Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="squeak9798" data-source="post: 1101784" data-attributes="member: 555320">You should atleast test a box that does the Rl-p justice //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif&nbsp; Given your supposed results of the listening test....I can tell you that there should be no one (including you and your &quot;posse&quot;) who draws any conclusions about how the Rl-p stacks up to the Type-R (or any other sub) in SQ because the box was clearly inappropriate for the Rl-p if that is the type of sound it gave you.Again...I don&#039;t know what you were listening to, but what you described is FAR from how a Rl-p should and can sound.&nbsp; This I can state with 100% confidence and certainty.Maybe because all you&#039;ve done for the past 3 months is rave about how wonderful the Type-R is.Possible reason?I was never even bringing your listening tests of the Type R in question.&nbsp; What I was saying was that your analysis of the Rl-p&#039;s sound is clearly flawed by something.&nbsp; Box?&nbsp; Power? Setup?&nbsp; Couldn&#039;t tell you, I wasn&#039;t there.&nbsp; But what you listened to was not an Rl-p performing at it&#039;s maximum.&nbsp; Period.As such, you can not draw any conclusions between it and any other sub on the market in terms of SQ as you tried to do already.&nbsp; Flawed test = flawed results = flawed conclusions.Which makes statements such as this: &quot;Not the worst, but far from woofers such as the alpine type X and JL w7.&quot; totally irrational and illogical.That is all I was stating.Kent&#039;s Rl-p vs. XXX comparo.His wasn&#039;t any more biased than yours.&nbsp; So, depending on how you look at it....that&#039;s either a compliment or an insult to the test //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gifAnd what you heard as NOT and Rl-p performing optimally.If you are going to try to compare SQ, atleast test each sub in it&#039;s optimal sound quality enclosure.I don&#039;t care about results as long as it&#039;s a fair fight.Then just as long as everybody reading this understand that the results are anything but conclusive //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif (this goes for any vs. thread....not just this one)And, following the recent bandwagon....I&#039;d say 99% of readers don&#039;t comprehend that statement.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="squeak9798, post: 1101784, member: 555320"] You should atleast test a box that does the Rl-p justice [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif[/IMG] Given your supposed results of the listening test....I can tell you that there should be no one (including you and your "posse") who draws any conclusions about how the Rl-p stacks up to the Type-R (or any other sub) in SQ because the box was clearly inappropriate for the Rl-p if that is the type of sound it gave you. Again...I don't know what you were listening to, but what you described is [B]FAR[/B] from how a Rl-p [I]should[/I] and [I]can[/I] sound. This I can state with 100% confidence and certainty. Maybe because all you've done for the past 3 months is rave about how wonderful the Type-R is. Possible reason? I was never even bringing your listening tests of the Type R in question. What I was saying was that your analysis of the Rl-p's sound is clearly flawed by something. Box? Power? Setup? Couldn't tell you, I wasn't there. But what you listened to was not an Rl-p performing at it's maximum. Period. As such, you can not draw any conclusions between it and any other sub on the market in terms of SQ as you tried to do already. Flawed test = flawed results = flawed conclusions. Which makes statements such as this: "Not the worst, but far from woofers such as the alpine type X and JL w7." totally irrational and illogical. That is all I was stating. Kent's Rl-p vs. XXX comparo. His wasn't any more biased than yours. So, depending on how [I]you[/I] look at it....that's either a compliment or an insult to the test [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif[/IMG] And what you heard as [B]NOT[/B] and Rl-p performing optimally. If you are going to try to compare SQ, atleast test each sub in it's optimal sound quality enclosure. I don't care about results as long as it's a fair fight. Then just as long as everybody reading this understand that the results are anything but conclusive [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif[/IMG] (this goes for any vs. thread....not just this one) And, following the recent bandwagon....I'd say 99% of readers don't comprehend that statement. [/QUOTE]

Verification