Thoughts on XRT-28 Speakers

[twiiii]

If you will google the XRT 28 you will find a continuing of the review for Absolute sound, where the reviewer pulls out charts of measurements he took and explains the many advantages of this particular line array producing accurately what is on the recording with a minimum of out side influence from detrimental acoustics. You may have to re-read it a couple of times and study the graphs to get everything settled in your mind. One thing I noted is the reponse falls off above 17 KHZ with no resonant HF peaks, . This allows for above average listening levels with out fatigue a very common issue with todays overly bright resonant speakers. The bass seems a little ragged but here room acoustics do come into play and with proper placement accurate wall shaking bass can be achieved. I have auditioned 28's at least a dozen times in the past with 402 and `1201 amps. In a larger room say with a 15+ listening distance the 402 would activate the power guard all to often with peaks. Where the 1201 just costed along. My average loud passage levels showed 12 watts on the meters, with rare spikes of 120 watts. But pulling out some of my favorite Telarc albums and tracks from music I recorded live the 402 just wasn't enough. I wonder if 611's would be the perfect match. They put out close to 1200 watt peaks and thats all I would ever need. But alas Mac never built an appropriate center channel to match the speakers so I didn't purchase them when I had a chance. I could have bought three to put beind a roll up screen, but I don't like projectors.

It might be fun to have three XR 290s for the front speakers, my Favorites, and 4 XRT 28's for the surrounds. Set them all for full range. Who would need subwoofers with that many full range speakers?

 

[Bill Ferris]

Bill,

Thanks for responses. Nice to hear quite close in sound between arrays. The lower Frequency response of the XRT30 I can see eliminating the sub.

Did you time align electrically with time delays or physically by moving the tweeter towers back by extimating lobe centers and cone depth for woofer and mid?

The separate towers make it easier physically with both these models. But leave one hanging for the mids for alignment.

Well VB, I first physically placed the tweeter(in the case of the XRT 22`s tweeter only array) for best stereo imaging with the XRT 22`s bass cabinet utilizing it`s passive crossover before trying to bi-amp.
When I bi-amplified them they sounded great dynamically, but lost all their imaging !!
My basic analog electronic crossover, at that time, had no time alignment capabilities.

So I figured out(with no help from Mac customer service, other than providing me with a schematic of the speaker system) in the early nineties that I needed to purchase new digital crossovers( I bought 2 to maintain separate mono block configuration) with time alignment & crossover type selections.
I breadboard built(copied) the XRT-22`s crossover and connected, my recently purchased in the early nineties, a very expensive Crown TEF/TDS TEF 12+ analyzer to the crossover and found out that it(the xover) delayed the bass/mid cabinet by ~ 6"(I forgot the fraction of a second amount, since that time).

So, once I dialed in the new digital crossover`s settings for frequency, slope order, type, and alignment values, the great imaging/sound stage depth that those speakers were capable of, along with the dynamic improvements that powerful bi-amplification(2 mono`d Crown PSA 2, and 2 mono`d Crown DC 300 II`s) provides, and I was a happy camper.

When I purchased the XRT-30`s in late 2003, I bi-amped with mostly the same amps(with the upgrade to 2 Mac MC 1201`s for the bass cabinets), digital crossovers, and 1/3rd octave White eq`s, re-setting the crossover, and re-voicing/tuning the system.

In the spring of 2012 I decided to upgrade the digital crossover, high/mid frequency amplification to Mac MC 275 VI and purchased 2 at first, but quickly realized that 2 more were needed(all mono`d) to keep up with the 1201`s and tri-amp was the way to go.

The new digital crossover can, with a quality microphone connected to it, perform auto time alignment between the crossover points when instructed to do so and then stores it.
Here`s a pic of the early nineties XRT-22, and another of the XRT 30`s high/mid line array.
Damn!! That was a lot of one finger typing !!

