Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562
aficionado
|
OP
aficionado
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562 |
I'll get them glasses Adrian! So what were your deciding factors to go with the 2809? If I knew what I knew now, pre-outs would have bumped to the 2809 at least.
Last edited by davekro; 04/03/09 08:21 PM.
Dave
"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice they're not."
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458 |
Dave? Tease....... Tease........ Tease........
::::::: No disrespect to Axiom, but my favorite woofer is my yellow lab :::::::
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
I bet those outfits are really hot onstage.
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458 |
Nah.... nothin' but COOOOOOOL!
::::::: No disrespect to Axiom, but my favorite woofer is my yellow lab :::::::
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,928
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,928 |
When you compare the 2809 with the 3808, I didn't see enough difference between them to justify the diff in $$. My 2809 can easily play to earsplitting levels and has virtually the same features as the 3808 but perhaps the one thing I couldn't refuse (at the time) was a local dealer had the 2809 PLUS the Denon BD1800 for $1100 CN (about $850ish US). Budget was definitely a factor in my decision, and I'm sure I don't really need more power than the 2809(115 wts) but it has the preouts just in case.
Half of communication is listening. You can't listen with your mouth.
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361 |
Budgets are a fact of life, and if any of us was lighting our candles with $100 bills, we should be on a different site. Given that you have to basically eat the 1900, I would not even consider getting a 2 or 3000 series and would not worry about it for years to come. Right now, IMO, is a bad time to buy. Too many companies are just getting around to room correction, HDMI switching and HD audio. Enjoy the new speakers for a few years and get something more beefed up later.
Panny 3000 PJ, 118" Carada, Denon 3300, PS3, Axiom QS8, PSB 5T, B&W sub, levitating speaker wire
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,843 Likes: 13
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,843 Likes: 13 |
I believe with the MultEQ XT you get upto 8 measurements and better filters. From their website...
"MultEQ XT, using the receiver interface, takes up to 8 measurements around the listening area and uses high resolution equalization filters for satellites and subwoofers. This is the most powerful built-in version of MultEQ for receivers."
"MultEQ takes up to 6 room position measurements, and uses mid-level resolution filters for satellites and subwoofers. "
M80s VP180 4xM22ow 4xM3ic EP600 2xEP350 AnthemAVM60 Outlaw7700 EmoA500 Epson5040UB FluanceRT85
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562
aficionado
|
OP
aficionado
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562 |
I bet those outfits are really hot onstage. When we saw them at Shoreline (Mountain View) a few year ago, they had on these full length coats covered with bling (looked like jewels). Either these coats added A LOT OF BULK, or these boys are big fellers! Great show complete with twirling guitar.
Dave
"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice they're not."
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562
aficionado
|
OP
aficionado
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562 |
"MultEQ XT, using the receiver interface, takes up to 8 measurements around the listening area and uses high resolution equalization filters for satellites and subwoofers. This is the most powerful built-in version of MultEQ for receivers."
I now recall the extra two measurements. Does this makes any noticeable difference? High res. filters... What does a filter do? How does a High res. filter do it better? I know the 3808 (maybe the 2809 too) had a better mic. Charles, very good points about waiting for another generation or cycle. I was figuring I could sell the 1909 for about a $80-$100 loss (paid $485), so not too bad of a rental/ audition fee. Though the "ooooooh, GUI, ooooh, pre-outs, oooooh the rest of it..." has is pull, if I find the loud listening level limit of the 1909 passes my occasional ZZ Top, Queen, etc. (plus beer) rock outs, the 1909 should do me well for a while. Maybe when the economy turns around and my business picks up, be ready for some upgrades. Like maybe change from this little old (2008) 73" Mitsub. DLP to a big screen (projector). I'm afraid it just never ends! <gasp>
Dave
"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice they're not."
|
|
|
Re: From a 1909, how much better SQ to 2809. To 3808.
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562
aficionado
|
OP
aficionado
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 562 |
Dave? Tease....... Tease........ Tease........ Now THAT'S cool right there, man. I don't care who ya are! I'm sure Larry The Cable Guy would concur.
Dave
"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice they're not."
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,949
Posts442,517
Members15,619
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
1 members (rrlev),
684
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|