Paradigm Signature S8's

[greggp2]

Does anyone have any experience or have auditioned the paradigm Signature S8's? If so, how does it compare to B&W Nautilus speakers? Say 802 or 803's?

[Davemcc]

Here's a thread you might find interesting.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42102

[johnrmarty]

I have been a dealer of the Paradigm speaker line for many years and I can tell you that without a doubt the Paradigm Signature S8's are some of the best speakers I have heard hands down. We go to Cedia every year and many manufacturers have speakers that are three times the price as the the S8's that in my opinion do not stack up. The S8 build quality, crossover, beryllium tweeters, and price are un-matched. I have auditioned the B&W 803D (our paradigm rep is also the B&W rep) but because we do not have them in our demo room next to the S8's it is hard to tell what the side by side comparison would be. If I am not mistaken the 803's are a couple thousand $ more than the S8's, but I may be wrong....if this is the case then I ask myself are the B&W's worth 2k+ more in sound quality alone? I really don't think so. The build quality on both the Paradigm speakers and the B&W at this level are very similar, but I do think that the Paradigm is the winner on finish quality. The B&W 803D's are a bit brighter overall in my opinion which some people like, but at higher volumes this can fatigue your ears. I have the Paradigm Signature S8's next to a pair of Kef Reference 205's in one of our demo rooms as well and that is a very close comparison as well. Keep in mind that the 205's are in the 12K range and the paradigms keep up quite nice...

[greggp2]

Thanks. I think the Paradigms are really nice speakers and was curious. I currently have B&W 802's, but they are not the D's. I like them, but they are a bit bright. Does Paradigm dealers offer any discounts? What do these guys retail for?

[greggp2]

Dave, thanks for the link comparison..

[WmAx]

Does anyone have any experience or have auditioned the paradigm Signature S8's? If so, how does it compare to B&W Nautilus speakers? Say 802 or 803's?

The cabinet of the 802/802D makes it the superior choice by far. The 802/802D has a completely inert cabinet, acoustically, providing for virtually no timbre distortion. A very rare feature in speakers. It is the rare speaker indeed that allows for this neutral behaviour. Along with this, the 802D has a reasonably linear response. Combine it with a high quality DSP EQ like the Behringer DCX2496 and you can obtain virtually any sound you want. The Paradigm cabinet to my knowledge is not even close to comparable to the B&W 802 cabinet system, which is one of the best measuring cabinets in existence among hi-fi speaker systems.

-Chris

[codexp3]

I think the B&Ws are overpriced. You pay more for speakers shipped over the pond. I maintain my position that the diamond tweeters are nothing more than a gimmick. I listened to both and I picked the S8v2s over the 803Ds. Beryllium over diamond for me. That being said, B&W was in my final four along with ‘digms, Dynaudio, and Ultima2s.

[johnrmarty]

The whole speaker listening process is very subjective...even the look of the cabinet is subjective. All I can say is the S8v2's for the money are great speakers. Every listening room is different as well. You can go into one store and listen to the B&W's and another and listen to the Paradigms with two completely different setups, acoustic treatments, and amplification. The new S8's in cherry retail for about 7K and the piano black or maple finish retails for about $7,800. Walking in a store and getting a deal on the S8's is a bit more difficult as they are not really online. Shoot me a PM when you get a chance.

[Rickster71]

The cabinet of the 802/802D makes it the superior choice by far. The 802/802D has a completely inert cabinet, acoustically, providing for virtually no timbre distortion. A very rare feature in speakers. It is the rare speaker indeed that allows for this neutral behaviour. Along with this, the 802D has a reasonably linear response. Combine it with a high quality DSP EQ like the Behringer DCX2496 and you can obtain virtually any sound you want. The Paradigm cabinet to my knowledge is not even close to comparable to the B&W 802 cabinet system, which is one of the best measuring cabinets in existence among hi-fi speaker systems.

-Chris

I've always heard the B&W had a well made cabinet.
How bad is the S8's enclosure?
Can you share some of your tests?

Thanks,
Rick

[syd123]

The cabinet of the 802/802D makes it the superior choice by far. The 802/802D has a completely inert cabinet, acoustically, providing for virtually no timbre distortion. A very rare feature in speakers. It is the rare speaker indeed that allows for this neutral behaviour. Along with this, the 802D has a reasonably linear response. Combine it with a high quality DSP EQ like the Behringer DCX2496 and you can obtain virtually any sound you want. The Paradigm cabinet to my knowledge is not even close to comparable to the B&W 802 cabinet system, which is one of the best measuring cabinets in existence among hi-fi speaker systems.

-Chris

While avoiding audible cabinet resonances is indeed important, I don't know that this alone makes a speaker sound "right" - it's simply one of many factors. ..And as the owner of a pair of Paradigm Signature S8 v.2's, I can tell you that I have never heard any cabinet resonance - whether while playing music or when rapping my knuckles on their sides - indeed, they sound as dead as a cinder block. And I believe this was supported by measurements of the S8's that I've read.

As for build, although I cannot recall the B&W models I listened to when buying my Sigs, I don't recall the B&W's having any advantage over them in build quality. To me, the S8's are exquisitely well made.

..As for sound, well, that's very subjective. As a lover of live music, to my ears, the S8's sound about as close to live music as any speaker I've owned or listened to - regardless of price. For reference, the speakers I've owned includes: Spica TC50's (3yrs), PSB Stratus Minis (4yrs), Vandersteen 3A Sigs (4yrs), and now the Paradigm S8 v.2s.

[PENG]

I think the B&Ws are overpriced. You pay more for speakers shipped over the pond. I maintain my position that the diamond tweeters are nothing more than a gimmick. I listened to both and I picked the S8v2s over the 803Ds. Beryllium over diamond for me. That being said, B&W was in my final four along with ‘digms, Dynaudio, and Ultima2s.

I would pay more for the diamond. We don't know their margins so it is hard to say if we pay more (effectively speaking) because of the extra shipping cost. Years ago I used to wonder why Bryston amps were cheaper in Hong Kong (I mean from authorized dealers) considering they had to be shipped all the way from Canada. UK is certainly a lot closer. In terms of sound quality I actually find the Sig series overrated. They don't sound much different than the Studios.

[PENG]

Thanks. I think the Paradigms are really nice speakers and was curious. I currently have B&W 802's, but they are not the D's. I like them, but they are a bit bright. Does Paradigm dealers offer any discounts? What do these guys retail for?

They may be bright but I find live concerts are typically bright too. People like the so called "warm" sound and that's their preference. I think B&W is one of those companies who try to design and build speakers that reproduce sound faithfully (everything else, e.g. room acoustics, electronics, being equal).

[WmAx]

Thanks. I think the Paradigms are really nice speakers and was curious. I currently have B&W 802's, but they are not the D's. I like them, but they are a bit bright. Does Paradigm dealers offer any discounts? What do these guys retail for?

You definitely need to use a high quality DSP EQ on your speakers. This is the solution to get the sound you want on very neutral speakers like the 802s. I am not talking about some graphic equalizer. I am talking about a powerful DSP device like the Behringer DCX2496. There are some simple shelving filter functions that will solve almost any tonal issue you have. Moving down the S8 would be a certain downgrade. It's not as if I'm just some dude making blind suggestions; I have studied speaker characteristics and how they relate to human auditory response for years, and used this to design speaker systems.

-Chris

[WmAx]

While avoiding audible cabinet resonances is indeed important, I don't know that this alone makes a speaker sound "right" - it's simply one of many factors. ..And as the owner of a pair of Paradigm Signature S8 v.2's, I can tell you that I have never heard any cabinet resonance - whether while playing music or when rapping my knuckles on their sides - indeed, they sound as dead as a cinder block. And I believe this was supported by measurements of the S8's that I've read.

Many people have made such statement as 'my speakers walls are not resonant', but in reality, the measure poorly and are resonant. It is a relative situation based on what other speakers you are comparing it to. Now, perhaps the S8 is non-resonant, but I am not aware of any measurements of it's cabinet system - and most speakers do not have inert cabinets. My reference to low/non-resonant is one that is literal - based on measured extreme low output cabinets.

An inert cabinet is a requirement for the highest of sound quality. Of course, there are many factors are you point out. This is one of the last ones that are addressed, but it is still very important if a perception of realism is to have a chance to occur without overlaying coloration(s) masking the signal.

As for build, although I cannot recall the B&W models I listened to when buying my Sigs, I don't recall the B&W's having any advantage over them in build quality. To me, the S8's are exquisitely well made.

The 802 and up (801, 800) have the cabinets with no audible acoustic output. However, the 803 does have a more densely braced cabinet compared to 99% of the hi fi speakers out there.

-Chris

[syd123]

"Many people have made such statement as 'my speakers walls are not resonant', but in reality, the measure poorly and are resonant. It is a relative situation based on what other speakers you are comparing it to. Now, perhaps the S8 is non-resonant, but I am not aware of any measurements of it's cabinet system - and most speakers do not have inert cabinets. My reference to low/non-resonant is one that is literal - based on measured extreme low output cabinets."

"An inert cabinet is a requirement for the highest of sound quality. Of course, there are many factors are you point out. This is one of the last ones that are addressed, but it is still very important if a perception of realism is to have a chance to occur without overlaying coloration(s) masking the signal."

I've attached links to the two reviews of the S8 v.2's that I know of. ..In both they comment on their remarkable measured performance AND their sound in use. ..In neither are they found to have cabinet issues. ..Indeed, comments about the cabinets are very positive. So, in the absence of either measurements or subjective observations that point to problems, I think one can conclude that the S8's cabinets are sufficiently inert.

Again, you seem to be elevating the pusuit of an "inert" cabinet to a place above any and all other considerations, including even driver design. ..Do you know that this one measurement trumps all others in predicting how a speaker will perform during blinded listening tests?? If so, then Paradigm, who designs and builds ALL of their drivers in-house can dispense with this costly practice and instead worry only about building more rigid cabinets. ..And they can dispense with the costly and time consuming double-blind testing they use to ensure that their speakers indeed sound like real music.

I think the cautious approach for those out to buy new speakers is to listen listen and listen some more. If speaker A sounds better than speaker B using all types of music, then that is all that matters. ..I'm not saying that the S8's would better the B&W's in this case, only that it is the only test that really matters.

www removed from both links..

soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/paradigm_signature_s8/

hometheaterhifi.com/speaker-reviews/home-theater-speakers/paradigm-reference-signature-s8v2-c5v2-adp3v2-speakers-and-signature-servo-subwoofer.html

[WmAx]

I've attached links to the two reviews of the S8 v.2's that I know of. ..In both they comment on their remarkable measured performance AND their sound in use. ..In neither are they found to have cabinet issues. ..Indeed, comments about the cabinets are very positive. So, in the absence of either measurements or subjective observations that point to problems, I think one can conclude that the S8's cabinets are sufficiently inert.

Unfortunately, the cabinet is not addressed there. It is not uncommon for reviewers to miss such important things. In fact, most reviewers really don't seem very well qualified to begin with, and of course, often use methods of low value to review speakers. The Theil CS 3.7 is a good exampe to pose here. It has a better than average cabinet, but is still very audibly resonant when compared directly against a non resonant reference. It's effects clearly color things like piano and vocals in classical music. Most people seem inclined to say by the old knock test to say it's solid. In fact, it's not really, and it's measurements of the enclosure confirm that it is only slightly better than average.

Again, you seem to be elevating the pusuit of an "inert" cabinet to a place above any and all other considerations, including even driver design.

Not true at all. I am simply pointing out the importance of the cabinet, assuming the drivers and crossover are extremely well executed. The B&W referenced has superb drivers/crossover, overall. The S8 has excellent drivers/crossover as well. The cabinet quality is unknown to me.

