Paradigm Monitor series questions... [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Paradigm Monitor series questions...



IRG
03-31-2005, 08:49 AM
I am sure this has been posted somewhere before, but my search wasn't helpful.

Anyway, I am curious about the Paradugm Monitor series, I never considered it before (and didn't think I had a local dealer, and now I do). I have heard great things about the Reference series (which the dealer also sells) but it is a bit out of my price range new.

Right now my dealer is selling what is left of the Monitor Series v3 at better prices. The Monitor 7 (floorstander) would be $580, normally $750. The larger bookshelf, the Monitor 5 he doesn't have in stock (he told me he has only ordered that speaker one or two times) so a new version4 would be the same price, $580. From what I have learned, there are some differences in the corssovers, and slight cosmetic changes, but otherwise, probably nothing of real significance. The Mini monitor is $400 and the Monitor 3 is $480, both would be discounted if I buy soon.

Any and all comments on the Monitor series would be welcome. For background, I have a NAD T-743 receiver, a new sub is also in the works, room size is 13 x 19, and this will be used 80% HT/tv viewing, 20% music, with the emphasis on music even though it gets used for that less. Music varies from aggresive alternative rock to classical, some blues and jazz, and some popular country (the wife). I am not giving myself a normal budget, as I have a few other expenses floating around, but $600 is probably my limit.

Is there a speaker in the Monitor line to avoid? One that shines above the others? If so why? I should say I sort of like the Monitor 7 because I wouldn't need stands (although I like the look of monitors on nice stands) and in my house 2 kids, one on the way, that would prevent some problems (yes, they have been toppled off before). I haven't done any serious music testing yet, obviously I will do so. Sometimes it helps to get some advice before hand, on what to listen for. Thanks y'all.

3db
03-31-2005, 08:57 AM
and I was fairly impressed. Then I stumbled across PSB Image series and never looked back. Generally, I found the PSB's to have a tighter and deeper bass than the Monitor series and I found the tweeters on the Image series not be as bright as the Monitor series. They both have awesome midrange and image well

IRG
03-31-2005, 09:08 AM
and I was fairly impressed. Then I stumbled across PSB Image series and never looked back. Generally, I found the PSB's to have a tighter and deeper bass than the Monitor series and I found the tweeters on the Image series not be as bright as the Monitor series. They both have awesome midrange and image well

Thanks dB. My other dealer sells PSB, and so I will be listening there too. In addition, that dealer also sells Monitor Audio, Boston Acoustics and Klipsch. They seem to prefer the Monitor Audio overall, but everyone has their preferences. The Paradigm dealer also sells Energy (what I have now) and Revell (very nice, but pricey) and Definitive Technology (no interest for me).

You mentioned the tweeter on the PSB as not as bright. If anything, I would prefer something a little more sizzle than my Energy. So I may actually prefer the Paradigm. My PSB dealer also felt that they two brands (Paradigm and PSB) were pretty similar, and they have been selling PSB for quite a while. I wish I have a B&W dealer locally. The closest one is about an hour or so away, and I am interested in the 602 S3. May have to make a trip to hear them too.

axelsrd
03-31-2005, 10:02 AM
I am sure this has been posted somewhere before, but my search wasn't helpful.

Anyway, I am curious about the Paradugm Monitor series, I never considered it before (and didn't think I had a local dealer, and now I do). I have heard great things about the Reference series (which the dealer also sells) but it is a bit out of my price range new.

Right now my dealer is selling what is left of the Monitor Series v3 at better prices. The Monitor 7 (floorstander) would be $580, normally $750. The larger bookshelf, the Monitor 5 he doesn't have in stock (he told me he has only ordered that speaker one or two times) so a new version4 would be the same price, $580. From what I have learned, there are some differences in the corssovers, and slight cosmetic changes, but otherwise, probably nothing of real significance. The Mini monitor is $400 and the Monitor 3 is $480, both would be discounted if I buy soon.

Any and all comments on the Monitor series would be welcome. For background, I have a NAD T-743 receiver, a new sub is also in the works, room size is 13 x 19, and this will be used 80% HT/tv viewing, 20% music, with the emphasis on music even though it gets used for that less. Music varies from aggresive alternative rock to classical, some blues and jazz, and some popular country (the wife). I am not giving myself a normal budget, as I have a few other expenses floating around, but $600 is probably my limit.

Is there a speaker in the Monitor line to avoid? One that shines above the others? If so why? I should say I sort of like the Monitor 7 because I wouldn't need stands (although I like the look of monitors on nice stands) and in my house 2 kids, one on the way, that would prevent some problems (yes, they have been toppled off before). I haven't done any serious music testing yet, obviously I will do so. Sometimes it helps to get some advice before hand, on what to listen for. Thanks y'all.

I have monitor 7's up front, mini monitors for rear and cc370 center and I absolutely love them. I don't know what else to tell you. These are some very fine speakers. I had considered the monitor 5's at one time but they are nothing more than a monitor 3 in a bigger box. I also found out from a dealer in Indiana that there were some problems with the 5's and they weren't sonically up to paradigm standards. Don't remember what the problem was but the dealer won't even recommend them anymore. And besides, you are getting the 7's at a fery good price.

IRG
03-31-2005, 10:19 AM
I have monitor 7's up front, mini monitors for rear and cc370 center and I absolutely love them. I don't know what else to tell you. These are some very fine speakers. I had considered the monitor 5's at one time but they are nothing more than a monitor 3 in a bigger box. I also found out from a dealer in Indiana that there were some problems with the 5's and they weren't sonically up to paradigm standards. Don't remember what the problem was but the dealer won't even recommend them anymore. And besides, you are getting the 7's at a fery good price.

Interesting about the Monitor 5s. Maybe that was why my dealer almost never sells or orders them either. At $580 that seems to be a pretty ood price on the 7s. Not sure if I can get by without them being shielded. I will have to check tonite. Where in Indiana are you? I went to grad school at IUPUI in Indy. Nice city, seemed to be improving a lot by the time I left.

axelsrd
03-31-2005, 10:52 AM
Interesting about the Monitor 5s. Maybe that was why my dealer almost never sells or orders them either. At $580 that seems to be a pretty ood price on the 7s. Not sure if I can get by without them being shielded. I will have to check tonite. Where in Indiana are you? I went to grad school at IUPUI in Indy. Nice city, seemed to be improving a lot by the time I left.

