Paradigm Studio 100 v.3 vs Axiom M80s.

[rajx7]

Hi Guys,
I just had the oppurtunity to listen to Paradigm Studio 100s and was quite impressed. I just wanted to know if anyone had the chance to listen to these and Axiom M80s. If yes, how do they compare with each other. If Axiom sounds as good as the Paradigms or little better, I would prefer to go for them, as there is a good difference in the dollar amount. I would really appreciate your insights.
Regards,
R

[kexodusc]

rajx7: I've not heard the M80's, but, a year ago I took the plunge on some Axiom M3Ti's. If you read the Axiom boards on their website, Axiom owners will all tell you how great they sound, because they're an internet-direct company, they offer tremendous savings, and that the M3Ti's will trounce the Studio 20's.

I own the Studio 20's. It's not even close. I'd like to personally slap every moron on that Axiom forum that makes such rediculous statements.

Now having said that, I have some impressions about the M3Ti's, which should sound somewhat similar to the M80's. A year ago or so I posted a rather unflattering review of the M3Ti's that I wish I could take back. At first I absolutely hated them. They sounded to me much worse than some older, cheap Paradigm Titans they replaced that I had for my dining room. Decent bass, but a bloated, and rather annoying sound in the midrange. After getting very bored one day, I decided to take the M3Ti's downstairs to my main system. I was floored at how my opinion changed.
I find the Axiom's have a very wide and deep soundstage, but a somewhat less focused imaging than say, the Studio 20's. They do sound very good for the money, but unlike most other speakers I own, they require (to me at least) absolutely no toe-in to sound good. At moderate volumes, in a medium or small room the M3Ti's would be very good.
I'd recommend them as a decent value, probably somewhere around the same level of performance as Paradigm's Mini-Monitors (though maybe not quite), but without the slightly bright sound Paradigm's known for. Though the Mini Monitors have a lower, and more authoritative bass, and would sound a bit better than the M3Ti's without a subwoofer. Considering the M3Ti's are about $125 less than the Mini Monitors (before shipping costs), they are a good value, especially if someone was putting together a home theater with a subwoofer.
I would expect the same scale of value from the M80's.
Just don't believe everything you read from some of the other Axiom owners...they don't sound anywhere near as good as my Studio 20's, and I'm very reluctant to believe the M80's would rival the Studio 100's.

[rajx7]

rajx7: I've not heard the M80's, but, a year ago I took the plunge on some Axiom M3Ti's. If you read the Axiom boards on their website, Axiom owners will all tell you how great they sound, because they're an internet-direct company, they offer tremendous savings, and that the M3Ti's will trounce the Studio 20's.

I own the Studio 20's. It's not even close. I'd like to personally slap every moron on that Axiom forum that makes such rediculous statements.

Now having said that, I have some impressions about the M3Ti's, which should sound somewhat similar to the M80's. A year ago or so I posted a rather unflattering review of the M3Ti's that I wish I could take back. At first I absolutely hated them. They sounded to me much worse than some older, cheap Paradigm Titans they replaced that I had for my dining room. Decent bass, but a bloated, and rather annoying sound in the midrange. After getting very bored one day, I decided to take the M3Ti's downstairs to my main system. I was floored at how my opinion changed.
I find the Axiom's have a very wide and deep soundstage, but a somewhat less focused imaging than say, the Studio 20's. They do sound very good for the money, but unlike most other speakers I own, they require (to me at least) absolutely no toe-in to sound good. At moderate volumes, in a medium or small room the M3Ti's would be very good.
I'd recommend them as a decent value, probably somewhere around the same level of performance as Paradigm's Mini-Monitors (though maybe not quite), but without the slightly bright sound Paradigm's known for. Though the Mini Monitors have a lower, and more authoritative bass, and would sound a bit better than the M3Ti's without a subwoofer. Considering the M3Ti's are about $125 less than the Mini Monitors (before shipping costs), they are a good value, especially if someone was putting together a home theater with a subwoofer.
I would expect the same scale of value from the M80's.
Just don't believe everything you read from some of the other Axiom owners...they don't sound anywhere near as good as my Studio 20's, and I'm very reluctant to believe the M80's would rival the Studio 100's.

Thanks kexodusc. Really appreciate your opinion. But again, of all the Axiom models M80s have the most acclaim and have read great reviews about it. They cost nearly $1000/pr less than Paradigm Studio 100s. So was wondering Paradigms were $1000/pr more woth sound over Axioms. or not.

[SAPSEC]

Are both Paradigm and Axiom Canadian speakers ? Same type like PSB ?

[rajx7]

Are both Paradigm and Axiom Canadian speakers ? Same type like PSB ?
Yes they both are Canadian as far as I know. Why?

[dvjorge]

I will go with the Studio 100 V3. The studio serie is one of the best value-price has the market now. Considering that speakers are one of the most important part of the chain, I will put all the money I can on them. Personally, I don't like the Axion's sound. On the other hand, I find Paradigm Studio Serie a real contender for any speaker in his price range.
Jorge.

[RGA]

Hi Guys,
I just had the oppurtunity to listen to Paradigm Studio 100s and was quite impressed. I just wanted to know if anyone had the chance to listen to these and Axiom M80s. If yes, how do they compare with each other. If Axiom sounds as good as the Paradigms or little better, I would prefer to go for them, as there is a good difference in the dollar amount. I would really appreciate your insights.
Regards,
R

Firstly, the reviews you may as well chuck out right now.

Secondly, I would not buy the Axiom's unless i knew I could return them full refund (including all shipping charges) - I'm not a huge fan of buying a speaker unless I can hear it first (including kits unless they're dirt cheap so it's no big deal if it sucks)

Thirdly for $2700.00Cdn I would explore a lot of the competition and of different cabinet design or speakers of panel design(stats and planars) etc.

On a personal note (And this is what I would do only so chuck it out if you wish) if number 2 does allow for free return I would definitely TRY it simply because I think the 100V3 is an atrocious bang for buck speaker as I have heard for $2700.00Cdn(It would be overpriced at $1500.00Cdn IMO). It's a worse speaker than the V2 its build Quality looks WORSE it sounds worse IMO, it has less bass than the V2 less impact, its treble is less bright but then it's also boring and the whole thing sounds like it lacks cohesion(and even sounds hollow with a funnel effect. If you must have Paradigm :rolleyes: then get the 100V2 or the 40V2 and a sub. OR preferably a PMC Transmission line or something anything from Dynaudio. I prefer high sensitive designs as they "TEND" not to make everything sound constipated and narrow.

As a Canadian I'm least proud of the speakers that come from our country - I'm happy they sell though and puts us on the map and helps the economy - but generally I feel we make some of the worst speakers on the market for sound quality for music - home theater maybe not too bad as boom and sizzle is popular these days probably because of the boom and sizzle recordings. Horrible Resolution lots of detail(noise in the signal).

This above paragraph is an opinion based off my auditions over the years ONLY - they are totally subjective and lots of people totally disagree with me on this - it is not meant to be argumentative in any way shape or form --- as a note I am seriously in the minority when it comes to the sound and value offerred by many of these speakers. (There are some exceptions here as well as I noted a couple of them). Speaker evaluation is subjective - not everyone appreciates,values or even hears the exact same things in the exact same way. (and some speakers are suited to certain genres of music as well).

I would audition speakers with wildly different cabinet shapes, design approaches, tweeter and woofer materials, etc --- preferably in the same room with the same equipment --- this is hard as most dealers don't have the set-ups generally to accomodate this like, for the most part, my dealer offers. So I have some advantage in not needing to rely on any print reviews to steer me because the sound is all that needs to be the indicator.

[kexodusc]

As a Canadian I'm least proud of the speakers that come from our country - I'm happy they sell though and puts us on the map and helps the economy - but generally I feel we make some of the worst speakers on the market for sound quality for music - home theater maybe not too bad as boom and sizzle is popular these days probably because of the boom and sizzle recordings. Horrible Resolution lots of detail(noise in the signal).

Yikes, that's an absolutely bold statement to make. Bang for the buck seems to be something Canadian speaker manufactures have in spades. I would argue completely the opposite of your assessment, RGA...especially the boom and sizzle stereotype (except for maybe a few large models). I will, however agree with you, that once you reach, say, the $2000 price level, Canadian speakers tend to lose their edge compared to other offerings. The only exception being Focus Audio, who IMO are the best kept secret in the audio world. The FS line are probably the best speakers I've heard between $3000-$8000 USD. Absolutely incredible (though they rely heavily on European drivers...a good thing IMO)

RGA, you'd probably actually like the Axiom sound...look around your area, Canadian stores still carry them in stock, despite Axiom's claim to the contrary. A very different sound than PSB, Paradigm, Energy, etc...After a year of almost zero use, I'm really starting to dig my M3Ti's...They have a very accurate bass and midrange (though the bass isn't very extended, these are pretty small), and a somewhat warm sound in the highs. These speakers sound much different than your typical slim line design...I'm tempted to almost believe the Axiom propaganda on their trapezoidal cabinet designs. Difficult to place though...

[46minaudio]

Firstly, the reviews you may as well chuck out right now.
Including yours.RGA you are a AN shill...Anything posted by you should be taken with a large grain of salt..

[Haoleb]

I own the M80's and while i really enjoy them and have not had a single bit of regret in buying them, but there are obviosly better speakers out there. I have not heard the paradigms but I remember them being very nice speakers. V2 perhaps is what im thinking of. The paradigms use real wood venner and weight about 40 lbs more per pair than the Axioms. Although from what i have seen pics of them and read they might be visually, nicer speakers. I have not heard them so the extra grand in cost might not be worth it.

Hearing the M80's is something i definetly reccomend you do. There are many axiom owners across the country that will open their house to you to come audition the speakers. A list of these folks can be found here: http://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=first&Number=12763&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=

From what i have read the M80's and 100's sound very similar so since 1000 dollars is alot of money i would go for the axioms and hope for the best. I have not heard of anyone who was not pleased with their purchase. There have been some who were dissapointed with some of the bookshelf models. Like the guy above maybe but It seems their floorstanders are much better. Although i doubt they sell nearly as many M80 as they do M3's But again, i suggest you try and hear the axioms. There could be someone very close to you with either the 60's or 80's who would have you over for a listen.

[RGA]

Including yours.RGA you are a AN shill...Anything posted by you should be taken with a large grain of salt..

As Jack Nicholson said "You can't handle the truth."

[46minaudio]

As Jack Nicholson said "You can't handle the truth."
No RGA you cant tell it...

[rajx7]

All you guys, thanks a lot for all your insights and suggestions. Just please do not throw stuff at each other just because you do not agree with each other. I know most of the comments posted here are subjective. There are millions of great speakers out there and so many odds against us to make the right decision to chose the right speakers. The reason could be budget and defnitely very low chances of hearing all the great speakers out there , thus we come out here to read each others opinions on the brands we never get to hear. If I could hear to all the brands I know are good, hell I would have never posted this question and I would have decided for myself. I just hope that by reading your experiences and different opinions I just hope it will help me to make the right decision.

Since the "bang for buck" was used in this discussion, I wanted to know, what you think of Athena AS-F2s. I know they do not cost as much as Axiom M80 and no way close to Paradigm 100s still have heard that they sound better than some of $2000 speaker/pr. Is it true?. By the way have Paradigm stopped selling Studio 100 v2 after v3s was released?
Regards,
R

[Kpt_Krunch]

rajx7 - part of what RGA said is true:

" I would audition speakers with wildly different cabinet shapes, design approaches, tweeter and woofer materials, etc --- preferably in the same room with the same equipment"

However, even this statement is total BS if it is NOT YOUR ROOM and NOT YOUR EQUIPMENT!!! The only way you can truly judge a speaker is how it sounds with your setup. Now, maybe RGA is sleeping with his dealer, I don't know, but most high end B&M shops will charge you a 10% to 20% restocking fee, which can be much more than shipping charges. (RGA - I'm not accusing you of anything - but the fact is every B&M store I was in that was 'high-end' will not allow me to take a speaker home for an audition, I can buy it and return it for said re-stocking charge though - even Future Shop and Best Buy give a 30 day return - no questions asked!).

So, I would try Axiom, and if you don't like it, you can return them. I took a big gamble (for me) recently by ordering Ascends - 340's across the front and CBM 170's for the side surrounds. I've had them for 5 days now, and these puppies are fantastic. And for the set (all 5) plus wall mounts and stands, I still saved over $1000 cdn vs. what the Paradigms V.3 100's would have cost me (what I as originally looking at).

People are not lying when they talk about these speakers (Ascends, Rockets, Axioms, etc.). If they were bad speakers, we'd know it by now.

So, try the Axioms, and if they do it for you, great. Even if the 'digm's are just slightly better, you probably wouldn't notice it. Just be wary that with a 4 ohm load those Axioms will be harder to drive than the 'digm's.

RGA - I do credit you for at least saying it was your opinion. However, many people love the Canadian sound - my guess is you like coloured speakers, nothing wrong with that, your ears! Just be a bit more careful with how you word things - you remind me of the loud mouth drunk looking for a fight in a bar - and you know what happens to those guys, right?

[Woochifer]

Since the "bang for buck" was used in this discussion, I wanted to know, what you think of Athena AS-F2s. I know they do not cost as much as Axiom M80 and no way close to Paradigm 100s still have heard that they sound better than some of $2000 speaker/pr. Is it true?. By the way have Paradigm stopped selling Studio 100 v2 after v3s was released?
Regards,
R

You're really the only arbiter of whether or not the Athenas sound anything like pricier speakers. And when you mention pricey speakers, you have to consider which ones you're comparing the Athenas to. Plenty of $2k speakers out there that don't sound anything like one another, so IMO that's not really a valid generalization.

Paradigm announced the Studio v.2 series around June 2003, and they stopped production on the v.2 series right around the same time. Whenever Paradigm transitions over to a new series, they usually don't waste any time between announcing a new series and discontinuing the old one. They had a price reduction to clear out whatever v.2 stock remained in their distribution warehouses, and almost everything was gone within a month of the announcement. The v.3 models started arriving at some dealers in July last year, so I doubt that you'll find any new in-box v.2 models. If you really want the v.2 models, check with a local dealer. Most Paradigm dealers I'm aware of have trade-in offers, so that means you might find some traded in units lying around their showrooms. You also might find some demo units available.

[rajx7]

Hey All,
Isn't it a wonder that "keeping life simple" concept can be so difficult. I had thought I had finally short listed to Paradigms and Axioms and was hoping to hear some positive inclination towards one of them and would have helped in my decision. But after reading all the contradictions my simple plan turned into complication.Won't it be great if all the opposite parties agreed on one brand. That would be like winning a lottery. Paradgim Studio 100 are around $2500/pr and so are Von Schweikerts VR-2 pair so I thought of pitching in Vons in the competition with other 2. I have heard some great things about it . So any of you guys have anything good to say about these babies especially the people against Paradigms.

I had not mentioned earlier but I have an unfinished basement, which I plan to finish in next few months. As you would have guessed, one of the rooms is reserved for my home theater and thus my research. I was hoping to settle on one speaker set before I had finished the basement. So what do you guys think of Von Von Schweikerts VR-2 for fronts, LCR 15 for center and TS 150 for surrounds. Does this package have a nice bang.
Help me make my decision guys.
Still thanks for your honest opinions, though.
R

[RGA]

rajx7 - part of what RGA said is true:

" I would audition speakers with wildly different cabinet shapes, design approaches, tweeter and woofer materials, etc --- preferably in the same room with the same equipment"

However, even this statement is total BS if it is NOT YOUR ROOM and NOT YOUR EQUIPMENT!!! The only way you can truly judge a speaker is how it sounds with your setup. Now, maybe RGA is sleeping with his dealer, I don't know, but most high end B&M shops will charge you a 10% to 20% restocking fee, which can be much more than shipping charges. (RGA - I'm not accusing you of anything - but the fact is every B&M store I was in that was 'high-end' will not allow me to take a speaker home for an audition, I can buy it and return it for said re-stocking charge though - even Future Shop and Best Buy give a 30 day return - no questions asked!).

So, I would try Axiom, and if you don't like it, you can return them. I took a big gamble (for me) recently by ordering Ascends - 340's across the front and CBM 170's for the side surrounds. I've had them for 5 days now, and these puppies are fantastic. And for the set (all 5) plus wall mounts and stands, I still saved over $1000 cdn vs. what the Paradigms V.3 100's would have cost me (what I as originally looking at).

People are not lying when they talk about these speakers (Ascends, Rockets, Axioms, etc.). If they were bad speakers, we'd know it by now.

So, try the Axioms, and if they do it for you, great. Even if the 'digm's are just slightly better, you probably wouldn't notice it. Just be wary that with a 4 ohm load those Axioms will be harder to drive than the 'digm's.

RGA - I do credit you for at least saying it was your opinion. However, many people love the Canadian sound - my guess is you like coloured speakers, nothing wrong with that, your ears! Just be a bit more careful with how you word things - you remind me of the loud mouth drunk looking for a fight in a bar - and you know what happens to those guys, right?

Ahh but you imply that what I like is innacurate and coloured - in fact they can be coloured because as you note the room is a function of the speakers - then again music also has colour and it had better be produced. For instance the editor at Hi-fi Choice magazine noted that in the review room the Audio Note speaker exhibited some colouration here and there they awarded it top marks for sound quality but cetianly they pointed out some reservations about the speaker.

They also awarded lots of other speakers great marks etc(that doesn't mean anything because if they dump on speakers TRUTHFULLY then those speaker or amp makers etc will no longer or ever send them products for review - the magazine doesn't get financing and goes out of business and the stereo magazine industry is a wasteland of defunct companies). Still the editor chose for his own home the Audio Note speakers and the 1992 version(despite the "colour") there is more to the game than that - and properly set-up won;t have that problem anyway since the review room has no corner listening accomodation) - not bad when they badly set-up the speaker it still won their best buy tag - now try badly positioning the B&W 705 or Paradigm and see if it wins anything - say connect them to the walls in corners and see what it sounds like - hmm coloured boomy and horrible when badly set-up).

It's one thing to reivew a speaker for the general public and it's one thing to SELL speakers to the general public. It's another thing to listen to thousands and thousands of products and actually keep one. Considering the miniscule size of Audio Note you might be surprised at just who owns them. Reviewers at Hifi+, Stereophile, Hi-fi Choice, enjoythemusic,com, stereotimes, and that's just the English branded rags. So yes listenable long term versus listenable for a review. My dealer sells lots of speakers for over 30 years - go to each one of the salespeople's homes and see what they own.

The issue of room is bogus - it does not matter **** all which room - the better speaker will sound better in any room. I know that because I listened to the AN's in four different rooms against the others in various sizes - didn't matter and despite the problems the E/LX faced in the Hi-fi Review by being in just about the worst possible room you could set the speaker up in it STILL beat the other speakers which for them would be ideal.

An basically requires corners to work best and close-ish to wall position - if the room is relatively normal and size appropriate it will work. Of course a better room will help but if the room is the cop out run run from the speaker maker.

And every dealer i know will let you take anything you want home - you give them a credit card security deposit - some just gave it to me to try. Actually this makes my whole room argument totally moot - take it home if you want try it out and make sure you have several others to switch in and out - either way you still have the problem(which is also largely bogus but still) of acoustic memory. It's funny I can remember what an oboe sounds like versus a cello even if I don't hear either one for 4 years acoustic memory bahh Humbug.

I am a huge supporter of the idea of trying an Axiom at home - they've lasted several years and are popular - they look like they offer just as good as similar designs for less money - people who have similar ears to me have said that they are basically cheaper better Paradigms - If that's and your on a budget it's worth the shipping charge - GAS nowadays will probably cost that much especially if the dealer is 50miles away.

And quite frankly this stuff isn't the end of the world - so who gives a flying leap if I don't like a particular speaker - throw it out if you don't like the opinion - but what the hell is the point of asking for one - There's bigger problems in life than buying sound reproduction boxes and worrying oif RGA doesn't approve - who the hell cares what I think - I have a viewpoint which isn't popular most of the time --- most people write me off as either a nutbar, a shill(man I wish I could at least get something out of this like the watches stereophile reviewers get for shilling Musical Fidelity), a fan-boy, a lover of innacurate distorted sound?? Frankly, it doesn't matter --- I did my comparisons head to head and I'm happy with the results and then I wanted to dispell a few things that I had been told over the last decade about certain designs like SET, and non slim boxed speakers. IMO "they"(industry companies reviewers and so called sonic experts) lied to me and I'd like to attempt to turn the tide in some small way.

[theaudiohobby]

For instance the editor at Hi-fi Choice magazine noted that in the review room the Audio Note speaker exhibited some colouration here and there they awarded it top marks for sound quality but certainly they pointed out some reservations about the speaker.
Funny I know, but the B&W 700 series and Audio Note Speakers, E/LX IIRC, were awarded about the same marks by Hifi Choice ;) The 703 was actually awarded an Editor's Choice award while the E/LX ( I think), had to content it self with a best buy award, does it really mean much in the scheme of things, I do not think so, though it sort of knocks your assessment of both speakers for six :D.

[kexodusc]

The issue of room is bogus - it does not matter **** all which room - the better speaker will sound better in any room. I know that because I listened to the AN's in four different rooms against the others in various sizes - didn't matter and despite the problems the E/LX faced in the Hi-fi Review by being in just about the worst possible room you could set the speaker up in it STILL beat the other speakers which for them would be ideal.

RGA,buddy...give your head a shake. Let me give you a perfect example of how room interactions can and do matter BIG TIME. I recently had an opportunity to spend a day with some Focus Audio speakers. Two different setups. The FS-888's were in the room with the B&W Nautilus 800's. Let me say that I loved both speakers, though I'm not a fan of B&W's price tag. The room was rectangular, I'm guessing 12 ft by 22 or so.
In position A, the 4 speakers were lined up along the narrow wall (12 feet), in position B along the wide wall, which was probably about 20 feet or so. You probably know where I'm going with this.

The Focus Audio FS-888's, when played along the wide wall, me sitting about 8 feet back, were absolutely incredible, and presented a much wider soundstage with more depth, realizm, and fantastic imaging, simply outperforming the B&W Naut 800's in every aspect IMO. These are among my favorite speakers. However, along the narrow wall, the FS-888's only had about 2 feet or so to breath on either side of the speaker, and it became immediately obvious that the extremely wide soundstage was being choked off. The B&W's, while still not sounding as pleasing to me in terms of the way it handled voices compared to the FS-888, managed to present a smaller soundstage along the smaller wall, and still maintaint the accuracy of imaging individual instruments...But yes, the B&W sounded better along the wide wall too.

This is a real phenomenon, that was instantly recognized by myself and the salesperson. In fact, they had just rearranged the room along the shortwall and when he started listening, he knew right away something was wrong when he popped in his demo CD and didn't get the results he was expecting to show me.

[RGA]

Funny I know, but the B&W 700 series and Audio Note Speakers, E/LX IIRC, were awarded about the same marks by Hifi Choice ;) The 703 was actually awarded an Editor's Choice award while the E/LX ( I think), had to content it self with a best buy award, does it really mean much in the scheme of things, I do not think so, though it sort of knocks your assessment of both speakers for six :D.

