• 02-21-2004, 10:06 AM
    metal tweeter on paradigm 60 v2 or v3
    which has a brighter sounding tweeter the paradigm studio or the b&w tweeter. Is the paradigm a little mellow due to the cloth suspension in the tweeter?
  • 02-21-2004, 12:26 PM
    Which B&W?

    B&W uses a inverted horn which is an attempt to reduce ringing...the idea being tht the the length and slope will take the ringing away and damp it down. How successful thta is depend on you. I think the CDM and NT range is quite succesful for a metal tweeter...I would personally prefer a speaker, if cost and home theater is not so much an issue, to buy speakers that don't create a problem in the first place and then have to fix it later. Of course Paradigm does the exact same thing in their system. Both don't particularly integrate their metal drivers seamllessly with their woofers and in my opinion if home theater pyrotechnics were not the goal there is no value in a metal tweeter over a sild or other soft dome which have better to the ear break-ups...and contrary to popular belief extend every bit as far - buit it costs more and that reduces profits.

    B&W's tweeter in the CDM 1 and NT series are not bright but because in some rooms there is an upper midrange suckout you can hear the handoff between drivers...as a result your ear focuses on the woofer and tweeter independantly of each other - some rooms this doesn't happen though nealry as bad.

    The Paradigm Studio V2 line lays back on the tweeter but many high notes on cymbals are smeared and overly excited to a spitty sound. Typically the speakers sound dry an unengaging with plentiful bass but less than good dynamics in the midband. The V3 supposedly offers a smoother treble but less bass.

    You may want to look at the Dynaudio Audience 52SE which oddly seems to be a blend of these two's better halves.

    By the way for the money both B&W's CDM and Paradigm's Studio series offer good value and are certainly better than the vast majority of speakers in the price range. If it sounds like i'm picking on them i'm not really it's just that most people never ever talk about a speaker's weaknesses - they all have them. I would take the CDM 1NT despite the flaws over the comparable V2 from Paradigm...both lines have upgraded - who did a better job? Don't know yet.
  • 02-23-2004, 02:42 PM
    Jimmy C
    Me thinks...
    ...either the B&W OR the Paradigm can sound sound less than stellar at times. The Studio 60s (either iteration) is a cooler, drier sounding speaker, while the (for eg.) 600 series has a slightly elevated midband, rendering it a bit cozier-sounding with poor to average software. Not a bad thing at times.

    The v3 is definitely an improvement (in most areas) over the v2 60s (which I have). I chose the Studio over the 600 series, and probably still would - v3 vs. S3. The type of music one listens to in conjunction with room acoustics would probably have a larger impact on the final sound than which decent speaker you chose - there's too many variables to make any blanket statements. If possible, demo at home (I know, I know... it's tough)

    I have personally never had any major problems with the 60s when one factors in the price. Any speaker can sound harsh, strident, and congested at moderate volume levels if the room, or whatever isn't just right. This also happened to me with RGAs old fave, the Ref de Capos. At moderate to loud levels (more on the "loud" side), this speaker fell apart for me. It became grainy, blah, blah... just didn't sound so good. Like RGA, I must also point out I'm being relatively critical, and don't get me wrong, the de Capo is a fantastic stand-mount speaker. If, on some stupid hypothetical scale... the de Caps fell apart at volume 8 (out of ten), the Studio 60s would become congested at 6 - SOMETHING like that. My point is neither are super head-bangers, both good to very good at their respective price points and value.

    Wow... I'm rambling... OK, the weaknesses of the 60s:

    1) Not the best choice for R&R (IMO) - can sound thin and harsh with crappy recordings.

    2) "Lumpy" sounding at times. Can't really describe it, but sometimes feels disjointed. Might be slight box resonances (might not, also) This is not a major concern AFAIC. Doesn't happen all the time.

    3) Crappy binding posts - doesn't affect performance, simply the P.I.T.A. value.

    4) Heavy, hard to move around.

    OK, so the good?:

    1) Fairly neutral, will render an instrument somewhat like it is supposed to sound - I have a Sciubba/Forcione duet... you can hear the "woodiness" of his guitar, and she sounds pretty damn convincing, like she might be in YOUR livingroom. Not the best I have heard, but pretty damn good considering cost.

    2) Soundstaging ability - instruments are well represented in size, placement, and scale. Again, certainly not the best I have heard, but satisfying.

    Overall, a good speaker when the going is good. You can easily but a rosier-tinted performance, but these fail to move me in the end - this is NOT a knock on the B&Ws, as I would say listen to them as much as possible.

    Damn... I hafta pay some bills and start the sauce... good luck with the quest!

    Hope some of my inane rambling actually helps :^P
  • 02-23-2004, 08:39 PM
    Jimmy part of what you found with the De Capo is also what I found in my final auditions with them which is why I went another route that didn't have these issues. The De Capo's tended to compress a little more at level and the new series or (i) version was harder than the prior model at level - minor quibbles. Also the depth of soundstage while extremely engaging and inviting I started to wonder a bit because it was always there. I still greatly like the speaker - it's my number 2 -- but it certainly has more personality than some and you have to buy into what it's doing - if you do it's audio Nirvana if not it's going to feel like something isn't on the up and up.

    In the end I went another route that didn't exhibit any of these issues...they have their own set of trade-offs that IMV were and are much subtler.
  • 02-24-2004, 03:23 AM
    Jimmy C
    Also kinda funny...
    ...what you found to be the de Capos best attributes are different than my list. I remember you speaking of their smoothness, bass, and dynamics, but I don't believe you ever used to mention the way the speaker puts up a virtual soundstage. This was my favorite aspect of the speaker - the band was IN FRONT of you, size propery represented. I remember hearing the White Stripes "Elephant" kick drum... very, very real.

    They definitely didn't seem bright to me, but I never felt them to be overly smooth - I can think of speakers that have a more velvety, soft top end. The Refs are probably more realistic in this regard. You're not supposed to hear excessive ringing, BUT cymbals ARE supposed to have a visceral impact upon a crash. The de Capos are very good in this regard.

    They are indeed very dynamic, but I was expecting a bit more bass given an 8" woofer. In all fairness, the room was large... bass would probably have been heavier in a normal sized listening environment.

    And yes, very coherent.

    All in all, a great stand-mount. Better value (IMO) than many other $2K (slightly over) speakers.