 

[Velocityboat]

Well VB, I first physically placed the tweeter(in the case of the XRT 22`s tweeter only array) for best stereo imaging with the XRT 22`s bass cabinet utilizing it`s passive crossover before trying to bi-amp.
When I bi-amplified them they sounded great dynamically, but lost all their imaging !!
My basic analog electronic crossover, at that time, had no time alignment capabilities.

So I figured out(with no help from Mac customer service, other than providing me with a schematic of the speaker system) in the early nineties that I needed to purchase new digital crossovers( I bought 2 to maintain separate mono block configuration) with time alignment & crossover type selections.
I breadboard built(copied) the XRT-22`s crossover and connected, my recently purchased in the early nineties, a very expensive Crown TEF/TDS TEF 12+ analyzer to the crossover and found out that it(the xover) delayed the bass/mid cabinet by ~ 6"(I forgot the fraction of a second amount, since that time).

So, once I dialed in the new digital crossover`s settings for frequency, slope order, type, and alignment values, the great imaging/sound stage depth that those speakers were capable of, along with the dynamic improvements that powerful bi-amplification(2 mono`d Crown PSA 2, and 2 mono`d Crown DC 300 II`s) provides, and I was a happy camper.

When I purchased the XRT-30`s in late 2003, I bi-amped with mostly the same amps(with the upgrade to 2 Mac MC 1201`s for the bass cabinets), digital crossovers, and 1/3rd octave White eq`s, re-setting the crossover, and re-voicing/tuning the system.

In the spring of 2012 I decided to upgrade the digital crossover, high/mid frequency amplification to Mac MC 275 VI and purchased 2 at first, but quickly realized that 2 more were needed(all mono`d) to keep up with the 1201`s and tri-amp was the way to go.

The new digital crossover can, with a quality microphone connected to it, perform auto time alignment between the crossover points when instructed to do so and then stores it.
Here`s a pic of the early nineties XRT-22, and another of the XRT 30`s high/mid line array.
Damn!! That was a lot of one finger typing !!View attachment 1250150 View attachment 1250141 View attachment 1250137

Very impressive improvement projects. thanks for sharing. I doubt I’ll every get beyond room perfect implementation. I suppose I could time align my XR290 woofers with the built in tools of MX150. A bit curious to see if delays and distance calculations would work if biamped pretending woofers were subs. The XR290 has mids and woofers angled back from the tweeters. So I imagine Roger Russell designed passive crossovers he optimized for offsets like XRT22.

When i make distance measurements from focus position to speakers in room perfect in MX150; I was in a quandry whether to pick the tweeter, bottom of cone on the mid, or bottom of cone on the woofers? As distance to focus position I picked to the tweeter. Has me thinking I should try measurements with three distances as Focus position using tweeter mid and woofer for focus 1, 2 and 3. . Let Room Perfect calculate filters then pick the best sounding by cycling through them to see what distance best optimizes sound between three drivers and focus spot. Or I am overthinking it.

Your digital crossover is impressive with auto time alignment. I would like to experiment with triamping if I find funds some day and an easy tool

 

[damacman]

Well VB, I first physically placed the tweeter(in the case of the XRT 22`s tweeter only array) for best stereo imaging with the XRT 22`s bass cabinet utilizing it`s passive crossover before trying to bi-amp.
When I bi-amplified them they sounded great dynamically, but lost all their imaging !!
My basic analog electronic crossover, at that time, had no time alignment capabilities.

So I figured out(with no help from Mac customer service, other than providing me with a schematic of the speaker system) in the early nineties that I needed to purchase new digital crossovers( I bought 2 to maintain separate mono block configuration) with time alignment & crossover type selections.
I breadboard built(copied) the XRT-22`s crossover and connected, my recently purchased in the early nineties, a very expensive Crown TEF/TDS TEF 12+ analyzer to the crossover and found out that it(the xover) delayed the bass/mid cabinet by ~ 6"(I forgot the fraction of a second amount, since that time).

So, once I dialed in the new digital crossover`s settings for frequency, slope order, type, and alignment values, the great imaging/sound stage depth that those speakers were capable of, along with the dynamic improvements that powerful bi-amplification(2 mono`d Crown PSA 2, and 2 mono`d Crown DC 300 II`s) provides, and I was a happy camper.

