• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Receiver and speaker match

Bill Murray said:
I hate 4 ohm speakers because it prevents you from safely driving a second pair of speakers. I also don't particularly like the acoustic suspension sound or watt gobbling ineffecient speakers. Plus I don't think AR sounds as good as so many who worship at this altar would have it. Enough reasons for you ??
Click to expand...
They don't stop you from adding a second set of speakers. They stop you from adding them in parallel.
 
teal'c said:
Sheesh, lighten up, @sqlsavior

That was a joke, and a good one. :p



Well since two out of your three reasons don't apply to the thread, there wasn't a lot of clarification.
CVs aren't acoustical suspension, nor are they inefficient.
:dunno:
I haven't heard any AR speakers, but going by what has been said on site, I'm guessing CVs do not sound much like ARs.

So it's still just you hate all 4 ohm speakers because you can't run four of them.
I see you haven't posted anything about NAD. Maybe try some NAD equipment, it can handle two sets of most 4 ohmers.
Click to expand...
OK I thought I was responding to ARs as they are the thing that comes to mind when 4 ohms are mentioned. CV and NAD (hoodat?) came into existence after I did the bulk of my gear acquisition. (You are talking to a living dinosaur). CV I have never heard in person, but they seem to be responsible for a lot of orgasms by those who have heard them. What I DO know about them is that their surrounds rot and need replacement. None of my speakers have ever rotted on me, and if they had I would be pissed at them rather than brag about them. As to NAD I never heard of them. I haven't paid much attention to anything on the planet since 1980.......
 
Bill Murray said:
OK I thought I was responding to ARs as they are the thing that comes to mind when 4 ohms are mentioned. CV and NAD (hoodat?) came into existence after I did the bulk of my gear acquisition. (You are talking to a living dinosaur). CV I have never heard in person, but they seem to be responsible for a lot of orgasms by those who have heard them. What I DO know about them is that their surrounds rot and need replacement. None of my speakers have ever rotted on me, and if they had I would be pissed at them rather than brag about them. As to NAD I never heard of them. I haven't paid much attention to anything on the planet since 1980.......
Click to expand...
NAD started up in 72... Perhaps you're familiar with their original name, New Acoustic Dimension?
As for CV, they've been around since 1954. Did they even have foam surrounds in '54? I know at least some of their early designs and their later high end versions had pleated paper surrounds. Bass was important to them even back then, so though I've never seen the really early stuff, the pics I've seen were of BIG speakers. Make my 90 lb AT-15s look like bookshelf units.

Bill Murray said:
Besides surround rot, another reason for me to be wary of CVs is that they are championed by that boring, obnoxious dude on Youtube.......................
Click to expand...
Well that's not really fair. Can't blame the speakers for who likes them.
 
Last edited:
teal'c said:
NAD started up in 72... Perhaps you're familiar with their original name, New Acoustic Dimension?
As for CV, they've been around since 1954. Did they even have foam surrounds in '54? I know at least some of their early designs and their later high end versions had pleated paper surrounds. Bass was important to them even back then, so though I've never seen the really early stuff, the pics I've seen were of BIG speakers. Make my 90 lb AT-15s look like bookshelf units.


Well that's not really fair. Can't blame the speakers for who likes them.
Click to expand...
As for rot, I expect that of day old or week old food, but not of speakers, even if 50 years old. As for Youtube Yahoo, it is a fact of life that people are attracted to, or repelled by, the spokesman (official or otherwise) of a product.
 
Bill Murray said:
As for rot, I expect that of day old or week old food, but not of speakers, even if 50 years old. As for Youtube Yahoo, it is a fact of life that people are attracted to, or repelled by, the spokesman (official or otherwise) of a product.
Click to expand...

Is this the guy?

 
Bill Murray said:
No not this guy. The dude I was referring to talks mostly about old speakers, and at that mostly about CV. He once had a video about how he was going to quit youtube because he didn't make enough money out of it, but he broke his promise and is still out there.
Click to expand...

This must be the guy!



I never was too fond of his reviews
 
He lost me when he hadn't said anything yet after half a minute. "Well... <sticks finger in ear>..." :boring:

I avoid opinionated people whose opinions annoy me, for many reasons, one of which applies in this case: I might get the wrong idea about something that is actually good. :dunno:

Not that I'm a CV fanboy, just saying.
 
toxcrusadr said:
He lost me when he hadn't said anything yet after half a minute. "Well... <sticks finger in ear>..." :boring:

I avoid opinionated people whose opinions annoy me, for many reasons, one of which applies in this case: I might get the wrong idea about something that is actually good. :dunno:

Not that I'm a CV fanboy, just saying.
Click to expand...
I know exactly how you feel. If a youtube video does not get right to the point, I make a quick exit. A lot of these videos are nothing more than pathetic attempts to fulfill a frustrated showbiz ambition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom