Anything else I should audition? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Anything else I should audition?



wgriel
12-07-2005, 03:37 PM
Hello all,

I'm new here, and pretty new to the audio world. By way of introduction, I live in Victoria BC -- home of RGA's fav dealer ;) I have only been interested in audio for about a year and half. That's when we bought a new house and I thought that it was time I got something better than computer speakers for sound.

Anyway, knowing nothing about this I bought a budget system consisting of a pair of Paradigm Phantoms, a Denon receiver (DRA395) and a Denon CD changer. And I absolutely loved it! I later added a pair of B&W DM600's for the kitchen - I've got an extremely open floor plan, so adding a small pair of speakers has really helped to fill the main living space with music.

Now, I'm starting to think I'd like to upgrade the Phantoms - I've been reading almost every review I can find (and finding most of them pretty useless) and listening to what I can.

So far I've auditioned Paradigm Studio 40's and B&W 603's, and I have to say that while I liked both, my preference was for the 603's. I know that B&W is getting slagged alot on this forum, but I really loved the sound and the looks of the 603's.

Oh, and looks do count as these speakers sit in a living room and I've got to make some concessions to the wife. I am next going to audition something from Boston Acoustics, probably the VR2 or VR3, but I'm not too sure what else I should listen to. Any suggestions?

Incidently, I wholeheartedly agree with RGA regarding Soundhounds - they are a class act (in fact, I just got back from there where I listened to a number of my CDs, and I've rarely had the pleasure of dealing with a business that is so helpful and accomodating).

Thanks for any thoughts or ideas,

Bill

calegrant
12-07-2005, 03:52 PM
You picked a good shop to visit. I also use them exclusively, and you'll never be disapointed with their service. I've bought my 600's, 604's and ASW 750 from them without any problems. Regardless of what people may say about B&W, the 600 series offers excellent sound at a great price. I haven't heard much from boston acoustics so I'm not much help, this was just a rant about you going to the best shop around.

Florian
12-07-2005, 05:25 PM
Well i dont know your budget and definetly dont know what to recommend for a few hundred bucks for a box but here goes a killer speaker with very stylish looks and very good sound. The Gallo Ref. 3

Woochifer
12-07-2005, 06:51 PM
There are so many speakers out there, and the only way to narrow things down is to just listen to them. The Paradigm Phantom is an entry level tower speaker. In general, tower speakers in the sub-$1,000 price range have a lot of compromises in their imaging properties and resonance emanating from the cabinet. In general, bookshelf speakers perform a lot better in those aspects, but at the expense of less bass. And if looks are a concern, it's easier to integrate smaller speakers into the decor than larger ones.

Soundhounds has a pretty extensive speaker lineup, ranging from planars to high efficiency box speakers (e.g. those Audio Notes that you might have read about in some of RGA's posts). You might want to give those alternative approaches a listen. In general, I find the appeal of planars somewhat limited because they are much more at home with acoustic instruments than with amplified pop music. Conversely, the speakers that work for me might not register with others.

Before anyone can suggest speakers to listen to, you need to tell us the budget and what kind of sound you're looking for. The B&W 600 series is probably their best regarded line-up because it delivers a very well balanced sound and holds its own in a very competitive price point. B&W catches a lot of flak because they're popular and their speakers are available everywhere (which means that a lot of people have heard them); it's easier for people to be critical of speakers that they've actually heard. Lately, their 700 series has been getting a lot of criticism.. The more appropriate Paradigm comparisons for the DM603 are actually the Monitor 7/9 and the Studio 60 because those are floorstanding models rather than a tall standmount like the 40.

Also, on-wall speakers are currently the fastest growing market segment. They're designed to integrate with the look of flat-screen TVs. They don't sound as good as decent bookshelf models, but they got the design aspect locked down, which is why they have grown popular.

Florian
12-07-2005, 07:01 PM
I find the appeal of planars somewhat limited because they are much more at home with acoustic instruments than with amplified pop music. Please only make such statments when you can back up that all planars, which are literally almost a hundred makers cannot do this. There are some small planars that wont do this, but most of them can and will do a much better job on it then those Paradigms you love and much much more.

As a huge member on this forum i would certainly expect of you that you do have the knowledge and expertise with those so called "planars" that you can make such bold statments.

Kind regards

Florian

Woochifer
12-07-2005, 07:28 PM
Please only make such statments when you can back up that all planars, which are literally almost a hundred makers cannot do this. There are some small planars that wont do this, but most of them can and will do a much better job on it then those Paradigms you love and much much more.

As a huge member on this forum i would certainly expect of you that you do have the knowledge and expertise with those so called "planars" that you can make such bold statments.

Kind regards

Florian

Okay, so my statement applies to THE PLANARS THAT I'VE HEARD over the years. I've yet to find one that does as good a job with amplified instrumentation as it does with acoustic ones. That includes Magnepan, Quad, Acoustat, Carver, Innersound, Martin Logan, and Apogee (the Duetta and Full Range) as well. I've heard them, and never felt compelled to buy any of them. Why? Because they don't fit my listening preferences!

I'm not telling anyone not to listen to planars, quite the contrary, I encourage people to try them out for themselves. Note that before that quote, I said "You might want to give those alternative approaches a listen." And afterwards, I said "Conversely, the speakers that work for me might not register with others." What's so objectionable about telling someone to explore different speaker designs for themselves? I guess pulling a quote out of context is more convenient to suit your strawman argument than considering the totality of what I was actually saying.

So, given that you're calling me out for making a blanket statement about planars, I assume that you've NEVER made any blanket statements about box speakers? I guess you've never heard that caveat about throwing stones while living in a glass house, eh?

Florian
12-07-2005, 07:44 PM
I assume that you've NEVER made any blanket statements about box speakers? Well Mr.W, you are forgeting that you and others have called on me many times for making bold statments about box speakers before and you are now taking a defensive aproach on my calling it out on you? Please, consider the past before making such a statment. Personally i can add a touch and say that i would rather own no speakers then to listen to Beethovens 9th on anything like a Paradigm or B&W box.

Your implies that the and i quote


That includes Magnepan, Quad, Acoustat, Carver, Innersound, Martin Logan, and Apogee (the Duetta and Full Range) as well. have not done it for you are very simplistic. Considering that the Martin Logan Statment E2 and the Prodigy will easily outperform anything Paradigm makes in the speed, bass, tonal acuracy area. What Magnepans have you heard? Whats your experience with Innersounds or the Apogees? Do you own one or even had one in your home? If you had i can tell you that it wont work, definetly not with your electronics or room.

It amuses me to read your comments and your defensive side once in a while, especially since you and some other favour a good review once in a while but tend to ignore the once you dont like, such as the reports that never complain about the sonic reproduction of POP, Rock etc,... music reproduced by the planar technology.

What do you mean by it, the electrostaic or the magnetostatic aproach? Or maybe the hybrid models? What electronics where used? How was the room and what recordings did you use?

Dont make such bold statments and please stop emberrasing yourself infront of the people who own the Soundlab U1, the big Apogees and the Martin Logan Prodigy which some of us own on audioreview because they all know that they have no problem with the acurate reproduction of the this type of music. You should not put down a technology which has existed over the many years and comes in such a vast amount of models and from such a huge amount of packages.

Regards

Florian

PS: For the final touch


What's so objectionable about telling someone to explore different speaker designs for themselves? I guess pulling a quote out of context is more convenient to suit your strawman argument than considering the totality of what I was actually saying.
There is nothing wrong with that, and i have nothing against you. But i dont consider your short experiences with these types of speakers to be worth a "BOLD" statment like that. There is absolutly no way that you can make such a statment unless you have heard them in your home. Considering your electronics and love for Home Theater you can hardly make this statment. The experience is far too short!

Florian
12-07-2005, 08:13 PM
I guess what i am after is this, do you think that your current Paradigm system will do more justice to Pop music then the "planars" ?

Woochifer
12-07-2005, 08:18 PM
Well Mr.W, you are forgeting that you and others have called on me many times for making bold statments about box speakers before and you are now taking a defensive aproach on my calling it out on you? Please, consider the past before making such a statment. Personally i can add a touch and say that i would rather own no speakers then to listen to Beethovens 9th on anything like a Paradigm or B&W box.

Yeah, and why did we call you out? Because you were making blanket statements a helluva lot more reckless and broad than the one that I made. If this is your little petty way of saying gotcha. Consider me caught this time. I should have phrased it differently, and readily admit to that. There, does that make you feel better?


have not done it for you are very simplistic.

Simplistic, but factual considering that these are my opinions that you're questioning.


Considering that the Martin Logan Statment E2 and the Prodigy will easily outperform anything Paradigm makes in the speed, bass, tonal acuracy area.

In Florian's opinion, and at a totally different price point.

BTW, which Paradigms have you actually heard? Kinda presumptuous unless you've actually heard EVERYTHING that Paradigm makes. (from the Stylus and Cinema models all the way up to the Signature S8)


What Magnepans have you heard?

The 1.6 and the 3.6, along with previous models from 20 years ago


Whats your experience with Innersounds or the Apogees?

Had a calibrated demo of the Eros (along with the integrated amps and crossover units) with Innersound's designer. Very impressive demo of an acoustic performance with the best bass integration that I've heard from a hybrid design, but audible flaws and exaggerations in the highs that I picked up on.

We've gone over my listenings with the Apogees repeatedly. Look it up yourself if you need a refresher.


Do you own one or even had one in your home?

If I've never heard a planar speaker that I would want to own, why would I have already owned one?


It amuses me to read your comments and your defensive side once in a while, especially since you and some other favour a good review once in a while but tend to ignore the once you dont like, such as the reports that never complain about the sonic reproduction of POP, Rock etc,... music reproduced by the planar technology.

And those reports are meaningless to me because I form my opinions based on my own listenings and preferences, not on second-hand protestations to the contrary.


Dont make such bold statments and please stop emberrasing yourself infront of the people who own the Soundlab U1, the big Apogees and the Martin Logan Prodigy which some of us own on audioreview because they all know that they have no problem with the acurate reproduction of the this type of music. You should not put down a technology which has existed over the many years and comes in such a vast amount of models and from such a huge amount of packages.

The only one embarassing himself is you with your self-obsessed proclamations, out-of-context argumentativeness, and holier-than-thou attitude. Like I said, I'm commenting on the ones that I've heard for myself, and opining based on my listening preferences. If you can't accept that or if you're interpreting my statements as a putdown (I've praised how planars sound with acoustic instruments repeatedly over the years, so I don't know why you're throwing a temper tantrum over one sentence out of context), then you got nothing to blame but your own closed-mindedness.

Woochifer
12-07-2005, 08:24 PM
I guess what i am after is this, do you think that your current Paradigm system will do more justice to Pop music then the "planars" ?

Within my price range, most definitely. And how pop music is supposed to sound is an entirely subjective point since the source is multitracked, mixed down, and processed to begin with.

Florian
12-08-2005, 05:05 AM
Yeah, and why did we call you out? Because you were making blanket statements a helluva lot more reckless and broad than the one that I made. If this is your little petty way of saying gotcha. Consider me caught this time. I should have phrased it differently, and readily admit to that. There, does that make you feel better? Not really, but its nice to now that you get it.



Simplistic, but factual considering that these are my opinions that you're questioning.

]Thats right i do question your opinions and experiences. And why do i do this? Simply because your comments on the exagurrated highs on the innersound and the integration leads me to believe even more know that you are not looking for accuare reproduction! You are looking for a sound that YOU like ane not what is real which therefore dissregards all your comments and "quality opinions" in my book.


In Florian's opinion, and at a totally different price point. Well, but WOOCH when i comment on BOX speakers i always consider the price range. I would never put a so called planar for 550$ against the 12000$ Avalon ;)


BTW, which Paradigms have you actually heard? Kinda presumptuous unless you've actually heard EVERYTHING that Paradigm makes. (from the Stylus and Cinema models all the way up to the Signature S8)
I have heard and lived with the Paradigm Atoms and the PDR10 and i have heard the old Reference series and like i said they are good for the money. But this is to be taken literry, GOOD FOR THE MONEY!




The 1.6 and the 3.6, along with previous models from 20 years ago Well this certainly is a amazing! Models from 20 years ago, like the MGII? Its neat that you fail to mention the huge differences between the models. I have personally owned the 1.6 and 3.6 and thats why i comment on it and tell you that the 3.6 has no problem incl. the 1.6 to reproduce your POP music.


Had a calibrated demo of the Eros (along with the integrated amps and crossover units) with Innersound's designer. Very impressive demo of an acoustic performance with the best bass integration that I've heard from a hybrid design, but audible flaws and exaggerations in the highs that I picked up on. I asume you are calling them flaws while comparing them to your little Paradigms? If this is the case then this whole discussion is pointless since you are not looking for REAL music and the ACCURATE reproduction of it but a mere "sound" that you like!