Yes and I noticed that as well - but the reviewer kept the one he liked best - and that one was the Audio Note - and that is more important to me than recommending the B&W who's advertising keeps the magazine in business - The editor's choie is the choice of who gave them the most money - hell the guys who DESIGNED the freaking 700 series will tell you in person that the AN;s are better - and you being in Europe should take Peter up on the offer to have you hear it from the horse's mouth - since the 700 series is woefully flawed in dsesign with atrocious top of the midwoofer passband distortion due to their kevlar drivers as was pointed out graphically with full measurements of the kevlar driver problems - truth hurts - go read John Ashman's link again.

[RGA]

RGA,buddy...give your head a shake. Let me give you a perfect example of how room interactions can and do matter BIG TIME. I recently had an opportunity to spend a day with some Focus Audio speakers. Two different setups. The FS-888's were in the room with the B&W Nautilus 800's. Let me say that I loved both speakers, though I'm not a fan of B&W's price tag. The room was rectangular, I'm guessing 12 ft by 22 or so.
In position A, the 4 speakers were lined up along the narrow wall (12 feet), in position B along the wide wall, which was probably about 20 feet or so. You probably know where I'm going with this.

The Focus Audio FS-888's, when played along the wide wall, me sitting about 8 feet back, were absolutely incredible, and presented a much wider soundstage with more depth, realizm, and fantastic imaging, simply outperforming the B&W Naut 800's in every aspect IMO. These are among my favorite speakers. However, along the narrow wall, the FS-888's only had about 2 feet or so to breath on either side of the speaker, and it became immediately obvious that the extremely wide soundstage was being choked off. The B&W's, while still not sounding as pleasing to me in terms of the way it handled voices compared to the FS-888, managed to present a smaller soundstage along the smaller wall, and still maintaint the accuracy of imaging individual instruments...But yes, the B&W sounded better along the wide wall too.

This is a real phenomenon, that was instantly recognized by myself and the salesperson. In fact, they had just rearranged the room along the shortwall and when he started listening, he knew right away something was wrong when he popped in his demo CD and didn't get the results he was expecting to show me.

But I already said that you need a room well suited for the speaker - if these companies had any clue they would tell you that in the instruction manual - my Wharfedales and AN's say it and so did my B&W's. SOme will provide a square foot effective rating, how far apart minimum and maximum they should be from one another 10 feet maximum for my Wharfedales which also happens to be the ideal, postion X feet from side and real walls geenrally within a range etc. If you follow their directions you SHOULD be close to the ideal spot - if the room has the distances and room size you SHOULD have zero problem getting them to sound their best in that room.

Of course the room is important for getting the best results - but the better speaker will sound better IT SHOULD in any room provided the room meets the criteria of the speaker maker. If I am listening in a typical 14X18 room at my dealer with a 12 foot ceiling and the speakers can handle that sized room - well mate the speaker is deisgned to operate in typical homes or IT SHOULD BE and that's a typical room.

It's always a cop out - it sounds bad because of the room? BS!. Gee every room then must be bad - how many rooms and equipment do i need to try the 705 in for them to sound good - i'm up to four now and they've actually been consistant in them - consistantly not good but consistant...and this is the speaker that won European Loudspeaker of the year. :rolleyes:

[kexodusc]

But I already said that you need a room well suited for the speaker....

The issue of room is bogus - it does not matter **** all which room - the better speaker will sound better in any room.

I respectfully submit you have inadvertently contradicted yourself...but I think we agree that sooner or later a room does matter.



It's always a cop out - it sounds bad because of the room? BS!. Gee every room then must be bad - how many rooms and equipment do i need to try the 705 in for them to sound good - i'm up to four now and they've actually been consistant in them - consistantly not good but consistant...and this is the speaker that won European Loudspeaker of the year. :rolleyes:

ROLFMAO!!! I'm not a big fan of the 705 either (but I wouldn't say it sounds "bad", just a bit expensive). I don't deny people can and do use it as a cop-out though..but how often do you seriously get this excuse? And from who?
Does B&W have a disclaimer on their website or something advising you to keep trying rooms until you like them?

It's easier to agree to disagree on what sounds good than argue over this. Geez, an audiologist friend of mine has shown me papers that prove that the shape of a person's ears will make a bigger difference on the perceived sound than any given piece of equipment...this could explain a lot...could explain some of Bose's claims.

[Woochifer]

They also awarded lots of other speakers great marks etc(that doesn't mean anything because if they dump on speakers TRUTHFULLY then those speaker or amp makers etc will no longer or ever send them products for review - the magazine doesn't get financing and goes out of business and the stereo magazine industry is a wasteland of defunct companies). Still the editor chose for his own home the Audio Note speakers and the 1992 version(despite the "colour") there is more to the game than that - and properly set-up won;t have that problem anyway since the review room has no corner listening accomodation) - not bad when they badly set-up the speaker it still won their best buy tag - now try badly positioning the B&W 705 or Paradigm and see if it wins anything - say connect them to the walls in corners and see what it sounds like - hmm coloured boomy and horrible when badly set-up).

It's one thing to reivew a speaker for the general public and it's one thing to SELL speakers to the general public. It's another thing to listen to thousands and thousands of products and actually keep one. Considering the miniscule size of Audio Note you might be surprised at just who owns them. Reviewers at Hifi+, Stereophile, Hi-fi Choice, enjoythemusic,com, stereotimes, and that's just the English branded rags. So yes listenable long term versus listenable for a review. My dealer sells lots of speakers for over 30 years - go to each one of the salespeople's homes and see what they own.

Geez, the first contribution to this thread that you made earlier was to "chuck out right now" all reviews. And here you go quoting reviews and what reviewers own as if it actually means something! I guess if somebody praises Paradigm, their review isn't worth much, but if they praise your Audio Notes like you do to no end, then reviews are precious and proof positive that you're right about everything. Nice consistency.


The issue of room is bogus - it does not matter **** all which room - the better speaker will sound better in any room. I know that because I listened to the AN's in four different rooms against the others in various sizes - didn't matter and despite the problems the E/LX faced in the Hi-fi Review by being in just about the worst possible room you could set the speaker up in it STILL beat the other speakers which for them would be ideal.

An basically requires corners to work best and close-ish to wall position - if the room is relatively normal and size appropriate it will work. Of course a better room will help but if the room is the cop out run run from the speaker maker.

No, the idea that rooms don't matter is what's bogus. A better speaker will NOT "sound better in any room." They might sound better in MOST rooms, but you cannot discount the role that the room plays in shaping what happens to the sound waves when they travel between the transducer and the ear.

Room dimensions have a DIRECT effect on the room modes and how much room gain occurs. A speaker design (except those with advanced active EQ systems) cannot by itself eliminate this as a variable. The room gain varies by the size of the room, and it affects ALL speakers. You think that your AN will sound identical in a 6'x6' concrete bunker and a 50'x80' room, and all points in between? The effect of the corner placement that AN recommends will vary depending on the room dimensions and configuration. As Kex pointed out, even moving the configuration around within the same room can result in a very different kind of sound.

As pointed out in the Alton Everest's acoustics handbook, different wall/boundary materials have different reflective/absorptive properties. And if you've ever looked at the absorption coeffecients for different wall materials, you'd notice that the absorption varies by frequency. Those have a very direct effect on what we hear because the only place where boundary effects don't matter is an anecholic chamber or outdoors in open space.

So you heard the ANs in four different demo rooms at your favorite dealer -- I guess you can now generalize how they sound in every possible room configuration in the world. And because AN speakers are in your infallible assessment completely unaffected by room effects, we can now rest assured that you've debunked all acoustical science with just your ears.

Whew, this means now I can return that SPL meter to Radio Shack and get my $40 back! I mean, when I moved my speakers from one room to another, one of the 10+ db peaks that I measured shifted from 70 Hz to 88 Hz. I thought that the room caused that, but since rooms don't matter, I can only conclude that measurements and SPL meters are just voodoo and part of a global conspiracy to stomp out musical enjoyment and bleed my pocketbook. I'll unplug my parametric EQ as well when I get home as well, since that was calibrated to in-room frequency measurements. Since room effects are bogus, the boomy bass that I was getting earlier is how the bass is SUPPOSED to sound and I simply bought a crappy subwoofer!


Actually this makes my whole room argument totally moot - take it home if you want try it out and make sure you have several others to switch in and out - either way you still have the problem(which is also largely bogus but still) of acoustic memory. It's funny I can remember what an oboe sounds like versus a cello even if I don't hear either one for 4 years acoustic memory bahh Humbug.

The room argument is NOT moot if you're basing your conclusions on listening sessions that were done in separate rooms. Auditory memory is obviously an issue you do not understand if you're taking it to the extent that the ability to differentiate between a cello and an oboe proves that it's bogus. The issue with auditory memory would be if you could identify the REPRODUCTION of the cello or oboe sounds four years later. Basically, it would simply entail listening to a playback, then four years later listening to it again and being able reliably tell if it was exactly what you heard before (i.e. if someone switched out the speakers and you had to pick out the exact one that you heard before without any visual assistance). THAT is the fallibility and unreliability of auditory memory.


And quite frankly this stuff isn't the end of the world - so who gives a flying leap if I don't like a particular speaker - throw it out if you don't like the opinion - but what the hell is the point of asking for one - There's bigger problems in life than buying sound reproduction boxes and worrying oif RGA doesn't approve - who the hell cares what I think - I have a viewpoint which isn't popular most of the time --- most people write me off as either a nutbar, a shill(man I wish I could at least get something out of this like the watches stereophile reviewers get for shilling Musical Fidelity), a fan-boy, a lover of innacurate distorted sound?? Frankly, it doesn't matter --- I did my comparisons head to head and I'm happy with the results and then I wanted to dispell a few things that I had been told over the last decade about certain designs like SET, and non slim boxed speakers.

Since you're now referring to yourself in third person, it obviously does matter what people think of you. But, it's not personal, the responses start flying around when you try to equate your PREFERENCES with some kind of proof that scientific principles about wave properties don't matter or have zero relevance to what we hear or are "bogus." Enjoy your speakers, but don't try and convince people that rooms don't matter, that your sighted biased listenings are more valid and reliable than what measured data shows, or that what your ears pick up with your ANs somehow invalidates every other approach to design. It's actually your generalizations and ridiculous stretching of otherwise valid points that are bogus.


IMO "they"(industry companies reviewers and so called sonic experts) lied to me and I'd like to attempt to turn the tide in some small way.

No, quite the contrary, AN IS a part of the industry; and your shilling for the company is hardly turning the tide, it's just another part of it. After all, you're trying to get people to listen to your speakers the same way that everybody else tries to get people to listen to their speakers.

[Woochifer]

Of course the room is important for getting the best results - but the better speaker will sound better IT SHOULD in any room provided the room meets the criteria of the speaker maker. If I am listening in a typical 14X18 room at my dealer with a 12 foot ceiling and the speakers can handle that sized room - well mate the speaker is deisgned to operate in typical homes or IT SHOULD BE and that's a typical room.

And where are the speakers positioned? And what are the absorptive properties of the walls? Is the floor on a slab or is it elevated? Where are the entryways located and low wide are they? Those are but a few of the factors that affect the sound quality.


It's always a cop out - it sounds bad because of the room? BS!. Gee every room then must be bad - how many rooms and equipment do i need to try the 705 in for them to sound good - i'm up to four now and they've actually been consistant in them - consistantly not good but consistant...and this is the speaker that won European Loudspeaker of the year. :rolleyes:

ALWAYS a cop out? You really need to get out from beyond your dealer's "four rooms" if you think that they are representative of every possible configuration. If you really want a contrast, try out a set of speakers inside of an untreated room with hard surfaces all the way around, and see if it sounds different from a room with carpeting, bass traps, and acoustically treated walls and ceilings.

Just in my house, the sound of my speakers changed when I moved them from one room to another. The peak in the bass shifted from 70 Hz to 88 Hz. Depending on the source material, that produces a VERY different sounding bass. Brick and glass along two walls on a slab hardwood floor to a room with drywall and plaster on three sides and an elevated floor with carpeting, again very different acoustical properties and results in different imaging and somewhat different tonal cues. The difference between having the acoustical panels in place versus not having them, also very noticeable in listenings AND measureable.

If the B&W 705 won an award, obviously SOMEBODY liked them, so your blanket condemnations of that speaker are obviously not universally shared.

[RGA]

I respectfully submit you have inadvertently contradicted yourself...but I think we agree that sooner or later a room does matter.



ROLFMAO!!! I'm not a big fan of the 705 either (but I wouldn't say it sounds "bad", just a bit expensive). I don't deny people can and do use it as a cop-out though..but how often do you seriously get this excuse? And from who?
Does B&W have a disclaimer on their website or something advising you to keep trying rooms until you like them?

It's easier to agree to disagree on what sounds good than argue over this. Geez, an audiologist friend of mine has shown me papers that prove that the shape of a person's ears will make a bigger difference on the perceived sound than any given piece of equipment...this could explain a lot...could explain some of Bose's claims.

But if your audiologist friend is correct he may want to tell Floyd Toole and Harman this because according to them everyone or mostly everyone prefers what they tell people to prefer and they have a DBT(such that it is) to "prove" it. Hmmm.

I actually would bet Toole and crew are kinda right but IMO wrong speakers :p

Of course preference is something else that those jokers never account for - for instance why some people love the Stones and I think they sound like screaming noise makers - same "sound" entering the old ear canal - but some HATE LOATHE despise and get physically ill listening to the stuff(RAP) and some have that reaction to Mozart. Same sound - very different reaction to it. Another hmm.

[GeneticDrift]

I have the m60's and I really love them. When I originally ordered them I never expected them to meet my expatiations. I figured I would play with them for 30 days and send them back.

I knew within the first 15 minutes they would never leave the house. They have surpassed every expectation I had.

I think many get in the mindset of bigger is better and want the m80's but I feel the m60 will satisfy 99% of purchasers.

[RGA]

And where are the speakers positioned? And what are the absorptive properties of the walls? Is the floor on a slab or is it elevated? Where are the entryways located and low wide are they? Those are but a few of the factors that affect the sound quality.



ALWAYS a cop out? You really need to get out from beyond your dealer's "four rooms" if you think that they are representative of every possible configuration. If you really want a contrast, try out a set of speakers inside of an untreated room with hard surfaces all the way around, and see if it sounds different from a room with carpeting, bass traps, and acoustically treated walls and ceilings.

Just in my house, the sound of my speakers changed when I moved them from one room to another. The peak in the bass shifted from 70 Hz to 88 Hz. Depending on the source material, that produces a VERY different sounding bass. Brick and glass along two walls on a slab hardwood floor to a room with drywall and plaster on three sides and an elevated floor with carpeting, again very different acoustical properties and results in different imaging and somewhat different tonal cues. The difference between having the acoustical panels in place versus not having them, also very noticeable in listenings AND measureable.

If the B&W 705 won an award, obviously SOMEBODY liked them, so your blanket condemnations of that speaker are obviously not universally shared.

Yup I'm sure they do. But - I have heard the 705 in three dealers now different rooms - treated and not of varying size. A boring speaker that can not get anything remotely close to reproducing a piano - yeah it's a tough instrument but... expectations must be low and most of the 705's competition might be worse - so the best of a bad lot and people who have no ear for good sound.

[Woochifer]

It's easier to agree to disagree on what sounds good than argue over this. Geez, an audiologist friend of mine has shown me papers that prove that the shape of a person's ears will make a bigger difference on the perceived sound than any given piece of equipment...this could explain a lot...could explain some of Bose's claims.

Actually, the shape of the human ear is exactly why we hear things behind us differently than sources directly in front of us. Back when we were getting into knockdown skirmishes on this board about the merits of EX/ES encoding, Terrence repeatedly pointed out that the shape of our ears and diffraction from our ear lobes affect how we hear things behind us. (Believe me, when I was new to this board and multichannel audio in general, that was one of the first things that Terrence straightened me out on)

This is one reason why you're not supposed to position surround speakers directly behind the listening position the same way that a main speaker is positioned directly in front. The ITU multichannel speaker reference placement specifies 110 degrees off center for the surround speaker placement, which is only 20 degrees behind the listener. If we didn't hear things differently from behind, then the reference should be 150 degrees offcenter to match the 30 degree recommended offset up front.

It's pretty much a given that people hear things differently.

[kexodusc]

Actually, the shape of the human ear is exactly why we hear things behind us differently than sources directly in front of us. Back when we were getting into knockdown skirmishes on this board about the merits of EX/ES encoding, Terrence repeatedly pointed out that the shape of our ears and diffraction from our ear lobes affect how we hear things behind us. (Believe me, when I was new to this board and multichannel audio in general, that was one of the first things that Terrence straightened me out on)
.

Great, in addition to woofer KY Jelly, we can sell ear lobe rings to compensate for lobe shapes and standardize everyone's hearing to the audiophile norm. Sit down, put on your 'lobes, and turn the music up...
Of course, then some other company will offer them in water based gel format instead of latex, and claim that it reduces sibilance while enhancing soundstage...which of course we'll have to counter with the DBT card...

[rajx7]

Hey Guys,
I thought people come here hoping to get some answers. I started this thread hoping to recieve some help with my selection of the speakers but instead, seems like I have started a cold war. You guys seem to have gone off track from the main topic. Please don't say that in essence it is a part of it. No body gave me an answer about Von Shweikerts I had mentioned earlier. Could anyone please be kind enough to help me there.

Regards,
R

[bacchanal]

Von Shweikerts are really nice...I've listened to the Vr2's once and I really liked them. Of course, I didn't audition them or anything. My impression was that they were a little more articulate than my Paradigm studio 40 v2's, and the top end of the frequency didn't have the charactaristic paradigm studio series sound.
I am quite happy with my studio 40s, and I don't think I'll feel the need to replace them for quite some time, but I'll probably consider Von Shweikert when I do. The problem is that VS is going to be pretty hard to find, and I don't know if you can get them online, but even if you could, you would still want to listen to them first.
When I bought my studio40s, I only considered speakers that I could listen to in person. I spent several months shopping around and listening before I made a purchase. I didn't audition every speaker in the same room, and I couldn't always use the same equipment either, but I was able to get a feel for the generel charactaristics of each speaker. You have to weigh in your mind what you are hearing based on the listening environment and equipment. Obviously no speaker is going to sound as good in best buy as it will at a hifi audio dealer. The listening environments (and equipment) are totally different.
Listen to whatever you can. If you don't find anything locally that thrills you, give the axioms a try in home. If you like them...keep them

[newbsterv2]

Hey RGA want a laugh?? I've auditioned the 705's as well and let's just say that I gave them 15 minutes and I was really bothered by their reproduction of music. Too forward a midrange, too much treble. I tried a few different brand receivers as well as cdp's to make sure it wasn't the source. Anyway, the Parts Express DIY kit that goes by the name of BR-1 for a measly $140 shipped to my door is pretty damned good at reproducing piano. Better than the Axiom M3ti, Paradigm Monitor 7, and Magnepan MMG. If the BR-1 had just a wee bit more extension on top for the "airiness" in recordings and the midrange was just a wee bit more forward I think that speaker would be the best speaker I've ever heard. Call that insane or ridiculous or whatever but it just goes to show that you don't have to spend the $1,500 asking price of the B&W 705 to enjoy Glenn Gould playing Bach's 2 and 3 part inventions on that troublesome Steinway cd318 that "hiccups" some of the time. Gotta love those salespeople too. They really do give the impression that they don't use the restroom as mere humans do but they emit rose petals from their belly buttons when they gotta go. Happy listening!!!


Yup I'm sure they do. But - I have heard the 705 in three dealers now different rooms - treated and not of varying size. A boring speaker that can not get anything remotely close to reproducing a piano - yeah it's a tough instrument but... expectations must be low and most of the 705's competition might be worse - so the best of a bad lot and people who have no ear for good sound.

[rajx7]

Thanks bacchanal. Finally somebody cared to say something, without being sarcastic. I have one dealer in my area for Von Shweikerts. I had the chance to listen to VR-4 Jr in stereo and man they sound so clean. But they are little too expensive for me. So thought of looking into a one lower model i.e VR-2. After researching online for those, read some nice reviews. Wanted to hear experiences from you guys.

[kexodusc]

newbsterv2...the extension in the BR-1's is actually there, it just starts to roll off and no longer falls within the state +/-3dB spec...but it's actually higher than the 18 kHz stated would suggest. Not that any of us can really hear that high.
Good choice, glad you like them...I'd put them up against the M3Ti's (I own) and Paradigm Mini Monitors (briefly owned) any day. A little tough on amps though...but great value.
There's a million and 1 tweaks out there too.

[RGA]

Newbster

It really is not totally surprising - it does not matter how much one spends on a speaker OR how much the company spends on drivers or materials - if it's a BAD design it's a BAD design.

[drseid]

So what do you guys think of Von Von Schweikerts VR-2 for fronts, LCR 15 for center and TS 150 for surrounds.


I think VS makes *great* speakers, both for the money and outright. I considered the VR4 SE Gen IIIs before I bought my current mains, and they were impressive.

Keep in mind, if you already auditioned the VR-4jrs and liked what you heard, you may be able to look for a used pair on Audiogon.com. You can get a lot more value for your money with used speakers (IMO), as many go for 50% discounts off list. A speaker you thought was "out of your league" pricewise may now be very affordable.

---Dave

[theaudiohobby]

Yes and I noticed that as well - but the reviewer kept the one he liked best - and that one was the Audio Note - and that is more important to me than recommending the B&W who's advertising keeps the magazine in business - The editor's choie is the choice of who gave them the most money - hell the guys who DESIGNED the freaking 700 series will tell you in person that the AN;s are better - and you being in Europe should take Peter up on the offer to have you hear it from the horse's mouth - since the 700 series is woefully flawed in dsesign with atrocious top of the midwoofer passband distortion due to their kevlar drivers as was pointed out graphically with full measurements of the kevlar driver problems - truth hurts - go read John Ashman's link again.

RGA,

What are you saying exactly? Who is the reviewer at Hifi Choice that owns Audio Notes, is that the only pair of speakers that he owns and when did he acquire them? Who are the guys at B&W that said ANs are better than B&Ws, care to provide any names, I do not think you can because it was a rumour started by PQ on AA ;) ? As for John Ashman's comments, did you ever the read the entirety of Lynn Olsen's articles on speaker materials and crossovers, and/or other authorities on the subject before arriving at your position? Also, I noticed that you are accussing the guys at Hifi Choice of impropriety, yet on the other hand, quote their reviews when arguing in favour of AN, old tatics never change ;) . What really hurts is the extent of your gullibility.

[RGA]

Audiohobby - Hi-fi choice has used the AN E/D as their reference speaker for the past 12 years - the magazine itself owns the speaker to judge amplifiers and other speakers against! Paul Messenger owns the speaker he reviewed. Though he may have returned the new one to Peter - because Peter unlike some makers does not give products to reviewers as a "token" of his appreciation - and since they already have the E/D I don't see why they would keep the new one - then again I don't know.

Rumour that PQ started? But you can verify since you are in England - you just needed to take him up on his offer which was a meeting with B&W designers who are presently working at B&W - you could meet with them listen to what they have to say - then after the meeting make a call to B&W reception and get them on the phone to make sure they "really" work there. You're afraid of what they WILL say because you have publically backed the 705 as a GREAT speaker. There are many companies who contract AN - Quad fairly recently.

AN I suspect doesn't bother HEAVILY in the marketing game because they're not deep pocketed enough to compete - why list all the recording studios that use their speakers or the who's who of people who own their stuff - it still doesn't mean anyone will like it better and Peter figures in the end if his stuff is good people will buy it based on sound - plenty of speakers I hate are used in recording studios - or are just not as good in normal listening rooms.

Yes I have read the entire article by Lynn - it's in my favorites - Lynn also happens to call the Audio Note amp the BEst sounding amp he owns(despite the measurements being inferior to some other amps he also owns) - all AN amps are designed and voiced(by ear and then modelled on computers to ensure the same sound) through their speakers - so AN can't be all bad as you're the one who likes to post Lynn's point of view all the time - well his POV is that AN is a great company - so you are quite selective eh? He's only right if he agrees with you? and totally stupid when he likes an AN product right? Wow this poor Lynn fellow must be a misguided fool? I hope he checks with you first. If AN built **** and Lynn likes it and it's his reference then follow the logic through. You don't like Peter Q's arrogance and thus you don't like his stiuff.

Lynn
"Case in point: I've lived with the Audio Note Ongaku SE211, as well as the Kassai PSE 300B and the Reichert SE 300B. I've also had access to my trusty Audionics CC-2 (not a bad transistor amp), a modern multi-kbuck Class A transistor unit, and a souped-up Dyna Stereo-70. They all sounded different, particularly to non-audiophile friends.

The Ongaku, by far, had the worst THD and power measurements ... 22W at 3% distortion. It also made the Ariel sound better than any electrostat I've ever heard ... in fact, the best sound I'd heard in many years. It certainly sounded better than anything I heard at the 1994 Winter CES. So what's going on here? Maybe THD is simply measuring the wrong thing."
(but then the Ongaku is considered in many quarters to be the best sounding amplifier made by anyone ever - look that up yourself) Doesn't mean you or I will agree I have never heard it because I don't have the $90k to buy it. (It bloody well better be for $90k.

...

"If it sounds much clearer, more natural, more true-to-life, that implies a problem (or type of distortion) has been removed. (Even if the problem cannot be measured with present-day equipment.)

I am hypothesizing (bear with me here) that the problem with analog transistor devices is actually non-linear Miller capacitance. You see, bipolar transistors, MOSFETS, and even diodes exhibit very significant changes in capacitance with applied voltage (possibly current and temperature as well). As capacitors go, it is my understanding that transistors are very poor quality, worse even than electrolytic capacitors."
by Mr. Lynn Olson

Ahh this seems odd that since you're a measurement freak yet Lynn supports a product which sounds more like music but measures (with the standard measurements anyway) the worst. And the article is so obvuiously talking about B&W kevlar since they're the first and biggest Kevlar supporter. Ashman showed you the measurements as well which you will never see from the likes of Stereophile. Most people are trained to think that this is acceptable sound quality - if most everything is bad then it's going to be really hard to tell what is good so you pick the best of a bad lot.

And I was not totally upset when thinking of the 705 at Hi-fi Choice - They generally try and review speakers within a certain budget range - and most of the competitors use practically a "clone" design cabinet shape and implementation - something's gotta win. And just so you know the B&W's got Editor's choice but umm 4 stars for sound quality in the case of the 703 http://hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=2783 The Signature 805 got 4 stars for sound quality http://hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=2770

The AN E with the supposedly lower Recommended rating here and a best buy in it's current form but on sound hmm 5 stars http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=475. Of course they like the E better for sound quality it is so obviously a better sounding speaker - Editors like to pick their choice - Who's your daddy? B&W and the mighty big corporations are your daddy. Hell What Hi-fi Choice awarded the Roksan Integrated the Super test award winner over the Sugden A21a (but even they said the A21a on sound quality alone was the best soudning amplifier of the group. But the game is not ALL about sound quality.

The A21a is not as compatible with as many speakers, has very few features and NO REMOTE, no LCD screen, runs bloody hot etc. The AN's biggest hit is no center channel you can not as easily or at all run a home theater system - positioning demands are odd - they don't look fashionable in appearance or design and they really do work better with SET amplifiers which almost no one has or is willing to buy - In some ways I can agree with them not being selected as an editor's choice because an editor's choice would be something to please and SUIT the most people - big bulky uglyish standmounts woith no matching center channel for home theater which work best with SET amps(which have no features unless a balance knob is a feature) won't suit the most people. The attractive looking Home theater package(though the CDM looked nicer to me) 700 series with funky shapes and more durable rubber surrounds as opposed to foam and that might work better on low grade amplification such as receivers - high WA facotor etc might make sense.


Stereophile uses the E to measure amplifiers which you can look through their online magazine when they measure lower powered amps - Art Dudly owns Audio Note products - a reviewer at Hifi news and/or Hi-fi+ owns at least a DAC(aslo measured and voiced on AN speakers), Paul Messenger who seems to get around owns AN, Steven Rochlin(editor of enjoythemusic.com is one of a number there who own products) and Bob Neil(positive feedback is one of a numebr who own AN gear) who is a reviewer and a dealer - Bob liked em so much he decided to become a dealer for them. Then there are reviewers at Stereotimes who deals with the ultra high end gear.

What more do you want? (Gee yeah Audio Note must suck right? All of these reviewers and competitor's designers and recording engineers must ALL be tone deaf except you) Because The Audio Hobby doesn't like Peter's Arrogant tone he must also build crappy sounding distortion boxes) Given the size of the company that's not bad.

Respecting the fact that this is a TASTE issue largely the current issue of Stereophile reviews the Paradigm Studio 60 and the reviewer(who I'm not familiar with but I liked the Studio 60V2 as well and have not heard the 60V3) owns the speaker or the previous one. So certainly many will (and reviewers are on a budget as well), like other sounds - Maggie, Electrostats, B&W, Elac, and yes Audio Note.

To me the 705 is atrocious for that kind of money - One could probably get the CDM 1NT or the Paradigm Studio 40V2 or the Dynaudio 42 or 52 AX Two used for about 1/3 the price and get MUCH better sound. But then that is just an opinion - if you like the sound who the F cares - you're money not mine.

[rajx7]

I think VS makes *great* speakers, both for the money and outright. I considered the VR4 SE Gen IIIs before I bought my current mains, and they were impressive.

Keep in mind, if you already auditioned the VR-4jrs and liked what you heard, you may be able to look for a used pair on Audiogon.com. You can get a lot more value for your money with used speakers (IMO), as many go for 50% discounts off list. A speaker you thought was "out of your league" pricewise may now be very affordable.

---Dave

Hi Dave,
I really appreciate your reply. I think I will consider buying used ones if I decide on going for VR-4s. But wanted to know if VR-2 sound as good as VR-4s. Since I am more interested in watching movies and some music so I was just wondering if VR-2 will produce pretty good sound movies.
Regards,
R

[drseid]

Well, they don't sound *quite* as good as the VR4jrs, but they do sound quite good. The 4jrs offer better bass extension and a bit better resolution in my opinion, but the VR2 is a great speaker in its own right (at least to my ears).

---Dave

[rajx7]

I should say Dave, you are a cautious writer. But thanks for you opinion. When I heard VR-4 jr. I thought it was one of the best speakers I have heard so far, but like I said earlier they are bit beyond my range. But I assume that all their speakers are timber matched as they do not set of center and surround speakers for VR-4 line up. They seem to have only one type center and surround speakers, that is LCR-15 and TS something. So I would assume if I want to create a 5.1 I will have to chose any set of 2 speakers and buy the 3 I mentioned abouve and they should be timber matched. I hope you understand where I am getting at?

[drseid]

Yes, the VS speakers should indeed be timbre matched, so mixing the VS types of speakers would not be a problem.

Just for clarification, I was not trying to push you into buying the VR4jrs, especially as you clearly stated they were out of your price range... I just meant that there were *some* differences between the VR2s and the 4jrs. So hearing one speaker was not a "shoe in" that the other would be what you are looking for.

That said, I think if you went with the VR2s you would not be dissatisfied.

I recommend auditioning a whole bunch of high-end brands... that is half the fun of the purchase (the hunt). :-)

Cautious writer.... Who me? ;-)

---Dave

[Jimmy C]

... you have an INCREDIBLE amount of time to type...lol. Hell, I'm home by noon and I have less time than you to spew rhetoric...lol. :*)

Again, I *briefly* read some of the previous lines, and, once agin, you have not heard what Harman can do. The (again) Circuit City and Best Buy JBLs, for eg. do NOT fall under the Harman (research) umbrella... TOTALLY different - not sure if you can soak this in at this point. AFAICR, you HAVE NOT heard the Revels and the S.O.T.A. JBLs... correct me if I'm wrong. If I'm right, why would you denounce the "White Papers" from them? After all, you havent heard what the white Papers are talking about. They have a HELL of a lot more experience than you or I...

And didn't you recently make disparaging (sp?) remarks regarding Art Dudley (yes) on another forum? BUT - he is OK now because he sometimes uses AN as a speaker to refer to? (S'Phile does) hhmmmm... Talk about having your cake and eating it too!

Believe me, I'm glad you have a passion that is relatively rare these days... but talk about things you are familiar with... don't pontificate!

[RGA]

Well Stereophile is a bit weird to start with - the reviewers like everything but JA slams some of them with the graphs - but problem is good or bad graph - the product usually sounds good to the reivewers - so how valuable are those graphs? not very, because measuring 10 things leaves out the other 1000 they could be measuring but don't know how or don't have the equipment. (Actually the last page of the most recent UHF has Regkind discussing - in veiled discourse Stereophile measuring. The industry measures those things that puts their products in the best light). You won't see those nifty Kevlar measurements in Stereophile or Soundstage bevcause they are special interest guides --- glorified advertisments.

I have problems with ALL review publications - I have LESS of a problem with certain ones and certain reviewers - but magazines are magazines becuase they have stuff to review - and if you give a bad review then your name gets out there. ALL of them including the so called skeptic mags like The Audio Critic and $ensible $ound - these guys are just hocking the cheap crap on the market and saying it's no worse - big deal - RCA has to get some good reviews somewhere and rather than being good you can blast the rest with some gimmick test.

I have not heard Revel M20- Anyone got a set I can put em in my room and A/B them against my current set. Metal tweeter? Described to me by an owner as analytical? Are two things that I don't want as descriptors of a speaker - but you never know.

[theaudiohobby]

I noticed that you danced around my questions without providing any definite answers :eek: , But I will help you along.

First, I have not read anywhere where Paul Messenger has said that the Audio Note E is his reference speaker, Do you have information that suggest otherwise, At various times, he has quoted the JBL K2 and the JMLabs as part of his reference equipment, but even if he owns the Audio Note, it is listed as part of his 'hundred others' (http://stereophile.com/analogsourcereviews/200linn/index3.html) :D . Secondly, I see no evidence anywhere that points to the fact that the E/D is part of Hifi Choice reference equipment,they might have used as a reference speaker for some comparative tests in the past but, I have last three editions to hand, the E/D is not mentioned anywhere as part of their reference setup. As for your remarks about Stereophile, Dick Olsher mentions the E/Spe (http://stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/740/index2.html) as a 'loaner' speaker, his comments 10 years on are spot on and echo some of my comments about your sonic preferences and seeming preference for the OTO SE and the A21A. Also again I do not see any evidence, that the E/Spe is a reference speaker, though some of their reviewers may well own one and use for some listening tests.


