Paradigm 20: any good?

[Jochem]

Hi,

Two days ago I bought a pair of Paradigm Studio 20's, after three rounds of listening at my local dealers listeningroom. Compared them with two B&W 603's and Chario Premium, and some large floorstanders.
At the store, the Paradigms seemed to excell at all fronts. I tried it with a NAD amplifier - a more expensive one than I have at home (312). I bought them for 850 euro's.

Listening for two days now, with my old Sony CD-player (CDP 950), they are detailed, but rather sharp. Winds (espc. brasss) do fine, as do drums (cymbals!). Strings (ie string quartet) seem agressive in the high registers, sometimes sort of distorted at ff passages (also depending on how loud I play of course!).

So I read a lot about 'breaking-in' the Paradigms, which seems to take some while. Others (see reviews on audioreview) have the same experience as I have.. But still I'm worried of course.

I see a few possibilities:

A. 'Breaking in' solves the problem (but does breaking in also counts for tweeters?)
B. I should buy another, more mellow amplifier
C. I have bad interconnects (they're not THAT expensive.. however not worthless I think)
D. My room is too small (I listen to them at a distance of aprox 2 meters)
E. At the store, I was only thinking I that I like the 'direct approach' of these speakers..



Can somebody say something wise about this problem?




Regards,

Jochem
Utrecht, Holland

---
Paradigm Studio 20 v3
NAD 312
Sony CDP-950
interconnects/cables: unknown

[cam]

Hi,

Two days ago I bought a pair of Paradigm Studio 20's, after three rounds of listening at my local dealers listeningroom. Compared them with two B&W 603's and Chario Premium, and some large floorstanders.
At the store, the Paradigms seemed to excell at all fronts. I tried it with a NAD amplifier - a more expensive one than I have at home (312). I bought them for 850 euro's.

Listening for two days now, with my old Sony CD-player (CDP 950), they are detailed, but rather sharp. Winds (espc. brasss) do fine, as do drums (cymbals!). Strings (ie string quartet) seem agressive in the high registers, sometimes sort of distorted at ff passages (also depending on how loud I play of course!).

So I read a lot about 'breaking-in' the Paradigms, which seems to take some while. Others (see reviews on audioreview) have the same experience as I have.. But still I'm worried of course.

I see a few possibilities:

A. 'Breaking in' solves the problem (but does breaking in also counts for tweeters?)
B. I should buy another, more mellow amplifier
C. I have bad interconnects (they're not THAT expensive.. however not worthless I think)
D. My room is too small (I listen to them at a distance of aprox 2 meters)
E. At the store, I was only thinking I that I like the 'direct approach' of these speakers..



Can somebody say something wise about this problem?




Regards,

Jochem
Utrecht, Holland

---
Paradigm Studio 20 v3
NAD 312
Sony CDP-950
interconnects/cables: unknown

Alot of people speak very highly of the 20's. As far as break-in, some people swear by it and some say it is a myth. Me, I'm somewhere in the middle. I have had the performance line and the monitor line and I have to say that I heard absolutly no difference in the way the tweeter sounded out of the box or 50 hours later. Maybe my hearing is just noy able to pick up any sound change but definetly, wholeheartedly I was able to hear a difference, a big difference in the woofer after 10 hours. Definetely your speaker from top to bottom will sound better with an amp upgrade.

[Wireworm5]

Just my .02 cents.
I have all Paradigm speakers cept for a pair of B&W 601. It's my experience that Paradigm speakers will reveal flaws in the other components (if they sound like crap,its not the speakers). However you may also not like metal tweeters as they may be what's giving you a harsh sound. But I find the treble in the Paradigms to be smoother than my 601's, but I like the edge the 601's add to rock guitar music. Its really a matter of taste.
Mp3's can also sound harsh and the liveliness of your room is a factor.

[RGA]

You're going to hear a lot about break in - largely though it is a matter of YOU getting used to the sound of the speaker. If you do great if not then they're going to annoy you. I was not a fan of the 20V2 - and while some of them I can see as good value for the money - I personally overall don't like the sound of most Paradigm speakers because I don't like the treble response. And I use generally the best gear available to listen to them with. I had good luck with my Sugden because Sugden tends to have a rather smooth valve like sound - which doesn't mean rolled-off.

Listen, it doesn't matter what I think of them or anyone else including revviewers - most every speaker or product gets good reviewers - but most stuff I frankly don't like. If I were a reviewer whether it be speaker reviewing or movie reviewing - you review to what you think people will like. I may hate horror movies(I don't I love them) but let's say I hated the genre I would still be able to say well Halloween does a better job than others for what it's doing so I give it a thumbs up because it's good for the genre - even though i personally would never want to watch it again.

This is speaker reviewing - I can recognize that given the money the Studio 20 offers great build and does some technical pyrotechnics very well - like imaging - reasonable bass etc - I even gave the Studio 100 an 8/10 and said lots of good things - but in the end I would not want to own those speakers for day to listening to music. To me these products are nice home theater/rockers with good build a reasonable price good reputation nice looks and have a tight punchy sound. Not much else you can ask for.

Except if it's my money I wouldn't get them. I'm leary on blaming other gear here as well - NAD is good, most recordings are not bright or tizzy - at least not mine. For the same money why not try Quad or Dynaudio.

[Jimmy C]

...yeah, I think they are a pretty good speaker - not sure if they would be my first choice in the price range, but they should serve you well.

Firstly, is your room overly reflective while the showroom might have had more sound-absorbing qualities? IMO, the room/speaker combo will have the most profound effect on sound. Next, are you listening to the same CDs? After room/speaker synergy, recording quality can have a huge effect.

I have a pair of Studio 60s, and there were changes in sound quality after some running in. At first, I thought I made a huge mistake... they barely sounded better than the Titans they replaced. Now there is no comparison... they are fairly warm and, as a matter of fact, on the dark, distant side. BUT - they won't put a bad disc into a favorable light.

Speaking of "break-in"... last week, a friend of mine bought a pair of Titans for his sister's new house. Well, I was somewhat excited - lemme borrow them to see if they sound any different than my 6 year-old pair (albeit not really used in 5 yrs). I A/Bd them using my Denon, and yes, there was indeed a difference... the new pair seemed constipated by comparison. Let you new 20s loosen up for a while unless there is a refund time limit - in the end, you may NOT like 'em.

Ironically, the Titans were the only speakers that I DIDN'T notice a difference during "break-in".

I wouldn't worry about wires too much, and I wouldn't buy a different amp for speakers you don't really like (IF that ends up being the case)

Good luck...

[Woochifer]

IMO, those Studio 20 v.3 models are excellent speakers at that price point. Easily one of the most versatile performers I've heard with some of the best imaging I've ever heard for a conventional box speaker. And a clear cut improvement over the Studio 40/CC/20 v.2 speakers that I currently use in my surround setup.

All three Studio series purchases I've made for my 5.1 setup needed a little bit of playing time before the sound settled in. In all three cases, they sounded somewhat harsher right out of the box than they did after a little bit of normal playing. The Studio 40s that I have I directly compared to a pair of demo models, and after a few hours of playing I couldn't tell the difference. Personally, I think break in is an overblown topic because there's no right or wrong way to do it, it just happens. If you still think something's up, try borrowing the demo models from your dealer and do a direct comparison. If you can do a blind test and pick out the demo model over the ones you're using then you need to play the speaker for more time or they might be defective.

If you've already done a few hours of playing, I suspect that the bigger factors at work are the speaker positioning and your room acoustics. As someone else mentioned, if you have a live sounding room with lots of reflective surfaces, then it will likely sound harsh. You can tame that by adding rugs or changing the furniture around, adding sound absorbing panels, or moving a bookshelf to the sidewalls or backwall to breakup the primary reflections. Changing the toe-in angle will also affect how much high end your ears pick up.

Interconnects only matter if you're picking up interference and need better shielding. Focusing on those other factors should help a lot more.

[Jochem]

thanks for all the advice, guys.
Jochem

I'm beginning to like them some more... expecially jazz does well
now I'm only waiting for the strings to melt

[Pat D]

Hi,

Two days ago I bought a pair of Paradigm Studio 20's, after three rounds of listening at my local dealers listeningroom. Compared them with two B&W 603's and Chario Premium, and some large floorstanders.
At the store, the Paradigms seemed to excell at all fronts. I tried it with a NAD amplifier - a more expensive one than I have at home (312). I bought them for 850 euro's.