I don't live in Indiana. I was working with a dealer to have them shipped to Atlanta to see if it would be cheaper to pay him shipping as apposed to paying the sales tax here. I ended up buying local and paying the tax. I auditioned the 7's, 9's and 11's side by side bouncing back and forth. The 9's had a bit better bass as they use two 8" vs two 6.5". The 11's, well, I couldn't hear any difference between them and the 7's so I ended up with the 7's at $659 out the door and never looked back. I didn't need the extra low end because I use a sub. I can't tell you how to spend your money other than stay away from the 5's.

axelsrd
03-31-2005, 10:55 AM
Not sure if I can get by without them being shielded.

If you have a projection tv it won't matter.

IRG
03-31-2005, 11:12 AM
If you have a projection tv it won't matter.

No I have a regular flat screen tube unit. Where in Atlanta do you live? My wife is from Marietta, and we might move back to that area in another year. I like it, except for the traffic. Are there any good audio shops in the area? There must be, given its size. If not, maybe I will open my own shop, then I can switch gear all the time!

bikehikefish
03-31-2005, 11:38 AM
IRG -

I currently use Mini-Monitors (V1) with the PS-1000 sub. They are great.

Recently I considered buying a pair of Monitor 7s on ebay, which went for $275. I went to my local Paradigm dealer and auditioned the Minis and 7s side by side. Was there a difference? Without a sub involved the 7s had more bass than the Minis (obviously). With a sub, there was a difference, but not much. Little better mid range with the 7s, better imaging. But to me, it wasn't a $275 improvement, so I didn't buy the 7s.

My opinion is, if you are using your speakers for 80% HT, and you are using a sub, the Monitor 7s won't be that much better to justify the cost.

IRG
03-31-2005, 11:51 AM
IRG -

I currently use Mini-Monitors (V1) with the PS-1000 sub. They are great.

Recently I considered buying a pair of Monitor 7s on ebay, which went for $275. I went to my local Paradigm dealer and auditioned the Minis and 7s side by side. Was there a difference? Without a sub involved the 7s had more bass than the Minis (obviously). With a sub, there was a difference, but not much. Little better mid range with the 7s, better imaging. But to me, it wasn't a $275 improvement, so I didn't buy the 7s.

My opinion is, if you are using your speakers for 80% HT, and you are using a sub, the Monitor 7s won't be that much better to justify the cost.

Thanks, I appreciate your comments. I suspect what you are saying is probably pretty close to what I would find too. In a bigger room, I could see the 7s making more sense as well. This is a small/medium sized room.

I am still considering a pair of JM Labs Chorus 706 S as well. Another dealer has them for a good price. Plus I wouldn't pay tax either, which adds up in NYS (8.25%). But I do like to support local dealers if possible. Hopefully this weekend I will be able to do some listening to see if anything grabs me.

axelsrd
03-31-2005, 12:13 PM
No I have a regular flat screen tube unit. Where in Atlanta do you live? My wife is from Marietta, and we might move back to that area in another year. I like it, except for the traffic. Are there any good audio shops in the area? There must be, given its size. If not, maybe I will open my own shop, then I can switch gear all the time!

Now this is getting weird...I live in Marietta but I am being transfered to New Orleans. Have to be there on the 11th. Anyway, bikehikefish has a good point, if it is a small room then maybe mini monitors up front and maybe a pair of Titans for rear and of course a center and sub. This is the setup I had before I moved the minis back and got the 7's.

IRG
03-31-2005, 12:24 PM
Now this is getting weird...I live in Marietta but I am being transfered to New Orleans. Have to be there on the 11th. Anyway, bikehikefish has a good point, if it is a small room then maybe mini monitors up front and maybe a pair of Titans for rear and of course a center and sub. This is the setup I had before I moved the minis back and got the 7's.

Does anyone like the Monitor 3 over the minimonitor? At this price point, I can get the JMLabs Chorus 706 S for about the same price, and I would probably go for those. TOugh to decide when I can't hear both back to back. Good luck with the move to New Orleans. I've never been there, but will be there in May for a conference. Supposed to be a fun town!

jasmit
03-31-2005, 04:01 PM
I like Paradigm speakers; I'm a Reference Studio owner. And Paradigm's Monitor series are not bad speakers at all for the price. But to my way of thinking, JMLab Chorus series speakers are a step or two up from Paradigm's Monitor series. And IMO they are much nicer to look at. Assuming you really like the sound of the JMLab, go with those over the Paradigm Monitors.

cam
03-31-2005, 05:08 PM
Does anyone like the Monitor 3 over the minimonitor? At this price point, I can get the JMLabs Chorus 706 S for about the same price, and I would probably go for those. TOugh to decide when I can't hear both back to back. Good luck with the move to New Orleans. I've never been there, but will be there in May for a conference. Supposed to be a fun town!
I have auditioned all the monitors and ended up buying the 7's. Reason I did, besides the sound, was that I wouldn't need stands. The 9's and 11's were more money with no real improvement. If I had to buy a standmount I would have bought the 3's although I would have been satisfied with the mini's. The 5's sounded thin and less dynamic and to be perfectly honest, looked very goofy on stands. The 3's on the other hand are a tad fat which may need a little getting use to visually, but sound very full and can take alot of abuse. One thing to consider here is the speaker efficiency, example, the mini's are 90db 1/w1/m, while the 7's are 93db. If you had a 75 watt amplifier powering the 7's, to reach the same volume with the mini's you would need a 150 watt amp. Having the 7's can save you from having to buy more power down the road. Just a thought.

IRG
04-01-2005, 08:18 AM
I like Paradigm speakers; I'm a Reference Studio owner. And Paradigm's Monitor series are not bad speakers at all for the price. But to my way of thinking, JMLab Chorus series speakers are a step or two up from Paradigm's Monitor series. And IMO they are much nicer to look at. Assuming you really like the sound of the JMLab, go with those over the Paradigm Monitors.

