C
Clark Grizwald
New member
I'm about to pull the wallet out (again) and get me some "real" monitors.
JFYI, I did have a pair of JBL 4400 series monitors back in the mid 80s (about $500 each).
I don't have lots of money (like I did back then) and would rather not spend more than $500 pr.
I COULD spend a LITTLE more, but I'm concerned with the price/performance point.
My thoughts are this:
Active monitors would be the best solution, but I want the most sound/performance from my system which to me means bi-amped. (am I wrong?)
I'm thinking a lower wattage/smaller coned bi-amped system would out perform a full range system.
So, am I right...is there a big differencce in quality/performance?
Should I go bi-amped?
JFYI, I did have a pair of JBL 4400 series monitors back in the mid 80s (about $500 each).
I don't have lots of money (like I did back then) and would rather not spend more than $500 pr.
I COULD spend a LITTLE more, but I'm concerned with the price/performance point.
My thoughts are this:
Active monitors would be the best solution, but I want the most sound/performance from my system which to me means bi-amped. (am I wrong?)
I'm thinking a lower wattage/smaller coned bi-amped system would out perform a full range system.
So, am I right...is there a big differencce in quality/performance?
Should I go bi-amped?