Listening for two days now, with my old Sony CD-player (CDP 950), they are detailed, but rather sharp. Winds (espc. brasss) do fine, as do drums (cymbals!). Strings (ie string quartet) seem agressive in the high registers, sometimes sort of distorted at ff passages (also depending on how loud I play of course!).

So I read a lot about 'breaking-in' the Paradigms, which seems to take some while. Others (see reviews on audioreview) have the same experience as I have.. But still I'm worried of course.

I see a few possibilities:

A. 'Breaking in' solves the problem (but does breaking in also counts for tweeters?)
B. I should buy another, more mellow amplifier
C. I have bad interconnects (they're not THAT expensive.. however not worthless I think)
D. My room is too small (I listen to them at a distance of aprox 2 meters)
E. At the store, I was only thinking I that I like the 'direct approach' of these speakers..



Can somebody say something wise about this problem?




Regards,

Jochem
Utrecht, Holland

---
Paradigm Studio 20 v3
NAD 312
Sony CDP-950
interconnects/cables: unknown

Well, that two meter distance would lead me to look at option D. A, B, and C are not related to the problem. E is a possibility as well, but I presume you did like the speakers in the store. However, it is always a good idea to audition speakers at home to see if you can get them to sound good there.

The high frequencies are absorbed by air, and so this is distance related. Probably more important is the ratio of direct to reflected sound. Anyway, facing the speaker straight ahead may help, although Paradigm Reference Series speakers have quite wide dispersion, but this may significantly change the amount of direct sound reaching your listening position.

Anyway, if that or other placement options don't fix the problem, we are left with option E, that the speakers aren't really what you want. My PSB Stratus Minis sound pretty good close up. They are more expensive and significantly harder to drive, although in a small room--especially with a NAD amplifier--that should be no problem.

You may also be playing the new speakers louder than normal, and that may affect the perceived balance as the ear is most sensitive in the upper midrange.

Another possibility are the recordings themselves. Maybe the agressive sound is on the recordings. Of course, what recordings you like and how much is going to vary depending on which speakers you are listening to.

[Jochem]

Of course, what recordings you like and how much is going to vary depending on which speakers you are listening to.

yes! I'm afraid I have te re-evaluate my collection
some jazz they do wonderful
some classical cd's that I thought were good recordings, suddenly show flaws
some songs of Queensryche, which I liked on my old B&W DM110i's, sound pretty awful

[anamorphic96]

It think what your noticing is how bad most music is recorded. I found this out when I purchased my Studio 40's. I used the Mini Monitors previously. What I began to notice was how much the sound just opened up. With that openess comes more detail and resolution. this. The old BW's where just not capable of this kind of detail. Dont get me wrong I love BW products but its just technology. Take the same level of BW speaker from its current line and you will notice the same thing.

On the flip side when something is recorded extremely well its a very rewarding experience. My speakers still give me goose bumps. Now if I can only get them to work better in my new apt. GRR

glenn

[RGA]

Of course, what recordings you like and how much is going to vary depending on which speakers you are listening to.

yes! I'm afraid I have te re-evaluate my collection
some jazz they do wonderful
some classical cd's that I thought were good recordings, suddenly show flaws
some songs of Queensryche, which I liked on my old B&W DM110i's, sound pretty awful

Actually I find most music is recorded quite well - which doesn't mean they're anywhere near as good as excellent recordings - a lot of speakers make a lot of recordings sound bad when the recording is perfectly fine. When it sounds bad the recroding is automatically blamed and the speaker is said to be revealing fo flaws in the disc or in the upstream equipment - I used to believe this exact same thing - but a funny thing happened at the audio shop one day. For this theory to hold water then it would imply that the more "revelaling" speaker would or should also bring out the best in the best recordings - and if a speaker that doesn't make a given recording sound horrible then it must be deemed as "forgiving" or rolled off in the highs and or lows. The problem with that is that it would also ruin really well recorded albums bringing them down a few pegs making it worse than the revealing speaker.

I have very well recorded albums like Leahy: Lakefield which is a busy disc of Fiddle dance music from Eastern Canada. This album has been brutal on most speakers. A recording I thought of as terrible was Amanda Marshal's first album - not so - it is a very well reocrded album. One review magazine gave Dianna Krall's latest cd an average recordiing rating - not so it is very well recorded front to back - miced a bit back. Most recordings are average to better - few are bad that I own. I am very leary on buying a speaker that would turn 80% of my music into unlistenable dregs and force me to only be able to listen to Patricia Barber's Cafe Blue - which isn't as well recorded as some think.