-Chris

[codexp3]

The cabinets are very well constructed in the Signature line. The drivers are exceptionally well built. I had to take my Sigs apart to replace the tweeter (not an equipment malfunction, but an incompetent mover malfunction). Here’s the old link, you can’t see much of the cabinet.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44954

[Warpdrv]

I will second the suggestion of the Signature S8's .v2, regardless of what anyone has to say here....

My dealer closest to me here has every speaker in the B&W line, and I have listened to the 802D's on multiple occasions, as well as the rest of the 800's in that lineup. To me they are very UN-engaging... they simply provided me with no emotional connection to the music... sure the tweeters are nice, but they are truly just flat overall in my opinion.... Now if I have to add an EQ to make my speakers come to life, I'm sorry that to me is not what I search for in a speaker period.

I want something that will give me goosebumps and make the hair on my neck stand up with an emotional impact !!!!! That is exactly what the Paradigm Sig S8's .v2 did for me... I had to drive 2 hours so I could hear them. I auditioned them side by side with the S6's.... The Be tweeter is to me the best tweeter I have ever heard to date... It is light and delicate - airy if you will, but not overwhelming or bright even in a bright room, it just floated about the room. It is easily the same as the best ribbon tweeter I have heard, but doesn't possess the restrictiveness or beaming nature of a ribbon. The midrange is truly brilliant - bringing an extremely wide soundstage, and is very prevalent not recessed, strong and powerful mids are extremely important to me, the Sigs just do all of it right.

They are seriously the best speaker I have ever heard, and on top of that they are a complete work of art !!!! Even better, they don't look like R2D2.


John Marty, I have heard great things about you, I'll be giving you a call next week - I got recently got your info already from Ken, for the same piece of equipment he got... It was nice to see your name pop up here....

Patrick

[ParadigmDawg]

I listened to the S8 today, love them and will own them at some point.

[Warpdrv]

I listened to the S8 today, love them and will own them at some point.

They are my next speaker to replace my Studio 100 system.

My Sig S4's in rosewood are awesome speakers. I love them and the .v2's are just that next step up the chain for Paradigm.

[WmAx]

To me they are very UN-engaging... they simply provided me with no emotional connection to the music... sure the tweeters are nice, but they are truly just flat overall in my opinion.... Now if I have to add an EQ to make my speakers come to life, I'm sorry that to me is not what I search for in a speaker period.

But... that is exactly how a neutral speaker with no EQ applied should sound with the way most commercial recordings are produced.

Using EQ properly merely allows YOU to add in the specific curves that you prefer instead of using the ones the manufacturer hard-wired into a speaker system. One can always get a better sound by customizing the curve to their preference as compared to settling for the hard-wired curve of a speaker. Of course, the EQ method I advocate is only suitable for truly neutral speaker systems.... and it's not some 'all over the place' type of curve you have to use. Specifically, there are only two primary EQ filters one needs to use with a neutral speaker to customize the sound to their exact preference: a high shelving filter that starts at about 4kHz; gradually attenuating response over that point from 1-4dB, set according to user preference. The other setting a low shelving filter to properly set baffle step transition amount for the specific room/placement. No speaker can have a baffle compensation transition that is fixed and have it work in multiple environments properly. This is completely dependent on the specific environment and placement in that environment. It must be adjusted for ideal response; the only exception being if the environment/placement it is used in is exactly the single one that was hard-wired into the response to begin with. It is highly improbable you will have the exact environment/placement that matches the factory hard-wired curve. A 0.5 dB error difference here can make a substantial sound quality difference! On top of these two filters, one can add filters to customize the 'tightness' perception of bass if using a powerful EQ like the DCX2496, on top of the ability of this device to ideally integrate speakers with subwoofer(s).

-Chris

[WmAx]

The Be tweeter is to me the best tweeter I have ever heard to date... It is light and delicate - airy if you will, but not overwhelming or bright even in a bright room, it just floated about the room. It is easily the same as the best ribbon tweeter I have heard, but doesn't possess the restrictiveness or beaming nature of a ribbon.

The tweeters used on these high end Paradigms are among the best, if not best measuring dome tweeters I have noticed. Besides having a smooth/flat response overall and low distortion, they have incredible horizontal dispersion that is extremely wide even at 15kHz; extremely rare for dome tweeters. This, in the right environment/set up, will provide for more realistic sound in itself in regards to the reflected ambient signals containing a larger amount of the band responsible for human spatial perception. It would even be worthwhile to buy 'replacement' tweeters to use for high end DIY project, assuming the replacement tweeter comes complete with the driver AND the faceplate(the faceplate is obviously a specialized waveguide providing the unique dispersion here).

The midrange is truly brilliant - bringing an extremely wide soundstage, and is very prevalent not recessed, strong and powerful mids are extremely important to me, the Sigs just do all of it right.


To be accurate, the treble band is the one responsible for the primary spatial effects of humans. I believe the tweeter is primarily responsible for this on the Paradigm.

-Chris

[Timmy245]

hey chris

i would really like to end up buying these speakers in the near future (sig 8s) do you recommend them ? and also sorry for hijacking the thread a little here but would you if you had the choice would you go with two diy infinity kappa 12" subs or two svs pb13 ultras

cheers Tim

[Warpdrv]

I think they are an excellent speaker, and they are beautiful as well, not that is as important, just an added bonus.... I doubt Chris has heard them, and if he did he would say they are not neutral enough for him...

Sorry to say that I don't think you will find alot of people that will want to add an extensive EQ setup to a set of speakers they just spent $15K on, like the 802D's. I certainly wouldn't. But that is neither here nor there...


Go with your gut, have you listened to the S8's...

I have auditioned many different speakers and as I said they are one of the best speakers I have ever heard. But that is ME. Speakers are a very emotional purchase, and you shouldn't go with what someone else suggests, you should go for something that sounds great to you...

[WmAx]

hey chris

i would really like to end up buying these speakers in the near future (sig 8s) do you recommend them ?

I really have no comment to make towards these speakers. Until I see credible 3rd party analysis of the cabinet system or at least get to measure, or compare it to a known non-resonant reference A/B myself, I can't make a recommendation for it in this price bracket.

and also sorry for hijacking the thread a little here but would you if you had the choice would you go with two diy infinity kappa 12" subs or two svs pb13 ultras

cheers Tim

No doubt, 2 of the Kappa Perfect subs. The PB13s would produce a bit more SPL over 30Hz, and the Kappas would produce more output under 30Hz, due to the cabinet design that minimizes port compression. But if you want to spend that kind of budget equal to two PB13 Ultras - I may suggest dual Audiopulse AXIS 15" DIY subs. These will outperform the PB13 Ultras by a large margin in every possible way. But I will point out that you need a dedicated circuit from the breaker box for each Axis. They require huge levels of power, at least 2000 watts RMS per driver, and you still won't come near their limits. You would need about 5000 watts RMS per AXIS to actually drive them to their limits. Another option would be dual 12" JL Audio W7 DIY ported subs, powered by 1000-1200 RMS each. You could do this on a single circuit. Of course, there are still more options; I am just listing a few top choices I would suggest for ultra high performance.

-Chris

[syd123]

I really have no comment to make towards these speakers. Until I see credible 3rd party analysis of the cabinet system or at least get to measure, or compare it to a known non-resonant reference A/B myself, I can't make a recommendation for it in this price bracket.


What 3rd party? You mean Stereophile? Is their another magazine that measure's cabinet resonance? ..If it is Stereophile then explain to me why even they don't place as much importance on this one single metric as you? Though I can't recall specific models I know that over the years they have given wholehearted A-class recommendations to speakers that performed imperfectly (though not poorly) with respect to their cabinet/ accelerometer analysis. It's also interesting how often a resonance is measured by JA, but none is heard by the reviewer doing the subjective analysis. So if a measurement doesn't strongly correlate with musical enjoyment by the listener, what good is the measurement?

Your view seems to imply that all one needs to do is shop by measurement and I'm not sure that would leave most people satisfied. Or perhaps your obsessing on this one measurement b/c it's the one that your particular speaker does particularly well on.

[codexp3]

I would pay more for the diamond. We don't know their margins so it is hard to say if we pay more (effectively speaking) because of the extra shipping cost. Years ago I used to wonder why Bryston amps were cheaper in Hong Kong (I mean from authorized dealers) considering they had to be shipped all the way from Canada. UK is certainly a lot closer. In terms of sound quality I actually find the Sig series overrated. They don't sound much different than the Studios.

I strongly disagree that the Signatures are overrated. I’ve never seen a review find a single fault with the S8v2s. As to diamond being a “great” material to use in tweeters, I have my doubts. I’ve seen numerous manufacturers make the switch to beryllium, but I haven’t seen another manufacturer jump on the gemstone bandwagon.

[jostenmeat]

I strongly disagree that the Signatures are overrated. I’ve never seen a review find a single fault with the S8v2s. As to diamond being a “great” material to use in tweeters, I have my doubts. I’ve seen numerous manufacturers make the switch to beryllium, but I haven’t seen another manufacturer jump on the gemstone bandwagon.

Hmrz.

IF I actually put as much stock into cone/driver material as you did, I would say that I abhor beryllium.

But, the fact is I don't think I put as much stock into it as you do. Now, I know of a dealer, and avid AV poster, who claims he can tell the difference between the various materials by ear.

The only beryllium I've heard was with Focal's high end, and I've never heard a more UNrealistic high end.

That's not knocking your Sigs though, cuz like I said, I know there's a lot more to it than material.

[PENG]

I strongly disagree that the Signatures are overrated. I’ve never seen a review find a single fault with the S8v2s. As to diamond being a “great” material to use in tweeters, I have my doubts. I’ve seen numerous manufacturers make the switch to beryllium, but I haven’t seen another manufacturer jump on the gemstone bandwagon.

As Canadian I would love to agree with you but I can only honestly agree to disagree. I know what you meant though as I have read a few rave reviews about them, but that is also the reason why I said they were overrated. One thing to keep in mind too, they are quite a bit less expensive compared to even the 803D so people may have a natural tendency to rave more about their performance.

Anyway I believe we all agree to a point that this is largely a subjective matter. To me even the original S2 sounded great but I just like the B&W much more. I know how violins sound (some may feel the real violin sound bright and cannot listen to them for longer than 30 seconds), they sound like what I heard through the 802/3Ds. When I auditioned high end speakers I always use the same CDs. The S8 did well too with violins but they just didn't sound as real to me. By the way, I have only auditioned the original Signatures version. It may or may not mean anything but I should have mentioned it earlier.

[codexp3]

By the way, I have only auditioned the original Signatures version. It may or may not mean anything but I should have mentioned it earlier.

The tweeter is greatly improved in the v2, that's what sold me. I liked the 803D, but ranked them third (cost not being included in the equation). I liked the Signature s8v2, Dynaudio Contour 5.4, B&W 803D, and the Revel f52s in that order. I'd be happy calling any of them my own. I do agree with your earlier statement, the Studio 100s did 90%+ of what the Sigs did, but the Studios are excellent speakers.

[PENG]

The tweeter is greatly improved in the v2, that's what sold me. I liked the 803D, but ranked them third (cost not being included in the equation). I liked the Signature s8v2, Dynaudio Contour 5.4, B&W 803D, and the Revel f52s in that order. I'd be happy calling any of them my own. I do agree with your earlier statement, the Studio 100s did 90%+ of what the Sigs did, but the Studios are excellent speakers.

I could have bought the original version a few years ago but I decided to settle for the Energy Verita (also Canadian made) that was priced between the Sig and the Studio but closer to the Studio 100 in terms of quality and price. In doing so I saved C$3,000. My logic at the time was to conserve cash and save up for the expensive 802. If the S8 V2 is greatly improved then I should audition them again but I think I would wait in case I could not resist the temptation. For me, this is really not the time to spend even 7K on speakers.

Thanks again for the info.

[Warpdrv]

Hmrz.

IF I actually put as much stock into cone/driver material as you did, I would say that I abhor beryllium.

But, the fact is I don't think I put as much stock into it as you do. Now, I know of a dealer, and avid AV poster, who claims he can tell the difference between the various materials by ear.

The only beryllium I've heard was with Focal's high end, and I've never heard a more UNrealistic high end.

That's not knocking your Sigs though, cuz like I said, I know there's a lot more to it than material.


That is not the first time that I have heard that the Focals high end with the Be tweeter they use was edgy and unrealistic... but then again, that also could come down to a room issue just the same... I have not had the opportunity to hear them myself...

I did not get that feeling with the Sig Be tweeter at all... A very well put together speaker in SQ from top to bottom... just one mans opinion.

[vicklan]

i thinks the B&W Nautilus speakers are much better

[WmAx]

What 3rd party? You mean Stereophile? Is their another magazine that measure's cabinet resonance? ..If it is Stereophile then explain to me why even they don't place as much importance on this one single metric as you?

I do not recommend Stereophile for anything except the measurement data base they have for loudspeakers and amplifiers. Their statements/reviews are usually of very low worth; don't presume that I imply that anything other than the actual measurements they make is of any worth. As an example of the ignorance of Stereophile: they recently reviewed the Theil CS 3.7, and made no note of the cabinet audibility in the review. But I listened to the 3.7, compared directly to a non-resonant reference in direct A/B, and the effect of the resonance was very clearly pronounced in certain music like piano and certain vocals; creating the typical emphasized frequency range coloration that resonance produces. The Stereophile measurements make it clear as to why it's so audible; it has substantial amplitude wall vibrations. But the reviewers make no reference comparisons under semi-controlled conditions, and I doubt they have trained with double blinded listening trials to be able to identify the exact cause of these coloration(s) as I have. For most, even when they clearly hear certain coloration, they can not usually specify the origin, as they have not under gone such training. I have found that resonance is one of these things that most people can not usually identify even though they clearly hear it's effects. It usually requires some sort of specific training to become familiar with the exact effect for them to be able to identify it.

I do not place all value on this single aspect. But it's one of many that a speaker must be sufficient at executing if it is to be of the highest sound quality.

Your view seems to imply that all one needs to do is shop by measurement and I'm not sure that would leave most people satisfied. Or perhaps your obsessing on this one measurement b/c it's the one that your particular speaker does particularly well on.

Now, while I will advocate that the right set of measurements will show nearly every aspect sufficient to determine overall sound/quality, I will point out that very few people are capable of interpreting that data even if it's available to them. To do such requires extensive knowledge of how measurements are performed and to be knowledgeable of the credible perceptual research that correlates specific measurements with human perception/audibility.

-Chris

[syd123]

very few[/I] people are capable of interpreting that data even if it's available to them. To do such requires extensive knowledge of how measurements are performed and to be knowledgeable of the credible perceptual research that correlates specific measurements with human perception/audibility.

-Chris

How do you know that the differences you heard b/w the Thiel and your "reference" were due only to cabinet resonance?? The drivers, cross-over, and cabinet shape (i.e., baffle) are all different too, correct?? Also, Thiel speakers are phase-coherent and time-aligned. How do you know that doesn't account for the difference??

Here again, you suggest that you can predict how accurate a speaker will sound based up on a small handful of measurements. ..How do you know that all such relevent measurements have already been developed?? People clearly hear differences b/w speakers that measure identically. Why??

So, recognizing that present day measurements likely fall short of quantifying all the nuances that differentialtes one speaker from another, why do you give such short shrift to actually listening?? ...To me, the Paradigms sounded more like the real music I'm used to listening too than the other speakers to which I listened. ..And I've listened (and played) a lot of live music in my life.

As for cabinet resonances, all that matters is that they are inaudible. ..Taking them from inaudible to non-measureable may not be worth the costs required to achieve. For a speaker built to sell at a given price point, a designer needs to spread costs across a bunch of pieces that make up the speaker - including cabinet, cross-over, cones, magnets, etc. etc.. The Paradigm Signature S8 v.2 retails for about US $7,000. ..Though definitely NOT an inexpensive speaker, it still is not a price-no-object design.

Though you've not seen measurements that relate to cabinet resonances, you did laud Paradigm for the fantantic drivers in the S8 v. 2., including the Be tweeter (you remarked it's one of the best you've seen meausured). Well, assuming that they didn't develop the drivers and tweeter by accident, it's not such a stretch to think that qualified engineers that developed these have given similar consideration to cabinet design and, as such, they've taken care to reduce cabinet resonances to the point of being inaudible. ..Your position seems to be that until you've seen evidence to the contrary, you're going to assume that the cabinet likely sucks. Why?

[WmAx]

How do you know that the differences you heard b/w the Thiel and your "reference" were due only to cabinet resonance?? The drivers, cross-over, and cabinet shape (i.e., baffle) are all different too, correct?? Also, Thiel speakers are phase-coherent and time-aligned. How do you know that doesn't account for the difference??

I have developed and carried out controlled listening tests (double blinded) of resonances in order to be able to accurately identify this particular effect. I have thus trained my hearing to identify this coloration, along with others. It is a lot like compressed audio blind testing; if you do this enough, you can learn to identify the specific coloration(s) that occur from specific effect(s) that otherwise one would not be able to specifically identify without such training. I have also done such training with harmonic distortion, transient perfect crossovers, etc.

Here again, you suggest that you can predict how accurate a speaker will sound based up on a small handful of measurements. ..How do you know that all such relevent measurements have already been developed?? People clearly hear differences b/w speakers that measure identically. Why??

In what case is it that two speakers measure identically and sound substantially different? Please provide these examples.

So, recognizing that present day measurements likely fall short of quantifying all the nuances that differentialtes one speaker from another, why do you give such short shrift to actually listening??

I don't recognize any such thing. Any audible difference will have a measurable difference.

Though you've not seen measurements that relate to cabinet resonances, you did laud Paradigm for the fantantic drivers in the S8 v. 2., including the Be tweeter (you remarked it's one of the best you've seen meausured). Well, assuming that they didn't develop the drivers and tweeter by accident, it's not such a stretch to think that qualified engineers that developed these have given similar consideration to cabinet design and, as such, they've taken care to reduce cabinet resonances to the point of being inaudible. ..Your position seems to be that until you've seen evidence to the contrary, you're going to assume that the cabinet likely sucks. Why?

Because statistically, most speakers have substantially resonant cabinets. This is the most expensive part of the speaker. Producing a very low acoustic output cabinet tends to increase costs substantially. I have seen many examples where the crossover and drivers were excellent and the cabinet system was not.

-Chris

[PENG]

Good morning Chris, I kow this is off track, but do you know of speakers in the 2 to 5K price range that have decent cabinets? If you do please name a few. Thanks!

[WmAx]

Good morning Chris, I kow this is off track, but do you know of speakers in the 2 to 5K price range that have decent cabinets? If you do please name a few. Thanks!

The B&W 804S has a decent cabinet featuring B&W's matrix bracing. An interlocking bracing system that leaves no more than about 4" unbraced from any relative point internally. Braces interlock and cross through all axises internally. This alone is not likely to produce a completely silent cabinet, but it will have a lower acoustic output compared to most. This speaker sells for under $5k, and it's a relatively neutral speaker overall, making it very suited to use with a device like the DCX2496 to obtain the specific sound one desires. I would recommend using dual high quality subwoofers with the 804 and crossing both the 804 and subs over at about 70Hz. The dual mid-basses on the 804 will allow for substantial dynamic range, but they are not suited to low bass reproduction and such low frequency energy should be filtered from them.

-Chris

[Rickster71]

Hi Chris, How can the "average" person detect cabinet resonance?

Would touching the side of the cabinet to feel any vibration be a starting point?
If I were to hold my ear against the cabinet and listen, while playing different types of music, would that give me clues as to what I should listen for?

Thanks,
Rick

[avaserfi]

Hi Chris, How can the "average" person detect cabinet resonance?

Would touching the side of the cabinet to feel any vibration be a starting point?
If I were to hold my ear against the cabinet and listen, while playing different types of music, would that give me clues as to what I should listen for?

Thanks,
Rick

I never knew resonance existed until I first heard the 802D, even after that I wasn't sure what it was I just knew someone was off with many speakers. Eventually the source of the aberration was narrowed down and I focused my attention on the subject.

Initially, I used a well recorded piano piece and listened to it on my old, highly resonant, speakers. The coloration was fairly clear, but when I put my ear on the speaker I could hear the specific coloration being reproduced from the panel directly. It was rather surprising, I never even realized that a loudspeaker panel could produce such substantial output. Additionally, from this point, with these speakers I could overlay the acoustic panel output over the transducer output mentally. Essentially, separating the resonance from the sound making it more obvious to myself.

From this point I wanted to learn more of the subject so I read research papers on resonance and found myself a low resonance reference point, a pair of headphones the 2003 model of Beyerdynamic's DT880. I have taken these headphones with me to various audio shops and done unscientific AB comparisons to listen for resonances. Often times it is very clear. Eventually, I altered some well recorded classical music files to recreate resonances so I could put myself through blinded trials to test my personal thresholds.

I think resonance is not a very commonly thought of issue primarily because it is hard/expensive to properly deal with and it seems many are accustom to its coloration.

[syd123]

I have developed and carried out controlled listening tests (double blinded) of resonances in order to be able to accurately identify this particular effect. I have thus trained my hearing to identify this coloration, along with others. It is a lot like compressed audio blind testing; if you do this enough, you can learn to identify the specific coloration(s) that occur from specific effect(s) that otherwise one would not be able to specifically identify without such training. I have also done such training with harmonic distortion, transient perfect crossovers, etc.

In what case is it that two speakers measure identically and sound substantially different? Please provide these examples.

I don't recognize any such thing. Any audible difference will have a measurable difference.

Because statistically, most speakers have substantially resonant cabinets. This is the most expensive part of the speaker. Producing a very low acoustic output cabinet tends to increase costs substantially. I have seen many examples where the crossover and drivers were excellent and the cabinet system was not.

-Chris

I have to be honest here and say that I just don't buy what you're saying. Your golden-eared claims are boastful but hardly believeable.

What sort of double-blind testing is it that trains a persons ear to discern cabinet resonances that a speaker manufacturer (or Stereophile) claims to be inaudible? I just can't imagine what that would be like. To be a well-controlled experiment it would have to include many speakers that differ from one another ONLY in that they have measureable resonances at different frequencies? Did you begin this quest by first constructing 15-20 pairs of such otherwise identical pairs of speakers??? And how do you do conduct your tests in a double-blinded way?? Did you actually have someone switching the speakers around in a way that neither he nor you is aware of what you're listening to? And wouldn't you need to do this with MANY different types of speakers, including: sealed, ported, transmission-line, electrostatic, etc.. etc.?

As for Stereophile, it's interesting that you believe them competent enough to accurately take measurements of resonances, but NOT competetent in their judgement of when they are, or are not, audible. This seems silly and self-serving. ..If I recall, Stereophile did find your B&W's to have small measureable resonances AND that they were likely inaudible. In this case, however, Stereophile is to be believed?

As for speakers that measure the same and sound different, I recall that the Vandersteen 3A's and 3A Signatures had very simliar measurements yet - to my ears - they sounded different. I had Vandersteen 3A Sigs for 4 years before I replaced them with the Paradigm S8's. I also owned a revised version of PSB Minis that, again if memory serves, measured differently from the previous version but sounded different.

And I also disagree that companies who spend heavily on driver and cross-over R&D simply throw in the towel when it comes to developing inert cabinets because of cost. This strikes me as nonsense. ...The biggest contributor to cabinet cost are the hardwood veneers and furniture like finishes. It is NOT having partitions, baffles, or braces inside the speaker. A good speaker company, like Paradigm, will recognize the need for an inert cabinet and will find a way to incorporate these to reduce resonances to inaudible levels. That some companies fail to tend to this is not in dispute, but your contention that all but B&W ignore this is.

To repeat, I can't help but think that you're simply a B&W fan (nothing wrong with that!) who is fixated on a particular measurement that your speaker happens to perform well on.

[Matt34]

I have to be honest here and say that I just don't buy what you're saying. Your golden-eared claims are boastful but hardly believeable.

What sort of double-blind testing is it that trains a persons ear to discern cabinet resonances? I just can't imagine what that would be like. To be a well-controlled experiment it would have to include many speakers that differ from one another ONLY in that they have measureable resonances at different frequencies? Did you begin this quest by first constructing 15-20 pairs of such otherwise identical pairs of speakers??? And how do you do conduct your tests in a double-blinded way?? Did you actually have someone switching the speakers around in a way that neither he nor you is aware of what you're listening to? And wouldn't you need to do this with MANY different types of speakers, including: sealed, ported, transmission-line, electrostatic, etc.. etc.?

As for Stereophile, it's interesting that you believe them competent enough to accurately take measurements of resonances, but NOT competetent in their judgement of when they are, or are not, audible. This seems silly and self-serving. ..If I recall, Stereophile did find your B&W's to have small measureable resonances AND that they were likely inaudible. In this case, however, Stereophile is to be believed?

As for speakers that measure the same and sound different, I recall that the Vandersteen 3A's and 3A Signatures had very simliar measurements yet - to my ears - they sounded different. I had Vandersteen 3A Sigs for 4 years before I replaced them with the Paradigm S8's. I also owned a revised version of PSB Minis that, again if memory serves, measured differently from the previous version but sounded different.

And I also disagree that companies who spend heavily on driver and cross-over R&D simply throw in the towel when it comes to developing inert cabinets because of cost. This strikes me as nonsense. ...The biggest contributor to cabinet cost are the hardwood veneers and furniture like finishes. It is NOT having partitions, baffles, or braces inside the speaker. A good speaker company, like Paradigm, will recognize the need for an inert cabinet and will find a way to incorporate these to reduce resonances to inaudible levels. That some companies fail to tend to this is not in dispute, but your contention that all but B&W ignore this is.

To repeat, I can't help but think that you're simply a B&W fan (nothing wrong with that!) who is fixated on a particular measurement that your speaker happens to perform well on.

AFAIK Chris doesn't own any B&W speakers...he builds his own.

[Rickster71]

I never knew resonance existed until I first heard the 802D, even after that I wasn't sure what it was I just knew someone was off with many speakers. Eventually the source of the aberration was narrowed down and I focused my attention on the subject.

Initially, I used a well recorded piano piece and listened to it on my old, highly resonant, speakers. The coloration was fairly clear, but when I put my ear on the speaker I could hear the specific coloration being reproduced from the panel directly. It was rather surprising, I never even realized that a loudspeaker panel could produce such substantial output. Additionally, from this point, with these speakers I could overlay the acoustic panel output over the transducer output mentally. Essentially, separating the resonance from the sound making it more obvious to myself.

From this point I wanted to learn more of the subject so I read research papers on resonance and found myself a low resonance reference point, a pair of headphones the 2003 model of Beyerdynamic's DT880. I have taken these headphones with me to various audio shops and done unscientific AB comparisons to listen for resonances. Often times it is very clear. Eventually, I altered some well recorded classical music files to recreate resonances so I could put myself through blinded trials to test my personal thresholds.

I think resonance is not a very commonly thought of issue primarily because it is hard/expensive to properly deal with and it seems many are accustom to its coloration.

Thanks Andrew, I really appreciate the reply.

Rick

[PENG]

AFAIK Chris doesn't own any B&W speakers...he builds his own.

lol, I thought syd talks more like he is a Paradigm fan than Chris being a B&W fan. Paradigm does know how to make great speakers though.

[avaserfi]

Thanks Andrew, I really appreciate the reply.

Rick

No problem at all. Be careful learning about such things. Cabinet resonance is the main reason why I started doing DIY speakers. I was happy with my old speakers until then....

[Sheep]

Chris I think it's time to put up a photo of your Monitors. He doesn't seem to get just how much bracing is required.

SheepStar

[Alex2507]

I have to be honest here and say that I just don't buy what you're saying.

I'm buying what he's saying. I'm sure you can imagine that after a while you get to know who on a forum is good for what. You would have to be a very quick study in order to determine that Chris is boastful within a month. Maybe you would be good enough to pass judgment on all the other people that I think know what they are talking about. Start with the ones who have contributed on this page. I think all of them are credible sources of info.

Maybe just ease up some for like another month. ;)

[bandphan]

Chris is boastful in a month.. ;)

lmao :p

[PENG]

The biggest contributor to cabinet cost are the hardwood veneers and furniture like finishes. It is NOT having partitions, baffles, or braces inside the speaker.

It is not that simple. Those internal partitions, baffles and braces has to be well designed and installed correctly, and that, can be costly. And yes, I am sure paradigm knows that very well. It's a little like the architectural, civil and structural engineering involved in buildings, bridges, towers etc.

[WmAx]

I have to be honest here and say that I just don't buy what you're saying. Your golden-eared claims are boastful but hardly believeable.

Golden ear claims? I have regular ears.

What sort of double-blind testing is it that trains a persons ear to discern cabinet resonances that a speaker manufacturer (or Stereophile) claims to be inaudible?

Such training for me has included using identical speaker drivers/crossovers in different cabinets (of varying resonance) and doing both real time switched blind tests and recordings of the speakers in a semi-anechoic tunnel and later analyzed with dbt software on a reference grade headphone with various simulated reverb/acoustic delays (resonance audibility varies with the environmental delay/reverb), as well as testing thresholds using simulated resonance (overlaying band limited signals mixed with an original signal). Resonance thresholds are no secret, and are a serious issue with sound quality. Conditions/environments/music-signal types and thresholds for resonances over various frequency bands have been carefully studied in listening tests by Flody Toole, Sean Olive and P.A. Fryer.


As for Stereophile, it's interesting that you believe them competent enough to accurately take measurements of resonances, but NOT competetent in their judgement of when they are, or are not, audible. This seems silly and self-serving. ..If I recall, Stereophile did find your B&W's to have small measureable resonances AND that they were likely inaudible. In this case, however, Stereophile is to be believed?

No, quite frankly, I have reviewed their measurement methods, and they are valid. But their information they talk about in the subjective is simply bull most of the time and unreliable. They don't take any precaution to place any type of useful controls in listening tests.

As for speakers that measure the same and sound different, I recall that the Vandersteen 3A's and 3A Signatures had very simliar measurements yet - to my ears - they sounded different.

Well, show me measurements using the same measurement techniques/conditions that show they are identical. The array of measurements must include a sufficient number/type of measurements, also, not just a few (that don't cover all of the likely relevant performance characteristics).

And I also disagree that companies who spend heavily on driver and cross-over R&D simply throw in the towel when it comes to developing inert cabinets because of cost. This strikes me as nonsense. ...The biggest contributor to cabinet cost are the hardwood veneers and furniture like finishes. It is NOT having partitions, baffles, or braces inside the speaker.

It takes more than a few extra braces to make an inert cabinet. It requires far more involved construction, and/or more exotic materials/construction. And when braces are used to reduce resonance by any appreciable amount by themselves, it requires an incredible level of bracing that greatly increases production time and involvement of construction(and as I pointed out earlier, this still is not likely to be sufficient to create a true inert cabinet). Hardwood veneer is very cheap unless you are using some kind of rare exotic wood.

A good speaker company, like Paradigm, will recognize the need for an inert cabinet and will find a way to incorporate these to reduce resonances to inaudible levels. That some companies fail to tend to this is not in dispute, but your contention that all but B&W ignore this is.

Again, I have no real information regarding the S8 cabinet. But it will not surprise me to find it similar to most other cabinets. Since this issue is rarely addressed anyways, it places less motivation on companies to put forth the extra money/effort.

To repeat, I can't help but think that you're simply a B&W fan (nothing wrong with that!) who is fixated on a particular measurement that your speaker happens to perform well on.

B&W is not the only company with very low resonance cabinets. They are simply an example of one of the few that do. I am not a B&W fan; I don't own any B&W speakers.

-Chris

[syd123]

It is not that simple. Those internal partitions, baffles and braces has to be well designed and installed correctly, and that, can be costly. And yes, I am sure paradigm knows that very well. It's a little like the architectural, civil and structural engineering involved in buildings, bridges, towers etc.

I agree - it's not simple, nor cheap (I didn't really say it was either of these). ..But it IS essential to designing a good speaker and as such it's not apt to be overlooked as often as Chris seems to suggest.

And please understand that I'm not trying to convince Chris, or anyone else, that Paradigm's are good speakers (like many speakers, it has it's fans and detractors which is all good and well).

What got me on this rant is that Chris (paraphrasing here)told a poster that he thought buying the S8's would be taking a step down from B&W because he knows that B&W builds inert cabinets whereas Paradigm probably ignored this important aspect of speaker design. He offered no compelling reason for thinking this other than it was statistically likely (?). To me, it seemed like he was recklessly impuning the reputation of a company without any compelling evidence to do so. ..If you re-read the who thread (pour a cup a coffee), I think you'll agree (or not).

[Mika75]

www.audio-ideas.com/reviews - paradigm-s1 (http://www.audio-ideas.com/reviews/loudspeakers/paradigm-s1.html)
http://www.audio-ideas.com/wp-content/2008/07/paradigm.jpghttp://www.audio-ideas.com/wp-content/2008/06/s1-construction.jpg

Review by Andrew Marshall July 7, 2008“All parts (baffle, rear and shell) on these compact cabinets are die-cast aluminum. The die-cast design also functions as an effective heatsink. Bass/midrange baffles and chassis are physically integrated allowing space for a powerful 6-inch (155mm) driver. Cabinet interiors reveal heavy-wall construction and extensive internal bracing. Constrained layer damping (CLD), is used in conjunction with a sophisticated Permacote Linacoustic to completely subdue stray residual vibrational energy within the cabinets.”

I’d also suggest that the application of veneer to the exterior box part of the enclosures also provides further damping of the cabinets. In the cutaway pic, you can see the bracing, and the well-organized crossover on the rear panel insert, as well as the close integration of the drivers on the front baffle surface. This is quite an incredible level of engineering and materials science in a loudspeaker, to a degree I’ve not seen before.

And there’s more: “”Critically placed isolation inserts and gaskets actually decouple drivers from the speaker enclosure itself. In Signature speakers the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated.” Paradigm calls this the “Isolation Mounting System”.

..one would think the S8's would share the same construction. www.paradigm.com/advanced design facility (http://www.paradigm.com/en/paradigm/technology/advanced_design.php)

[Rickster71]

No they aren't the same at all, the S1 was added years later to the Signature line.
It's cabinet is all metal construction. It's completely different from the S-2 thru S-8 line.
The S-1 is a nice speaker, though it is different construction.

Rick

[syd123]

Thanks for this Mika75. ...A relevant contribution to the discussion.

While this may not - to Chris' satisfaction - prove that the S8 cabinets are totally inert, it does show that Paradigm has certainly given much thought to minimizing audible resonances. ..I'm eager to read Chris's reply.

[syd123]

No they aren't the same at all, the S1 was added years later to the Signature line.
It's cabinet is all metal construction. It's completely different from the S-2 thru S-8 line.
The S-1 is a nice speaker, though it is different construction.

Rick

Rick is correct that this S1 is different from the others. ..It is made with (I think) aluminum cabinet. ..But the link is still informative as it takes you to pages where their R&D related to managing resonances is discussed.

What I glean from all this is that Paradigm is indeed mindful of reducing cabinet resonances.

[Sheep]

Thanks for this Mika75. ...A relevant contribution to the discussion.

While this may not - to Chris' satisfaction - prove that the S8 cabinets are totally inert, it does show that Paradigm has certainly given much thought to minimizing audible resonances. ..I'm eager to read Chris's reply.

Having seen Chris's Monitors insides, I can tell you that the S1 does not have enough bracing.

SheepStar

[Sheep]

I think they are an excellent speaker, and they are beautiful as well, not that is as important, just an added bonus.... I doubt Chris has heard them, and if he did he would say they are not neutral enough for him...

Sorry to say that I don't think you will find alot of people that will want to add an extensive EQ setup to a set of speakers they just spent $15K on, like the 802D's. I certainly wouldn't. But that is neither here nor there...


Go with your gut, have you listened to the S8's...

I have auditioned many different speakers and as I said they are one of the best speakers I have ever heard. But that is ME. Speakers are a very emotional purchase, and you shouldn't go with what someone else suggests, you should go for something that sounds great to you...

I just wanted to clarify what you're saying here...

EQing main speakers that handle the largest load is too much work, but you'll but you do it for a subwoofer, that plays a 60Hz range of frequencies.

SheepStar

[Davemcc]

Having seen Chris's Monitors insides, I can tell you that the S1 does not have enough bracing.

SheepStar

“All parts (baffle, rear and shell) on these compact cabinets are die-cast aluminum. The die-cast design also functions as an effective heatsink. Bass/midrange baffles and chassis are physically integrated allowing space for a powerful 6-inch (155mm) driver. Cabinet interiors reveal heavy-wall construction and extensive internal bracing. Constrained layer damping (CLD), is used in conjunction with a sophisticated Permacote Linacoustic to completely subdue stray residual vibrational energy within the cabinets.”

After working for several years in a cast aluminum foundry, I've come to have some experience with that material. In the case of the image and description of the S1 above, I think that would produce a significantly neutral cabinet. Of course that can depend on the wall thickness of the die cast pieces used and the thickness/effectiveness of the constrained layer damping. Only actual testing, as Chris suggests, would show one way or the other whether this method works or whether it is primarily marketing.

Having said that, I'm no fan of the S8. I listened to them a couple of times in a dedicated room and I found that the midrange sounded "off" somehow. My reaction to it and the best word I found to describe it was resonant. I did not find this characteristic in the 803D. But as they say, different shops, different days, who knows...somebody put an accelerometer to these things and settle this once and for all.;)

[PENG]

What got me on this rant is that Chris (paraphrasing here)told a poster that he thought buying the S8's would be taking a step down from B&W because he knows that B&W builds inert cabinets whereas Paradigm probably ignored this important aspect of speaker design. He offered no compelling reason for thinking this other than it was statistically likely (?). To me, it seemed like he was recklessly impuning the reputation of a company without any compelling evidence to do so. ..If you re-read the who thread (pour a cup a coffee), I think you'll agree (or not).

I do appreciate what you are saying, but this is what I found in one of his response to you:

"Not true at all. I am simply pointing out the importance of the cabinet, assuming the drivers and crossover are extremely well executed. The B&W referenced has superb drivers/crossover, overall. The S8 has excellent drivers/crossover as well. The cabinet quality is unknown to me."

I thought this has been a healthy debate and whether it means anything to you or not, I also find your posts interesting and quite enjoyable. That being said, the way you questioned Chris seemed unnecessarily aggressive (sort of like interrogating if I may exaggerate a little). As usual, he responded calmly and stuck to the relevant points.

[Sheep]

After working for several years in a cast aluminum foundry, I've come to have some experience with that material. In the case of the image and description of the S1 above, I think that would produce a significantly neutral cabinet. Of course that can depend on the wall thickness of the die cast pieces used and the thickness/effectiveness of the constrained layer damping. Only actual testing, as Chris suggests, would show one way or the other whether this method works or whether it is primarily marketing.

Having said that, I'm no fan of the S8. I listened to them a couple of times in a dedicated room and I found that the midrange sounded "off" somehow. My reaction to it and the best word I found to describe it was resonant. I did not find this characteristic in the 803D. But as they say, different shops, different days, who knows...somebody put an accelerometer to these things and settle this once and for all.;)

WmAx's monitors use solid oak bracing every 3 inches on every axis (sometimes metal), Concrete, and the Peal N Seal to dampen the walls. Aluminum walls with no cross bracing side to side or front to back, will not be enough to tame midrange panel resonance.

SheepStar

[syd123]

I do appreciate what you are saying, but this is what I found in one of his response to you:

"Not true at all. I am simply pointing out the importance of the cabinet, assuming the drivers and crossover are extremely well executed. The B&W referenced has superb drivers/crossover, overall. The S8 has excellent drivers/crossover as well. The cabinet quality is unknown to me."

I thought this has been a healthy debate and whether it means anything to you or not, I also find your posts interesting and quite enjoyable. That being said, the way you questioned Chris seemed unnecessarily aggressive (sort of like interrogating if I may exaggerate a little). As usual, he responded calmly and stuck to the relevant points.

Hi Peng. ..The comment from Chris that I was referring to is:

"...Moving down the S8 would be a certain downgrade. It's not as if I'm just some dude making blind suggestions; I have studied speaker characteristics and how they relate to human auditory response for years, and used this to design speaker systems."

To be this specific in his recommendations without having ever heard the speaker in question seems ridiculous and not at all scientific. It's interesting that on audioasylum.com there are posts from people like Jeff Joseph (of Jeff Joseph audio) and Bobby Palkovic (of Merlin loudspeakers) who would never make such absolute and polarizing comments. Indeed, they've often suggested that people go out and listen to all they can and they've said complementary things about other speaker brands.

[Sheep]

Hi Peng. ..The comment from Chris that I was referring to is:

"...Moving down the S8 would be a certain downgrade. It's not as if I'm just some dude making blind suggestions; I have studied speaker characteristics and how they relate to human auditory response for years, and used this to design speaker systems."

To be this specific in his recommendations without having ever heard the speaker in question seems ridiculous and not at all scientific. It's interesting that on audioasylum.com there are posts from people like Jeff Joseph (of Jeff Joseph audio) and Bobby Palkovic (of Merlin loudspeakers) who would never make such absolute and polarizing comments. Indeed, they've often suggested that people go out and listen to all they can and they've said complementary things about other speaker brands.

Maybe you should go back there then.

SheepStar

[avaserfi]

Perhaps, a little understanding of what causes resonance is in order. There are two primary sources aside from transducer resonance: 1) Panel resonance caused by the coupling of the transducer to the cabinet and energy being transferred between the two units; 2) As a transducer moves forward and backward it creates waves in two directions, in a typical cabinet the back waves will create resonance as well.

Both resonances must be dealt with differently if considering a typical cabinet speaker, the first can be attenuated through a mix of dense bracing, constraint layers and decoupling the driver from the cabinet. The second can be dealt with by using large amounts of highly absorbent acoustic material.

In the case of the S1, based on the pictures, it would certainly be a lower resonance unit compared to most (I cannot comment on its price class as I don't know what it costs). The bracing structure is efficient and of a suitable material, but the lack of damping shown will result in some resonances due to back waves. Of course, it is possible damping material is used and not pictured, but in almost all cases poly fill type materials are insufficient, 8lb rock wool or OC705 is far superior.

The B&W 802D uses a mix of dense cross bracing for the lower module, a special inert material for the midrange and also uses a highly sophisticated decoupling method when attaching the drivers. Additionally, the enclosure is specially designed to address issues of back waves.

As far as Paradigm is concerned, as of late it seems they have been giving more attention to resonances as shown by measurement of their newer speakers. Does this mean the S8s are resonance free? I cannot fully comment as I have seen no measurements or auditioned them with a resonance free reference. Although, if they are treated as the S1 are it is likely they have low resonance.

Indeed, they've often suggested that people go out and listen to all they can and they've said complementary things about other speaker brands.

Certainly, auditioning is fun, but it has been shown time and time again that sighted listening tests are biased by a variety of factors. I suggest reading the following literature to illustrate the exact effects of bias in a sighted listening test.

Toole, Floyd E. Subjective Evaluation: Identifying and Controlling the Variables. J. Audio Engineering Soc., Conference Paper 8-013. May 1990.

Toole, Floyd E.; Olive, Sean E. Hearing is Believing vs. Believing is Hearing: Blind vs. Sighted Listening Tests, and Other Interesting Things. J. Audio Engineering Soc., Conference Paper 3894. November 1994.

[syd123]

"Certainly, auditioning is fun, but it has been shown time and time again that sighted listening tests are biased by a variety of factors. I suggest reading the following literature to illustrate the exact effects of bias in a sighted listening test."

Thanks for the reading recommendations. I will, as I time allows, give it a look. ..And I completely agree with notion that people are influenced by what they see. We see that all over our hobby - from woven fabric-covered interconnects with blue connectors (sometimes packaged in teak boxes) to amplifiers with outrageously thick faceplates. And while I tried not to be overly influenced by appearance when I bought my last pair of speakers (S8's) I certainly was not blinded when I compared them to other speakers. ..This time around looks had to matter to some degree. ..My wonderful wife tolerated my Vandersteen 3A Sigs for many years - though they looked like mammoth coffins - before asking me to replace them with something that looked a little less forboding.

One thing that all this talk of resonance seems to miss, IMHO, is the important of room interaction. ..A perfectly neutral speaker in a room with lots of echo will sound worse than a less-than-perfectly neutral in a room where reflections have been well managed.

[avaserfi]

One thing that all this talk of resonance seems to miss, IMHO, is the important of room interaction. ..A perfectly neutral speaker in a room with lots of echo will sound worse than a less-than-perfectly neutral in a room where reflections have been well managed.

These are two separate issues to a point. Resonance audibility is directly affected by room interaction.

[WmAx]

One thing that all this talk of resonance seems to miss, IMHO, is the important of room interaction. ..A perfectly neutral speaker in a room with lots of echo will sound worse than a less-than-perfectly neutral in a room where reflections have been well managed.

An interesting fact: resonance is more easily heard in a room that has less broadband absorption. You read that right; resonance audibility detection works in the opposite of how most distortion(s) are masked. For example: In an anechoic chamber, resonance is far harder to hear as compared to in a reverberant normal room.

-Chris

[WmAx]

Thanks for this Mika75. ...A relevant contribution to the discussion.

While this may not - to Chris' satisfaction - prove that the S8 cabinets are totally inert, it does show that Paradigm has certainly given much thought to minimizing audible resonances. ..I'm eager to read Chris's reply.

I have been familiar with the S1 and it's cabinet system for a long time, and when it fit the budget and performance profile of a specific user's request, I have recommended it in some prior posts, to be used with dual smaller size(to be certain the sub's cabinet panels have a relatively high resonant frequency due to the high xover point needed) stereo subs(absolute requirement to use stereo subs; one placed near each satellite due to the high crossover point required), crossed at about 105-110 Hz(lower point not sufficient due to the distortion vs. SPL profile of the speaker as you approach and go under this frequency band) to the S1 using a powerful processor like the DCX2496(a receiver's built in xover system is not likely going to be sufficient, and in addition, the DCX is going to allow the needed tonal modification to get the sound to one's ideal preference). In addition, I recommend likely needing to open the S1 up and replacing the interior acoustic absorption material with something like OC 705 or rockwool board; most speakers use an insufficient internal stuffing such as low density poly or dacron fill.

I have no reason to believe the S8 cabinet shares anything in common with the all metal cast alloy cabinet of the S1.

-Chris

[WmAx]

Hi Peng. ..The comment from Chris that I was referring to is:

"...Moving down the S8 would be a certain downgrade. It's not as if I'm just some dude making blind suggestions; I have studied speaker characteristics and how they relate to human auditory response for years, and used this to design speaker systems."

To be this specific in his recommendations without having ever heard the speaker in question seems ridiculous and not at all scientific. It's interesting that on audioasylum.com there are posts from people like Jeff Joseph (of Jeff Joseph audio) and Bobby Palkovic (of Merlin loudspeakers) who would never make such absolute and polarizing comments. Indeed, they've often suggested that people go out and listen to all they can and they've said complementary things about other speaker brands.

As I clarified in another post, this is statistically based comment. Based on the very low frequency of occurrence of low acoustic output cabinets of high end speakers, much less moderate price bracket full range speakers, one can only look at the probabilities here when no type of analysis and/or no detailed information of cabinet construction/design has been provided.

-Chris

[WmAx]

WmAx's monitors use solid oak bracing every 3 inches on every axis (sometimes metal), Concrete, and the Peal N Seal to dampen the walls. Aluminum walls with no cross bracing side to side or front to back, will not be enough to tame midrange panel resonance.

SheepStar

While I HIGHLY doubt the S1 can match any of my cabinets for low acoustic output of the cabinets, the S1 is far superior to most of the cabinets on retail bookshelf speakers. I am certain the S1 will be better than most in this regard. Combined with it's superb drivers and crossover, and thus excellent measured response (above 105-110Hz), it could make for a superb value system if used with high quality stereo subs and a DCX2496 or comparable xover/processor, and possibly some slight mods to the S1(replace internal acoustic absorption material and possibly add in Dynamat dampening to the aluminum).

-Chris

[syd123]

Chris,

Of Paradigms entry-level Signature speaker you pay a high compliment by saying:

"While I HIGHLY doubt the S1 can match any of my cabinets for low acoustic output of the cabinets, the S1 is far superior to most of the cabinets on retail bookshelf speakers."

Then you said relative to your assumption (stated earlier on in the thread) that the S8 has a poorly constructed cabinet:

"As I clarified in another post, this is statistically based comment. Based on the very low frequency of occurrence of low acoustic output cabinets of high end speakers"

This begs the question, If Paradigm spent the necessary R&D devising an inert cabinet system for it's entry level Signature speaker, why is it such a stretch to think that they may have paid this matter some attention in their top-of-the line flagship Signature speaker?? It seems clear - based on what Paradigm did with their S1 - that they are not simply another marketing-driven speaker company bent on designing pretty, but poorly engineered speakers, but rather take a solid engineering-based approach to their designs. Yes, I realize the S8 is a floor-stander and as such presents different challenges, but the point remains.

So, to me, based on your remarks, their discussion of cabinet resonances on their website, and their extensive use of DBT in developing their speakers (as explained on their website) it seems to me quite likely that they worked hard to minimize cabinet resonances in this speaker. ..This isn't to say they're as inert as yours, or as a B&W, just that they likely considered this as an important design consideration.

[PENG]

Hi Peng. ..The comment from Chris that I was referring to is:

"...Moving down the S8 would be a certain downgrade. It's not as if I'm just some dude making blind suggestions; I have studied speaker characteristics and how they relate to human auditory response for years, and used this to design speaker systems."

To be this specific in his recommendations without having ever heard the speaker in question seems ridiculous and not at all scientific.

Good catch, but I don't see anything wrong with his comments. I don't think you have to own and have driven a BMW 850 to know that it would be a down grade to own and drive a Lexus GS 350. It is not hard to see that the S8 is comparable to the 803S and/or 803D but not the 802 and above.

[Mika75]

Stereophile.com/Larry Greenhill interviews Revel's Kevin Voecks • June, 2008 (http://stereophile.com/interviews/608kev/)

Voecks:Listening tests over the past 10 years have taught us one other thing. Above the midprice range of loudspeakers, there is no correlation between the sound quality and the loudspeaker's price. Although many high-priced loudspeakers do perform adequately in our listening tests, the most expensive speaker in a given double-blind listening test may be the least preferred by our listening panel.

[RacineBoxer]

wmax - you've posted quite often that you've conducted various amounts of research with double blind listening, I'm curious where your research was published so I might be able to read it.

Also, I know there was a thread a while back where you were "rebuilding" someone's Infinity Primus floorstanders with your idea of a cabinet upgrade. Has this project been finished and are these speakers available for audition?

[codexp3]

Good catch, but I don't see anything wrong with his comments. I don't think you have to own and have driven a BMW 850 to know that it would be a down grade to own and drive a Lexus GS 350. It is not hard to see that the S8 is comparable to the 803S and/or 803D but not the 802 and above.

Why would anyone drive an 850? Unless of course you hate hp. I'll stick with Renntech'd AMGs. :D

[Sheep]

So, to me, based on your remarks, their discussion of cabinet resonances on their website, and their extensive use of DBT in developing their speakers (as explained on their website) it seems to me quite likely that they worked hard to minimize cabinet resonances in this speaker.

You're kidding right? You should read Audioquest's website too then, they claim all kinds of things on there. Thanks for the chicklet btw.

SheepStar

[WmAx]

wmax - you've posted quite often that you've conducted various amounts of research with double blind listening, I'm curious where your research was published so I might be able to read it.

The listening tests that I personally performed were my privately performed work, as I thought I specified. It is not published.

Also, I know there was a thread a while back where you were "rebuilding" someone's Infinity Primus floorstanders with your idea of a cabinet upgrade. Has this project been finished and are these speakers available for audition?

The project is nearly complete. It is for a member of this board. They are not available for any type of audition with me - but perhaps the member (matt34) will allow you to listen to them after he gets them, assuming you are somewhat close to him to make this feasible of course.

-Chris

[syd123]

Hi Chris,

You have not replied to my question. To briefly restate it:

If you're willing to admit that Paradigm paid careful attention to creating an inert cabinet system for it's entry level "Signature" speaker the S1, why is it such a stretch for you to think that they may have paid this matter some attention in their top-of-the line flagship "Signature" speaker the S8?? Yes, I realize the S8 is a floor-stander and as such presents different challenges, but the point remains.

Put another way:

While discussing the S8 you declined to give Paradigm the benefit of the doubt because (paraphrasing) "statistically very few companies give sufficient attention to cabinet resonances." Then, later in the thread, you gave high praise to Paradigm for minimizing resonances in it's S1. So , statistically speaking, what percentage of companies would pay so much attention to resonances in their entry level speaker then so little attention to it in their flagship?

[WmAx]

Hi Chris,

You have not replied to my question. To briefly restate it:

If you're willing to admit that Paradigm paid careful attention to creating an inert cabinet system for it's entry level "Signature" speaker the S1, why is it such a stretch for you to think that they may have paid this matter some attention in their top-of-the line flagship "Signature" speaker the S8?? Yes, I realize the S8 is a floor-stander and as such presents different challenges, but the point remains.

Put another way:

While discussing the S8 you declined to give Paradigm the benefit of the doubt because (paraphrasing) "statistically very few companies give sufficient attention to cabinet resonances." Then, later in the thread, you gave high praise to Paradigm for minimizing resonances in it's S1. So , statistically speaking, what percentage of companies would pay so much attention to resonances in their entry level speaker then so little attention to it in their flagship?

It is a case of very different cost/challenges. It is easy to make a very small bookshelf like the S1 using this solid cast method. The only thing I remember Paradigm claiming to have done to reduce resonances in the S8 is to use a driver decoupling(however effective their particular execution is, I have no idea). But even a perfectly executed variant of this feature, alone, is not enough to reduce the cabinet output to inaudible levels. It does reduce the transmission by a notable degree, however. I have used this method in combination with other things on past cabinets.

-Chris

[haraldo]

Measurements of panel resonances on Reference Studio/100 v.3, while this is not the speaker being discussed here, I guess it may still have some relevance.....

Doesn't this figure show way too much resonances on back panel?

http://stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/105paradigm/index2.html

[syd123]

"The only thing I remember Paradigm claiming to have done to reduce resonances in the S8 is to use a driver decoupling (however effective their particular execution is, I have no idea). But even a perfectly executed variant of this feature, alone, is not enough to reduce the cabinet output to inaudible levels."

On their website they also point to the use of radial bracing.. They claim that this, along with their sophisticated decoupling system, indeed results in resonances being reduced to inaudible levels. You claim otherwise. ..But before you (or those reading this thread who may see you as an authority on such matters) discount their claims as unsupported, you should recognize that they too use double-blind testing, an enormous (and expensive) anechoic research center, and embrace the idea that neutral/flat measured performance is highly correlated with listener preference. Again, it would be very out of character for an engineering-driven company that developed the S1 (that you so highly praised), would give such short shrift to their top-of-the-line flagship speaker.

[Davemcc]

There seems to be a fair number of S8 owners here defending the model. Open one up and snap some pics of the internal cabinet construction. Seriously, I have searched for any pics or mention online about how the cabinet is actually constructed. Short of this IMS feature, I've been unable to find any mention of the acoustic engineering designed into the cabinet. If the S8 faithful want to win over the skeptics, open them up and show us the internal bracing.

[haraldo]

There seems to be a fair number of S8 owners here defending the model. Open one up and snap some pics of the internal cabinet construction. Seriously, I have searched for any pics or mention online about how the cabinet is actually constructed. Short of this IMS feature, I've been unable to find any mention of the acoustic engineering designed into the cabinet. If the S8 faithful want to win over the skeptics, open them up and show us the internal bracing.

I would be skeptical, if they don't even want to show schematics of the internals

[syd123]

There seems to be a fair number of S8 owners here defending the model. Open one up and snap some pics of the internal cabinet construction. Seriously, I have searched for any pics or mention online about how the cabinet is actually constructed. Short of this IMS feature, I've been unable to find any mention of the acoustic engineering designed into the cabinet. If the S8 faithful want to win over the skeptics, open them up and show us the internal bracing.

Actually, I think the only S8 owner whose speaking up on this issue is me :) The others seem to have more sense than I.

Why should an owner feel the onus to disassemble their speaker? The only reason that I continue to go on and on about this is because I'm quite bothered that Chris would presume the S8's - and the many other floor-standing speakers he impugned without mentioning them directly - have problems with resonances simply because their designers do not share his particular view on what constitutes and audible resonance and how best to address it. The thread caught my eye b/c it mentioned the speakers that I happen to own but I'd feel this way no matter which brand he disparaged in this manner.

Chris cites his use of double-blind testing and use of measurements as evidence of an impartial, science-based approach to speaker design. Well, take a look at Paradigms website and read the fairly detailed explanations of their approach to speaker design, use of the NRC in Canada, development of their own anechoic chamber, use of DBT, and you'll see that they also take a very engineering approach to designing speakers. They are not like the many "two guys in a garage" outfits or the the smaller companies who have more to say about their furniture grade finishes than the scientific rationale for their designs.

Remember, of the many glowing reviews of the Paradigm S8's - both the v.1 and v.2 w/ beryllium tweeter - not ONE (that I've read anyway) has noted ANY problems with resonances. Yet Chris has presumed them to have them simply b/c he's come to expect this from speaker mfgs.

I'm a little surprised that others aren't also challenging him on his sweeping generalizations.

[haraldo]

There seems to be a fair number of S8 owners here defending the model. Open one up and snap some pics of the internal cabinet construction. Seriously, I have searched for any pics or mention online about how the cabinet is actually constructed. Short of this IMS feature, I've been unable to find any mention of the acoustic engineering designed into the cabinet. If the S8 faithful want to win over the skeptics, open them up and show us the internal bracing.

Actually, I think the only S8 owner whose speaking up on this issue is me :) The others seem to have more sense than I.