We've gone over my listenings with the Apogees repeatedly. Look it up yourself if you need a refresher. I know and they are all pointless, but thats ok i dont need to since i personally OWN them and know what they can do. Same as on the Maggies :p



If I've never heard a planar speaker that I would want to own, why would I have already owned one? Because i only consider your opinion valid if you have had one in your home and played with them. All other experiences are pretty meaningless since they all react to placment by the inches and definetly will not work on your electronics. I think that with your equipment as a reference point you have no buisiness commenting on these "planars" and if they do something right or wrong since it is impossible for your system to reproduce music acuratly in the first place.




And those reports are meaningless to me because I form my opinions based on my own listenings and preferences, not on second-hand protestations to the contrary. No protesting here, i am simply enjoying it. You take your Paradigms as a reference point and comment on Innersounds, 3.'6 and the like and call them all "planars" and throw them in one bowl. Its funny to hear that from a man who is very far away from having a characterless system. But maybe thats not your goal, but if it isnt then you shouldn comment on something being exagurrated.



The only one embarassing himself is you with your self-obsessed proclamations, out-of-context argumentativeness, and holier-than-thou attitude. Like I said, I'm commenting on the ones that I've heard for myself, and opining based on my listening preferences. If you can't accept that or if you're interpreting my statements as a putdown (I've praised how planars sound with acoustic instruments repeatedly over the years, so I don't know why you're throwing a temper tantrum over one sentence out of context), then you got nothing to blame but your own closed-mindedness. I am not hollier then you, infact i am not holy at and definetly am not religious. I know your commenting on what you heard but i question the value of it, especially to a newcomer when it is obvious that you are not looking for a accurate reproduction but to a simple sound that you like.

Cheers

Florian

Florian
12-08-2005, 05:33 AM
Within my price range, most definitely. And how pop music is supposed to sound is an entirely subjective point since the source is multitracked, mixed down, and processed to begin with.
Well you can make this a lot easier. Go to a concert hall and record the performance. Then play it back on your system and check if the natural color of the instrument is correct. If the the notes have a endless decay, how the downward dynamic range is, are the instruments reproduces with enough air and space around them, are they in their original size? How is the front to back layering? How good are they in the transiants responsce? Is the radiation pattern like the instruments?

Us two know the answere and but i will let you in on a secret. If your system can accuratly reproduce the sound of a full blown orchestra in all its power and glory and emotional impact then it will most likely do a good job on your pop recordings ;-)

Woochifer
12-08-2005, 12:57 PM
Thats right i do question your opinions and experiences. And why do i do this? Simply because your comments on the exagurrated highs on the innersound and the integration leads me to believe even more know that you are not looking for accuare reproduction! You are looking for a sound that YOU like ane not what is real which therefore dissregards all your comments and "quality opinions" in my book.

Quite the contrary, I am looking for accurate reproduction. It just so happens that my interpretation of what sounds real is obviously different than yours. If you want to tell me that my sensory perception of reality is wrong, then you're more than welcome to, but that doesn't make your presumptions any less false than they are.


Well, but WOOCH when i comment on BOX speakers i always consider the price range. I would never put a so called planar for 550$ against the 12000$ Avalon

So, is that why you're comparing a $70,000 Martin Logan model against the entire Paradigm lineup, even though you haven't actually heard the entire Paradigm line?


I have heard and lived with the Paradigm Atoms and the PDR10 and i have heard the old Reference series and like i said they are good for the money. But this is to be taken literry, GOOD FOR THE MONEY!

But, you still haven't heard every Paradigm model, so you're making yet another unsubstantiated blanket statement of your own to add to many others that you've already contributed to this forum. Like I said, people throwing stones shouldn't live in glass houses.


Well this certainly is a amazing! Models from 20 years ago, like the MGII? Its neat that you fail to mention the huge differences between the models. I have personally owned the 1.6 and 3.6 and thats why i comment on it and tell you that the 3.6 has no problem incl. the 1.6 to reproduce your POP music.

In Florian's opinion the 1.6 has no problem. In Wooch's opinion, the 1.6 had plenty of problems with MY pop music (which I doubt you listen to anyway), which is why I eliminated them from consideration fairly early.


I asume you are calling them flaws while comparing them to your little Paradigms? If this is the case then this whole discussion is pointless since you are not looking for REAL music and the ACCURATE reproduction of it but a mere "sound" that you like!

EVERYBODY looks for the sound that they like in a speaker, and that seems to be the point that you miss. There is no universally agreed upon standard about what sounds more real, since every speaker has imperfections of some kind. That's why everybody has different preferences on speakers.

If you think that ringing with female voices is a better representation of reality, then you're more than welcome to invest in the Innersounds. Like I said, they were very impressive in many areas, but flawed. The demo was setup and calibrated by Innersound's designer. The much lower priced Dunlavy SC-IVs that were formerly setup in that same room sounded far more impressive and "real" to my ears.


Because i only consider your opinion valid if you have had one in your home and played with them. All other experiences are pretty meaningless since they all react to placment by the inches and definetly will not work on your electronics. I think that with your equipment as a reference point you have no buisiness commenting on these "planars" and if they do something right or wrong since it is impossible for your system to reproduce music acuratly in the first place.

My equipment is what I listen to at home and what I purchased within the budget that I set for myself, not what I consider a reference point. I have heard better systems, and use those listenings as my points of reference. If having a reference level system at home was my priority, I would have bought one a long time ago. I could care less if you consider my opinions valid. I mean, you haven't actually heard my system at your home and played around with it, so your opinion of my system and your presumptions about how I perceive sound, by YOUR OWN STANDARD, is also therefore invalid.

My point on this thread is to encourage people to listen to as many different speakers as possible. You've obviously missed the thrust of that in your pointless effort to discredit my opinions (which are what they are ... OPINIONS).


No protesting here, i am simply enjoying it. You take your Paradigms as a reference point and comment on Innersounds, 3.'6 and the like and call them all "planars" and throw them in one bowl. Its funny to hear that from a man who is very far away from having a characterless system. But maybe thats not your goal, but if it isnt then you shouldn comment on something being exagurrated.

Ah yes, the real Florian comes out with the little smarmy insults of someone else's system whenever he can't handle a disagreement. It never fails.

Keep in mind that you weren't in the room with me when I heard those Innersounds. If you consider ringing in the highs a sign of realism, then knock yourself out.


I am not hollier then you, infact i am not holy at and definetly am not religious. I know your commenting on what you heard but i question the value of it, especially to a newcomer when it is obvious that you are not looking for a accurate reproduction but to a simple sound that you like.