When I purchased the XRT-30`s in late 2003, I bi-amped with mostly the same amps(with the upgrade to 2 Mac MC 1201`s for the bass cabinets), digital crossovers, and 1/3rd octave White eq`s, re-setting the crossover, and re-voicing/tuning the system.

In the spring of 2012 I decided to upgrade the digital crossover, high/mid frequency amplification to Mac MC 275 VI and purchased 2 at first, but quickly realized that 2 more were needed(all mono`d) to keep up with the 1201`s and tri-amp was the way to go.

The new digital crossover can, with a quality microphone connected to it, perform auto time alignment between the crossover points when instructed to do so and then stores it.
Here`s a pic of the early nineties XRT-22, and another of the XRT 30`s high/mid line array.
Damn!! That was a lot of one finger typing !!View attachment 1250150 View attachment 1250141 View attachment 1250137

Bill - I’d like to see a thread on your setup that highlighted the mechanics - layout, cable routing / terminations, AC power delivery, etc. Mainly because it’s my opinion that you have one of the most well engineered setups here at AK.

 

[Bill Ferris]

Very impressive improvement projects. thanks for sharing. I doubt I’ll every get beyond room perfect implementation. I suppose I could time align my XR290 woofers with the built in tools of MX150. A bit curious to see if delays and distance calculations would work if biamped pretending woofers were subs. The XR290 has mids and woofers angled back from the tweeters. So I imagine Roger Russell designed passive crossovers he optimized for offsets like XRT22.

When i make distance measurements from focus position to speakers in room perfect in MX150; I was in a quandry whether to pick the tweeter, bottom of cone on the mid, or bottom of cone on the woofers? As distance to focus position I picked to the tweeter. Has me thinking I should try measurements with three distances as Focus position using tweeter mid and woofer for focus 1, 2 and 3. . Let Room Perfect calculate filters then pick the best sounding by cycling through them to see what distance best optimizes sound between three drivers and focus spot. Or I am overthinking it.

The digital crossover is impressive with auto time alignment. I would like to experiment with triamping if I find funds some day and an easy tool

To me it was worth it, but very pricy, as all was purchased new !! ("Walletous Depletous") , but somewhat spread over time!!

But not likely to need to upgrade anytime in the future, for my soon to be 64 year old cigarette smoking old fart ass`s remaining lifetime !!

With no wife, children, it was less painful, or in fact impossible, than it would have been otherwise.

 

[Bill Ferris]

Bill - I’d like to see a thread on your setup that highlighted the mechanics - layout, cable routing / terminations, AC power delivery, etc. Mainly because it’s my opinion that you have one of the most well engineered setups here at AK.

Well Sir, thank you for the super compliment.
I believe that during the 2 years that I`ve been on AK, that my systems, and their setup, connections, and reasons why, both, source signal and power have all been posted, and in some cases possibly painfully redundant.

I`m partially paralyzed and type with one finger, so creating a diatribe road map of what I`ve done and why could be more than I`m willing to take on.
If you, with you lightning fast two hand multi-finger typing skills, wish to dig up and collate all my audio system`s techno post/thread noises and present them in a beneficial way for folks on this site, well then damacman, you Sir. have my permission.

I am really moved by your compliment, and suggestion, too.

Take care, and have a great weekend, as best you can Sir.