That is kind of what I have been thinking lately too. The Monitor's seem nice enough but they really aren't much of a step up from what I have now, and don't look as nice either (got to keep the wife happy). The JM Labs do look nice, and the Monitor Audio Silver look even better. I would like to demo the B&Ws before I make any decision, but not sure when I can do that. I may look at the PSB Image speakers too, another decent speaker in this category, and something that is local. Still looking...

thepogue
04-01-2005, 11:16 AM
B&W would not impress you...in fact they tend to be layed back...smooth as butter...well worth a listen but not as all sizzling...

Good Luck! Peace, Pogue



Thanks dB. My other dealer sells PSB, and so I will be listening there too. In addition, that dealer also sells Monitor Audio, Boston Acoustics and Klipsch. They seem to prefer the Monitor Audio overall, but everyone has their preferences. The Paradigm dealer also sells Energy (what I have now) and Revell (very nice, but pricey) and Definitive Technology (no interest for me).

You mentioned the tweeter on the PSB as not as bright. If anything, I would prefer something a little more sizzle than my Energy. So I may actually prefer the Paradigm. My PSB dealer also felt that they two brands (Paradigm and PSB) were pretty similar, and they have been selling PSB for quite a while. I wish I have a B&W dealer locally. The closest one is about an hour or so away, and I am interested in the 602 S3. May have to make a trip to hear them too.

kexodusc
04-01-2005, 11:45 AM
My own preference in the Monitor line is for the Monitor 5's or the Mini Monitors...If a sub is DEFINITELY in the mix, cross it over at 60 Hz or below and don't look back...The larger ones tend to have some cabinet resonance issues in my opinion...
PSB and Energy have comparable products in my opinion that have just a slightly different flavour than the Monitors, not better or worse, just different. If you're looking for a bit more sizzle a the top, the Monitor line is as much sizzle as I'd care to try without it becoming harsh...

For home theater use more than 2-channel stereo use, I see no reason to spend more money on the larger speakers (unless your room is huge)...the best value would be in the Mini Monitors and as good a sub as you can buy...
Good luck.

cam
04-01-2005, 05:33 PM
My own preference in the Monitor line is for the Monitor 5's or the Mini Monitors...If a sub is DEFINITELY in the mix, cross it over at 60 Hz or below and don't look back...The larger ones tend to have some cabinet resonance issues in my opinion...
PSB and Energy have comparable products in my opinion that have just a slightly different flavour than the Monitors, not better or worse, just different. If you're looking for a bit more sizzle a the top, the Monitor line is as much sizzle as I'd care to try without it becoming harsh...

For home theater use more than 2-channel stereo use, I see no reason to spend more money on the larger speakers (unless your room is huge)...the best value would be in the Mini Monitors and as good a sub as you can buy...
Good luck.
Hey Kex, I agree that the mini's coupled together with a capable sub would meet most peoples needs. The mini's are a very good recommendation. You say your preference would be for the 5's, I'm just wondering though, have you actually heard them, I know you have the studio 40's so maybe you are biased towards this style of standmount. Both RGA and I would most definetaly recommend the less expensive 3 over the 5. The 3 sounds alot better in everyway (to me) and save you some money as well. Maybe the studio line the 40's are better then the 20's but maybe in the monitor line the 5's are a step back from the 3's. For the most part, I have never heard anyone say anything good about the 5's except you and Wooch and both you guys have the 40's. Hmmmm, I heard the 5's and believe me you, they suck, and I'm not surprised they have sold so poorly.

Woochifer
04-01-2005, 05:53 PM
Hey Kex, I agree that the mini's coupled together with a capable sub would meet most peoples needs. The mini's are a very good recommendation. You say your preference would be for the 5's, I'm just wondering though, have you actually heard them, I know you have the studio 40's so maybe you are biased towards this style of standmount. Both RGA and I would most definetaly recommend the less expensive 3 over the 5. The 3 sounds alot better in everyway (to me) and save you some money as well. Maybe the studio line the 40's are better then the 20's but maybe in the monitor line the 5's are a step back from the 3's. For the most part, I have never heard anyone say anything good about the 5's except you and Wooch and both you guys have the 40's. Hmmmm, I heard the 5's and believe me you, they suck, and I'm not surprised they have sold so poorly.

That's interesting because my understanding is that the Monitor 3 is one of the poorest sellers in the Monitor lineup. Generally, I liked the Monitor 5 the best in the Monitor lineup, although the Monitor 3 and 11 are the two models that I have not listened to. In my listenings, the 5 had the best overall balance, with less of the resonance and other liabilities that I picked up from the tower models. Kex and I are not alone in this assessment either, as The Absolute Sound rated it as a best buy on their recommended components list a couple of years ago, and I've seen plenty of positive impressions of the 5s on this and other boards.

cam
04-01-2005, 06:35 PM
That's interesting because my understanding is that the Monitor 3 is one of the poorest sellers in the Monitor lineup. Generally, I liked the Monitor 5 the best in the Monitor lineup, although the Monitor 3 and 11 are the two models that I have not listened to. In my listenings, the 5 had the best overall balance, with less of the resonance and other liabilities that I picked up from the tower models. Kex and I are not alone in this assessment either, as The Absolute Sound rated it as a best buy on their recommended components list a couple of years ago, and I've seen plenty of positive impressions of the 5s on this and other boards.
Absolute Sound can rate any product as a best buy, but when total sales are concerned, the 5's sell poorly. And you are right, the 3's don't sell that well also, it seems that the mini's get all the attention. And why not, they do sound good and they are the perfect size, visually, on 22 to 24 inch stands. If you listen to the mini's extensively to the 3's with some material you are familiar with, you will notice that the overall sense of depth and clarity goes to the 3's, and for only $50 more, atleast in my area. Notice the specs between the mini's and the 3's are similar, yet a more dynamic sound can be had with the 3's. I did listen extensively to both and regardless of total sales, the 3's sound better. The 5's sound thin and less dynamic, and I can only assume because they don't sell very many, that alot of people are hearing the same thing I am. Many Paradigm sales people I have dealt with have said the same thing, they have a tough time selling those 5's, and if they were as good as you say, then they would be having a tough time having them in stock.........., or maybe no one is buying them so they don't bother stocking them. Just so no one flames me, if you own the 5's, they are a good speaker, in fact all the monitors are good, (the studios are better in every way), it is just a matter of personal taste in evaluating them in order of better to best. For standmounts 1st - 3's, 2nd - mini's, and 3rd - 5's. For floorstanders you could choose either the 7's, 9's or 11's but for the money, if you would buy anything more then the 7's, your money would be better spent on the studio line. Of course everything I have said is my own preference.