Why should an owner feel the onus to disassemble their speaker? The only reason that I continue to go on and on about this is because I'm quite bothered that Chris would presume the S8's - and the many other floor-standing speakers he impugned without mentioning them directly - have problems with resonances simply because their designers do not share his particular view on what constitutes and audible resonance and how best to address it. The thread caught my eye b/c it mentioned the speakers that I happen to own but I'd feel this way no matter which brand he disparaged in this manner.

Chris cites his use of double-blind testing and use of measurements as evidence of an impartial, science-based approach to speaker design. Well, take a look at Paradigms website and read the fairly detailed explanations of their approach to speaker design, use of the NRC in Canada, development of their own anechoic chamber, use of DBT, and you'll see that they also take a very engineering approach to designing speakers. They are not like the many "two guys in a garage" outfits or the the smaller companies who have more to say about their furniture grade finishes than the scientific rationale for their designs.

Remember, of the many glowing reviews of the Paradigm S8's - both the v.1 and v.2 w/ beryllium tweeter - not ONE (that I've read anyway) has noted ANY problems with resonances. Yet Chris has presumed them to have them simply b/c he's come to expect this from speaker mfgs.

I'm a little surprised that others aren't also challenging him on his sweeping generalizations.

Oh if you seen the bleeding disagreements I've had in the past with WmAx... I will never agree with his opinions on loudspeakers..... but that's my right..... And yes I do believe some people here ignores important properties of speaker design, because it, for some reason, doesn't match what has been scientifically proven by AES.

[Davemcc]

The only reason that I continue to go on and on about this is because I'm quite bothered that Chris would presume the S8's - and the many other floor-standing speakers he impugned without mentioning them directly - have problems with resonances simply because their designers do not share his particular view on what constitutes and audible resonance and how best to address it.

I keep visiting this thread and searching for some evidence to suggest that the cabinet is as well constructed as you would suggest. Lacking any info from Paradigm directly or any other available source, I would have to go back to my local shop and and ask them to disassemble their floor model S8. I'm quite sure that they would be unwilling to do that since I've already expressed to them my underwhelming experience during a couple of auditions.

I've expressed before in this thread and others that I could only categorize what I was hearing as resonance, for lack of a better word. I'll explain why I chose that word for my own experience with the S8. I literally grew up in a piano store. As a teenager, I helped rebuild pianos and the sound of the S8 reminded me very much of the tone one might hear from a piano with a cracked or damaged soundboard, causing some unwanted resonance that needs to be repaired. I'm glad you love your speakers, but to my ear the S8's did not present a realistic or natural sound reproduction.

I would like to see a resolution to this issue almost as a point of curiosity, to see if there is anything physical to cause my listening impressions. I use bookshelf speakers and have primarily concentrated on bookshelf speakers in my auditions. In my auditions of mid to high end bookshelf speakers, I have never experienced such a sound as what I heard in the S8 which may be why it stood out so glaringly in my experience with the S8. High end bookshelves generally lack resonance due to the smaller cabinet panels and relative ease and low expense of building a suitably braced cabinet.

On top of that, I've found that Chris' suggestions are rarely, if ever, wrong. Because Chris' part in this thread reinforces my previously held experience, I tend to fall in line with Chris on this issue as well.

[Mika75]

Open one up and snap some pics of the internal cabinet construction.

I've removed my drivers a few times just out of curiosity, inspecting the measures taken to reduce cabinet resonance (and to see why they are soo damn heavy!) so I agree with this request, even though it wont give us technical data, but it will be an insight to what lengths Paradigm has gone to..

[Warpdrv]

Wow you guys.... seriously...

Either produce measurements for or against your supporting theories, or just drop it....

I love the Sigs.... I think they sound great to my ears....

Are they worth paying retail for in my opinion... Not sure... In this economy probably not... But then again I really don't pay retail for anything. I have been offered a price on them that would sway me towards buying them in the near future.

Am I going to worry about cabinet resonances on speakers I have spent time with and love.... doubt it...

Am I going to sit and argue with someone on the internet that I don't really know, much less give a P00 about whether or not they agree with my thoughts on a speaker I truly love and admire.... I highly doubt it...

Relax People.... not worth your energy.... really...

group hug... :D

[TheFactor]

My Studios dont have any of the above mentioned issues I cant see how there top of the line sigs would either :confused:

[syd123]

I keep visiting this thread and searching for some evidence to suggest that the cabinet is as well constructed as you would suggest.

Frankly, I don't think the burden of proof is on me. .. I am not that concerned with defending these speakers specifically. My gripe is with Chris's condemnation of floor-standers in general.

I've expressed before in this thread and others that I could only categorize what I was hearing as resonance, for lack of a better word. I'll explain why I chose that word for my own experience with the S8. I literally grew up in a piano store. As a teenager, I helped rebuild pianos and the sound of the S8 reminded me very much of the tone one might hear from a piano with a cracked or damaged soundboard, causing some unwanted resonance that needs to be repaired. I'm glad you love your speakers, but to my ear the S8's did not present a realistic or natural sound reproduction.

I would like to see a resolution to this issue almost as a point of curiosity, to see if there is anything physical to cause my listening impressions. I use bookshelf speakers and have primarily concentrated on bookshelf speakers in my auditions. In my auditions of mid to high end bookshelf speakers, I have never experienced such a sound as what I heard in the S8 which may be why it stood out so glaringly in my experience with the S8. High end bookshelves generally lack resonance due to the smaller cabinet panels and relative ease and low expense of building a suitably braced cabinet.

What sort of resolution would satisfy you?? Maybe you heard a bad pair. Or perhaps what you think was a resonance emanating from the speaker was in fact coming from something else (perhaps another speaker in the room. I was told once that ideally no other speakers should be in the room). ..Who knows. Do you recall the song?? Go listen to another pair and if you hear the same thing then case closed.

As for me, I can tell you that as someone with excellent measured hearing, a life-time of music fixation and years spent around live music I have NOT heard any resonances from the cabinet. .. And I've listened to all types of music from Bill Evans to Oscar Peterson to Bjork to Randy Newman to Gorillaz.

As for Chris's expertise. ..There are experts everywhere and they all have their own set of biases and predjudices - nothing unusual about that. It's noteworthy that the various experts who have reviewed the S8's have said glowing things (and have measured them to be flat flat flat) and none have observed any cabinet resonances. Chris, who has NOT heard them or measured them nonetheless advised against purchasing them because of "presumed" problems with their cabinets. People reading this thread will need to come to their own conclusions about which of the two seems more believable - the people who have listened to these and measured them, or a poster on audioholics who has never listened to them but condemns them anyway.

[TheFactor]

I keep visiting this thread and searching for some evidence to suggest that the cabinet is as well constructed as you would suggest.

Frankly, I don't think the burden of proof is on me. .. I am not that concerned with defending these speakers specifically. My gripe is with Chris's condemnation of floor-standers in general.

I've expressed before in this thread and others that I could only categorize what I was hearing as resonance, for lack of a better word. I'll explain why I chose that word for my own experience with the S8. I literally grew up in a piano store. As a teenager, I helped rebuild pianos and the sound of the S8 reminded me very much of the tone one might hear from a piano with a cracked or damaged soundboard, causing some unwanted resonance that needs to be repaired. I'm glad you love your speakers, but to my ear the S8's did not present a realistic or natural sound reproduction.

I would like to see a resolution to this issue almost as a point of curiosity, to see if there is anything physical to cause my listening impressions. I use bookshelf speakers and have primarily concentrated on bookshelf speakers in my auditions. In my auditions of mid to high end bookshelf speakers, I have never experienced such a sound as what I heard in the S8 which may be why it stood out so glaringly in my experience with the S8. High end bookshelves generally lack resonance due to the smaller cabinet panels and relative ease and low expense of building a suitably braced cabinet.

What sort of resolution would satisfy you?? Maybe you heard a bad pair. Or perhaps what you think was a resonance emanating from the speaker was in fact coming from something else (perhaps another speaker in the room. I was told once that ideally no other speakers should be in the room). ..Who knows. Do you recall the song?? Go listen to another pair and if you hear the same thing then case closed.

As for me, I can tell you that as someone with excellent measured hearing, a life-time of music fixation and years spent around live music I have NOT heard any resonances from the cabinet. .. And I've listened to all types of music from Bill Evans to Oscar Peterson to Bjork to Randy Newman to Gorillaz.

As for Chris's expertise. ..There are experts everywhere and they all have their own set of biases and predjudices - nothing unusual about that. It's noteworthy that the various experts who have reviewed the S8's have said glowing things (and have measured them to be flat flat flat) and none have observed any cabinet resonances. Chris, who has NOT heard them or measured them nonetheless advised against purchasing them because of "presumed" problems with their cabinets. People reading this thread will need to come to their own conclusions about which of the two seems more believable - the people who have listened to these and measured them, or a poster on audioholics who has never listened to them but condemns them anyway.
Well said and as they say you hit the nail wright on the head!!!

[Davemcc]

Frankly, I don't think the burden of proof is on me.

Not at all. Please don't misunderstand my interest in this thread. It is more from academic curiosity to maybe try and explain what I heard in the demo room. Perhaps if I could see what makes these so great in other people opinion, I could go back and give them a fresh listen with new ears. Barring any new info by Paradigm or others on the cabinet construction, I guess I'll simply have to stick with my initial assessment from my own listening.

What sort of resolution would satisfy you??

Honestly, I have no requirements that need to be satisfied. If this remains an enduring mystery to me, that's OK too. It may simply be a matter of preference. I listen primarily bookshelf speakers, as I mentioned, and I have a hard time finding floorstanders that I like. The S8 may just be grouped in with others that share similar characteristics by their design.

Besides, the only person a speaker needs to please is it's owner and there are several happy S8 owners here. Mission accomplished.

[Likecoiledsteel]

The S8 was a very nice speaker when I auditioned them. However, I felt the Sonus Faber Cremona bested them in musicality and smoothness. Sound is too subjective to rely on other's ears. Find what you like and go for it.
Steel

[RacineBoxer]

On top of that, I've found that Chris' suggestions are rarely, if ever, wrong. Because Chris' part in this thread reinforces my previously held experience, I tend to fall in line with Chris on this issue as well.


So in other words you are in the process of selling those dynaudio's and picking up some B&W's? Since, according to him, the dynaudio's are surely inferior at the same price point.

[Alex2507]

So in other words you are in the process of selling those dynaudio's and picking up some B&W's? Since, according to him, the dynaudio's are surely inferior at the same price point.

Where does he mention the price point of the Dynaudio's?

[codexp3]

From Paradigm:

It’s the attention to (or more correctly, the obsession with) details that separates the very best high-end speaker designs from the rest. Take, as an example, our IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT butyl-rubber driver fastening system. Developed in response to the nemesis of all speaker designers – cabinet resonances and vibrations – our Isolation Mounting System (IMS) is simply another step on the road to audio perfection. Critically placed isolation inserts and gaskets actually decouple drivers from the speaker enclosure itself. This “baffleless” technology reduces driver/enclosure interactions and their associated resonances to inaudible levels. In Signature speakers the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated.

[RacineBoxer]

Where does he mention the price point of the Dynaudio's?

Well the search function came through for me, I was merely guessing. Just do an advanced search and with his username, type in different speaker manufacturer's, and you'll see outside of B&W, Behringer & Harman/Infinity/Toole they all suck. Based on never hearing them but reading some research of course.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=323973&highlight=dynaudio#post323973

[syd123]

From Paradigm:

It’s the attention to (or more correctly, the obsession with) details that separates the very best high-end speaker designs from the rest. Take, as an example, our IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT butyl-rubber driver fastening system. Developed in response to the nemesis of all speaker designers – cabinet resonances and vibrations – our Isolation Mounting System (IMS) is simply another step on the road to audio perfection. Critically placed isolation inserts and gaskets actually decouple drivers from the speaker enclosure itself. This “baffleless” technology reduces driver/enclosure interactions and their associated resonances to inaudible levels. In Signature speakers the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated.