Very kind regards, OKB

 

[twiiii]

If you are going to time align your line arrays, you realize you will have to bend the line array of tweeters and mids in an arc so all the sound from the drivers arrive at the same time at only one location. . As Don Davis use to say you either get the alignment very close or you don't worry about it. Because of the intimacy of a line array the anomalies are very narrow and there fore the ear/brain can integrate the sound into an acceptable listening experience with the driver centers placed very close together. But normally there are so many issues with recordings using so many mics and tampering with mixes and tone controls time alignment only reveals errors. I read some where once upon a time room perfect could correct for incorrect arrival times, but I can't swear to it. It was supposed to be able to correct a Klipsch Corner Horn, and that would be quite a job. Thats why when Roger and his assistant were developing the XRT 18 they designed special crossover using a computer program where the tweeters in the center received one spectrum and as you moved from the center the tweeters were filtered differently. They may have been using a form of Bessel array grouping drivers into sub groups in addition. The first Bessel array I heard used 25 Altec 5" speakers arranged in a square grid wired in a Bessel array configuration. Another box was just wired in series parallel. The Bessel array was louder with the same power, could handle more power and if you walked around the speaker with a sound level meter the speaker polar pattern was very close to the classic cardioid shape, with no lobbing to the rear which is typical of multi speakers units not wired properly or the drivers not placed correctly in relation to each other. We built some custom column speakers using Altec 409's, 403', or the famous 755 E in Bessel configurations for Catholic Churches where we could not use distributed ceiling systems or center clusters and before Renkus Heinz developed their line arrays that used digital processing to steer the emissions of the column to coverer a very broad horizontal area while making the vertical axis very narrow to keep emissions off floors, ceiling and back walls only covering the audience with about a 4 ft vertical emission . If you made the line arrays long enough you could place the speakers behind the mics with very little feed back issue because the mics were only close to a small fraction of the number speakers direct field. I know it is not logical, but I have seen it work many times. Harmon, owner of JBL, bought the company that did the initial development work in Germany.

 

[Velocityboat]

I read some where once upon a time room perfect could correct for incorrect arrival times,

Twiiii,

Here is a technical paper on Room Perfect. It first estimates the driver and cross over characteristics. Then calculates filters based on all the room positions of the microphone. The only correction of arrival times seems to be in the section talking about subwoofers on page 6 of the whitepaper link below. Thus why, I would have to biamp in order to do time correction treating the XR290s woofer as a sub and mids and tweeter colum as a row. But Roger Russell does say in his design description he put tweeter column outside on XR290 to correct arrival time. Which makes sense given the tweeter is a greater distance from the ear being outside column versus mid and woofer of a funky shaped pentagon. Thus he built in the time correction by cabinet shape and placement of columns while also curing additive bass reflections inside the cabinet. So perhaps I am splitting hairs trying to chase the nth degree of performance that is already there.


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=70904

The thing that puzzles me is for Room Perfect integration on MX150/MX151 one must measure distance to each speaker for HT for every focus position where for two channel it is not necessary. I guess this is to calculate time delays when same signal is fed to all room speakers perhaps. Thus a quandary y on whether to measureto ouside ofthe cabinet or too the bottom of the cone and to which driver, woofer mid or tweeter for best average? Probably just splitting hairs.

The time align arc is the pinciple Wilson speakers use. Giving them their signature trash can looks. I believe the arc on industrial line arrays is more to balance volume levels between front rows and rear of the stadium and is a differing power distribution so close rows do not get blown out and back rows get a similar volume level with a power boost. Thus more even SPL across a large audience

 

[twiiii]

I have always had an issue with focus and centering imaging shifting in my Stereo and home theatre systems. But with the MX 151 my center is rock sold only with the audio spectrum changing as you move your head because of travel time differences cause frequencies to combine out of phase cancelling or diminishing the signal. The 151 allows you to adjust the travel to the nearest inch, where other units to the nearest foot. Well it makes all the difference in the world whether in the pure stereo or movie modes. In fact unless you have your screen on where you can see the settings, on some DVD's and SACDS if you have the back channels off, you cant tell if your in the Pure Audio or digital modes. Thats to say you can't tell the center channel is working un less you look at your power amp meters. I don't use the same model speakers up front. But my center speaker uses the same tweeters and the same number, but half the same mids and half the woofers of the same model. Only my super tweeters are different, but they perform and are balanced the same so there is no give away there either. I am not sure but there is a difference in bass production between a HT setting and a pure analog setting with the Pure Audio being the best for Stereo recording. . So after hours of listening I can easily tell what for mat I'm listening to by listening for low bass below 40 HZ. Dynamic impact of stereo recording is better in addition in the Pure Audio mode than in one of the HT modes, too.