This has zero to do with your speakers but the notion that when music sounds lousy right away the recording is blamed. I personally would rather own a stereo system that i can listen to any disc in my collection and show off to other people ANY disc in my collection without fear that I need to only select discs or tracks that sound right. Chances are if this is what you're doing the blame is hardly all of those recording engineers incompetance and deafness. This isn't to say some sound thin or bright - but I have a number of discs that will separate the boys from the men - Leahy is a decent one - Amanda Marchal's is another where the sound is thin and brittle - Jesse Cook's Tempest or almost anything of the unamoplified acoustic instrument variety - classical music - older recordings sound honky or blaring on bad speakers/systems or thin. Then on what are considered good recordings the speakers usually perform a lot better - but then the speaker which supposedly softens up the bad recoprding seem to also wow the hell out of you on those considered good recordings.

Speaker positioning is huge in order to fix up the sound of a speaker - and amplification/source have to be at least respectable - and a good match - as is your taste - but mate DO NOT change your taste in music(how can you) to suit the speaker. This makes no sense - you're basically then buying gear for the gear's sake and not to serve the music YOU LOVE. This IMO is not the point of a stereo system - the point of a stereo system is to make the music you already love brought up a level so that you love it even more. Even if that means buying a speaker with more personality or even one with a midbass hump. A lot of the 70's rock discs I have (I don't have a lot truthfully) tend to sound a bit thin so the last speaker I would want is one that is a bit thin sounding - If this was a big part of what I played i would want a speaker that is a bit fatter or even resembling the west coast sound - I would sacrifice the currnt notion of accuracy and take a little splash of tubby so that that those recording sound more rich - like buying a Starbaucks Bold Sumatra versus Folgers breakfast Light. Or a thick Port versus a dry Red. The B&W's of old like the Matrix series had much to be desired and B&W threw some of that GOOD away when they made the Nautilus series. Yes the Nautilus has improved some technical areas - but they threw out some of the musical value they had gotten right and now the Nautilus while a technically very good speaker - sounds technical or artifical. It's tough to place as to what exactly isn't up to snuff. Still a great line mind you - but IMO not an improvement musically.

Do not feel like you have to keep them - most any dealer will take them back and let you move to a competitor they carry - To me there is a difference between a bright speaker and one that is extended. If I notice detail as detail I get nervous about it's ability to realistically get the content off the disc without adding artifacts. The fact that my ear is even drawn to the tweeter as a separate entity bothers me most of the time. Allow them no more than 10 hours to "break in" - after that 2-3days and after trying different positionings and on unamplified music if there are a lot of your discs that sound in the slightes and I mean slightest bit etchy or hard - at 90-100decibals then to me the speaker needs to go. It will only result in having them gather dust - or being run on short listening sessions because you get a headache. Life is short buy a speaker that makes what you like sound good.

[Wireworm5]

I have Metallica ST. Anger album which I happen to like, and think its perhaps the best recorded heavy metal rock that I've encountered. On my system I can crank it, and the detail of the bass playing remains intact. However reading reviews by Metallica fans on this album on Amazon, the consesus is they sounds like a garage band, and generally disliked.
So out of curiousity I played this album on a make shift system. I wanted a more boom box sound. So I hooked up my CV- LS8's to an old JVC receiver and added some bass with its on board equalizer. There it was, the garage band sound that all these reviewers are talking about.
So I have to conclude that in this case a excellent recording for the mass public played on boom boxes is too revealing and will sound like crap.
If these metallica fans could hear this recording the way it was intended, on a good system, I think the reviews would have been more positive.

[Woochifer]

I have Metallica ST. Anger album which I happen to like, and think its perhaps the best recorded heavy metal rock that I've encountered. On my system I can crank it, and the detail of the bass playing remains intact. However reading reviews by Metallica fans on this album on Amazon, the consesus is they sounds like a garage band, and generally disliked.
So out of curiousity I played this album on a make shift system. I wanted a more boom box sound. So I hooked up my CV- LS8's to an old JVC receiver and added some bass with its on board equalizer. There it was, the garage band sound that all these reviewers are talking about.
So I have to conclude that in this case a excellent recording for the mass public played on boom boxes is too revealing and will sound like crap.
If these metallica fans could hear this recording the way it was intended, on a good system, I think the reviews would have been more positive.