Rumour that PQ started? But you can verify since you are in England - you just needed to take him up on his offer which was a meeting with B&W designers who are presently working at B&W - you could meet with them listen to what they have to say - then after the meeting make a call to B&W reception and get them on the phone to make sure they "really" work there.
Yes, a rumour that PQ started himself, Have a read (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=158887&highlight=bass+ Peter+Qvortrup+Peter+Qvortrup&session=).


You're afraid of what they WILL say because you have publically backed the 705 as a GREAT speaker.
I have never stated anywhere that the B&W 705 is a great speaker, however I maintain that it much better speaker than the Audio Note K in many areas. The 705 does not suffer the atrocious boxiness of the AN K, and to these ears at least the bass on the 705 is much more coherent even if it rolls off earlier, i.e. lean. I am yet to hear your arguments on why the use of Kevlar has adversely impacted the performance of the 705.

Yes I have read the entire article by Lynn..(SNIPPED - Off topic). And the article is so obvuiously talking about B&W kevlar since they're the first and biggest Kevlar supporter. Ashman showed you the measurements as well which you will never see from the likes of Stereophile.
You said that you have read Lynn Olsen articles in entirety, yet you did not make a single mention of any of his comments, but managed to say quote four paragraphs of unrelated material. How sweet :D , Secondly reread the thread on AA, John Ashman was unable to substantiate (http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_2/feature-interview-kevin-voecks-4-2004.html) his comments (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=179342&highlight=john+ashman+cdm&session=) with facts, neither were you, when I asked how the use of Kevlar adversely affected the design of the 705 vis a vis the CDM1NT, you drew a blank, how about revisiting that question?


And I was not totally upset when thinking of the 705 at Hi-fi Choice - They generally try and review speakers within a certain budget range - and most of the competitors use practically a "clone" design cabinet shape and implementation - something's gotta win. And just so you know the B&W's got Editor's choice but umm 4 stars for sound quality in the case of the 703 http://hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=2783 The Signature 805 got 4 stars for sound quality http://hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=2770

The AN E with the supposedly lower Recommended rating here and a best buy in it's current form but on sound hmm 5 stars http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=475. Of course they like the E better for sound quality it is so obviously a better sounding speaker - Editors like to pick their choice - Who's your daddy? B&W and the mighty big corporations are your daddy. Hell What Hi-fi Choice awarded the Roksan Integrated the Super test award winner over the Sugden A21a (but even they said the A21a on sound quality alone was the best soudning amplifier of the group. But the game is not ALL about sound quality. Read the more recent review of the AN E, it did not get top marks for sound quality even at it's price point. Your comments about the A21A are really no surprise to me, because the measurements of the A21A (http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=1933) and OTO SE are fairly similar, so it is no brainer that you like both of them. However, they gave the OTO SE four stars and the A21A five stars on sound quality which throws a spanner into your ratings logic. :D , there are other issues that explain this seeming discrepancy, but frankly it is a waste of time dwelling on them.


The Audio Hobby doesn't like Peter's Arrogant tone...I have never stated that PQ is arrogant, however I have put it to him that some of his statements are plainly false (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=hirez&n=160699&highlight=Peter+Qvortrup+substantiate&r=&session=) :( , of which he has had no comeback.

And in your reponse, try and stick to the points discussed. :D

[rajx7]

Yes, the VS speakers should indeed be timbre matched, so mixing the VS types of speakers would not be a problem.

Just for clarification, I was not trying to push you into buying the VR4jrs, especially as you clearly stated they were out of your price range... I just meant that there were *some* differences between the VR2s and the 4jrs. So hearing one speaker was not a "shoe in" that the other would be what you are looking for.

That said, I think if you went with the VR2s you would not be dissatisfied.

I recommend auditioning a whole bunch of high-end brands... that is half the fun of the purchase (the hunt). :-)

Cautious writer.... Who me? ;-)

---Dave

Hey Dave, I know that you were not pushing anything on me, just expressing you opinion. When I said that you were a cautious writer I was actually refering to the following line you had written earlier : "VR2 is a great speaker in its own right (at least to my ears)." If you had been reading earlier posts in this thread there is lot of hot debate going on and kind of whose speaker and ears are better. So when I read that, it kind of sounded funny. As if you were making it clear even before anyone can say anything, that it sounds great to your ears. Since I also loved Vr-4s I can trust your ears.:) So it shows that you have Tyle acoutics. Are they great speakers for the price they charge. What made you go for them and what all did you audition before you took them in.

By the way I totally agree the fun in the "hunt" part you had mentioned. It's the "process of achieving" is more entertaining than "achieving". That's the reason even when we have stuff which we like we are out here looking for more...isn't it wonder.. sadly but truly it never ends even if you think you have the best. I would love to go out and audition as much as possible but don't seem to have to many variety in my area. Recently came across another brand, LINN speakers. Heard of them?

Regards,
Raj

[drseid]

Hey Dave, I know that you were not pushing anything on me, just expressing you opinion. When I said that you were a cautious writer I was actually refering to the following line you had written earlier : "VR2 is a great speaker in its own right (at least to my ears)." If you had been reading earlier posts in this thread there is lot of hot debate going on and kind of whose speaker and ears are better. So when I read that, it kind of sounded funny. As if you were making it clear even before anyone can say anything, that it sounds great to your ears. Since I also loved Vr-4s I can trust your ears.:) So it shows that you have Tyle acoutics. Are they great speakers for the price they charge. What made you go for them and what all did you audition before you took them in.

By the way I totally agree the fun in the "hunt" part you had mentioned. It's the "process of achieving" is more entertaining than "achieving". That's the reason even when we have stuff which we like we are out here looking for more...isn't it wonder.. sadly but truly it never ends even if you think you have the best. I would love to go out and audition as much as possible but don't seem to have to many variety in my area. Recently came across another brand, LINN speakers. Heard of them?

Regards,
Raj

Well, obviously I am biased as I am an owner.... But I would argue that Tyler Acoustics offers some of the largest bang for the buck available in High-end audio.

My Linbrook Signature System speakers use Seas Excel drivers (very expensive) and Ty Lashbrook built them to order (as he does all of the Tyler speakers)... Mine came in a fabulous Rosewood finish. I picked them for their superior soundstaging, acuracy, overall slightly laid back tonal qualities (not to mention fabulous bass extension and resolution) and looks/build quality. Also, I had tried out the Tyler Taylo Reference monitors that are more in your price range first (so I had a good idea what the Tyler "sound" was like, before investing $4,500+ on a pair of built to order speakers). I loved the Taylos (that I bought used on Audiogon.com) so much that they now occupy the rear 3 channels in my sound system... I just could not part with them. Finally, I liked the fact that I was buying from a great guy who builds all of his speakers himself, and he is *very* down to earth. Just a little guy trying to make an honest living without being full of himself.

I did not mention Tyler previously because 1) they were not on your audition list, and 2) they are Internet direct, and it did not sound like that was a direction you would like to head in. I will say that now that Ty has a new addition to his web site where you can get the email of a local owner who has volunteered to let people listen to their various Tyler speakers, they might be worth a look if you are interested (I would argue they definitely are, of course). Ty Lashbrook's (Tyler's) web page is http://www.tyleracoustics.com just for reference.

Other speakers I listened to were the Legacy Audio Focus 20/20 (nice top to bottom sound, but a *bit* too bright for my taste), McIntosh XRT-28s (I *loved* these, but they are $18,200/pr. (too much for *my* price range ;-)) -- still I am glad I got a chance to hear them..., the Dali Helicon800s (which were unbelieveable performers in the just under $6000 price range (and they look *fabulous*), but not *quite* as good as the Tylers (for less money)), the Dali MS5s (I did not care for the sound or price ($12,400/pr. -- note: I listened to these right after the XRT-28s, so that may have had something to do with my displeasure)), and the Von Schweikert VR-4 Sig. Gen IIIs (very impressive, but again to not quite up to the Tylers).

I did hear the Linn Katans ($1000/pr.) just for kicks at one of the dealers, and I *loved* them. Quite frankly, for $1000/pr. new, I can't think of a speaker I would buy instead of them at that price. I did not get to hear any of Linn's larger speakers, as the dealer did not carry them. Sorry I can't be of more help there.

All of my auditions with the exception of the Tylers and the Linns were on all top-of-the-line McIntosh electronics. The Linns were on mid-level Linn electronics, and the Tylers were home demos on my own modest equipment listed below.

Hope that helps...

---Dave

[Jimmy C]

Well Stereophile is a bit weird to start with - the reviewers like everything but JA slams some of them with the graphs - but problem is good or bad graph - the product usually sounds good to the reivewers - so how valuable are those graphs? not very, because measuring 10 things leaves out the other 1000 they could be measuring but don't know how or don't have the equipment. (Actually the last page of the most recent UHF has Regkind discussing - in veiled discourse Stereophile measuring. The industry measures those things that puts their products in the best light). You won't see those nifty Kevlar measurements in Stereophile or Soundstage bevcause they are special interest guides --- glorified advertisments.

I have problems with ALL review publications - I have LESS of a problem with certain ones and certain reviewers - but magazines are magazines becuase they have stuff to review - and if you give a bad review then your name gets out there. ALL of them including the so called skeptic mags like The Audio Critic and $ensible $ound - these guys are just hocking the cheap crap on the market and saying it's no worse - big deal - RCA has to get some good reviews somewhere and rather than being good you can blast the rest with some gimmick test.

I have not heard Revel M20- Anyone got a set I can put em in my room and A/B them against my current set. Metal tweeter? Described to me by an owner as analytical? Are two things that I don't want as descriptors of a speaker - but you never know.

...yes, that is the best way to compare. When I wanted something better than my Paradigms, I listened in the stores, narrowed it down to my favorites and took them home. I knew what I liked and didn't like about the 60s, so I sorta used that as a reference. It's hard to find your favorites in ONE store, so...

The M20s "analytical"? Not sure... whoever says they're anaylitical might like certain colorations to give the illusion of smoothness or whatever... doesn't mean he's right, and there are too many variables to bother trying to nail down one description. I've heard them in 4 diff rooms, hundreds of recordings, different formats, etc. I would say they are the most honest to the source speaker I have heard. My 60s, for eg., tend to homogonize everything... the 20s will render things ars they are with an unusual amount of clarity. It's almost eerie at first.

Now take the 3A de Capos (didn't you have these? I know you're at least familiar with them). These struck me as having an upper bass/lower mid abberation. Once you get used to the Revels, it's easy to pick out things like cabinet colorations... and way later, S'Philes measurements confirmed my feelings. I would also say in comparison to the Refs, the M20 have deeper (but slightly fatter) bass and a more straightfoward, honest presentation. The de Capos are less software picky. Now, I'm not saying my speakers are the best, it's just that they have qualities that are important to me. I could easily have lived with the Refs.

The Dynaudio 1.3 (non-SE) were also nice, but didn't "do it" for me at the price.

I'm can't say my Revels will be my last speaker, but I haven't heard anything that would make me want to switch... even at twice the price. Maybe not the last, but I'll always keep them.

[RGA]

I noticed that you danced around my questions without providing any definite answers :eek: , But I will help you along.

First, I have not read anywhere where Paul Messenger has said that the Audio Note E is his reference speaker, Do you have information that suggest otherwise, At various times, he has quoted the JBL K2 and the JMLabs as part of his reference equipment, but even if he owns the Audio Note, it is listed as part of his 'hundred others' (http://stereophile.com/analogsourcereviews/200linn/index3.html) :D . Secondly, I see no evidence anywhere that points to the fact that the E/D is part of Hifi Choice reference equipment,they might have used as a reference speaker for some comparative tests in the past but, I have last three editions to hand, the E/D is not mentioned anywhere as part of their reference setup. As for your remarks about Stereophile, Dick Olsher mentions the E/Spe (http://stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/740/index2.html) as a 'loaner' speaker, his comments 10 years on are spot on and echo some of my comments about your sonic preferences and seeming preference for the OTO SE and the A21A. Also again I do not see any evidence, that the E/Spe is a reference speaker, though some of their reviewers may well own one and use for some listening tests.