Just because you're not religious doesn't mean that you're incapable of deifying yourself, or at the very least, your ears and your purported reference system, since you obviously worship them and expect others to do the same. Perceptions of accurate reproduction are ultimately in the ears of the listener, since no speaker is perfect.


Well you can make this a lot easier. Go to a concert hall and record the performance. Then play it back on your system and check if the natural color of the instrument is correct. If the the notes have a endless decay, how the downward dynamic range is, are the instruments reproduces with enough air and space around them, are they in their original size? How is the front to back layering? How good are they in the transiants responsce? Is the radiation pattern like the instruments?

And I presume that you've actually done this nonsensical exercise yourself? I would LOVE to hear the quality of the recording that you made for yourself, if you think you're capable of producing a reference level recording from the audience that can reveal all of those aforementioned qualities. Feel free to send your recording to me in a lossless format, and I'll compare it to the SF Symphony's DSD-Surround recording of Mahler's 5th, for which I was a member of the audience, when it comes out on CD/SACD next spring.

calegrant
12-08-2005, 01:16 PM
Enough of this foolish pissing match, Smith and Wesson six shooters at 10 paces.

Duds
12-08-2005, 01:28 PM
Florian screws up a lot of threads. I find myself having to weed threw his crap just to read somethign that has to do with the actual post.


Enough of this foolish pissing match, Smith and Wesson six shooters at 10 paces.

Duds
12-08-2005, 01:38 PM
the speakers i recently purchased, the Von Schweikert VR1. I am extremely happy with the sound i get from them, and they are beautiful to look at as well. I have the African Hazelwood finish, and i think a few others on this bord do as well.

Florian
12-08-2005, 01:39 PM
Quite the contrary, I am looking for accurate reproduction. It just so happens that my interpretation of what sounds real is obviously different than yours. If you want to tell me that my sensory perception of reality is wrong, then you're more than welcome to, but that doesn't make your presumptions any less false than they are.
How can you say that a 100cm tall wooden box with unmatched drivers, small radiation pattern and lack of speed, lack of coloration etc etc... reproduces the music you hear life in a concert?



So, is that why you're comparing a $70,000 Martin Logan model against the entire Paradigm lineup, even though you haven't actually heard the entire Paradigm line?
I am not comparing them, you said that heard the speaker from Martin Logan but did not specify what model. This is the same reason i started this, you call it the "planar" technology without knowing that they are no alike at all and therefore i piced a planar of much choice since they all seem to have the same weakness in your opinion and the way you make your statments!



But, you still haven't heard every Paradigm model, so you're making yet another unsubstantiated blanket statement of your own to add to many others that you've already contributed to this forum. Like I said, people throwing stones shouldn't live in glass houses.

My opinion of box speakers in general stand exept for a few exeptions which are a totally different concept then anything that Pardigm makes. If you would like reasurence we can ask the people at audiogon whoch run 50K plus systems as to why they chose their speakers and not the Paradigm. Should we do that?



In Florian's opinion the 1.6 has no problem. In Wooch's opinion, the 1.6 had plenty of problems with MY pop music (which I doubt you listen to anyway), which is why I eliminated them from consideration fairly early.

Please list the problems you have and why you feel ALL planars employ the same problems.


EVERYBODY looks for the sound that they like in a speaker, and that seems to be the point that you miss. There is no universally agreed upon standard about what sounds more real, since every speaker has imperfections of some kind. That's why everybody has different preferences on speakers.
This is why its impossible to argue with someone who likes colored speakers. Yes we all do hear differently, but we can all hear the instruments their tonal color and know what size they are etc.. I disagree with all people who tune their system to THEIR needs in sound since i belive the goal is to reproduce music just like it is when someone is playing a life instrument. Since you like the sound the way you want it and not the way it really sounds in real life disqualifys your opinions in my book and those who seek the most honest reproduction.



If you think that ringing with female voices is a better representation of reality, then you're more than welcome to invest in the Innersounds. Like I said, they were very impressive in many areas, but flawed. The demo was setup and calibrated by Innersound's designer. The much lower priced Dunlavy SC-IVs that were formerly setup in that same room sounded far more impressive and "real" to my ears.
Well at least you dont mention your Paradigms in the same sentence as the Innersounds and Dunlavys. You should point out that you either recommend speakers based on their VALUE or their absolut characteristics to reproduce a record as close to reality as possible. What flaws does your Paradigm have. I can listen you at least 10 right out of the back of my hand. There are great speakers out there and i have made a list but these surely dont incl. a 100cm box that is the same exept for the brand name as 1000 others. I state which box i like and which i dont like, you on the other hand blame it on the planar technology which is in itself not even a technology but a description.



My equipment is what I listen to at home and what I purchased within the budget that I set for myself, not what I consider a reference point. I have heard better systems, and use those listenings as my points of reference. If having a reference level system at home was my priority, I would have bought one a long time ago. I could care less if you consider my opinions valid. I mean, you haven't actually heard my system at your home and played around with it, so your opinion of my system and your presumptions about how I perceive sound, by YOUR OWN STANDARD, is also therefore invalid.
True, but you should not speak in absolut terms of a given technology. If you would have said that you didnt like the 1.6 for example because of the lack of bass or some other reason i wouldnt have jumped at ya ;-) But the problem lies in the general description.


My point on this thread is to encourage people to listen to as many different speakers as possible. You've obviously missed the thrust of that in your pointless effort to discredit my opinions (which are what they are ... OPINIONS).
No that is not the reason, the reason is like i said above the generalisation of a given design.



Ah yes, the real Florian comes out with the little smarmy insults of someone else's system whenever he can't handle a disagreement. It never fails.
Interesting come back, i am not sad or dissapointet but simply try to tell you that you should not speak of a given design in absolut terms like you do when you recommend people to listen to equimpment. Thats all.


Keep in mind that you weren't in the room with me when I heard those Innersounds. If you consider ringing in the highs a sign of realism, then knock yourself out.
I havent heard them in the house, but it would be interesting if you asume that the highs in the Innersound room where not as acurate as those from any Paradigm model.



Just because you're not religious doesn't mean that you're incapable of deifying yourself, or at the very least, your ears and your purported reference system, since you obviously worship them and expect others to do the same. Perceptions of accurate reproduction are ultimately in the ears of the listener, since no speaker is perfect.
You are right and i have not said that there is ONE reference system but quite a few, but they are nowhere to be found at a 2K pricelevel ;-)



And I presume that you've actually done this nonsensical exercise yourself? I would LOVE to hear the quality of the recording that you made for yourself, if you think you're capable of producing a reference level recording from the audience that can reveal all of those aforementioned qualities. Feel free to send your recording to me in a lossless format, and I'll compare it to the SF Symphony's DSD-Surround recording of Mahler's 5th, for which I was a member of the audience, when it comes out on CD/SACD next spring.[/QUOTE]

Florian
12-08-2005, 01:46 PM
Dear Duds, you seem to think that i screw up threads but i simply have a different opinion then most of the rest. I am glad that you like your speakers, and have no problem with that all.

