Daverz wrote:
> What name calling? I called your -post- obnoxious, because, if we are
> being frank now, it was obnoxious. You saw a post about analog
> equipment and your objectivist warrior mode kicked in (if it is in fact
> ever turned off).
LOL. You post all the above and have the
Mnyb wrote:
> ... As a lot of power is needed for the EQ alone making the sub even
> more ineficient by reducing size seems such a waste to me . why fight
> against nature .
I have quite a small room & it's nearly square (-not- ideal!!) - but
*that's* why I have 2 tiddly "aesthetic" subwoofers
pablolie wrote:
> I got tired of the standard PS getting so dirty that it prevented
> operation of the SBT remote. Finally decided to go for a cleaner TeraDak
> supply, despite the questionable price ratio (~$130 on Ebay) compared to
> the Touch price point.24838
Or you could have just bought