Pretty high praise for that album. I admit I gave it few listens and then put it down, never really quite connected with it. Even on my system, the recording does remind me a lot of a garage demo, especially with how detached the vocals sound. I can see how Metallica was trying to go with more of a raw sound with St. Anger, especially considering how polished their last three albums had sounded. (Even though it's got its detractors, I use "Load" as one of my test discs when I evaluate speakers) It definitely has more of a street feel than any of the other stuff that they've done with Bob Rock, but I'm not sure if I would go as far as calling St. Anger one of the best recorded metal albums out there, or blame the boom box playback for its lukewarm reception. Musically, that album still hasn't sunk in with me. I guess I'm still in the old school RideTheLightning/MasterofPuppets/AndJusticeForAll phase!

BTW, I heard a lot of great things about the new Metallica movie. Supposed to be a very insightful documentary that traces all the stuff they went through while recording St. Anger. Heard that the movie has a lot of parallels to This Is Spinal Tap, except that it's about a real band.

[Woochifer]

Of course, what recordings you like and how much is going to vary depending on which speakers you are listening to.

yes! I'm afraid I have te re-evaluate my collection
some jazz they do wonderful
some classical cd's that I thought were good recordings, suddenly show flaws
some songs of Queensryche, which I liked on my old B&W DM110i's, sound pretty awful

Well, I wouldn't go that far! I hope that evaluation process does not entail junking your disc collection to suit your speakers. If you ever read product reviews in high end mags, notice how most of the music that they refer to in their reviews is gawdawful crap that someone would have to pay you to sit through? Doesn't matter to me how well it's recorded, stuff like Amanda McBroom to me is just lousy music that can't stand sitting through. Big difference between someone who loves audio for its own sake, and someone who loves music and will enjoy it whether it gets played through an exotic million dollar system or a transistor radio.

The thing about most pop recordings is that they are not optimized for high resolution systems. They are typically overdubbed to the tilt, compressed, processed, and designed to sound like anything but a live performance (not that there's really any "right" way for amplified instruments to sound anyway). And they are typically mixed using near field monitors, like the Yamaha NS10, that optimize a recording for car audio environments or use with smaller mini system or satellite speakers. A pop recording mixed like this can still sound good on a high res system, but that won't always be the case because the mix was not done with high res playback in mind.

You had the same situation in the 1970s, when most classic rock recordings were mixed using JBL studio monitors. "West coast" speakers like JBL played those recordings very well, while they tended to sound thin and lifeless on most "British sound" speakers like the B&Ws and KEFs of that era. The aftermarket for vintage JBLs remains strong precisely because classic rock fans still prefer how their music sounds when played back through those speakers. (the JBL L65s that my dad bought for $600 in 1976 will fetch more than that if they're in restored condition) Doesn't matter to them that those speakers don't sound very good with classical or a lot of acoustic music.

And with classical recordings, a LOT of the early digital recordings and overly multitracked recordings sound horrendous. Those recordings will be not sound right on pretty much any speaker that does not boost the midrange and/or severely roll off the high end (like a lot of older "high end" speakers did).

When I auditioned the Studio v.3 series, I ran a pretty wide range of music through those speakers, and thought that they fared very well with all of them. The versatility of the Studio series IMO is its strength.

[Jochem]

Woochifer wrote:
The thing about most pop recordings is that they are not optimized for high resolution systems.


I think this is the matter in case of Queensryche, which sounds not-too-convincing on my Studio 20's


Anyway,
What I also don't like on them is dance- or dance-related electronics: elektro, techno, squarepusher, aphex twin, EBM and the like; I notice they make me tired... and not only with the things mentioned here, also violin can be a bit 'screechy'.

but what's the alternative for 800 euro p.pair?
Quad 11L?

RGA, what do you think are good loudspeakers for me, considering my living-situation ?



Jochem
---
Paradigm Studio 20
NAD 312
Sony CDP-650

[Woochifer]

Woochifer wrote:
The thing about most pop recordings is that they are not optimized for high resolution systems.


I think this is the matter in case of Queensryche, which sounds not-too-convincing on my Studio 20's


Anyway,
What I also don't like on them is dance- or dance-related electronics: elektro, techno, squarepusher, aphex twin, EBM and the like; I notice they make me tired... and not only with the things mentioned here, also violin can be a bit 'screechy'.

but what's the alternative for 800 euro p.pair?
Quad 11L?

