Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 33 of 33

Thread: Pargon VS Metregon

  1. #31
    Senior Member Hoerninger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,892
    I do not worry - I do not own it.
    Some condemn it - some glorify it, or something in between.
    (But I may listen to Paragon XXL, look here in Lansing Heritage. )

    My special interest is, whether the simulation shows the correct result - it is a question of own experience or reliability of the program. If the program does it well, it can be considered to use a compression chamber when rebuilding it. (This won't be a copy of course.)
    ___________
    Peter

  2. #32
    Maron Horonzakz
    Guest
    I would look for a woofer/horn that would go one white note lower. Or one octive lower. And not piddle with the present cutoff frequency.

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    846
    I didn't say most paragons had passive radiators bat a guy iIknew built a room on to his house just for his paragon and then was so disapointed by the base response comparred even to a properly set up 130A in a C34, that he added 6 cubic feet behind each LE15A and a passive radiator and it came tio life. There must not have been more than a foot or two behind each woofer in the stock design and correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that horn handles what you might call the lowest part of the midrange or maybe the highest parts of the bass so rather than helping the bottom end the horn just makes the range just above a little harder to compete with.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Metregon Value
    By rgrjit8 in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-09-2003, 11:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •