Guestbook

Dear Nubert team,As an old Nubert customer (August 1998) and new Internet user, I would like to send you a few kind words by e-mail. First of all, congratulations on winning 1st place in the speaker test in VIDEO magazine. It makes you feel really good to have bought from the same manufacturer. My NUWAVE and NULINE speakers are still doing well and sound better than on the first day. Yesterday I was visited by a TV technician, Mr. Bertels, who proudly told me about the purchase of his NUWAVE 10. Great, another new customer! Best regards from Hamburg.

Dear Factory team,I wanted to report the following: In 1998 I bought two speaker stands from you for my NULINE RS 3. These stands consisted of the base and the plate for the speaker. Between them were two 62 cm long tubes. I have replaced these tubes with ones 1.40 m long, so that the rear speakers are now enthroned high above me, resulting in a much better surround effect. Recommended for imitation. Good day!

Dear Nubert TeamYour NuWave8 is an excellent analytical monitor speaker with a good price-performance ratio. There are no top-heavy, boomy or sibilant effects. The amazing thing about your speakers is the very precise impulse fidelity combined with a linear frequency response and high power handling, making this product suitable for professional use. However, not every listener will like these characteristics. You can't expect super-wide stereo, rumbling bass, sharp highs etc. from Nubert speakers. In addition, these machines mercilessly expose the recording deficits of many CDs. I would like to mention a few reference recordings: Rickie Lee Jones (first album), sahra k. (Closer than they Appear), Tori Amos, and as a highlight the Super Audio CD The Door by KEB'MO'.

Hello to the whole Nubert team, I can only agree with the opinion of Frank Theimer, but I still think it's a pity that there are still people who have to make everything bad although there is no reason to do so. MFG Denis Wagner

Hello dear Nubert team: I've been the proud owner of a pair of NuWave 8s and the CS-4 center speaker in Neptune blue for about 14 months now, and it's a real wonder how you can get such a bass out of such cabinet sizes and, above all, such chassis sizes (diameter = 18 cm). Normally other speaker manufacturers would have to pack their bags! I had the chance to compare my Nubert loudspeakers directly with a pair of loudspeakers from a well-known manufacturer in the USA that cost around DM 10,000. This raised the question for me and some of my friends: why spend so much money when the cheaper speakers are clearly the better ones? The sound and the power of the bass that you get for just under 1800 DM is phenomenal! Even TV programs and music stations are properly enhanced. With really loud movie passages in Dolby Digital and DTS with my Yamaha DSP-A1, you could even work without a subwoofer, the NuWave 8s reach so deep down into the bass cellar. Even really powerful DTS bass attacks (U-571: Explosion of the water bombs, Sleepy Hollow: Horse ride through the forest) were handled without distortion. It seems as if the drivers simply don't want to reach their limits, even though they look more than dainty. Everyone, really everyone, asked about the subwoofer when listening to loud music and no one could believe that the NuWave 8 played without it. The bass is so good that I had to turn the bass control down from +5 (old speakers) to -2 and switch off the bass extension. The sound pressure that the speaker produces is also comparable with professional PA systems. Of course, this also applies to the center speaker. All in all, Nubert loudspeakers are as good as a gift for what they can do, for the materials used (other loudspeakers up to DM 5000 can only dream of such crossovers) and for the way they are finished. I recommend Nubert loudspeakers to EVERYONE without exception - why spend more money? For me, there is simply no better sound !!!

I am since about a week very proud owner of the aw550 subwoofer. and although I was initially somewhat skeptical of a subwoofer with almost twice the power to switch to this small, I was in no time taught better. my small room (17m2) is optimally sounded by the aw550! the bass comes precise, powerful and bring the floor to vibrate :-)i am absolutely satisfied with the subwoofer and do not even want to imagine what brute force there even a 850 or 900 must have - for my room probably too much of a good thing :-)greetings from austria (no kangaroohs),harry

Hello, Mr. Schiffler! Thank you for your constructive contribution. In principle, we also answer all questions. Mostly, however, directly by e-mail. Believe it or not, we had a forum created a long time ago. However, the topic was put on ice due to time constraints. However, I have also noticed the change in the entry structure and I think it is now really time to realize this project. Give us a little more time. It's coming...

In response to the discussion between Mr. Roderburg, Mr. Redlich and Mr. Schiffler, here is an attempt to clarify the problem: A loudspeaker designer has to deal with the fact that the room sometimes responds violently to what the loudspeaker tells him. In rooms with parallel, solid room boundary surfaces, a large number of natural resonances (room modes) occur in the low frequency range, which amplify the radiated sound. The resulting level increases are greater near the walls than in the center of the room, so that the listening position should be as far away from the walls as possible (there is a lot more to say about this). Since the living rooms of most potential customers (and probably also his own listening room) correspond to the above-mentioned boundary conditions, the developer will design the bass radiation of his speaker for this typical application and limit it sensibly. The reference to the subwoofer in the 660 does not apply here, as its volume cannot be adjusted at will, whereas in rooms with a lot of low-frequency absorption and non-parallel room boundary surfaces, the room modes will be much less pronounced: Low-frequency absorption is caused, for example, by so-called flexible facing shells (e.g. wood or plasterboard cladding, as is very likely the case with Roderburg's pitched roof). It can't be the carpet, because it hardly absorbs any low frequencies and it's probably not due to polarity reversal either, otherwise Mr. Roderburg wouldn't praise the 660 so highly. I had a lot of fun with the 660 for many years in my room, which was also highly damped. After switching to Nuwave 10 (even more precise), the additional active bass linearization module brought the final kick, so you, Mr. Roderburg, should be happy about your room, which offers you the opportunity to hear only what is really on the can (if you care to), although an upgrade with an active woofer is probably in order... Best regards, Manfred Werner!

To Martin R.: I have a room of about 24 square meters, wood paneling, carpeting throughout. Close to my subwoofer (factory outlet competitor from Berlin), the bass is quite decent, but as soon as I take three steps back into the room, the fat foundation disappears into thin air, whereas in the corners of the room, the bass is overwhelming. at the moment, it's still too much effort for me to move my confusingly wired equipment to another room, but I think it's due to the wood and all the carpet.

To Martin R. I beg your pardon!!! The specification was made on demand, with 0.8 Qm cone area per speaker, ha., ha..., now I'm holding the brochure I hear something ... in my hand, but it says 800 Qcm, i.e. 0.08 Qm x 2 = 0.16 Qm. He (the caller) must have hidden a few TT in his 660. He probably got the 800 Qcm wrong. So sorry for the mistake. But let's go back to the nuBox 660: the functions of the individual speakers are very precisely defined in Technik Satt. 2-way speaker with a sub-woofer (upper TT) and a lower TT that works purely as a subwoofer. So you already have 2 subwoofers in your room. A subwoofer that is supposed to provide audibly and perceptibly more pressure should have PA dimensions. If you really have enough power available, I still suspect a technical problem.