I'm still a little perplexed by this kinda statement:
"The Hawk is inefficient so you will need an amplifier that sports high amperage and a watt minumum of around 60 per channel. The Sim I-5 is an excellent 'budget' piece of equipment for the Hawk and can match well. Still, you are only getting a faint idea of what this speaker is capable of."
How can an an amp be an "excellent" choice for the Hawks, and yet only "faintly" give an idea of their potential? They either are not an excellent (budget...? at $3k new for a $3k new speaker?) match or they do a better than faint job of revealing the Hawks. I get confused at such strong descriptors.
It's interesting how you get these different points of views about the same products (I-5 & Hawks).
- walkman
"The Hawk is inefficient so you will need an amplifier that sports high amperage and a watt minumum of around 60 per channel. The Sim I-5 is an excellent 'budget' piece of equipment for the Hawk and can match well. Still, you are only getting a faint idea of what this speaker is capable of."
How can an an amp be an "excellent" choice for the Hawks, and yet only "faintly" give an idea of their potential? They either are not an excellent (budget...? at $3k new for a $3k new speaker?) match or they do a better than faint job of revealing the Hawks. I get confused at such strong descriptors.
It's interesting how you get these different points of views about the same products (I-5 & Hawks).
- walkman