Search results

Becoming obsolete does not make a product bad. My Phase Linear 1000 Autocorrelator was a necessity back in the days of tape, but not needed in later digital times. My nomination for worst component ever is the HDMI cable. Bundling copy protection into signal delivery is a bad idea from the start.

So, along with your recent article on WaveForming, I guess the correct way to go would be 5 of these, hung on the walls.

A truly interesting sub, and one I can aspire to. It's nice to read about, and get solid info on, something like this, rather than "This costs more than you net in a year...."

More audio for the .01%

42" tall seems like a lot for a bookshelf speaker, which is what this is listed as in the article. To answer the question in the title: It depends on what your goal is. If the goal is good sound in your room, I expect you could find a pair of speakers under $6,000 that could do that, making...

I basically agree with your conclusion. My best listening is in my main room in surround sound. My $100 Sony Bluetooth noise cancelling headphones do a fine job when I need to focus on work or hands free phone calls.

If the criteria was which could do a better job with a 18hz tone in a large room, then I completely agree with you. If you also consider purchase price, size & weight, and ability to adjust in-room response, all in a medium size room; then the outcome seems less clear to me.

A direct comparison between this and a SVS PB1000 Pro would be very nice.

I've stopped watching Thursday Night Football on Amazon Prime because the idea of seeing commercials on a pay channel is a total no go for me.

I'd like to explore the science of curved vs. flat screens. If a 49" curved screen is better than flat, at what size is curved no longer a benefit? Could it be a function of viewing distance, rather than display size? Maybe it's a function of # of viewers, and curved means a smaller sweet...

I agree. It's easier to sell a high end system to someone who aspires to one, rather than someone who's idea of home entertainment sound comes through TV speakers that are advertised as surround sound. To expand A/V, I'd look to putting loss leader, upgradeable 5.1 systems into living rooms of...

Nice trip down memory lane. I, too, had large Advents, fairly early on, and, when my child was young, a period where my main speakers were a KLH sat/sub.

A more literal translation might be audiophiles love good audio. Movies have audio tracks. Why would anyone that loves audio ever listen to a TV speaker?

The last time I moved I ripped all my CDs to flac and keep them on my NAS. For movies, I'm concerned about streaming compression. I've got about 300 movies in my collection. If it's a movie I think I'll watch again, I'd rather buy than rent. Streaming is becoming more and more expensive...

"HDMI was designed to simplify the AV world"? HDMI was designed to enforce copy protection on high definition media and hardware.

Steve wrote: "However….virtually no one in their right mind considers their next mid-range $700 home theater receiver to be “essential.”" Perhaps not, but I do consider at least a modest receiver to be essential.

I've had a few Harmony remotes over the years, and somewhere in my closed is a Harmony Hub. Worked pretty well, especially if you have some wifi troubleshooting background, and it was great to get all those other remotes off my coffee table. I stopped using mine when I cut the cord in 2019. I...

Best April 1st reporting I've read this morning.

Mazer, that's a very convincing argument.

Maybe it's my bad for bringing up dual subs, but I think it's a valid alternative when talking bang for the buck in subs. Adding a second receiver, or dual main L/R's is not going to do much but mess things up, but dual subs is a good solution to LF standing waves, and makes a very audible...