Enjoy!

PS: Just as a note, i talke with many members on here and recommend speakers too them. I have made many posts in the gallers and definetly encourage everyone no matter what they buy.

Woochifer
12-08-2005, 03:44 PM
How can you say that a 100cm tall wooden box with unmatched drivers, small radiation pattern and lack of speed, lack of coloration etc etc... reproduces the music you hear life in a concert?

Within the limitations of your obviously biased and rhetorical question, the only answer would be no.

Then again, no speaker out there can completely reproduce the music from a concert anyway, so your example is just as nonsensical as your telling me to record a concert and play it back at home for evaluation. (You still haven't told me if you've done it yourself, and if you have, where anyone can hear this wonderful recording that you made from inside a concert hall)


I am not comparing them, you said that heard the speaker from Martin Logan but did not specify what model. This is the same reason i started this, you call it the "planar" technology without knowing that they are no alike at all and therefore i piced a planar of much choice since they all seem to have the same weakness in your opinion and the way you make your statments!

Not comparing them?

Considering that the Martin Logan Statment E2 and the Prodigy will easily outperform anything Paradigm makes in the speed, bass, tonal acuracy area.

In English, we call that kind of statement a comparison.

And in case your reading comprehension is lacking, I have already corrected myself in my first response. My comments on planar speakers pertain the ones that I've heard. Time to move on.


My opinion of box speakers in general stand exept for a few exeptions which are a totally different concept then anything that Pardigm makes. If you would like reasurence we can ask the people at audiogon whoch run 50K plus systems as to why they chose their speakers and not the Paradigm. Should we do that?

Once again, your statements are hypocritical because you're justifying yourself in making blanket indictments against box speakers, while calling me out for making one about planar speakers (and one that I have already corrected myself on and retracted). You're the one saying that opinions are invalid unless someone has the components in their home for evaluation, and that you cannot make blanket statements about a speaker technology without having heard all of them. By your own standards, you own opinions are invalid.


Please list the problems you have and why you feel ALL planars employ the same problems.

The 1.6 was the only planar speaker readily available for demo within my price range, and it simply did not provide the appropriate amount of impact and forwardness with trip hop, electronica, rock music, and hip hop. Plus, at moderately high volume levels with all sources, it started to strain audibly. Whether it was an issue with the amp or the speaker itself didn't matter, that was not going to work with my setup.

Again, I already corrected myself about the more general statements about planars. Time to move on


This is why its impossible to argue with someone who likes colored speakers. Yes we all do hear differently, but we can all hear the instruments their tonal color and know what size they are etc.. I disagree with all people who tune their system to THEIR needs in sound since i belive the goal is to reproduce music just like it is when someone is playing a life instrument. Since you like the sound the way you want it and not the way it really sounds in real life disqualifys your opinions in my book and those who seek the most honest reproduction.

And the point that you keep missing is that your definition of a "colored" sounding speaker is not the universal truth. There's no such thing as a perfect speaker, and the preferences that people make are which compromises are in line with their own definition of realism. And like I said earlier, with pop music, you don't have consistent references to go by. The majority of my listening does not involve acoustic music, so I am not going to saddle myself with a less than stellar sound with amplified music just to meet some arbitrary standard for "honest reproduction."


Well at least you dont mention your Paradigms in the same sentence as the Innersounds and Dunlavys. You should point out that you either recommend speakers based on their VALUE or their absolut characteristics to reproduce a record as close to reality as possible.

Well, let's see, my Paradigms cost $900 a pair, while the Innersounds went for $15k+ and the Dunlavys cost $8k. It would be ridiculous for me to compare them since a pair of the Innersounds cost more than quadruple what my entire 5.1 setup cost.

Given that the topic of this thread inquired into speakers in the price range of the Paradigm Studio 40 or B&W 603, why should I have to point out that I'm discussing speakers in that price range? If anyone should have a disclaimer, it's you since you're routinely bringing up speakers that cost $70,000 to make your case.


What flaws does your Paradigm have. I can listen you at least 10 right out of the back of my hand.

Go ahead and name 10 flaws, that is, if you've actually listened to the speakers that I own (the Studio 40 v.2), and brought them home and played around with them. If you haven't done so, then any evaluation of yours is invalid by your own standards.

I've never said that my speakers were flawless, only that they meet my preferences and my budget. And in totality, I found them much preferable to the 1.6, and more realistic sounding even with a lot of my acoustic sources.


There are great speakers out there and i have made a list but these surely dont incl. a 100cm box that is the same exept for the brand name as 1000 others.

Prove to me that my speakers are no different (except for the brand name) as "1000 others." And you don't even have to name all 1000 ... 500 will suffice. I went through much fewer than "1000" speakers in my price range when I was auditioning speakers, and none of them sounded "no different" from one another.


I state which box i like and which i dont like, you on the other hand blame it on the planar technology which is in itself not even a technology but a description.

You have made so many blanket statements about box speakers on this board that it would be all to easy to point out the hypocrisy in this statement.


I havent heard them in the house, but it would be interesting if you asume that the highs in the Innersound room where not as acurate as those from any Paradigm model.

Since you haven't heard my system in your home and played around with it yourself, then any comments and presumptions about my system, my preferences, my assessments, and my opinions are thereby invalid.

wgriel
12-08-2005, 04:43 PM
You picked a good shop to visit. I also use them exclusively, and you'll never be disapointed with their service. I've bought my 600's, 604's and ASW 750 from them without any problems. Regardless of what people may say about B&W, the 600 series offers excellent sound at a great price. I haven't heard much from boston acoustics so I'm not much help, this was just a rant about you going to the best shop around.

Hey calegrant,

thanks for the reply. How do you like the 604's? I am interested in them as well, though they may be too big for my living room.

Bill

wgriel
12-08-2005, 04:59 PM
There are so many speakers out there, and the only way to narrow things down is to just listen to them. The Paradigm Phantom is an entry level tower speaker. In general, tower speakers in the sub-$1,000 price range have a lot of compromises in their imaging properties and resonance emanating from the cabinet. In general, bookshelf speakers perform a lot better in those aspects, but at the expense of less bass. And if looks are a concern, it's easier to integrate smaller speakers into the decor than larger ones.