Remember bi amping was originally developed to lower distortion and correct for in efficiencies between different driver types with out waisting power. Even when Altec and JBL were using giant horn for their woofers HF horns had to be attenuated 4 db to start with. So half the power was going to resistors. Coils and caps insertion losses robbed power from woofers too and decoupled the woofers from the amp so there was very litttle cone control. But by the time Mac was building speakers using sealed boxes and the woofers with the shorting pieces, woofer distortion had dropped significant ly and with sealed woofer boxes amps with high damping factors weren't really necessary, so early Autoformers were OK. Todays amps have a much higher damping factor as a result of research to give the amps high current capability and to drive mis matched impedances of other speaker designs. One thing people don't realize about Mac speakers is how well controlled the speakers impedance is over the spectrum. They require a lot of power, but they don't overly stress amplifiers with extremely non linear impedance issues. Mac has also developed up grades in their transformers for tube units in addition. Todays tube amps maybe from the same family, but they are not your Grand dads 275's. The most complex issue with speakers is controlling crossover parameters at the frequencies on either side of the specific frequency of the crossover. Hours and hours of engineering time are spent making a woofer and mid integrate together. Dunlavy was no doubt the best. His speakers had the flattest response and the most beautiful time energy curves you will ever see. But Roger has the perfect solution, no crossovers. I asked him once if I wanted to produce 110 db in my home which speaker should I choose. IDS or XR290. Hands down he said the 290. The IDS just doesn't have the cone area a 290 has. Paul klipsch was a stickler when it came to FM modulation. This is where an IDS falls short as the low bass frequencies modulate the cone causing all the higher frequencies to be shifted and modulated creating waves of distorted sound as the cones are also acting as non linear pistons.

 

[c_dk]

The room EQ stuff is interesting and goes back to things that McIntosh was promoting back in 1977.....probably should be a separate post.....

But it doesn't answer any of the OPs questions.

I am familiar with all the Mac speakers up to the XR28 generation.....however, McIntosh speakers have triggered many negative feelings with dealers and salespeople over the decades; often having nothing to do with sound quality.

All the reviewers feed off each other and so if one has opinion you can often predetermine what each other reviewer will opine.

You therefore will find "reviews" all over the map and ultimately it can only come down to how well they interact in your room and your sound expectations.

 

[twiiii]

Yeah when Clarion bought Mac things changed with a new speaker designer who loved metal diaphragms so the XRT 26 and 25 weren't favored. When Mac redesigned with the XRT 28 and 30 the sound improved, but as you say everyone was disgruntled. There were other reasons between dealers and the factory and that didn't help. When they fired our rep most the Mac dealers in our area quit being dealers. It took a long time to return Texas and adjoining states back into a profitable area for Mac. There is one theory that Roger used in his designs and others that followed I don't like. In a perfectly reverberant room all frequencies should have the same energy. Well that maybe true for a perfectly Omni speaker but not for a directional speaker. Perfect line arrays would have equal energy, but they are not perfect and as the frequencies get lower there is more lower midrange and bass, and less highs. Boosting the highs is not an answer. And lets face musical instruments are directional and don't have uniform dispersion either. So why would speakers? Find ing the correct balance is the hard part. Thats why I prefer XR 290's first and Xrt 28's second. I never liked the looks of the speakers with the separate bass/ mid commode and tweeter array. They may have sounded great, that I can't argue with; but, the looks were just not my cup of tea.

 

[onwardjames]

@Velocityboat I got to hear those IDS-25's, which is why (with prodding from you and Damacman) I currently enjoy my XRT20's. They are really amazing speakers, those IDS25's.

Hope the OP gets those speakers.

