard, and an very convincing and seamless encirclement effect with multichannel sources.

You absolutely have to listen to the Vandys before you buy. People who love them will tell you that nothing else comes close to how accurately a Vandy renders musical sounds, while people who hate them just hate them. I did not like them because I thought that their tonal characteristics sounded bizarre (a Vandy owner will tell me that I'm just used to hearing inaccurate speakers). But, they do so many things very well that I don't just dismiss them either (and this makes them all the more frustrating).

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

* Have you ever measured Vandies? If so, show me your flat response. You are the one that made the claim of them being flat. So you back yours up Sir Mouth. Uh, you can't void an opinion. As you admitted when I say Vandersteens aren't flat it is just my opinion. I have enough experience hearing quality speakers to know what one is supposed to sound like. And, in my opinion, Vandersteen is not a quality speaker. They sound nothing like real life music. This is something your lack of knowledge and Googling isn't going to tell you. Vandersteen's are as colored and far away from neutral as a speaker can get. Your ignorance shows and your real character shines through as you try to convey the sound. Let's get right to the point, first, have you ever heard a single pair of Vandersteen's? And, if you have, what was the "right" set up? What gear and what , if any, special set up was done? Would you say they sounded just like your horns?

Peabody, your stupid azz made the comment that they were not flat. When you make such a claim, it is up to you to provide information that supports that claim, not be a coward and try and put it off on somebody else. Its your big mouth, now put the measurements up or shut up, period.

I said this The speakers have a pretty flat frequency response over most of its range.

I didn't say they were totally flat at all, and this proves that its YOUR comprehension that is in question here.

I do not care about your personal opinion. That is like azzes, we all have one. Measurements don't lie, and if you are going to make a claim on their measurement, then support it with facts. They don't sound like real life TO YOU, and maybe you should say that. To other folks, they are a very neutral and uncolored speaker with a huge soundstage. To a older person who proabably does not have much hearing about 10k, or to a person who has been listening to speakers with a rising upper end response, they may sound veiled. But that would be your problem, not the speakers.

Yes, I have heard Vandersteens. I have heard their entire line. I have been to Vandersteens factory twice in the last 10 years to do interviews for Surround Sound magazine. It is right in my backyard as a matter of fact in the Central Valley of California. I know how the speakers are measured and voiced. I have heard them set up correctly, and they are far from veiled.

By the way grandpa, I wasn't listening to any horn loaded speakers when I heard the Vandersteens. I was listening to Dunlavy SC-V on a daily basis. This is the second time you have made a lame assumption thinking that you had the right answer. My CURRENT speaker system was even around me when I heard the Vandersteens, so quit trying to find a way out of your stupidity by spinning this into something it is not. You are becoming a huge bull**** artist, and it is smelling the place up. Your personal opinion is just what it is, your personal opinion.

[Mr Peabody]

Peabody, your stupid azz made the comment that they were not flat. When you make such a claim, it is up to you to provide information that supports that claim, not be a coward and try and put it off on somebody else. Its your big mouth, now put the measurements up or shut up, period.

* Now Terry, if you will be so kind as to re-read the posts, you will notice you are the one who mentioned a flat response first in post #3, you provide your response chart first.

I do not care about your personal opinion. That is like azzes, we all have one. Measurements don't lie, and if you are going to make a claim on their measurement, then support it with facts. They don't sound like real life TO YOU, and maybe you should say that. To other folks, they are a very neutral and uncolored speaker with a huge soundstage. To a older person who proabably does not have much hearing about 10k, or to a person who has been listening to speakers with a rising upper end response, they may sound veiled. But that would be your problem, not the speakers.

* As you re-read, you will also notice in my original post, #2, I said "in my opinion", and it's true we all have one and anyone here is welcome to accept mine or not.

Yes, I have heard Vandersteens. I have heard their entire line. I have been to Vandersteens factory twice in the last 10 years to do interviews for Surround Sound magazine. I know how the speakers are measured and voiced. I have heard them set up correctly, and they are far from veiled.

* Oh really, how about giving us a link to those reviews? I'd find them quite interesting. Especially, if they exist. I mean, you did avoid all my questions by giving extraneous information.

By the way grandpa, I wasn't listening to any horn loaded speakers when I heard the Vandersteens. I was listening to Dunlavy SC-V on a daily basis. This is the second time you have made a lame assumption thinking that you had the right answer. My CURRENT speaker system was even around me when I heard the Vandersteens, so quit trying to find a way out of your stupidity by spinning this into something it is not. You are becoming a huge bull**** artist, and it is smelling the place up. Your personal opinion is just what it is, your personal opinion.

Well Terry my opinions are based on my life experiences unlike yourself who posts here based on wishful thinking, imagination and what you can dig up on Google. If I was to be old it certainly wouldn't be nothing to be ashamed of, and which you should respect your elders, but it seems you have trouble accepting your age as everyone here who you disagree with has to be an old man. I really think you should consider Nightflier's advice and seek some serious mental therapy. It's quite humorous as you have no idea how old I am.

[mlsstl]

Boy, I hate to see a discussion take on a nasty tone.