Hey Woochifer,
thanks for the response. I do think you are right about the bookshelves vs floorstanders at that price threshold. Having said that, floorstanders work much better in this space. Also, I don't regret my purchase of the phantoms for a second - they were very a very appropriate speaker for my first purchase despite the compromises. I honestly couldn't detect any until I got the upgrade bug and started listening to other speakers.

I'm not going to get rid of them either - I've got another space that I'll move them to, more on that later...



Before anyone can suggest speakers to listen to, you need to tell us the budget and what kind of sound you're looking for.

You're right, I left out a lot of important details. I suppose I hinted at my budget based on what I've listened to, but generally, I'd prefer to stay under about $2000.00 Canadian. My music tastes are primarily Jazz and Blues, though I do like to listen to some classic rock from time to time.

As I've already said, I think that I can fit floorstanders in here better than bookshelves - I don't think the wife would care for stands...oh, and I'm strictly doing 2 channel listening here - I am going to put together a budget home theatre based on the phantoms. HT is not a big priority with us, but I can pretty cheaply build around the phantoms and have something that is at least more convincing than the TV speakers.



The B&W 600 series is probably their best regarded line-up because it delivers a very well balanced sound and holds its own in a very competitive price point. B&W catches a lot of flak because they're popular and their speakers are available everywhere (which means that a lot of people have heard them); it's easier for people to be critical of speakers that they've actually heard. Lately, their 700 series has been getting a lot of criticism.. The more appropriate Paradigm comparisons for the DM603 are actually the Monitor 7/9 and the Studio 60 because those are floorstanding models rather than a tall standmount like the 40.

You are right - I compared those two because at the time they were priced almost identically.


Also, on-wall speakers are currently the fastest growing market segment. They're designed to integrate with the look of flat-screen TVs. They don't sound as good as decent bookshelf models, but they got the design aspect locked down, which is why they have grown popular.

I can see why, but they don't interest me at all for this application.

Thanks again for your input,

Bill

calegrant
12-08-2005, 06:07 PM
I love my 604's. I considered the 603's, but I have my gear in a 40x36 foot room so the extra power fills it much nicer. For an average living room, the 603's paired up with a good sub will be more than enough bass. I don't advise dropping to the 602 5's though, the midrange in the 603's really helps alot.

Woochifer
12-08-2005, 06:15 PM
You're right, I left out a lot of important details. I suppose I hinted at my budget based on what I've listened to, but generally, I'd prefer to stay under about $2000.00 Canadian. My music tastes are primarily Jazz and Blues, though I do like to listen to some classic rock from time to time.

As I've already said, I think that I can fit floorstanders in here better than bookshelves - I don't think the wife would care for stands...oh, and I'm strictly doing 2 channel listening here - I am going to put together a budget home theatre based on the phantoms. HT is not a big priority with us, but I can pretty cheaply build around the phantoms and have something that is at least more convincing than the TV speakers.

That might explain why you liked the B&Ws. In general, Paradigm voices their speakers more aggressively than B&W does, and while they are very good with acoustic sources (the v.3 Studio series in particular is an exceptionally neutral speaker in its price range), their strongsuit is with rock, alternative, hip hop, electronica, and home theater sources. B&W tends to favor overall balance in the 600 series, and that does lend itself well to the music that you like to listen to. Obviously, other Canadian speakers such as PSB, Energy, and Mirage might give you more bang for the buck compared to imports, so at least give them a listen.

You might want to look at the Magnepan 1.6 and the Vandersteen 2ce. Those speakers sound very different from each other, and from the Paradigms and B&Ws. Both speaker lines aren't for everybody, but they have some very vocal proponents. I know that Soundhounds carries Magnepan, while you might need to venture into the Seattle area to find a Vandersteen dealer because I know that they only distribute in Canada to Ontario. The Magnepan 1.6 and 3.6 impressed me with acoustic music, so they are definitely worth listening to. Just make sure that you bring along some classic rock CDs to see if they work for you in that genre. IMO, they were not as impressive with those sources and with home theater.

The Vandys were very enigmatic speakers, and more so than any other speaker out there, people's opinions about them are generally split down the middle -- either love 'em or hate 'em. They imaged exceptionally well, but had a bizarre tonal balance overall. Vandersteen proponents will argue that they are the most accurate speakers on the market (I know of at least three very good audio reviewers who use the Vandersteen 5a as their reference speaker) because of the attention paid to the time and phase correctness. I generally found the Vandys very perplexing, but I know some very good listeners who swear by them.

wgriel
12-08-2005, 08:43 PM
That might explain why you liked the B&Ws. In general, Paradigm voices their speakers more aggressively than B&W does, and while they are very good with acoustic sources (the v.3 Studio series in particular is an exceptionally neutral speaker in its price range), their strongsuit is with rock, alternative, hip hop, electronica, and home theater sources. B&W tends to favor overall balance in the 600 series, and that does lend itself well to the music that you like to listen to.

Yeah, that makes sense - I want to emphasize that in no way did I dislike the Paradigms - but it seemed a bit more forward than the B&W 603. I can totally understand someone loving the sound of the Studios, and I could happily live with them. But for the music I like the 600 series just seemed a bit more appropriate.

Maybe it's just because I'm fairly new at this, but what I can't understand is how so many people on these forums can be so derisive of any of these competently designed speakers. To me, everything I've listened to has sounded good, but some simply sound better than others. But reading some comments, you'd think listening to some of these speakers is a cruel form of torture! Do people really loathe the sounds of some of these speakers or is this just a childish way to justify their choices?

Ah well, maybe I'm just not discriminating enough, but I kind of like it that way :)


Obviously, other Canadian speakers such as PSB, Energy, and Mirage might give you more bang for the buck compared to imports, so at least give them a listen.

Good suggestions - I know there is a PSB dealer in town, and Energy can be found in a few places. I will give the Maggies a listen as well - I doubt that they'd fit the decor very well, but it won't hurt me to at least hear what they're all about.

Thanks again for your helpful suggestions

Bill

wgriel
12-08-2005, 08:47 PM
I love my 604's. I considered the 603's, but I have my gear in a 40x36 foot room so the extra power fills it much nicer. For an average living room, the 603's paired up with a good sub will be more than enough bass. I don't advise dropping to the 602 5's though, the midrange in the 603's really helps alot.

Wow - you've got a big space! I do think the 603's would be enough for my space, especially because I've got some 600's mounted in the kitchen. I did enquire about the 602.5's, but the staff at Soundhounds were pretty convinced that it wouldn't be enough for my space.

