有關ENERGY喇叭

avfire 發表於 2009-6-30 21:12

點解好似沒人提ENGERY這品牌, 因本人有一個新的engery centre, 想買對同品牌前置, 想大家比點意見. 先多謝各師兄

wil-wil 發表於 2009-6-30 22:32

我都係用中置既 Energy C-50

http://www.post76.com/discuss/attachments/forumid_34/20080615_e0ec2d270d5ad50a5d7erD9ZmJDV2mNJ.jpg

avfire 發表於 2009-7-7 08:55

真係好小人提喎

cakecake 發表於 2009-7-7 09:00

Energy for AV用多

yuppi 發表於 2009-7-7 09:08

Energy = Mirage, 如果出相同款Energy 比較抵玩{:1_253:}

michaelwong 發表於 2009-7-7 10:24

1# avfire
avfire, 我之前用energy c200作前置, av用ok! 要幾爆有幾爆. 不過聽歌就......{:6_206:}
因現在聽歌多, 所以用大半年後頂唔順賣走, 用回床下底對kef coda 8.{:6_139:}

Let-Go 發表於 2009-7-7 12:14

本帖最後由 Let-Go 於 2009-7-7 12:16 編輯

1# avfire

Dear avfire
please check this web
http://hifi.ascl.hk/product_list.php?id=5&lang=cht

I am considering the "take classic 5.1"
http://reviews.cnet.com/surround-speaker-systems/energy-take-classic/4505-7868_7-33310963.html?tag=mncol;also

ginson 發表於 2009-7-7 14:05

Let-Go兄
我用緊Energy最細個set RC Micro (你個Review都有提), 睇戲唔錯, 呢set take classic都應該唔差
不過個Sub仔樣就似MM-8啦,但係我覺得偏肥同慢,尤其收得慢,係d爆一下既位差d, 不過3k到全套既標準係咁上下, take classic呢套好似再平d添 (USD$1000:USD$600).

alexn 發表於 2009-7-7 14:11

Let-Go兄
我用緊Energy最細個set RC Micro (你個Review都有提), 睇戲唔錯, 呢set take classic都應該唔差
不過個Sub仔樣就似MM-8啦,但係我覺得偏肥同慢,尤其收得慢,係d爆一下既位差d, 不過3k到全套既標準係咁上下, t ...
ginson 發表於 2009-7-7 14:05 http://www.post76.com/discuss/images/common/back.gif
RC Micro 貴過 Take Classic 咁多 ?
USD1000 vs USD600 .... {:6_121:}

ginson 發表於 2009-7-7 14:17

我唔肯定有無咁多,個網寫既
Design and features
The Take Classic's satellite speakers and subwoofer are bigger than the RC-Micro 5.1 system, but it's a whopping 40 percent less expensive ($600 compared with $1,000).

不過Micro應該貴d既,因為size細但功效大

頁: [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Post76.hk's Archiver

有關ENERGY喇叭