 

[Velocityboat]

[QUOTE="twiiii, post: 11871764,There is one theory that Roger used in his designs and others that followed I don't like. In a perfectly reverberant room all frequencies should have the same energy. Well that maybe true for a perfectly Omni speaker but not for a directional speaker. Perfect line arrays would have equal energy, but they are not perfect and as the frequencies get lower there is more lower midrange and bass, and less highs. Boosting the highs is not an answer. And lets face musical instruments are directional and don't have uniform dispersion either. So why would speakers? Find ing the correct balance is the hard part. Thats why I prefer XR 290's first and Xrt 28's second. I never liked the looks of the speakers with the separate bass/ mid commode and tweeter array. They may have sounded great, that I can't argue with; but, the looks were just not my cup of tea.[/QUOTE]

I will admit in my room that is reverbrant the bass and mids on the XR290 do load up the mids and bass. The two woofer designs XRT20, XRT22, XRT26, XRT28, and XRT30 should be better for less bass. I noticed running just XRT20 the bass was more manageable than when I inversed stacked the XR19 on top as my XR290 clone, I used until i found my XR290s. The clone stack drove me to the room perfect solution versus room treatments. That makes the four woofer stack perfect.

In all actuality I believe Roger Russell voices to match how most humans hear thus he has more low bass and mid bass. His website covers human hearing A line array to corectly do bass wave cancelations need to be 17.5 ft which is not possible. T and coherencehus in a smaller lively room the room perfect is the ticket to get the bass perfect.

I got out the tape measure on the XR290s today measuring driver distance from the ears in the focus sweet spot. The distance to middle travel of woofer. mid range, and tweeter dome is exactly the same distance 14 ft 8 inches when the cabinets are parallel to the rear wall. Thus his suggestion to ensure the XR290 tweeters face straight forward is for perfect time alignment for each drivers sound waves. So yes Roger made sure the drivers were time aligned on the XR290 cabinet with the stange pentagon design shape. I suspect he did same time aligns for XRT20 and the XRT22 with their stand designs if set up exactly as he recommends.

The straight forward tweeter array also makes a bigger sound stage.

The IDS25 with single full range driver is an even better level of coherence and better dynamics without crossovers. But, yes not SPL of XR290.

 

[twiiii]

Better perceived dynamics. Remember even though the IDS does not use power robbing crossovers, that can also change relation ships between drivers, the IDS drivers are not perfect time machines either. Any time there is a change in frequency response there is a change in time, though not as drastic as with crossovers. Wouldn't be fun if Magnapan made a perfect full range ribbon speaker with out crossovers. Because of the lower mass the Magnapan would be another step forward toward perfection. I wonder what an IDS would sound like if Roger could have had Magico make the drivers with their ultra light ultra rigid midrange material and their very high magnetic flux magnets. Then have an small class A amp driving each individual driver.

I mean if they can introduce a $250,000 mono amp at the High End Show in Munich, why not a special one of a KIND self powered full range Speaker from Roger with Room Perfect built in ?

 

[Velocityboat]

Better perceived dynamics. Remember even though the IDS does not use power robbing crossovers, that can also change relation ships between drivers, the IDS drivers are not perfect time machines either. Any time there is a change in frequency response there is a change in time, though not as drastic as with crossovers. Wouldn't be fun if Magnapan made a perfect full range ribbon speaker with out crossovers. Because of the lower mass the Magnapan would be another step forward toward perfection. I wonder what an IDS would sound like if Roger could have had Magico make the drivers with their ultra light ultra rigid midrange material and their very high magnetic flux magnets. Then have an small class A amp driving each individual driver.

I mean if they can introduce a $250,000 mono amp at the High End Show in Munich, why not a special one of a KIND self powered full range Speaker from Roger with Room Perfect built in ?

Some interesting ideas. The magico drivers and set amps.

Paul McGowan of PS audio is planning to market a all out 7 foot quasi line array dipole in 2019. DSP and separate amps for servo controlled woofers running bass and custom folded ribbons and line of domes based on Arnie Nudells last speaker he dubbed the IRS killer. Interesting he is keeping passive cross overs at first. It will likely be a six figure speaker. It wll be interesting to see he can pull it off without Arnies inputs and direction trying to make it sound like a prototype Arnie built. .Every you tube post it seems to morph. One day side firing woofers next front facing. Seems more focused on voicing than accuracy. But every speaker is a trade off.