Anyway, I'm going to listen to some more speakers before I make a purchase. The 603's have impressed me the most, but I'm not in any kind of hurry to spend my money.

Bill

wgriel
12-08-2005, 08:57 PM
the speakers i recently purchased, the Von Schweikert VR1. I am extremely happy with the sound i get from them, and they are beautiful to look at as well. I have the African Hazelwood finish, and i think a few others on this bord do as well.

Hi Duds,

thanks for the recommendation - those are beautiful finishes! I don't know if I can get them in my area, but if I find a dealer I'll give them a listen.

Bill

Woochifer
12-08-2005, 09:49 PM
Yeah, that makes sense - I want to emphasize that in no way did I dislike the Paradigms - but it seemed a bit more forward than the B&W 603. I can totally understand someone loving the sound of the Studios, and I could happily live with them. But for the music I like the 600 series just seemed a bit more appropriate.

That's how it is once you get beyond the entry level stuff. Every speaker, even high end reference models, will have flaws of some kind. Once you get into the higher end stuff, the flaws will generally reduce in magnitude, but every speaker takes a somewhat different approach in how its voiced and designed. Sifting through them and identifying the ones that make your music come to life is all part of the hobby.


Maybe it's just because I'm fairly new at this, but what I can't understand is how so many people on these forums can be so derisive of any of these competently designed speakers. To me, everything I've listened to has sounded good, but some simply sound better than others. But reading some comments, you'd think listening to some of these speakers is a cruel form of torture! Do people really loathe the sounds of some of these speakers or is this just a childish way to justify their choices?

In no other hobby I can think of, aside from maybe wine tasting, are relatively narrow differences between products magnified to such an exaggerated extreme. All you have to do is read the magnitude of change sometimes ascribed to cables costing thousands of dollars to get an idea of how far this can go. With speakers, you got a lot of self-described audiophiles who have their preferences and favorites, and feel the need to prop their own choices up by taking everything else down. There are plenty of speakers that I don't care much for, but if someone else feels that they are the last word in realism and musicality, I don't take any issue with that. If you like B&W better, that does not equate to Paradigm being bad. But, there are people that post on forums like this one who will basically trash anything that doesn't fit their narrow preferences.

Unlike 20 or so years ago where bad speakers were easy to find, nowadays you won't find nearly as many specialty speakers that are grossly inaccurate or horrible sounding. You'll get people who try to convince otherwise, but in general with a brand like Paradigm or B&W, you're starting from a pretty good baseline. Where you go from that baseline is up to you. You already found something that you like, so now it's just a matter of whether you find something else that you like even better. And that's the part of the hobby that can be both good and bad -- the constant quest for the next upgrade.

Duds
12-09-2005, 05:16 AM
Hey Bill

I'm assuming you checked them out on the VS website, trust me, the finish is much much better looking in person!! The dealer I got mine may be willing to ship a set to you for an audition. I know when I got mine he allowed me a 30 day trial period, and if I didnt like them I could return them for full refund. If you want, send me a private message and i'll give you the name of the dealer.

I also listened to B&W and Paradigm before my purchase. I liked the Studio 20's and also liked the 602s3's and even the 601s3's. I dont think you can go worng with any of them, they all have their own strengths, but only you can decide which ones sound better to you.

Good luck!


Hi Duds,

thanks for the recommendation - those are beautiful finishes! I don't know if I can get them in my area, but if I find a dealer I'll give them a listen.

Bill

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 01:54 AM
Hello all,

I'm new here, and pretty new to the audio world. By way of introduction, I live in Victoria BC -- home of RGA's fav dealer ;) I have only been interested in audio for about a year and half. That's when we bought a new house and I thought that it was time I got something better than computer speakers for sound.

Anyway, knowing nothing about this I bought a budget system consisting of a pair of Paradigm Phantoms, a Denon receiver (DRA395) and a Denon CD changer. And I absolutely loved it! I later added a pair of B&W DM600's for the kitchen - I've got an extremely open floor plan, so adding a small pair of speakers has really helped to fill the main living space with music.

Now, I'm starting to think I'd like to upgrade the Phantoms - I've been reading almost every review I can find (and finding most of them pretty useless) and listening to what I can.

So far I've auditioned Paradigm Studio 40's and B&W 603's, and I have to say that while I liked both, my preference was for the 603's. I know that B&W is getting slagged alot on this forum, but I really loved the sound and the looks of the 603's.

Oh, and looks do count as these speakers sit in a living room and I've got to make some concessions to the wife. I am next going to audition something from Boston Acoustics, probably the VR2 or VR3, but I'm not too sure what else I should listen to. Any suggestions?

Incidently, I wholeheartedly agree with RGA regarding Soundhounds - they are a class act (in fact, I just got back from there where I listened to a number of my CDs, and I've rarely had the pleasure of dealing with a business that is so helpful and accomodating).

Thanks for any thoughts or ideas,

Bill


DON'T LISTEN TO THE NEGATIVE B&W STUFF. THEY ARE AMONG THE FINEST LOUDSPEAKERS MADE IN THE WORLD. THAT BEING SAID, THEY ARE ON THE BRIGHT SIDE, BUT EXPERIMENTING WITH CABLES CAN HELP.

RECOMMENDED PRODUCTS FROM "THE ABSOLUTE SOUND" MAGAZINE": PSB ALPHA B, $249; EPOS ELS3, $329; USHER S520, $375; MONITOR AUDIO BRONZE B2, $399; INFINITY PRIMUS 360, $660; WHARFEDALE DIAMOND 9.6, $750; PSB T45/55, $749 AND $899; TOTEM RAINMAKER, $900; BOHLENDER GRAEBENER RADIA Z, $999; MAGNEPAN MG12/QR, $1099; SPENDOR S3/5 AND S3/5SE, $1099 AND $1399; REVEL CONCERTA F12, $1199; DYNAUDIO AUDIENCE 52SE, $1500. ALL ARE "PER PAIR", BY THE WAY.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 02:03 AM
Hello all,

I'm new here, and pretty new to the audio world. By way of introduction, I live in Victoria BC -- home of RGA's fav dealer ;) I have only been interested in audio for about a year and half. That's when we bought a new house and I thought that it was time I got something better than computer speakers for sound.

Anyway, knowing nothing about this I bought a budget system consisting of a pair of Paradigm Phantoms, a Denon receiver (DRA395) and a Denon CD changer. And I absolutely loved it! I later added a pair of B&W DM600's for the kitchen - I've got an extremely open floor plan, so adding a small pair of speakers has really helped to fill the main living space with music.

