Originally Posted By: Micah

That's pretty much what I figured. But where I start to lose a clear understanding of the way things work is, if they're using 600 watts to move the one woofer in the EP600 in a ported design, which is more efficient than a sealed box, then I would have thought the EP800, which uses a less efficient design, would require more than 400 watts per speaker to even get close to the output of the 600.
The speakers are wired in parallel and the amp achieves that much power, even more, IIRC.

 Quote:

If in fact a ported design holds an advantage in the area of bass extension, then I'm curious why they would take what seems like 'the harder road' to getting the EP800 to hit those awesome low bass notes that it does. And why it doesn't require gobbs more power than it does to perform the way it performs.
You also have to consider how Axiom produces their lineup and to add another box design might be more costly than to simply router out a second hole in the already large cabinet of the 600 turning that cabinet design into a sealed unit.

 Quote:
all attempts I've made searching for the differences via the internet seem to conflict with the information I've gotten here.
We seem to have a different approach on this forum, straight talk and no myths.

 Quote:
Which is why I'd love to hear it from the horses mouth. What advantage did the sealed box used with the EP800 have?
I believe it was Ian that mentioned using the 600 box and amp due to the factors I previously mentioned way back when it was first introduced.

Jason
M80 v2
VP160 v3
QS8 v2
PB13 Ultra
Denon 3808
Samsung 85" Q70