RGA
04-01-2005, 07:07 PM
Cam

How did you know I liked the 3's more than the 5's? Quantity of sales has zip to do with quality ie Bose.

cam
04-01-2005, 07:38 PM
Cam

How did you know I liked the 3's more than the 5's? Quantity of sales has zip to do with quality ie Bose.
Previous threads you stated what I had already experienced. The 3's sound really good. It does use an 8 inch driver which might be the reason, but I never felt that the 9's with dual 8 inch drivers over the 7's with dual 6.5's was any better. Again, just my personal preference. And when I bought my 7's, if the 9's were better, I would have spent the extra $200 since my wife had already givin me the go ahead.

Woochifer
04-01-2005, 07:56 PM
Absolute Sound can rate any product as a best buy, but when total sales are concerned, the 5's sell poorly. And you are right, the 3's don't sell that well also, it seems that the mini's get all the attention. And why not, they do sound good and they are the perfect size, visually, on 22 to 24 inch stands. If you listen to the mini's extensively to the 3's with some material you are familiar with, you will notice that the overall sense of depth and clarity goes to the 3's, and for only $50 more, atleast in my area. Notice the specs between the mini's and the 3's are similar, yet a more dynamic sound can be had with the 3's. I did listen extensively to both and regardless of total sales, the 3's sound better. The 5's sound thin and less dynamic, and I can only assume because they don't sell very many, that alot of people are hearing the same thing I am. Many Paradigm sales people I have dealt with have said the same thing, they have a tough time selling those 5's, and if they were as good as you say, then they would be having a tough time having them in stock.........., or maybe no one is buying them so they don't bother stocking them. Just so no one flames me, if you own the 5's, they are a good speaker, in fact all the monitors are good, (the studios are better in every way), it is just a matter of personal taste in evaluating them in order of better to best. For standmounts 1st - 3's, 2nd - mini's, and 3rd - 5's. For floorstanders you could choose either the 7's, 9's or 11's but for the money, if you would buy anything more then the 7's, your money would be better spent on the studio line. Of course everything I have said is my own preference.

I dunno, two of the dealers in my area (one of which closed last year) don't stock the Monitor 3 because from what they told me at least, the majority of their standmount customers pick between the Mini and the 5, and don't bother with the 3. In addition, the Monitor 5 is also frequently auditioned by customers who are considering the Monitor 7, because the driver configuration on the two speakers is identical. I much preferred the 5 over the 7, because in my listenings the 5 imaged better and it had less cabinet resonance than the 7.

I pointed out the Absolute Sound review because you seem certain that few people outside of Kex and myself would like the 5. One review isn't the end all, but that plus my observations on this and other boards provides plenty of fodder to the contrary. It's fine to have your own preference, but reinforcing it by speculating on how few or how many people share your observations is a tangental presumption.

cam
04-01-2005, 08:40 PM
I dunno, two of the dealers in my area (one of which closed last year) don't stock the Monitor 3 because from what they told me at least, the majority of their standmount customers pick between the Mini and the 5, and don't bother with the 3. In addition, the Monitor 5 is also frequently auditioned by customers who are considering the Monitor 7, because the driver configuration on the two speakers is identical. I much preferred the 5 over the 7, because in my listenings the 5 imaged better and it had less cabinet resonance than the 7.

I pointed out the Absolute Sound review because you seem certain that few people outside of Kex and myself would like the 5. One review isn't the end all, but that plus my observations on this and other boards provides plenty of fodder to the contrary. It's fine to have your own preference, but reinforcing it by speculating on how few or how many people share your observations is a tangental presumption.
You and Kex prefer the 5's over the other standmounts. Nothing wrong with that. Just as a few people such as Rga and I prefer the 3's. All four of us are in the minority. The 3's and the 5's do not sell in quantity as the mini's and 7's. If you listen to these boards, people own the mini's, 7's and 11's the most. If the 5's sold well such as the 40's, these boards would be full of monitor 5 enquiries and questions. They are not. Nobody talks about the 3's either, but to me they are a definate improvement for the money over the mini's and 5's.

RGA
04-01-2005, 09:47 PM
Cam

You are probably right -- A dealer in Qualicham the next town over from me carries Paradigm and they only carry the very entry Paradigm standmounts because they're cheap (Atom and Titan) and then they carry the 7,9 and Studio 100. They said people are unwilling to spend big dollars on the 20, 40 or even the 5 because the speakers don;t have enough bass and the 7 is only a little more than the 5 here ($125.00 more or so). The 40 they sat on for 18 months. They have a 705 though -- sold exactly one in the last 5 months.

Most average folks do not listen to classical strings they listen to blue collar music --- so do I and it's no insult but Joe sixpack want AC/DC and he wants it loud with impact and a bit of box noise isn;t so bad if you get BALLS in your system. All of these standmounts have none of this in any credible way.

If you get the chance to hear a Cerwin Vega D9 one day or one of the replacements which use a 15 inch woofer then you'll know what I mean -- They are by no means perfect with numerous obvious problems - but one can buy one of these PARTY speakers and I bet most people listening to the heavy rock are going to laugh at monitors and so they should. When you go to ANY nightclub they usually have some monster JBL with huge woofer and gigantic horn -- lots of them played real loud. Sorry but most monitors are not going to do that.

He said selling a Monitor at $1300.00 versus a floorstander like the B&W 603S3 for ~$14000.00Cdn --- the customers were buying them at a clip of 20-1. And I can tell you right now that if it's between spending $2300.00 on the B&W 705 which is laughably pathetic with anything of bass or dynamic or dynamic bass content, and the B&W 604S3 which is reasonably competant in the bass for $2000.00 ($300.00 less money and I don't need to pay extra for for stands), there is simply no contest as to which one I would buy. The colouration offered up by the 604 is a good trade for the puny bass, dynamics offerred up by the 705.