 

[JosephH]

Well folks, 3 weeks later i hear from the estate broker and the XRT-28 and the MX-136 are mine if I want them. I think I can get them for $3,300 for both. Both are mint and only a few miles from my house.
It will be a big financial stretch for me, as after 2 weeks I took that money and more and purchased a Vette. So someone talk me out of this purchase! How much of an upgrade are these going to be from my Aerial Acoustics 10T MkII? I am going to search again for that review Twii mentions.

 

[damacman]

Well folks, 3 weeks later i hear from the estate broker and the XRT-28 and the MX-136 are mine if I want them. I think I can get them for $3,300 for both. Both are mint and only a few miles from my house.
It will be a big financial stretch for me, as after 2 weeks I took that money and more and purchased a Vette. So someone talk me out of this purchase! How much of an upgrade are these going to be from my Aerial Acoustics 10T MkII? I am going to search again for that review Twii mentions.

Just do it. Afterwards, you'll either be selling the MX132 or MX136 so that will help ease the pain.

 

[Velocityboat]

Well folks, 3 weeks later i hear from the estate broker and the XRT-28 and the MX-136 are mine if I want them. I think I can get them for $3,300 for both. Both are mint and only a few miles from my house.
It will be a big financial stretch for me, as after 2 weeks I took that money and more and purchased a Vette. So someone talk me out of this purchase! How much of an upgrade are these going to be from my Aerial Acoustics 10T MkII? I am going to search again for that review Twii mentions.

A purchase you will never regret. An excellent price for excellent gear. Big line arrays add so much detail and depth with huge soundstage. There is always another vette to purchase. So if things get tight unload it. Once you are all in. You will never second guess.

 

[JosephH]

Ok, it's a done deal. I went to look at them last night and they were in pretty good shape, just missing a bit of black paint from the bases. The metal is undamaged, so a touch up should be no big deal if I find the right paint. He demoed them with a Yamaha M-80, as the two McIntosh amps had sold buy the time I saw the ad weeks ago. They sounded okay, but I was not terribly impressed.as they were pretty flat. I had a hunch, and sure enough they were running the speakers on one amp, but had not replaced the jumpers between the terminals on back!!! So, now I know why they were still around for me, (I was 4th in line) The MX136 was spotless, but missing the remote. So I explained that I would have to replace the remote, and offered him $3,300 for everything. He accepted and I went to get the appliance dolly that I had in the truck. As were were loading the 2nd speaker on the dolly, he pointed to the speaker cables and asked if I wanted them. Since there were a 12' pair of Audioquest Type 4 speaker cables, I wasted no time accepting! Woo hoo!
He helped me load them in my girl's Avalanche, and they fit fine, but after the dolly was loaded, Lisa had to keep the MX136 on her lap! I got them home and into the house by myself, without damage. I fabricated the missing jumpers and hooked them up to the MC452. Holy crap! What amazing sound came forth! The music was accurate, powerful and expansive! Much like going to the MC452, I heard things that I haven't heard before. Especially things like brushes, vibes and the timbre and decay of notes to a level I had not heard before. After a couple hours I quickly switched to the Aerials, and while sound was great, it was compressed and limited compared to the 28's. I ended up turning it down because I was being overwhelmed by music. At similar dBs no other speaker has ever given me that sensation. I did not have time to hook up the MX-136, but I am excited that I will be able to use the balanced outputs from the MX-132 to the MC 452. The type 4 cables will replace 30 year old monster cable, so ther should be an improvement there as well. The cherry on the cake was the remote from my MX132 works perfectly with the MX136, and I have a brand new MC remote still in the bag from AC! It was a very good night!
The large hole in the wall is my project where the system will be built into the wall. I am still considering what color to paint the wall behind the TV, I am leaning gray, BTW.

 

[longgone]

... paint the wall black with Mac meter blue trim?