RGA, what do you think are good loudspeakers for me, considering my living-situation ?



Jochem
---
Paradigm Studio 20
NAD 312
Sony CDP-650

If your previous speakers were older B&Ws, the Studio 20s have a very different sound. To me, it's more immediate and engaging. Listeners who are more used to the older B&W sound might find the Studio series overly aggressive. For someone like me who does not like the older B&Ws, the Studios strike the right balance.

I listen to a lot of comparable electronica on my Studio setup, and find the sound very much attuned to my preferences. Stuff like Chemical Brothers, Crystal Method, Portishead, and Underworld, and "nujazz" like Jazzanova and St. Germain work very well on my setup, and the imaging with the Studio series is very good at conveying the various phasing tricks that the engineers use on those recordings to convey a larger soundstage. The highs on a lot of electronica recordings tend to be mixed on the high side. For one thing, a lot of that is intended for 12" vinyl and nightclub system playback. For that music, I still generally preferred the Studios to the more laid back sound that I heard from the B&W 600 S2 series speakers that I was also auditioning earlier. Obviously, your preferences might be different.

But as I stated earlier, I think in general, the biggest variable is your room acoustics. You might want to borrow some other speakers from your dealer and see if they give you the same issues. Excessive room reflections can smear the sound and make the highs seem harsh no matter what speakers you're trying out. The wide dispersion pattern of the Studio 20s helps out with the imaging, but if you have nothing but hard surfaces close by, it could also create a harsher sound. The acoustics in my room are problematic and I use acoustic panels in my room behind the front speakers, and by reducing the frontwall reflections, it significantly smoothed out the sound in my room and tightened up the imaging. If you're looking for something different from the Studio series that might work better for your preferences, you can start with B&W, Mission, KEF, and Dynaudio, and proceed from there.

[RGA]

Woochifer wrote:
The thing about most pop recordings is that they are not optimized for high resolution systems.


I think this is the matter in case of Queensryche, which sounds not-too-convincing on my Studio 20's


Anyway,
What I also don't like on them is dance- or dance-related electronics: elektro, techno, squarepusher, aphex twin, EBM and the like; I notice they make me tired... and not only with the things mentioned here, also violin can be a bit 'screechy'.

but what's the alternative for 800 euro p.pair?
Quad 11L?

RGA, what do you think are good loudspeakers for me, considering my living-situation ?



Jochem
---
Paradigm Studio 20
NAD 312
Sony CDP-650

Firstly for 800 EU those speakers are grossly overpriced - They should be about $800.00Cdn - ~350 EU.

I would think you could get a host of sepakers over there better than the Studio 20 - note though that I have not heard the V3 Studio just the V3 of the monitor line - Yes I would certainly try out the Quad or Von Sweikert. I am not going to make any specific recommendation - what I am recommending is not to put up with a speaker that makes your music not enjoyable - even if that means selecting a speaker that is rolled off or humped up or euphonic or whatever - ideally you want a balance and I'm not saying get a totally innacurate poor measuring speaker but one that isn't annoying - I can listen to my speakers at a reasonably loud level for 8 hours - there is not muting or roll-off. I have not heard the new Quad's - heard good things about them - but really it has to please YOU.

This is why advice of specific brands isn't helpful because I don't necessarily listen to the same music or have the same preferances. I only chimed in because you are hearing what I have always heard with the particular brand - after break in - and with good equipment over the last 8 years from these guys. If it's a sound yu like go for it but it sounded to me that you had reservations - there are lots of other brands - Quad seems to have a similarity in their views as the speaker I bought so perhaps I would like the Quads too - and in Europe there is the classic Spendors - there is Harbeth there is ATC(I'm not familiar with). I would try and listen to speakers with a different approach - silk/soft dome tweeters perhaps. Quad has reasons for their choice as dooes the company making my speakers - Von sweikert's VR 1 is another - and PMC recently switched from a metal tweeter to a silk dome in their PMC TB2 - their upscale speakers all had soft domes reserving the cheap titanium for the lower line - now that hey have switched might be worth a try. But lots available. http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/lseriesworks.htm

I had my K's for 6 months and they gave me 100% trade-up on them so maybe you're dealer has such a program.