Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Are you serious? What part of the word; "unavailable" requires
explanation?

What part of the thrust of my original post...

------------------------------------------
I've found a forthcoming power amplifier that I may be interested in, but
the only specs available at present are that it does 500W into 8 ohms
bridged for mono, and 230W per channel into 4 ohms.

What would be its likely stereo output into 8 ohms?
------------------------------------------

....did you neglect to consider when you decided to dish out a million and
one warnings about stuff that has nothing specific to do with the amplifier
in question?


But there is such a thing as a bargain.

**Indeed. However, when it is 'vapourware' it is.......nothing.

AFTER the amp has hit the market and AFTER the amp has been
independently tested and AFTER the amp has been shown to be reliable,
it may be worthy of consideration. Before those facts are known, it
is pointless bothering with.

If, at the start of the second quarter of 2005, I want to give a product
which has been announced as due to be released in the second quarter of 2005
my consideration, then I am entirely at liberty to do so. The fact that you
think that nothing should be done until it has not only arrived, but been
debugged by the early adopters, is irrelevant to my purpose in starting this
thread.


The Alesis RA range of amps look somewhat similar to the forthcoming amp
from Behringer - same basic configuration, although the RA500 is 3U high
instead of the 2U shown on Behringer's web site. Are they the ones you're
referring to?


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com/FiatPandaRally/index.htm
www.wally.myby.co.uk

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

But there is such a thing as a bargain.

Yes. Behringer fall into the 'how do they do it for the money' camp.
Bit like Chinese cordless drills.

More like Nad, perhaps.


But with both don't compare in
performance to the 'real' thing. Which tends to be rather a large
factor in Hi-Fi.

All I can say is that I'm impressed with what has happened by adding the
active crossover. Limited though it may be, my one and only experience of
their kit has been good, and I'm tempted to try some more of it. Nobody has
stepped up and cited a specific item from their range that's indubitable
crap, never mind explained why. I'm not saying the criticisms that have
appeared are not without foundation, but they are rather generalised.
Indeed, the only solid *fact* that I have available is that the crossover
does the business, for me, and better than expected.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com/FiatPandaRally/index.htm
www.wally.myby.co.uk

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Wally wrote:
And like I said before, pick up a good so-called PA amp - a QSC or a
Crown for example, derate it a bit, and get ready to have your socks
blown off when you take your measurements.


Certainly my experience so far. Early days in my experimenting, but when
I started to use an InterM R500 as the power amp on my Mordaunts
in a large room, I noticed an immediate improvement in top and depth of
bass. I was going to buy new speakers and now am not. I think that
headroom is one of the key steps to quality of sound.

Peter Scott

In article ,
Wally wrote:
But there is such a thing as a bargain.

Yes. Behringer fall into the 'how do they do it for the money' camp.
Bit like Chinese cordless drills.

More like Nad, perhaps.

No, NAD produce fine sounding gear with no frills at a reasonable price.
My experience of Behringer is that they produce extremely flash looking
gear with all the 'functions' - needed or not - without actually worrying
so much about the actual sound quality, which will be adequate, but no
more. In other words, it's designed to appeal to the mass market, rather
than giving exceptional value to the discerning that NAD usually do.

Of course, YMMV.


But with both don't compare in
performance to the 'real' thing. Which tends to be rather a large
factor in Hi-Fi.

All I can say is that I'm impressed with what has happened by adding the
active crossover. Limited though it may be, my one and only experience
of their kit has been good, and I'm tempted to try some more of it.
Nobody has stepped up and cited a specific item from their range that's
indubitable crap, never mind explained why. I'm not saying the
criticisms that have appeared are not without foundation, but they are
rather generalised. Indeed, the only solid *fact* that I have available
is that the crossover does the business, for me, and better than
expected.

An active crossover might well cure problems of a room/speaker
combination, etc, that are far more severe than the minor differences
between well and adequately designed electronics.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No, NAD produce fine sounding gear with no frills at a reasonable
price. My experience of Behringer is that they produce extremely
flash looking gear with all the 'functions' - needed or not - without
actually worrying so much about the actual sound quality, which will
be adequate, but no more. In other words, it's designed to appeal to
the mass market, rather than giving exceptional value to the
discerning that NAD usually do.

How much of their gear have you actually used? Which bits, specifically?


An active crossover might well cure problems of a room/speaker
combination, etc, that are far more severe than the minor differences
between well and adequately designed electronics.

I'm glad I didn't buy an *expensive* active crossover, then - the minor
differences between that and the one I did buy would have been lost in the
overall change to the system sound that came about by dint of putting *an*
active crossover into it.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com/FiatPandaRally/index.htm
www.wally.myby.co.uk

In article ,
Wally wrote:
No, NAD produce fine sounding gear with no frills at a reasonable
price. My experience of Behringer is that they produce extremely
flash looking gear with all the 'functions' - needed or not - without
actually worrying so much about the actual sound quality, which will
be adequate, but no more. In other words, it's designed to appeal to
the mass market, rather than giving exceptional value to the
discerning that NAD usually do.

How much of their gear have you actually used? Which bits, specifically?

A couple of mixers and compressor /limiters. Ok and good value for money,
but...

--
*I don't have a license to kill, but I do have a learner's permit.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.