The sad part is that the Monitor 3 I would probably buy over the 705 as well...and the reason is that for the price difference I could buy a $2000.00 Rel Subwoofer for the differnece. Yeah maybe the 705 has a better tweeter but -- the 3/Rel combbo would kill it under 100hz.

IRG
04-02-2005, 04:41 AM
Cam

You are probably right -- A dealer in Qualicham the next town over from me carries Paradigm and they only carry the very entry Paradigm standmounts because they're cheap (Atom and Titan) and then they carry the 7,9 and Studio 100. They said people are unwilling to spend big dollars on the 20, 40 or even the 5 because the speakers don;t have enough bass and the 7 is only a little more than the 5 here ($125.00 more or so). The 40 they sat on for 18 months. They have a 705 though -- sold exactly one in the last 5 months.

Most average folks do not listen to classical strings they listen to blue collar music --- so do I and it's no insult but Joe sixpack want AC/DC and he wants it loud with impact and a bit of box noise isn;t so bad if you get BALLS in your system. All of these standmounts have none of this in any credible way.

If you get the chance to hear a Cerwin Vega D9 one day or one of the replacements which use a 15 inch woofer then you'll know what I mean -- They are by no means perfect with numerous obvious problems - but one can buy one of these PARTY speakers and I bet most people listening to the heavy rock are going to laugh at monitors and so they should. When you go to ANY nightclub they usually have some monster JBL with huge woofer and gigantic horn -- lots of them played real loud. Sorry but most monitors are not going to do that.

He said selling a Monitor at $1300.00 versus a floorstander like the B&W 603S3 for ~$14000.00Cdn --- the customers were buying them at a clip of 20-1. And I can tell you right now that if it's between spending $2300.00 on the B&W 705 which is laughably pathetic with anything of bass or dynamic or dynamic bass content, and the B&W 604S3 which is reasonably competant in the bass for $2000.00 ($300.00 less money and I don't need to pay extra for for stands), there is simply no contest as to which one I would buy. The colouration offered up by the 604 is a good trade for the puny bass, dynamics offerred up by the 705.

The sad part is that the Monitor 3 I would probably buy over the 705 as well...and the reason is that for the price difference I could buy a $2000.00 Rel Subwoofer for the differnece. Yeah maybe the 705 has a better tweeter but -- the 3/Rel combbo would kill it under 100hz.

And I think you are right, at least when it comes to Joe six pack. I find myself in the middle - just like my politics (I'm a moderate!). I like to crank the metal now and then, but also love to listen to the wonderfully played violin of Hillary Hahn.

One thing is for sure - the ability to find and buy quality speakers today is much better than say 10 years ago. The quality of speakers like the Energy C-3, Monitor 3, JM Labs Chorus, PSB Image, etc. would be given rave reviews and would sell for $1k+ a decade ago. Now it's the Von Schweikerts, etc. that get the rave reviews at $1k. Just think what might be affordable in 2015. The Reference 3A could be the next Mini-Monitor. Or not.

Anyway, a speaker like the JM Labs 706 S Chorus with a good sub (I'm still not paying $2k for a sub though) is probably the way I will go until something more affordable comes along. Or my budget expands, or both. I hope to listen to the Monitor 3 today, and see how that compares. I can get it pretty cheap, so it is worth an audition at least.

However, besides sound, aesthetics also comes into play for me, and the Monitors don't really cut it, nor does my C-3, although they aren't bad. Here is where I do like speakers like the CDMT-1nt or the 705- they do look sharp. But not at their prices. The VR-1 are a nice in-between speaker therefore. I think even your AN have grown on me a little bit. Not the prices though, that will have to wait.

I should correct myself in that I don't really want "sizzle" that is the wrong adjective, but I do look for very clear, open spacious highs that seem to be very lifelike. No veiled or rolled of highs. Accuracy is key, and if a recording is bright, the speaker will show that, if the recording is dull then that is what you will also hear.

RGA
04-02-2005, 04:35 PM
IRG

Actully I think speakers are worse for the money today than they were 10 or even 15 years ago. Consider, and sure I may have a bias but my Wharfedale Vangaurds which were failry popular speakers -- they were $2k...looking around today at what I can buy for $2k and other than technobabbling reviews I would be VERY hard pressed to vouch for $2k speakers. Though I will concede that many new speakers will create a more realistic soundstage and they may image better -- and they probably have a flatter response -- say the Studio 100V3 and B&W 604S3. On the other hand the Wharfedales use real wood, 20lb woofer magnets, Fostex ringdac horn tweeters(or very close oem variant), can play louder than either of them and ocmpletely embarrass them dynamically -- they sound bigger fullerr have more impact a smoother less etchy treble...and seem to go deeper in the bass(though it may just be that they can play it's bass at louder levels which is even more important).

So certainly there are newer speakers that have better attributes but they also draw attention to what they lost IMO -- one can;t throw the baby out with the bathwater and then say it's an improvement because they bought a new bathtub (ie; we're still missing the baby). I don't find standmounts better either -- heck from the same companies I can't even agree. Most people I know even B&W fans would say that the B&W Matrix 805 is better than the N805 -- I would argue that the CDM 2SE is the best standmount other than the M805 that they have made ...the DM 302 was IMO better than the 303. Missions older stuff is better than their new stuff. Ditto for Klipsch.

Even my Audio Note's are 1980 Snell inspired -- the owner knew that much of the problems could be worked out not completely chucked out for a good looks and cheap parts. Some companies have largely felt the same way -- Magnepan and Quad for a start.

thepogue
04-03-2005, 05:21 PM
you throw some BS like this...