Yes, a rumour that PQ started himself, Have a read (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=158887&highlight=bass+ Peter+Qvortrup+Peter+Qvortrup&session=).
I have never stated anywhere that the B&W 705 is a great speaker, however I maintain that it much better speaker than the Audio Note K in many areas. The 705 does not suffer the atrocious boxiness of the AN K, and to these ears at least the bass on the 705 is much more coherent even if it rolls off earlier, i.e. lean. I am yet to hear your arguments on why the use of Kevlar has adversely impacted the performance of the 705.

You said that you have read Lynn Olsen articles in entirety, yet you did not make a single mention of any of his comments, but managed to say quote four paragraphs of unrelated material. How sweet :D , Secondly reread the thread on AA, John Ashman was unable to substantiate (http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_2/feature-interview-kevin-voecks-4-2004.html) his comments (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=179342&highlight=john+ashman+cdm&session=) with facts, neither were you, when I asked how the use of Kevlar adversely affected the design of the 705 vis a vis the CDM1NT, you drew a blank, how about revisiting that question?

Read the more recent review of the AN E, it did not get top marks for sound quality even at it's price point. Your comments about the A21A are really no surprise to me, because the measurements of the A21A (http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=1933) and OTO SE are fairly similar, so it is no brainer that you like both of them. However, they gave the OTO SE four stars and the A21A five stars on sound quality which throws a spanner into your ratings logic. :D , there are other issues that explain this seeming discrepancy, but frankly it is a waste of time dwelling on them.

I have never stated that PQ is arrogant, however I have put it to him that some of his statements are plainly false (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=hirez&n=160699&highlight=Peter+Qvortrup+substantiate&r=&session=) :( , of which he has had no comeback.

And in your reponse, try and stick to the points discussed. :D

Send an e-mail to Lynn Olsen and ask him yourself what speaker he was referring to - B&W.

PQ already said he would back up his claim - take him up on it.

"Reviewed and Recommended way back in 1992, the Audio Note Type E has long been a favourite tool amongst Choice reviewers." Umm they use it to measure equipment - the opening lines of the thread I gave you. The E was used simalarly with Stereohile for measring amplifiers - you need a good measring accurate speaker in order to measure amplifiers with no?

You don;t see the forrest for the trees mate so i gorw weary - you don;t like the sound of Audio Note you prefer B&W fine. Ashman has already shown you the acoustic affects of the B&W woofers and Lynn Olson already says it in his article - you choose to ignore it that is fine by me. I bring up the other products because they are all voiced through Audio Note speakers - try thinking about that a little.

From Lynn
"At the present, though, even the best Kevlar, carbon-fiber, or aluminum
designs show at least one high-Q peak at the top of the working range,
requiring a sharp crossover, a notch filter, or preferably both to control
the peak. Unfortunately, this peak usually falls in a region between 3 and
5 kHz, right where the ear is most sensitive to resonant coloration."

B&W Corssover 4khz

"There are highly-reviewed (by the large-circulation "underground"
magazines) 2-way speakers that use 7" Kevlar drivers crossed over to
metal-dome tweeters. Technically, these loudspeakers operate with uniform
motion over the range of both drivers; in practice, though, the crossovers
are hard pressed to remove all of the energy from the Kevlar breakup region
between 3 and 5 kHz."

B&W Corssover 4khz.

"The reviews of these particular 2-way speakers go on at considerable, and
amusing, length about the trials in finding an amplifier that "revealed"
the full quality of the loudspeaker. In reality, the reviewer was forced to
use an amplifier that was particularly free of coloration in the region
where the Kevlar driver was breaking up. Since most audiophiles and
reviewers are unfamilar with the direct sound (and measurements) of
commonly-used raw drivers, they can't evaluate how much "Kevlar sound", or
"aluminum sound", remains as a residue in the finished design."

John Ashman did though by showing the measurements of the material itself and what do you know. Lynn was right. And incidentally what AN has been saying for decades.

"This is a problem, by the way, that plagues all current 2-way Kevlar,
metal, or carbon-fiber loudspeakers ... at the current state of the art,
the 6.5" or 7" drivers are forced to operate right up to the edge of their
working ranges in order to meet the tweeter in a moderate-distortion
frequency range."

Gee he goes even further here and which incorporates all B&W loudspeakers and any other maker using kevlar with drivers tof this size.

"If you lower the crossover frequency, tweeter IM distortion skyrockets,
resulting in raspy, distorted high frequencies at mid-to-high listening
levels; if you raise the crossover frequency, the Kevlar breakup creeps in,
resulting in a forward, aggressive sound at moderate listening levels, and
complete breakup at high levels (unlike paper cones, Kevlar, metal, and
carbon fibers do not go into gradual breakup)."

Which is why they don;t sound very cohesive - I personally don;t have a problem with this too much because i frankly prefer B&W to most speakers in the class - but that does not mean that I donl't notice the problems - they are audibly and clearly there.

"I should add, by the way, that I like Kevlar and carbon-fiber drivers very
much ... but they are difficult drivers to work with, with strong resonant
signatures that must be controlled acoustically and electrically."

Yes and I like B&W better than most of their peers in the price ranges -but they have issues.

"As mentioned above, rigid cones have advantages, but are difficult to damp
completely. A different approach is to use a cone material that is made
from a highly lossy material (traditionally, this was plastic-doped paper,
but this has been supplanted by polypropylene in most modern loudspeakers).
The cone then damps itself, progressively losing energy as the impulse from
the voice coil spreads outwards across the cone surface. The choice of
spider and surround are then much less critical.

This type of material typically measures quite flat and also allows a
simple 6dB/Octave crossover; personally, though, I don't care for the sound
of most polypropylene drivers, finding them rather vague and
blurry-sounding at low-to-medium listening levels. Without access to a B&K
swept IM distortion analyzer, I have to resort to guesswork, but I strongly
suspect that this type of cone has fairly high IM distortion since it is
quite soft. In addition, it is quite difficult to make a material that has
perfectly linear mechanical attenuation; in practice, distortion creeps in
when you actually want a progressive attenuation of energy over the surface
of the cone."

So we're not saved by polyprolyne either - which explains for me why I don't like most of these speakers at lower volume - actually it doesn't explain jack squat - it just means I kinda hear it the same way this fellow does - so what? He isn;t the last word in Audio neither am I and neither are you.

And back to Kevlar -

"A unique and quite desirable property of the latest Scan-Speak Kevlar
drivers is a smooth rolloff region above the usual Kevlar peak. All of the
other Kevlar drivers (that I have measured and listened to) have chaotic
breakup regions; the Scan-Speaks are the only ones that appear
well-controlled in this region..."

B&W does not use Scan-Speak (Note the part ALL OF THE OTHER).

And Lynn Olson is at enjoythemusic.com - where the editor of enjoythemusic Steven Rochlin also owns dozens of speakers - his reference is what> a 10 year old Audio Note J/SPX? And also the Ongaku(which he had to sell due to finances). I e-mailed Rochlin and just so you know the J is the spekaer he uses as the reference speaker at the online e-zine.

Mate I'm not saying AN is the BEST stuff - even though i may come across that way - what I'm saying is that it serves the music properly - that does not mean other stuff does not. I have been impressed with lots of very unlike gear - the Dynaudio Audience and PMC gear is almost the antitheses of the AN designs and I like them a helluva lot for a start.

Hi-fi choice is also considering price - the OTO is much more expensive than the A21a - and again the OTO loses points on power - it won;t sound good on most of the speakers out there - you cannot give it 5 stars for sound becuase it isn't going to sound like 5 stars on 95% of the speakers on the market. If I was the publisher I would not give it five stars for sound either. How could i recommend the OTO to someone using 705's Just isn't going to work very well except at low to average volume. Then that guy is going to yell at the magazine - I did notice that they recently had the OTO SE as an award amplifier in a contest they were running. But even doing that is not going to work without the right speakers. And with AN the right speakers is AN - they are first and formost a system approach - it needs to be in an all AN system --- which makes the company one of the most impractical on the market. You take a DAC and put it in another set-up and could get disastrous results - the amps well tubes are fussy to start with but SET's are even more of a pain in the rear.

It is simply this - I come off to you as someone who thinks AN is best and everyone else sucks - that's not my intention - you come off to me as someone who thinks everything that Audio Note makes sucks and that nobody would or should like anything they make - so we both go back and forth trying to name drop well so and so uses it - but it only got a best buy tag instead of a editor's choice tag? Well it got a rave review, but the guy noticed this flaw, so i take a speaker you like and say well they liked it but noticed this flaw, well they scored this product really high - but this newer one they liked more, well this reviewer kept the speaker, well he has other speakers too.

Hell I've done it again in this reply :rolleyes: Some people have taken me up on my advice went to soundhounds and listened for themselves. There is a fellow here who is going to get a speaker sent to him and he may hate them.

What I keep saying though is IF and I capitalized IF you are dissatisfied with the usual suspects then try another path - if you love the sound of the 705 and don't think the K is any good then there really isn't much to say - you hear it very differently than the way I'm hearing it.

[46minaudio]

Send an e-mail to Lynn Olsen and ask him yourself what speaker he was referring to - B&W.

PQ already said he would back up his claim - take him up on it.

"Reviewed and Recommended way back in 1992, the Audio Note Type E has long been a favourite tool amongst Choice reviewers." Umm they use it to measure equipment - the opening lines of the thread I gave you. The E was used simalarly with Stereohile for measring amplifiers - you need a good measring accurate speaker in order to measure amplifiers with no?

You don;t see the forrest for the trees mate so i gorw weary - you don;t like the sound of Audio Note you prefer B&W fine. Ashman has already shown you the acoustic affects of the B&W woofers and Lynn Olson already says it in his article - you choose to ignore it that is fine by me. I bring up the other products because they are all voiced through Audio Note speakers - try thinking about that a little.

From Lynn
"At the present, though, even the best Kevlar, carbon-fiber, or aluminum
designs show at least one high-Q peak at the top of the working range,
requiring a sharp crossover, a notch filter, or preferably both to control
the peak. Unfortunately, this peak usually falls in a region between 3 and
5 kHz, right where the ear is most sensitive to resonant coloration."

B&W Corssover 4khz

"There are highly-reviewed (by the large-circulation "underground"
magazines) 2-way speakers that use 7" Kevlar drivers crossed over to
metal-dome tweeters. Technically, these loudspeakers operate with uniform
motion over the range of both drivers; in practice, though, the crossovers
are hard pressed to remove all of the energy from the Kevlar breakup region
between 3 and 5 kHz."

B&W Corssover 4khz.

"The reviews of these particular 2-way speakers go on at considerable, and
amusing, length about the trials in finding an amplifier that "revealed"
the full quality of the loudspeaker. In reality, the reviewer was forced to
use an amplifier that was particularly free of coloration in the region
where the Kevlar driver was breaking up. Since most audiophiles and
reviewers are unfamilar with the direct sound (and measurements) of
commonly-used raw drivers, they can't evaluate how much "Kevlar sound", or
"aluminum sound", remains as a residue in the finished design."

John Ashman did though by showing the measurements of the material itself and what do you know. Lynn was right. And incidentally what AN has been saying for decades.

"This is a problem, by the way, that plagues all current 2-way Kevlar,
metal, or carbon-fiber loudspeakers ... at the current state of the art,
the 6.5" or 7" drivers are forced to operate right up to the edge of their
working ranges in order to meet the tweeter in a moderate-distortion
frequency range."

