Interesting AVS Thread

Lsi9

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=774391
Seems like a nice guy, don't jump down his throat

Dennis Gardner

I remember when Jim Salk came onto the AVS scene and was promptly told to get lost due to his bullish self promotion of his Veracity speakers. At the time he had only sold 3 pairs and was considered a nice wood craftsmen but not a real speaker maker since he was basically building beautiful boxes and stuffing off the shelf drivers in them without alot of testing and R&D. Since then, he has gathered a decent following, but still comes to defend his product too quickly and with too much gusto for my tastes. BTW he does make pretty speakers.............

Refefer

I almost responded to this crap last night. What diatribe. He is completely talking out of his **** about the comparison, making inaccurate assumptions and generally being a pain.

His MTS might sound nice, but in no way compensates for better design, testing, and R&D.

jakelm

He is right about the port.

Dennis Gardner

jakelm wrote:

He is right about the port.

He's wrong about port design on the 9s since the majority of the porting is done through the power port in the rear of the cabinet. He is correct about his design being somewhat less placement sensitive due to the sealed box. On his other claims I find it laughable that his off the shelf Vifa driver is superior to Polks custom designed drivers without him carefully studying that specific properties of the Polk and the ring radiator tweeter that Polk uses can hardly be compared to a common "dome" tweeter he so loosely keeps referring to.

jakelm

You might not agree, but I believe if Polk used higher quality drivers and crossovers, then Polk wouldnt need to put 3 ports in one cabinet.

But its hard to say which is better. Some think (like me) if you have 2 speakers side by side and speaker A gets the same responce as speaker B, but speaker A doesnt have holes or ports through and through its cabinet and its the drivers producing the Fr and not the box , then speaker A is a better speaker.

Just my opinion.

Jake

Lsi9

Well you can look at the other side of the coin on the port issue...
More power is left over for the mid range and tweeters instead of having to drive bass woofers.
Sound is sound why should one care if clean bass is produced from a speaker or a port. I disagree with you on ported speakers.
I look for clean midrange and treble in speakers, how low the speakers go is the last thing one should be concerned about.

jakelm

Lsi9 wrote:

I look for clean midrange and treble in speakers, how low the speakers go is the last thing one should be concerned about.

I absolutly aggree with you Lsi9. I am saying its hard to say which is better.

But IMO a non ported speaker is my preference because of placement issues.

Take a ported speaker and stick it in a bookshelf, the sound is alot different than if it were not ported. Distance from a back wall, rear port, front firing port. A speaker with no port and is capable of a flat Fr responce can be placed in alot more positons and not loose or gain Fr responce.

So if eveyting else is equal:
Sp A (port) Sp B (nonport)
Fr responce: 1 to 1
Build quality: 1 to 1
Sp placement: 1 to 2

Then Sp B is better

louthewiz

That salk guy is a real monkey comparing his so called salks to polk lsi9s which to me is biased , I know how good those polks are but the salks fail compared to the lsi9s IMOHO.

Toka78

I think what Jim suggested in the AVS thread is the best idea...an A/B test. Anyone done that yet?

louthewiz

Yes I heard them side to side and the polks were alot smoother in the mids than the salks.

Toka78

Well, there you go!