Vandys certainly have a devoted following, but that doesn't translate to universal consensus. When I've heard them in the past they were "OK" but didn't send me off to nirvana. However I don't discount the authenticity of the devotion the adherents present.

Of course, no speaker out there has a "universal consensus" and never will any more than you can get car enthusiasts to agree on the best sports car.

My pet theory is that each of us responds to different cues when listening. Some people are impressed by sheer volume and dynamics. Other people look for tone balance first while still others are mesmerized by an ethereal three dimensional image that seems to float and shimmer. Take a dozen experienced listeners and you'll get the operational priorities of what a speaker should do put in a dozen different orders. Take a hundred listeners and you'll get a hundred sets of priorities.

I know the limitations of my current speakers - Spendor SP1/2Es. They don't do extremely deep bass. They don't do extremely loud. The sweet spot is smallish. But in terms of midrange purity and accuracy, an absolutely realistic image that isn't "Kodachromed" and a tone balance that is spot-on for acoustic instruments, I find them near perfect for how I listen. I certainly know of nothing else I could buy in their price range as a replacement that I'd prefer.

I also know that many people have heard this exact same speaker and passed on it, wondering what the fuss was about. I've never heard the magic from Vandy's that others have, but I certainly heard many others that have done a far better job of having me scratch my head trying to figure out what someone else is so entranced with. However, that doesn't bother me. I'd rather have someone disagree with my opinion on speakers than wanting to send me to meet my maker for disagreeing about religion or politics.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Well Terry my opinions are based on my life experiences unlike yourself who posts here based on wishful thinking, imagination and what you can dig up on Google. If I was to be old it certainly wouldn't be nothing to be ashamed of, and which you should respect your elders, but it seems you have trouble accepting your age as everyone here who you disagree with has to be an old man. I really think you should consider Nightflier's advice and seek some serious mental therapy. It's quite humorous as you have no idea how old I am.

Peabrain, Just because your experience was based on life experience does not mean you can hear worth a damn, or that what you heard is more valid than someone elses experience. You real life experience didn't teach you how HDMI works, or that a realta chip cannot invent more information on DVD.

People have to earn my respect, I do not just give it to them because of their age. I know some pretty dumb older people (pix, and now you) who are not deserving of any respect at all.

I didn't disagree with you because you are an old man, I just said that your age can effect the frequency response of your hearing. If you think the Vandy's are veiled, that this is the case with you, because no review has pointed that out, and that was not my experience.

I will tell you just like I told nightliar. You are a failure at online psychology, and you can take your advice and shove it up your azz.

Funny, how old you are doesn't interest me one bit. Where is the measurement peahead? I do not want to see any more of your bull****, just the measurement proving your point. Thanks.

[nightflier]

Answering the question above...I have not actually heard Vandy speakers. The seller is local, so I was wondering if it was worth my time and effort to go listen. Sounds like maybe it is. I do think I will value flat response, but I don't know for sure...thus agreeing with both of you that I'll have to listen to know. I'm not a fan of the big boomy speakers...more a fan of clarity and realism, in case that helps. I don't have anything with larger than an 8-inch woofer...even including my home-theater sub.

So I do a search on my name, and I land here. Not trying to get into the middle of anything, but on the subject of Vandersteen I do have a bit of personal experience to add that might be of interest to 02audionoob (if he's still reading this thread).

I had a pair of 2c's and that boxy center channel, the VCC, I think it's called. Silly thing is, I bought them unheard only because the name Vandersteen sounded high-faluttin' (it was Dutch and I thought that this would be up there with PrimaLuna and other names I thought where hi-end). Well, with my Onkyo receiver (80W, supposedly), they were nothing to write home about. Having spent more on these than I would ever dreamed I would spend on 3 speakers, I was sorely disappointed. So I started to sell them, first the center, and then the L&R. They sold but the 2Cs were sent back to me because the buyer said I didn't describe the scratches well enough (another learning experience for me). Anyhow, when they came back I wanted to test them to make sure they worked and hooked them up to a newly configured 2-channel rig with a new toy I had just acquired: a 500W Spectron amp.

Well, that changed everything. Maybe is was also the different setup, the simplified gear, or maybe something tightened up during shippping, but I'm pretty sure the Spectron was the biggest factor. The speakers sounded very good: excellent imaging, great clarity, and a lot more bass than I ever heard from them before. So they became my reference speakers for quite some time. As my equipment improved, however, I also started to grow weary of them. Besides the fact that the cats were always rubbing themselves against them (though thankfully not scratching them), they also started to sound bright and I guess you could say colored. In the end, I wanted something better so they were audiogoned.

I guess the most important thing to say about these speakers is that they crave power because they have deep impedance curves at certain frequencies. They are also very picky about what kind of amplification you have and how they are set up. Under certain conditions the bass goes very deep but it can also sound boomy. Likewise, the etchy treble can be tamed with warmer components (the Spectron is definitely not warm), but for some people this may be exactly what they are looking for. If there is one speaker that defined synergy for me, it was this one. So if I can give one piece of advice, bring your amp along for the audition. Better yet, see if you can arrange an audition in your own home. There's just no way to know if they will meet your expectations otherwise.