"say the Studio 100V3 and B&W 604S3. On the other hand the Wharfedales use real wood, 20lb woofer magnets, Fostex ringdac horn tweeters(or very close oem variant), can play louder than either of them and ocmpletely embarrass them dynamically ..."

now help me out brudda...where can I read about this face off? where is the data to support this blow out?...are we talking all Wharfedales models? were not just talkin better than.....we're talking BLOW AWAY DYNAMICALLY....please.. I've done a internet search and can't find a bloody thing that leads me to beleive this WTF!!! or could it be...that you might just happen to own a set?...why do you do this?...it's sooo damned transparent
...over and over again...pleaseeeee stooppppppp!!! ppppplllllleeeeaaaaasssseeeee...cant you just say...this is what I own AN...Wharfedales...bla bla bla...and suggest that others might like it too?...why so deep a story line? It always sounds like your trying to justify what you own...and that you've got some brillant secreat that your just now unvailing..it makes you sound like as arse...sorry...it does.....son..get a grip.....please...and stop stalking Peter...he's afriad of you..and he thinks your hurting his stock.....and leave those poor guys alone at "Your" hi-fi shop...they talk about you when you leave...they wish you had a girlfriend...I do too....I'm your friend...you sound too old for your age...you talk like you've seen it all...heard it all...then we find out you dont drive a car....that looks silly...but it's good for the local eco-system...but never the less it looks silly......you need a pet, one that needs to be taken on walks......drink more...study less...take a month off the computer...play D&D with some ole buddies...without calling your fighter "AN the annihilator"....stop hugging your speakers....they like you for taking them home..but not that much...stop thinking we're all knott-heads...we know you like the stuff you bought (AN)....ok...thats cool...now leave us alone...we're all adult...if we're all silly for not buying the best like you did...so-be-it...let us wallow in out stupidity...play baseball...be a youth leader...take up weilding for a hobby...ok...now go..and sin no-more...and come back and enjoy...and stop sounding like a deaperate AN amway dealer...we'll buy them if we want...not a second before.......whew..

end rant...

BTW I still love you RGA....

Peace, Pogue

RGA
04-03-2005, 08:01 PM
:) Yes a month off might be good.

I don;t want to seem to be like those religious converter folk "trust in me for I shall lead you to God -- otherwise you'll burn in hell -- Christians Catholics Jehova's -- man if i've turned into that then yikes.

IRG
04-04-2005, 11:27 AM
:) Yes a month off might be good.

I don;t want to seem to be like those religious converter folk "trust in me for I shall lead you to God -- otherwise you'll burn in hell -- Christians Catholics Jehova's -- man if i've turned into that then yikes.

I kinda agree with the Pogue too. You may not have noticed how influenced you have become by Peter, although it isn't hard to imagine. I had a good friend from college that ended up in a religious cult (he was not the religious type at all) and ended up being kidnapped back by his parents to be deprogrammed. He was even on the TV show 20/20 about the experience. Not saying the same thing here is true of course, but it is easy to see how one person with a wealth of experience can be so influential. Yet it doesn't mean they are right. AN may be a fine product, although most of us can't hear/see it because it isn't readily available. Too expensive for most people, and even those who can afford it won't. True about most high end audio I guess, not just AN.

I disagree with you though about speakers in the last 10 years. Your reference as others pointed out, is extremely limited. Speakers from Paradigm, PSB, Energy, Axiom, B&W, etc. that sell quality speakers under $1k (and many under $500) are of much higher quality for the money than 10-20 years ago. Not that there weren't fine products 10 years ago, but today there is more to choose from, at all price levels.

Woochifer
04-04-2005, 12:51 PM
I disagree with you though about speakers in the last 10 years. Your reference as others pointed out, is extremely limited. Speakers from Paradigm, PSB, Energy, Axiom, B&W, etc. that sell quality speakers under $1k (and many under $500) are of much higher quality for the money than 10-20 years ago. Not that there weren't fine products 10 years ago, but today there is more to choose from, at all price levels.

I think you nailed it right there. The state of speakers right now is such that differences have narrowed a lot and you don't have as many of the very distinct sounds that before would get associated with a particular company or region (i.e. the "west coast" sound, the "New England" sound, the "British" sound). But, at the expense of blurring the distinctions and losing some of the personality that speakers used to have, the current speakers in general are higher in quality and you don't have the extreme inconsistency that existed 20 years ago.

Back then, the personalities of most speakers were defined by their most extreme colorations. But, it's not necessarily a good thing to instantly identify the sound of a particular speaker, when in actuality the speaker is supposed to reproduce a source signal as transparently as possible. The biggest difference nowadays is that you can find plenty of credible sounding speakers in the entry level price points, whereas before most of the entry level speakers sounded awful, and not just in subtle ways. Speakers are still where you find the biggest contrasts in audio, but at least now, those contrasts are less likely to make you cringe.

RGA
04-04-2005, 06:44 PM
Woocifer et al...I understand the notion that it's not necesarily a good idea to be able to identify a given sound as the new England sound -- I may not be old enough to get most of those references but I don;t really think that has changed -- I can identify an electrostat and planar versus a boxed enclosure.

Also, if a homogenous sound is going to be the ideal where all speakers want to sound like all other speakers it had better be the RIGHT sound -- and despite what is out there there is no evidence that PROVES it's being done correctly.

I was in a shop several weeks ago -- a used cd seller and he had in the corners some music playing through some old I believe Celestions or AR 3's whatever they were they must have been at least 15 years old. Right next store to this shop is a major retailer called A&B sound that sells a number of currently popular speakers - a friend of mine plays acoustic guitar and is in a band...regardless the old speakers played the same music and it was absoutely phenomenal -- the new ones played them but left us cold.

I have no problem with the notion that speakers today offer a similar sound across the board because most of them are vry very similar -- so similar that many people want to sepnd weeks at home with several pairs -- so they are hardly so different to be knocked out of the running quickly. They are notidentical but the differences are small. Whereas in 1990 which was when I just started to get into it, you had wildly different speakers - Cerwin Vega fat 15 inch woofers, My wharfedale horns Klipsch was very popular then with the big 12 inch and a horn in a two way enclosure, the crazy Bose 901s . Then you had a number of slim boxes showing up -- Wharfedale changed approach and went to the Modus line presumably to copy B&W. Gone were the Boston Acoustics and Snell fatter boxes for slim boxes and some very expesnive ones put side firing subwoofers in their enclosures. I have heard the fat and thin the planar and panel and read the reviews all of these years even being published several times in UHF.

This is ultimately a personal issue I take with some of this because my speakers are based off a late 1970's design and so it's hard to remove my listening sessions from my take on other people's views. It is very hard to read the theory and then have it go the other way in the listening room -- and I believe my very first post of a 5 speaker review I had done a few years ago had me more puzzled by it all --- it should have went very differently.