Gee he goes even further here and which incorporates all B&W loudspeakers and any other maker using kevlar with drivers tof this size.

"If you lower the crossover frequency, tweeter IM distortion skyrockets,
resulting in raspy, distorted high frequencies at mid-to-high listening
levels; if you raise the crossover frequency, the Kevlar breakup creeps in,
resulting in a forward, aggressive sound at moderate listening levels, and
complete breakup at high levels (unlike paper cones, Kevlar, metal, and
carbon fibers do not go into gradual breakup)."

Which is why they don;t sound very cohesive - I personally don;t have a problem with this too much because i frankly prefer B&W to most speakers in the class - but that does not mean that I donl't notice the problems - they are audibly and clearly there.

"I should add, by the way, that I like Kevlar and carbon-fiber drivers very
much ... but they are difficult drivers to work with, with strong resonant
signatures that must be controlled acoustically and electrically."

Yes and I like B&W better than most of their peers in the price ranges -but they have issues.

"As mentioned above, rigid cones have advantages, but are difficult to damp
completely. A different approach is to use a cone material that is made
from a highly lossy material (traditionally, this was plastic-doped paper,
but this has been supplanted by polypropylene in most modern loudspeakers).
The cone then damps itself, progressively losing energy as the impulse from
the voice coil spreads outwards across the cone surface. The choice of
spider and surround are then much less critical.

This type of material typically measures quite flat and also allows a
simple 6dB/Octave crossover; personally, though, I don't care for the sound
of most polypropylene drivers, finding them rather vague and
blurry-sounding at low-to-medium listening levels. Without access to a B&K
swept IM distortion analyzer, I have to resort to guesswork, but I strongly
suspect that this type of cone has fairly high IM distortion since it is
quite soft. In addition, it is quite difficult to make a material that has
perfectly linear mechanical attenuation; in practice, distortion creeps in
when you actually want a progressive attenuation of energy over the surface
of the cone."

So we're not saved by polyprolyne either - which explains for me why I don't like most of these speakers at lower volume - actually it doesn't explain jack squat - it just means I kinda hear it the same way this fellow does - so what? He isn;t the last word in Audio neither am I and neither are you.

And back to Kevlar -

"A unique and quite desirable property of the latest Scan-Speak Kevlar
drivers is a smooth rolloff region above the usual Kevlar peak. All of the
other Kevlar drivers (that I have measured and listened to) have chaotic
breakup regions; the Scan-Speaks are the only ones that appear
well-controlled in this region..."

B&W does not use Scan-Speak (Note the part ALL OF THE OTHER).

And Lynn Olson is at enjoythemusic.com - where the editor of enjoythemusic Steven Rochlin also owns dozens of speakers - his reference is what> a 10 year old Audio Note J/SPX? And also the Ongaku(which he had to sell due to finances). I e-mailed Rochlin and just so you know the J is the spekaer he uses as the reference speaker at the online e-zine.

Mate I'm not saying AN is the BEST stuff - even though i may come across that way - what I'm saying is that it serves the music properly - that does not mean other stuff does not. I have been impressed with lots of very unlike gear - the Dynaudio Audience and PMC gear is almost the antitheses of the AN designs and I like them a helluva lot for a start.

Hi-fi choice is also considering price - the OTO is much more expensive than the A21a - and again the OTO loses points on power - it won;t sound good on most of the speakers out there - you cannot give it 5 stars for sound becuase it isn't going to sound like 5 stars on 95% of the speakers on the market. If I was the publisher I would not give it five stars for sound either. How could i recommend the OTO to someone using 705's Just isn't going to work very well except at low to average volume. Then that guy is going to yell at the magazine - I did notice that they recently had the OTO SE as an award amplifier in a contest they were running. But even doing that is not going to work without the right speakers. And with AN the right speakers is AN - they are first and formost a system approach - it needs to be in an all AN system --- which makes the company one of the most impractical on the market. You take a DAC and put it in another set-up and could get disastrous results - the amps well tubes are fussy to start with but SET's are even more of a pain in the rear.

It is simply this - I come off to you as someone who thinks AN is best and everyone else sucks - that's not my intention - you come off to me as someone who thinks everything that Audio Note makes sucks and that nobody would or should like anything they make - so we both go back and forth trying to name drop well so and so uses it - but it only got a best buy tag instead of a editor's choice tag? Well it got a rave review, but the guy noticed this flaw, so i take a speaker you like and say well they liked it but noticed this flaw, well they scored this product really high - but this newer one they liked more, well this reviewer kept the speaker, well he has other speakers too.

Hell I've done it again in this reply :rolleyes: Some people have taken me up on my advice went to soundhounds and listened for themselves. There is a fellow here who is going to get a speaker sent to him and he may hate them.

What I keep saying though is IF and I capitalized IF you are dissatisfied with the usual suspects then try another path - if you love the sound of the 705 and don't think the K is any good then there really isn't much to say - you hear it very differently than the way I'm hearing it.
Here again RGA the AN SHILL fails to produce facts.The only reviews that are worth a ****( RGA APPROVED) are the ones that back his opinion...SHILLLLLL

[rajx7]

Well, obviously I am biased as I am an owner.... But I would argue that Tyler Acoustics offers some of the largest bang for the buck available in High-end audio.

My Linbrook Signature System speakers use Seas Excel drivers (very expensive) and Ty Lashbrook built them to order (as he does all of the Tyler speakers)... Mine came in a fabulous Rosewood finish. I picked them for their superior soundstaging, acuracy, overall slightly laid back tonal qualities (not to mention fabulous bass extension and resolution) and looks/build quality. Also, I had tried out the Tyler Taylo Reference monitors that are more in your price range first (so I had a good idea what the Tyler "sound" was like, before investing $4,500+ on a pair of built to order speakers). I loved the Taylos (that I bought used on Audiogon.com) so much that they now occupy the rear 3 channels in my sound system... I just could not part with them. Finally, I liked the fact that I was buying from a great guy who builds all of his speakers himself, and he is *very* down to earth. Just a little guy trying to make an honest living without being full of himself.

I did not mention Tyler previously because 1) they were not on your audition list, and 2) they are Internet direct, and it did not sound like that was a direction you would like to head in. I will say that now that Ty has a new addition to his web site where you can get the email of a local owner who has volunteered to let people listen to their various Tyler speakers, they might be worth a look if you are interested (I would argue they definitely are, of course). Ty Lashbrook's (Tyler's) web page is http://www.tyleracoustics.com just for reference.

Other speakers I listened to were the Legacy Audio Focus 20/20 (nice top to bottom sound, but a *bit* too bright for my taste), McIntosh XRT-28s (I *loved* these, but they are $18,200/pr. (too much for *my* price range ;-)) -- still I am glad I got a chance to hear them..., the Dali Helicon800s (which were unbelieveable performers in the just under $6000 price range (and they look *fabulous*), but not *quite* as good as the Tylers (for less money)), the Dali MS5s (I did not care for the sound or price ($12,400/pr. -- note: I listened to these right after the XRT-28s, so that may have had something to do with my displeasure)), and the Von Schweikert VR-4 Sig. Gen IIIs (very impressive, but again to not quite up to the Tylers).

I did hear the Linn Katans ($1000/pr.) just for kicks at one of the dealers, and I *loved* them. Quite frankly, for $1000/pr. new, I can't think of a speaker I would buy instead of them at that price. I did not get to hear any of Linn's larger speakers, as the dealer did not carry them. Sorry I can't be of more help there.

All of my auditions with the exception of the Tylers and the Linns were on all top-of-the-line McIntosh electronics. The Linns were on mid-level Linn electronics, and the Tylers were home demos on my own modest equipment listed below.

Hope that helps...

---Dave

Thanks again dude. This is what I would like to see when I come here for opinions and hear people's experiences, I expect to see that and thanks to you for just doing that. I have found a dealer here who carries LINN speakers. I think I will hear them. Tell me one thing have acoutically treated your room. That is another big research, I have been doing simultaneously. I found a dealer who carry the Knauf compressed fiber glass tubes. I plan to make some Bass traps this holiday season and experiment them.

[RGA]

46minaudio

Shill = "One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle."

Please explain your position and your proof. I did not write the reviews, and I didn't buy the reivewers those speakers, nor do I sell equipment or profit from Audio Note, or the other companies' products I recommend in any way. In fact the only crime here that has been comitted is by you - it's called

Slander = "Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation."

:rolleyes:

Why I bother to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent :confused:

[drseid]

Tell me one thing have acoutically treated your room.

I confess I have not. My room is medium sized, and it is not too problematic (no tremendous bass or reflection issues). I am sure acoustic treatments would be helpful regardless, but room space to put all the treatments in comes into play.

---Dave

[theaudiohobby]

RGA,

ROTFL :D :D , it been a while that I have read a response so weak on facts as your last post, to top it all, you then ask me to go and do the legwork to back your controversial claims :confused: :) . Amazing logic! You come off as someone trying make 2 + 2 come to 5, there is no need for a detailed reply since you did not provide a single fact to back up any of your claims. That said, I do not think that all Audio Note products suck, some do ;) ,many are very ugly ;) as you very readily accept. However, the negative marketing campaign and blatantly false claims (about competitor's products) put out by Audio Note and some of it fans is rather irksome: :( .

[RGA]

Actually I answered mostly all of your questions - more to the point Lynn Olsen and Hi-fi Choice answered them.

[RGA]

Hi Guys,
I just had the oppurtunity to listen to Paradigm Studio 100s and was quite impressed. I just wanted to know if anyone had the chance to listen to these and Axiom M80s. If yes, how do they compare with each other. If Axiom sounds as good as the Paradigms or little better, I would prefer to go for them, as there is a good difference in the dollar amount. I would really appreciate your insights.
Regards,
R

I'd like to opologise for being one of many to get this thread of topic. Is this the Studio 100V2 or V3. If the former I would probably buy it if you can get a deal - if the latter I would take the chance on Axiom - you can always ship it back if you don't like it.

Also if it has not already been said you could and probably should explore the used market - you'd be surprised at the deals you can get at high end dealerships on used speakers - speakers are generlaly cheap to repair minor damage as well. I have seen $5,000.00 spekaer after 2-3 years going for about $2k - I recently(2 years ago) saw a Bryston 3B ST going for $600.00Cdn asking.

A slightly cheaper option might also be the B&W 604S3, Energy C9, Klipsh RF series, etc.

[theaudiohobby]

Actually I answered mostly all of your questions - more to the point Lynn Olsen and Hi-fi Choice answered them.

Really... :confused: color me blue :p , talk about a cop out :( , where are the facts to back up your assertions :confused: I thought you were link happy a few posts ago, you are certainly stuck in dogma and self-delusion alley ;).

[RGA]

Thread number 49 - all those little things in quotes - Lynn Olsen and Hi-fi choice's words direct quotes from them - I'm sorry you don;t comprehend - you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.

[theaudiohobby]

Thread number 49 - all those little things in quotes - Lynn Olsen and Hi-fi choice's words direct quotes from them - I'm sorry you don;t comprehend - you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.

The emperor has realised that he is wearing no cloths.;) :p

[46minaudio]

The emperor has realised that he is wearing no cloths.;) :p
YEP you have discovered RGA .... This has been going on for years now..It used to be decapos...Now his new flavor is AN..Of course there is nothing better(if you listen to RGAS shill bullsh&t)...Everyone should take this shill with a hugh grain of salt....

[RGA]

You know it's funny - a shill is a person selling a lie - so if it is true then wow there are a lot of liars and shills under their control. Reference 3a? Well I was talking about them BEFORE they started getting rave reviews every place under the sun. It's still a terrific speaker - but when you hear something even better - then so be it. Of course people were raving about AN 2 decades before I ever heard of them so they hardly need me.

Why I bother. Good luck with that.