I hope this helps a bit.

[bobsticks]

My pet theory is that each of us responds to different cues when listening. Some people are impressed by sheer volume and dynamics. Other people look for tone balance first while still others are mesmerized by an ethereal three dimensional image that seems to float and shimmer. Take a dozen experienced listeners and you'll get the operational priorities of what a speaker should do put in a dozen different orders. Take a hundred listeners and you'll get a hundred sets of priorities.



Jah. I place much more emphasis on tonal characteristics and imaging than slam. One of my buddies is all about slam and volume. Obviously our systems are made up of components that are as different as night and day but each gets us where we wanna go.
The bottom line is, every speaker will have strengths and shortcomings so ya find the best compromise.

As the ad hominems begin to fly it does occur to me that if one is arguing something as a matter of fact versus a matter of opinion one should be prepared to back that up with data.

[Rich-n-Texas]

It's worth noting that Vandersteen is particularly polarizing, so we may be in store for quite a show.

Vandys are about as polarizing and enigmatic a speaker as there is -- people either love 'em or hate 'em.
Who said that? What? :idea:

Munch, munch.. Tex!!! Pass that queso dip ya hawg!!!!! Munch, munch...
Here ya go dawg. I dressed it up wit somma dem Scotch Bonnets you like so much. :thumbsup:

I've decided to subscribe to Home Theater magazine. :yesnod:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So I do a search on my name, and I land here. Not trying to get into the middle of anything, but on the subject of Vandersteen I do have a bit of personal experience to add that might be of interest to 02audionoob (if he's still reading this thread).

I had a pair of 2c's and that boxy center channel, the VCC, I think it's called. Silly thing is, I bought them unheard only because the name Vandersteen sounded high-faluttin' (it was Dutch and I thought that this would be up there with PrimaLuna and other names I thought where hi-end). Well, with my Onkyo receiver (80W, supposedly), they were nothing to write home about. Having spent more on these than I would ever dreamed I would spend on 3 speakers, I was sorely disappointed. So I started to sell them, first the center, and then the L&R. They sold but the 2Cs were sent back to me because the buyer said I didn't describe the scratches well enough (another learning experience for me). Anyhow, when they came back I wanted to test them to make sure they worked and hooked them up to a newly configured 2-channel rig with a new toy I had just acquired: a 500W Spectron amp.

Well, that changed everything. Maybe is was also the different setup, the simplified gear, or maybe something tightened up during shippping, but I'm pretty sure the Spectron was the biggest factor. The speakers sounded very good: excellent imaging, great clarity, and a lot more bass than I ever heard from them before. So they became my reference speakers for quite some time. As my equipment improved, however, I also started to grow weary of them. Besides the fact that the cats were always rubbing themselves against them (though thankfully not scratching them), they also started to sound bright and I guess you could say colored. In the end, I wanted something better so they were audiogoned.

I guess the most important thing to say about these speakers is that they crave power because they have deep impedance curves at certain frequencies. They are also very picky about what kind of amplification you have and how they are set up. Under certain conditions the bass goes very deep but it can also sound boomy. Likewise, the etchy treble can be tamed with warmer components (the Spectron is definitely not warm), but for some people this may be exactly what they are looking for. If there is one speaker that defined synergy for me, it was this one. So if I can give one piece of advice, bring your amp along for the audition. Better yet, see if you can arrange an audition in your own home. There's just no way to know if they will meet your expectations otherwise.

I hope this helps a bit.

Well I'll be damned, I just found a post from nightliar I actually agree with. If you do not provide enough power to them, they will sound veiled and uninteresting. Properly set up with the right amp and positioning, and this speaker sounds excellent.

This is why I say go give them a listen.

[02audionoob]

So I do a search on my name, and I land here. Not trying to get into the middle of anything, but on the subject of Vandersteen I do have a bit of personal experience to add that might be of interest to 02audionoob (if he's still reading this thread).




Still reading. The Vandersteen speakers that were available at the time I started the thread are now gone. I began to get the sense they would not be for me, so I just couldn't muster the energy to go call up the seller. Words like power hungry, veiled, and boomy don't sound like my thing. If another pair becomes available, though, I might get interested again. I stepped up in power on my Adcom system recently, so I might be less afraid of power hungry speakers on that. And there's still the old Marantz that doesn't exactly suffer from a lack of power...the original spot I had in mind.

[Worf101]

Here ya go dawg. I dressed it up wit somma dem Scotch Bonnets you like so much. :thumbsup:

I've decided to subscribe to Home Theater magazine. :yesnod:

Interesting that I write something and you quote me as "TopDawg". Who's he?

Da Worfster

[Rich-n-Texas]

"Top Klingon" would have been a better description? Is "Top Dawg" a bad phrase in Troy, NY?

Nothing personal Worf. :sosp:

[nightflier]

Well I'll be damned, I just found a post from nightliar I actually agree with. If you do not provide enough power to them, they will sound veiled and uninteresting. Properly set up with the right amp and positioning, and this speaker sounds excellent.

Se formó un sal pa fuera!