I can't speak to speakers from the 1970's too well but I don't see how mathematics has been drastically changed to such a degree -- allmost every review I read of a panel speaker the review always says something like speaker design has not progressed yada yadda... Perhaps the drivers, the wiring and crossovers but the theory? the bosx and cabinet shape? I dunno.

Or perhpas everyone is talking in genaralities in that generally speaker an entry level speaker today was better than an entry level speaker back then across the board - sort of like a Pro-Ject Debut table today being better than a Fisher turntable back in the 1970s for similar dollar considered equivelant. But the Linn LP 12 back then is still a bit of King in many circles even against more expensive brand new stuff.

I remember years ago in the mid 80s where Cadilachad put out a new flagship vehicle and were going to have a publicity stunt against a Rolls Royce -- apparently knowing full well that Rolls would refuse the challenge because they custom built them(built to order) then and no such vehicle. This would then be a kind of coup that Rolls chickened out. However Rolls agreed to the challenge in thatthey would put up a 10 or 15 year old model they had on hand which had few hundred thousand Miles already on it. To which cadilac then refused. Obviously.

I believe regardless that people should have as much varying choice in what they want to buy...If ultimately that is X brand is not the issue -- but I would like to go into a store where Y and Z don't sound almost exactly the same.

One of the big reasons I bought my Wharfedales was interestingly the way it presented Mancini's The Pink Panther theme...I was young and probably jumped into it too fast arguably but it presented it differently and seemingly more truthful(of course not being at the recording studio who knows), either way it sounded better than the other speakers to me - other horns even like the Klispch were completely different. These speakers are not bad they have given good musical enjoyment for over 15 years.

I like to use B&W as a good example -- the Matrix 801 is very widely considered to be better sounding than the Nautilus 801 and same for the 805. The matrix suffers from poorer quality parts granted and those can now be rectified with varous advancements that make the Matrix series better than it was. The Matrix was what 1980, the Nautilus in new form is 2005...and even these statement speakers of then and now are not totally different -- they are closer in sound than people in both camps would like to admit I suspect.

kexodusc
04-05-2005, 03:50 AM
RGA: Stats and planars and and box speakers, even ported vs. sealed, transmission line vs. passive radiator etc are all usually very noticeable because these are huge fundamental design changes.
I think Wooch was more referring to the traditional "flavors" that a 2 or 3 way reflex system would have a few years back...the so called warm, bright, forward, etc buzzwords that have worked their way into receivers now too. A lot more tuning was done by ear back then, where as todays perfectionists spend thousands of hours running simulations to make a speaker as neutral sounding as possible, even if it doesn't suit their preference.
Designs come and go, but RGA, I think your really stretching the truth when you say the AN J or E is based on a 1970's design...maybe the cabinet dimensions, but there's been so many tweaks, modifications, driver improvements, etc in the last 30 years that it's not really fair to call it old technology. And old compared to what? Most of the modern slim-line design speakers aren't using any fancy new technology either, slim-line cabinets were around back then too but in the absence of advanced computer simulation programs, both crossover work and cabinet design work were much more difficult and costly, so they didn't catch on until they became cheaper to make. Designers tended to resort to golden rule figures because it was cheaper and easier.
I believe that most research in the last 10 years or so hasn't gone as much into improving sound as it has into reducing production costs. Perhaps with the exception being in driver design - the push for cleaner-while-louder (but not necessarily better sound). A $300 pair of bookshelfs today would cost $25 back in $1975, and for $25 you wouldn't be able to buy much back then People forget this. Even looking at speakers from 15 years ago and today, my Wharfedale Emeralds had a higher retail price in 1993 than my my Studio 40's in 2003, yet I like the Studio 40's a bit better (but I got the Emeralds used for $250!!! :D )
Today's entry level speakers are much better than yesterdays. The higher-end products haven't enjoyed the same economies over time because their just isn't enough business to justify the massive investments. I believe those who are fortunate to have the luxury of exceptional sounding speakers in their homes are often too hard on lower end speakers because they've been spoiled. Remember they aren't made with you in mind...they're made with people considering buying Boomboxes in mind, and in this they are incredibly successful.

It's amazing how often the AR-3's get brought up...Someone should buy the rights to these and find a way to mass produce them to lower cost without compromising sound!

oddeoowphil38
04-16-2005, 04:21 PM
Does anyone like the Monitor 3 over the minimonitor? At this price point, I can get the JMLabs Chorus 706 S for about the same price, and I would probably go for those. TOugh to decide when I can't hear both back to back. Good luck with the move to New Orleans. I've never been there, but will be there in May for a conference. Supposed to be a fun town!
:) Hello there I am a newbie here. But I must tell you that I really like the monitor 3's. They a have more presence and are fuller sounding as compared to the mini's. The 3's also play a lil deeper than the mini's because of the 8" midbass vs. the 61/2" on the mini's. Just thought I would add my two cents so to speak. Good luck on your descision and remember what works for you is paramount. That is, speaker choice is highly subjective -so if one brand sounds better to you then go with them and be done with it or you will go insane like I did.

IRG
04-18-2005, 05:39 AM
:) Hello there I am a newbie here. But I must tell you that I really like the monitor 3's. They a have more presence and are fuller sounding as compared to the mini's. The 3's also play a lil deeper than the mini's because of the 8" midbass vs. the 61/2" on the mini's. Just thought I would add my two cents so to speak. Good luck on your descision and remember what works for you is paramount. That is, speaker choice is highly subjective -so if one brand sounds better to you then go with them and be done with it or you will go insane like I did.

I ended up buying the Monior 3 and have liked them quite a bit. I auditioned them with what I formerly owned, the Energy C-3, and the Monitor 3 is a fuller sounding speaker. I also auditioned them to the more expensive Paradigm Reference 20 v3, and surprisingly on some music, I preferred the Monitor 3, and other music (classical) I preferred the 20. Overall, I would have taken the 20 if the cost was similar, but since they were more than twice the cost, I was happy enough with the Monitor 3. My next purchase is a better sub that will really make the Monitor 3s shine.