Now, I'm starting to think I'd like to upgrade the Phantoms - I've been reading almost every review I can find (and finding most of them pretty useless) and listening to what I can.

So far I've auditioned Paradigm Studio 40's and B&W 603's, and I have to say that while I liked both, my preference was for the 603's. I know that B&W is getting slagged alot on this forum, but I really loved the sound and the looks of the 603's.

Oh, and looks do count as these speakers sit in a living room and I've got to make some concessions to the wife. I am next going to audition something from Boston Acoustics, probably the VR2 or VR3, but I'm not too sure what else I should listen to. Any suggestions?

Incidently, I wholeheartedly agree with RGA regarding Soundhounds - they are a class act (in fact, I just got back from there where I listened to a number of my CDs, and I've rarely had the pleasure of dealing with a business that is so helpful and accomodating).

Thanks for any thoughts or ideas,

Bill


I WROTE SOME RESPONSES SIMPLY TO GIVE ADVICE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE ASKING. I DON'T GET HUNG-UP ON WHAT MY FONT SIZE IS; WHETHER I USE CAPITAL LETTERS; IF INFORMATION IS UNDERLINED, BOLD, ITALICIZED, OR ANYTHING ELSE SOME OF THE OTHER PEOPLE GET SORE ABOUT REGARDING THE SIZE OF LETTERS OR NUMBERS.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 02:55 AM
the martinlogan statements cannot compare with ANYTHING THAT PARADIGM PRODUCES. PERIOD. they (m/l) are superior. they have twin towers-an electrostat panel, a tower of cones, then a pair of eight subwoofers, per side. obviously, they are for large rooms. but, paradigm doesn't come close with all their speakers, combined, to the m/l's statements which retail in excess of $70,000 and, I believe, require bi-amping for each side????????????

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 08:57 PM
i auditioned, actually purchased a pair of martinlogan ASCENT'S. i only had them for a week or so before the woofer in one of the speakers went out. i suspected, and confirmed, with martinlogan, that the cone woofer was the weak link in the speaker. they also have a 4 ohm impedance, which means you are going to require a relatively high current amp. at least 100 wpc from a good amp/integrated amp or a very very good receiver, like SONY, PIONEER, OUTLAW, ETC.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 08:59 PM
i neglected to state that i was using a BRYSTON 4B ST POWER AMP, RATED AT 250 WPC @ 8 OHMS, AND 400 WPC @ 4 OHMS. I DID CRANK THEM, SO I PROBABLY BLEW THE WOOFER. THE ELECTROSTAT panel used in the martinlogans are superb.

Mike Anderson
12-10-2005, 10:21 PM
The 1.6 was the only planar speaker readily available for demo within my price range, and it simply did not provide the appropriate amount of impact and forwardness with trip hop, electronica, rock music, and hip hop.


Just one nitpick here, but an important one:

"Electronica" covers a lot of ground. If you want head-pounding tecnho, that's one thing, and I see what you're saying.

But 70% of the stuff I listen to these days is "electronica", and almost all of it (e.g. ambient) does not require head pounding, chest-thumping dynamics.

For this stuff, the Maggies absolutely excel. It's just gorgeous, lush sound - full of beautiful, multi-layered details and a magnificent, complex timbre like I've never heard from another speaker.

E-Stat
12-11-2005, 08:05 AM
Just one nitpick here, but an important one:

"Electronica" covers a lot of ground. If you want head-pounding tecnho, that's one thing, and I see what you're saying.

But 70% of the stuff I listen to these days is "electronica", and almost all of it (e.g. ambient) does not require head pounding, chest-thumping dynamics.

For this stuff, the Maggies absolutely excel. It's just gorgeous, lush sound - full of beautiful, multi-layered details and a magnificent, complex timbre like I've never heard from another speaker.
I agree. While I favor acoustical music, I rather enjoy the coherency, sound field, and delineation of my full range 'stats on pop and electronic music as well. I played Madonna and Radiohead on my (now sold) Acoustats for a couple of friends and they were amazed at the presentation. "This is better than live".

Different strokes for different folks. My long term friend and ex-TAS reviewer JWC likes his Avalons (it was his Dayton-Wrights that turned me onto full range electrostats thirty years ago).

rw

RICKY009
12-13-2005, 12:03 AM
Von Shweikert Loudspeakers Are Very Very Good. Good Shopping And Good Choice

wmloving
12-13-2005, 12:14 PM
Bill,

Just bought a pair of 2CE Sigs last weekend. Tried to love the B&W's for 5 years, but they did not have the full range of sound I was looking for; just not balanced. I think the reason they sound so bright is that there's not the bass response to balance them out. If the speaker only reproduces sound to 45Hz, you just won't be able to hear bass regardless of what cables, etc. you have. Thought about doing a subwoofer to fix this, but didn't want to go that way.

The Vandersteens have low end down around 30Hz (still missing 10 Hz if you ask me) and are incredibly well balanced and transparent. There are adjustments to mid and treble on the back of the speaker. I have not needed them so far, but the speakers are not really broken in yet.

I'm using these with 125 watts of clean power into 8 ohms and some entry level "audiophile" gear. The music sounds so much better than it ever did with the B&W's. It's just right. I haven't played them really loud yet, but I can't imagine they are going to sound bad unless I crank it to the clipping point.

I have a large room (den/kitchen combo) with 9 foot ceilings and they fill the room with detailed sound and warm accurate bass. They remind me of listening to Magnepans or Martin Logans, but with more bass and less transparency. A nice tradeoff if you ask me. Especially for the price. These can be had, including the stands, for a reasonable discount.

Hope you find something you like!

Florian
12-14-2005, 11:48 AM
Finally someone with ears who actually listens! Gratulations on your purchase!

wgriel
12-14-2005, 03:50 PM
I have a large room (den/kitchen combo) with 9 foot ceilings and they fill the room with detailed sound and warm accurate bass. They remind me of listening to Magnepans or Martin Logans, but with more bass and less transparency. A nice tradeoff if you ask me. Especially for the price. These can be had, including the stands, for a reasonable discount.

Hope you find something you like!

Thanks for the recommendation - I actually do have a room kind of like that. It's a large living room, but opens up to a dining room, then on to the kitchen. I've got bookshelves in the kitchen (B&W DM600's) and the sound is fine there, but I do want something more refined than the Paradigm Phantoms that I've currently got in the living room.

I don't know if there are any Vandersteen dealers anywhere near me, but I'll investigate that.

Bill