Clio09,
Enjoy the 911. The 84-89 911s were special. Personally, the 964s always have held my heart.
Noble100,
It is obvious in your mind there is only one solution to a problem, yours. Thank goodness people like James B. Lansing, Paul Klipsch, Henry Kloss, Paul Walker, Roy Allison, and Jim Winey didn't decide that the best speakers of their day were as good as could be.
For virtually every issue in life and science, there are multiple solutions, each with its own trade offs. Those that get so myopically focused as to believe there is only, or decide they already know it all, never learn and never develop further. There is no best speaker design, dynamic drivers, horns, electrostatic, ribbon, or quasi ribbon, they all have trade offs.
You can fool yourself that the only important thing with subwoofers is a smooth frequency response, regardless of output capability, transient response, room decay, phasing, and a plethora of other issues that we are still learning and defining in the setup of sound.
You can also continue to believe that your 2.7s extend with any authority to 35 hz, they start to roll off in the 50hz range and will quickly slap the panels when trying to reproduce any type of deep bass. If you would high pass the 2.7s they will sound less dark and sound cleaner after being relieved of trying to handle the deep bass. Did I mention I owned a pair of 2.7s for more than a decade which were run both full range and with an active crossover?
Just for shits and giggles, I ran a quick MLSSA at my listening position in my main systems this morning. There are two graphs, the one with bass flat to 20hz is my 3.5s with a single Rythmik 15, crossover set at 80hz between the two, and NO EQUALIZATION. The second with the rolloff is the 3.5s running full range.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/rDxsgpnU5xVsz1UWA
Enjoy the 911. The 84-89 911s were special. Personally, the 964s always have held my heart.
Noble100,
It is obvious in your mind there is only one solution to a problem, yours. Thank goodness people like James B. Lansing, Paul Klipsch, Henry Kloss, Paul Walker, Roy Allison, and Jim Winey didn't decide that the best speakers of their day were as good as could be.
For virtually every issue in life and science, there are multiple solutions, each with its own trade offs. Those that get so myopically focused as to believe there is only, or decide they already know it all, never learn and never develop further. There is no best speaker design, dynamic drivers, horns, electrostatic, ribbon, or quasi ribbon, they all have trade offs.
You can fool yourself that the only important thing with subwoofers is a smooth frequency response, regardless of output capability, transient response, room decay, phasing, and a plethora of other issues that we are still learning and defining in the setup of sound.
You can also continue to believe that your 2.7s extend with any authority to 35 hz, they start to roll off in the 50hz range and will quickly slap the panels when trying to reproduce any type of deep bass. If you would high pass the 2.7s they will sound less dark and sound cleaner after being relieved of trying to handle the deep bass. Did I mention I owned a pair of 2.7s for more than a decade which were run both full range and with an active crossover?
Just for shits and giggles, I ran a quick MLSSA at my listening position in my main systems this morning. There are two graphs, the one with bass flat to 20hz is my 3.5s with a single Rythmik 15, crossover set at 80hz between the two, and NO EQUALIZATION. The second with the rolloff is the 3.5s running full range.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/rDxsgpnU5xVsz1UWA