Feanor
04-18-2005, 09:05 AM
...
Anyway, I am curious about the Paradugm Monitor series, I never considered it before (and didn't think I had a local dealer, and now I do). I have heard great things about the Reference series (which the dealer also sells) but it is a bit out of my price range new.
....

I have MiniMonitors, (V.3, I believe), as fronts in my HT system. They're OK but not great -- limited bass, somewhat forward and colored mid-range. I originally bought them for my main system but I wished I'd saved my money.

I replaced them there with Magneplanar MMG's. The Maggies wasted them in every respect, at least with accoustic music.

From your profile I see you have Energy C3's. If I were you I'd keep those until I had the cash for at least, say, the Paradigm Reference Studio 40's.

kexodusc
04-18-2005, 09:19 AM
Hey Kex, I agree that the mini's coupled together with a capable sub would meet most peoples needs. The mini's are a very good recommendation. You say your preference would be for the 5's, I'm just wondering though, have you actually heard them, I know you have the studio 40's so maybe you are biased towards this style of standmount. Both RGA and I would most definetaly recommend the less expensive 3 over the 5. The 3 sounds alot better in everyway (to me) and save you some money as well. Maybe the studio line the 40's are better then the 20's but maybe in the monitor line the 5's are a step back from the 3's. For the most part, I have never heard anyone say anything good about the 5's except you and Wooch and both you guys have the 40's. Hmmmm, I heard the 5's and believe me you, they suck, and I'm not surprised they have sold so poorly.
Cam:
I don't know how I missed this post, but I've been having "issues" with the auto-email thing...
Anyhoo, just to clarify: I have a cousin who until recently owned the Monitor 5's...I'm extremely familiar with them. To me the Monitor 3 had the poorest midrange response of all the Monitors...I attribute this solely to that 8" woofer. It pounds the bass though, and when I say poorest mid-range, I don't mean that it's bad, just not quite as nice as the others (there's a larger Monitor with the 8" woofer too, I think...I confess I haven't heard this one). The Monitor 5 has a much tighter, more accurate, and punchy bass sound IMO, while preserving the superior midrange. It's a bit more money than 3, but I like it better for these reasons. It seemed to me to be a bit more dynamic too, not as stressed when musical pasages get busy.
I flip-flop between the Mini and Monitor 5 as being best value in that line.
Interestingly enough, I'm not sure I like the Studio 40 that much better than 20's except that the bass is a definite improvement, and it made listening to 2-channel stereo better. I bought mine used but I think if I was buying new, I would have had to listen more closely between the 20 and 40....I used a subwoofer always so the extra bass might not have been justification for the added price...I'll never know now though.

IRG
04-18-2005, 09:41 AM
Cam:
I don't know how I missed this post, but I've been having "issues" with the auto-email thing...
Anyhoo, just to clarify: I have a cousin who until recently owned the Monitor 5's...I'm extremely familiar with them. To me the Monitor 3 had the poorest midrange response of all the Monitors...I attribute this solely to that 8" woofer. It pounds the bass though, and when I say poorest mid-range, I don't mean that it's bad, just not quite as nice as the others (there's a larger Monitor with the 8" woofer too, I think...I confess I haven't heard this one). The Monitor 5 has a much tighter, more accurate, and punchy bass sound IMO, while preserving the superior midrange. It's a bit more money than 3, but I like it better for these reasons. It seemed to me to be a bit more dynamic too, not as stressed when musical pasages get busy.
I flip-flop between the Mini and Monitor 5 as being best value in that line.
Interestingly enough, I'm not sure I like the Studio 40 that much better than 20's except that the bass is a definite improvement, and it made listening to 2-channel stereo better. I bought mine used but I think if I was buying new, I would have had to listen more closely between the 20 and 40....I used a subwoofer always so the extra bass might not have been justification for the added price...I'll never know now though.

I'm not cam, but your comments surprised me. I thought the midrange of the 3 better than the mini. It seems fuller to me, and not just bass. It was also better than the Energy C-3 I had before it. I did not hear the Monitor 5 though. My dealer rarely orders them, I think he said in the number of years he has been selling Paradigm, only 2 customer wanted them. Others on this site and other places didn't give the monitor 5 high praises either. Originally that was going to be my choice. It is also a pretty large speaker, so that alone creates some different issues, as in stand height.

You mentioned the Monitor 3 pounds the bass because of its larger woofer. I thought the Reference 20 v3 I listened to pounded the bass even more so, especially on rock materials. At times it almost seemed more bloated to me, although on strings and some vocals I preferred it. To each his own I guess.

The monitor 3's midrange to me sounded better than the mini, and even better with a subwoofer which I use. That can change things as well. Some people have mentioned that the best value in the line is actually the Monitor 7, which I didn't really get to audition, but without stands being needed, and possibly not even a sub if you do 2 channel music and not need it for rap, this could indeed be the best value.

I've seen more 2 way moniors using a larger woofer size, like Reference 3A, B&W 602, and some others. Maybe not a trend, but not all monitors need to be a 5 or 6" woofer anymore. It seems that the midrange as well as bass can be improved with a slightly larger woofer.

RGA
04-18-2005, 12:36 PM
IRG

Well I agree with you on the Monitor 3 which I heard again recently -- the 5 is punchier in the bass but then that is hardly a good thing necessarily. Do I want an organ to sound punchy or the low notes of a piano -- I find most every "so-called" punchy speaker is insufferably bad at recreating acoustic instruments - they sound strained, thin and bright.

Take the acoustic Guitarist Jesse Cook -- the Monitor 5 IMO is unlistenable to my ears with guitar works -- it sounds bright on leading edges with an exagerration on leading edges -- the monitor 3 isn;t free either but it's acceptable for the fact that it's a lot less expensive and it seems to be able to create more body to the guitar box...that's the problem to me these days the box resonance of an instrument is critical NOT JUST the leading edge of the string pics.

I don't expect the world from this price range of course and the monitor 5 is by no means a bad speaker for this money $599.00Cdn. For $101.00 more the AX Two lays a world of hurt on it though. For $379.00 or so the Monitor 3 is a better value to me. It has a fuller kind of sound which compensates to the ear for weaknesses...they say much of speaker design is art -- art at hiding the faults of the product -- they all have their faults so give me the best artists.