I owned a pair of Jensens from the late 70's of a similar size and I'm going from a memory so don't hold me to this. Bass quality was an oxymoron.Originally Posted by BGHD
David
|
I owned a pair of Jensens from the late 70's of a similar size and I'm going from a memory so don't hold me to this. Bass quality was an oxymoron.Originally Posted by BGHD
David
Not having had much experience listening to other speakers, I can't really make a fair assessment about my Jensens' quality of bass. However, what I can say for sure is that, it was capable of going much lower than 340SE. How much lower, I can't say, but it had the capacity to produce low frequency sound that can shake windows and doors even at normal volume, which wasn't something 340SE wasn't designed to do (I imagine)Originally Posted by BGHD
I watched King Kong today and the auditory experience was a treat with the 340SE and SVS sub. (Even though I only have 2.1 setup). Too bad the movie was long and a bit mediocre.
My wife and I watched it last night and I agree with you but my wife liked it (except for the bugs) more than I did. The LFE was way too tame. I'd read that in the forums but was still surprised at the lack of deep bass even in the jungle scenes.Originally Posted by incyphe
David
Yes King Kong was whimpy in the bass. Try War of the Worlds, or Haunting DTS....
The 340's are not full range and must be used with a sub if you want full range. I can only imagine how bloated the mid bass hump is in those old Jensens are (disco boom boxes ).
The 340's will have an accurate mid bass that many inexperienced enthusiasts precieve as little or no bass.
You know you're an audio freak when you judge movies by how much bass they have.
dbart is right on both counts.
KK was disappointing... especially after the serious LEF's on LOTR!
WOTW was so intense that anything that was 'motion sensitive' was lighting up! My receivers' remote control kept going on. Could be the most bass-intensive movie I've ever played... especially the beginning, when things were rising up from the ground. Yeowzer!
shane
Yes Eve, I like to watch.
My setup:
http://www.fototime.com/5EF1F78FC789849/orig.jpg
HT: 340SE's Front & Center - 340 Classic's Surround, SVS PB110-ISD.
Office (2-ch): 170SE's
KK was decent, but anything after the original is just a copy! I, too, was surprised that the LFE was as tame as it is.....Kong's footfalls should've shook the room.
Still gotta see WOTW even though everyone was disappointed by the story, just for the sound. After all.....we are a buncha audio geeks, right?
Ed
* Sierra-2EX's W/V2 crossover upgrade
* (2) Rythmik F12's
* Parasound Halo P6
* Audio by Van Alstine DVA-M225 Monoblock Amps
* MiniDSP 2x4HD For Sub calibration
*World's Best Cables Canare 4S11 speaker cables
Well... since we will recommend 'watching' a crappy movie simply for the LFE's... I'd say that's a big yes.Originally Posted by Mag_Neato
shane
Yes Eve, I like to watch.
My setup:
http://www.fototime.com/5EF1F78FC789849/orig.jpg
HT: 340SE's Front & Center - 340 Classic's Surround, SVS PB110-ISD.
Office (2-ch): 170SE's
It is funny.....
I have friends in the movie business, and some of them are voting members of the "Academy". For most of the movies that are up for awards, the members get DVD copies of the movies to watch....most of them just watch the movies on their TV using their TV's speakers.
I recently met some people that work on the audio side....so of course, they care.....I'm not sure if they are voting members, and I know they are more concerned with the overall sound....not just the LFE.
-curtis
Here's a list of movies that won awards for sound...Originally Posted by curtis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Sound
I certainly hope your friends don't vote on this particular category...