I somewhat suspect that this will not meet Chris's approval. ..Hat's off to Paradigm, however, if this indeed works (which it appears to me that it does). This is a more elegant way of reducing resonances without having to build a 250lb cabinet which is what Chris seems to imply is necessary. ..As it is the S8's weighs a robust 100lbs

[syd123]

Well the search function came through for me, I was merely guessing. Just do an advanced search and with his username, type in different speaker manufacturer's, and you'll see outside of B&W, Behringer & Harman/Infinity/Toole they all suck. Based on never hearing them but reading some research of course.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=323973&highlight=dynaudio#post323973

good grief. I had no idea that Chris's views on this subject were so entrenched.

[ParadigmDawg]

I don't remember writing that.;)From Paradigm:

It’s the attention to (or more correctly, the obsession with) details that separates the very best high-end speaker designs from the rest. Take, as an example, our IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT butyl-rubber driver fastening system. Developed in response to the nemesis of all speaker designers – cabinet resonances and vibrations – our Isolation Mounting System (IMS) is simply another step on the road to audio perfection. Critically placed isolation inserts and gaskets actually decouple drivers from the speaker enclosure itself. This “baffleless” technology reduces driver/enclosure interactions and their associated resonances to inaudible levels. In Signature speakers the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated.

[Matt34]

I googled Paradigm SIgnature S8 to try and find an exploded 3D view so I could put this thread to rest but alas, the internet denied my victory.

RacineBoxer,

Lets stay on the topic.

[codexp3]

I guess it all comes down to subjectivity. I am very surprised anyone can find a major flaw with the S8v2s. They may not be everyone’s favorite, but it’s a real reach to consider them anything sort of excellent. I’m starting to think Chris caught a Paradigm engineer peeing on his front porch. That would explain why he’s so critical… :D

[TheFactor]

I guess it all comes down to subjectivity. I am very surprised anyone can find a major flaw with the S8v2s. They may not be everyone’s favorite, but it’s a real reach to consider them anything sort of excellent. I’m starting to think Chris caught a Paradigm engineer peeing on his front porch. That would explain why he’s so critical… :D

:eek: Now Thats funny :D

[TheFactor]

From Paradigm:

It’s the attention to (or more correctly, the obsession with) details that separates the very best high-end speaker designs from the rest. Take, as an example, our IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT butyl-rubber driver fastening system. Developed in response to the nemesis of all speaker designers – cabinet resonances and vibrations – our Isolation Mounting System (IMS) is simply another step on the road to audio perfection. Critically placed isolation inserts and gaskets actually decouple drivers from the speaker enclosure itself. This “baffleless” technology reduces driver/enclosure interactions and their associated resonances to inaudible levels. In Signature speakers the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated.

That the same type of mounting system in my Studios and no vibrations here either although im only running the 60's but my cc690 center is smooth as silk to and thats why I found it funny to hear that the S8 had Resonance issues on this thread when there in A different league than my Studios. Well its nice to hear the positive side now ...Paradigms FTW :D

[codexp3]

That the same type of mounting system in my Studios and no vibrations here either although im only running the 60's but my cc690 center is smooth as silk to and thats why I found it funny to hear that the S8 had Resonance issues on this thread when there in A different league than my Studios. Well its nice to hear the positive side now ...Paradigms FTW :D

The Studios are no slouch! I really thought price to performance they were a better value than the Signatures. I paid the premium simply because I love the tweeters in the Signature v2 line. I feel the Studios represent one of the best values in home audio right along with the Dynaudio focus line.

[WmAx]

From Paradigm:

It’s the attention to (or more correctly, the obsession with) details that separates the very best high-end speaker designs from the rest. Take, as an example, our IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT butyl-rubber driver fastening system. Developed in response to the nemesis of all speaker designers – cabinet resonances and vibrations – our Isolation Mounting System (IMS) is simply another step on the road to audio perfection. Critically placed isolation inserts and gaskets actually decouple drivers from the speaker enclosure itself. This “baffleless” technology reduces driver/enclosure interactions and their associated resonances to inaudible levels. In Signature speakers the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated.

The Studio 100 is also specified as using this decoupling system for the drivers. This last line, where the ad copy says.... "....the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated", does not appear to have much in the way evidence supporting it by looking at other speakers that use this same system that have been measured.

The Studio 100 cabinet is anything but low in measured resonance amplitude. The IMS mounting system seems to have done very little to help in this case example.

Stereophile Studio 100 V3 accelerometer measurement: http://stereophile.com/images/archivesart/P100fig2.jpg

Ad copy simply does not mean much of anything it seems.

Of course, this is the Studio 100, not the S8. Maybe the S8 has relatively low resonance cabinets, but it seems unlikely as I have explained prior in this thread.

-Chris

[TheFactor]

The Studios are no slouch! I really thought price to performance they were a better value than the Signatures. I paid the premium simply because I love the tweeters in the Signature v2 line. I feel the Studios represent one of the best values in home audio right along with the Dynaudio focus line.

Nice !!! Thanks :) Im really happy with my Studios and enjoy them more everyday but the Signature v2 line is simply beautiful and bring the highs to a totaly different level I think as you say , the tweeters really are phenomenal . I know when im watching a movie with my Studios and a phone rings or someones doing dishes it sounds like its in my house and I catch myself looking towards the kitchen or looking to see if my phone lit up lol :D

[Davemcc]

So in other words you are in the process of selling those dynaudio's and picking up some B&W's? Since, according to him, the dynaudio's are surely inferior at the same price point.

Surely you are referring to Chris' reference to the Focus 220 floorstanders. I'm quite sure my Focus 140 bookshelf speakers do not share the resonance characteristics of the floorstanding model.

[no. 5]

...I found it funny to hear that the S8 had Resonance issues on this thread when there in A different league than my Studios.

The thing to remember about these resonance "issues" is who brought it up. That is, a person who feels that any resonance is too much, and in my opinion, having a speaker with no audible resonance is a worthy objective, but the fact is, it is an attribute that very few commercial speakers have.

But the thing is, "flawed" speakers still sound very good; in the research of Floyd Toole that WmAx brought up, the loudspeakers that scored highly, or won comparisons still had flaws. Revel Salon2's have some cabinet resonance, and they won double blind listening comparisons. Think about that; commercial speakers that have resonant cabinets can sound monumentally better than other commercial speakers that also have resonant cabinets. Why must the S8 be all that different?

For that matter, comments about how well the cabinet is constructed, or the extent of resonance are conjecture, as absolutely zero information has been provided as to construction or measured behavior of the S8's cabinet.

[syd123]

Chris,

Unless I'm mistaken, Paradigm's claim: "....the problem of enclosure resonances is not simply reduced, it is essentially eliminated" is made only with respect to the Signatures.

That said, I even question your claim about the 100's being "anything but low in measured resonance"

Note John Atkinson's (who conducts these measurements) comments:

I haven't said anything about coloration. That's because, despite the variety of program material I auditioned on the Studio/100s, I was never made aware of any persistent problem in this area. This is one neutral speaker.

With respect to their cabinets, Paradigm states:

Enclosures use acoustically inert high-density hardboard and strategically located radial braces as needed to limit unwanted resonances, increase enclosure stiffness and prevent “ballooning” effects.

Acoustical damping material eliminates internal standing waves. Low-diffraction grills minimize interference from enclosure edges. High-velocity, low-noise ports allow maximum bass efficiency with minimum turbulence distortion.

You do realize that these are a full-range speaker that retail for a modest $2300/pair? Given this, I find their measured and, more importantly, observed performance to be quite impressive. I spent quite a bit of time listening to these speakers before electing to go up to the Signatures. ..The 100's are very well built, very substantial, and - I think - compare quite favorably with other speakers in their price range.

[TheFactor]

The thing to remember about these resonance "issues" is who brought it up. That is, a person who feels that any resonance is too much, and in my opinion, having a speaker with no audible resonance is a worthy objective, but the fact is, it is an attribute that very few commercial speakers have.

But the thing is, "flawed" speakers still sound very good; in the research of Floyd Toole that WmAx brought up, the loudspeakers that scored highly, or won comparisons still had flaws. Revel Salon2's have some cabinet resonance, and they won double blind listening comparisons. Think about that; commercial speakers that have resonant cabinets can sound monumentally better than other commercial speakers that also have resonant cabinets. Why must the S8 be all that different?

For that matter, comments about how well the cabinet is constructed, or the extent of resonance are conjecture, as absolutely zero information has been provided as to construction or measured behavior of the S8's cabinet. Thats a pretty good perspective on both sides of the fence I must say and may I add it must be very hard to satisfy WmAx in the audio world because he does seem to be very critical of many if not almost all commercial manufactures excluding DIY Projects IT "APPEARS" . I dont mean that in a sarcastic manor either I really dont, it actually must be kind of sad to be that knowledgeable and well versed in the audio world about speakers, amps, subs ect. to not be able to enjoy something for what it is and the good things it has to offer instead of only finding the negative things if indeed there are, I mean it must be really hard for him to enjoy any type of HT equipment when your that critical . Just my 2cents

[syd123]

The thing to remember about these resonance "issues" is who brought it up. That is, a person who feels that any resonance is too much, and in my opinion, having a speaker with no audible resonance is a worthy objective, but the fact is, it is an attribute that very few commercial speakers have.

But the thing is, "flawed" speakers still sound very good; in the research of Floyd Toole that WmAx brought up, the loudspeakers that scored highly, or won comparisons still had flaws. Revel Salon2's have some cabinet resonance, and they won double blind listening comparisons. Think about that; commercial speakers that have resonant cabinets can sound monumentally better than other commercial speakers that also have resonant cabinets. Why must the S8 be all that different?

For that matter, comments about how well the cabinet is constructed, or the extent of resonance are conjecture, as absolutely zero information has been provided as to construction or measured behavior of the S8's cabinet.


I think you've done a good job of summarizing this thread. ..And your comments about how speakers that measure imperfectly may nontheless sound terrific are spot on.

As an FYI, it was acknowledged early on that none of the reviews (all glowing) provided data on cabinet resonances. In a couple of the reviews the cabinets were highly praised as "inert" but, admittedly, no accelerometer measurements on the cabinets were provided (as far as I know only Stereophile does this and these speakers were never reviewed by Stereophile. ..Though they did receive a stellar review in their sister A/V mag).

Chris siezed upon the lack of cabinet measurements and told the OP it would be a "definite downgrade to go from B&W 802's to the S8's" because of cabinet issues. He was unequivocal. He made this remarkable statement even as he admitted that he personally had never heard them, never measured them, nor had read anywhere that their cabinets had measureable or audible resonances. In fact, I don't think he mentioned having ever personally seen them.

I mentioned the numerous positive reviews where NOT ONE reviewer noted resonances (and where the speakers measured remarkably flat) only to say, "c'mon, how can you KNOW FOR CERTAIN these speakers have problems with resonances when NONE of these reviewers observed ANY cabinet issues?"

Later, Paradigm's claims (however unsupported by incontravertible evidence) for their decoupling system (claimed to reduce reduce resonances to inaudible levels); mention of their use of double-blind testing & thorough analysis, in-house designed & manufactured drivers, Canada's NRC's and their own anechoic chamber, etc. etc.. were all served up as information to be considered and weighed in comparison with Chris's equally unsupported claims.

[Alex2507]

Well the search function came through for me, I was merely guessing. Just do an advanced search and with his username, type in different speaker manufacturer's, and you'll see outside of B&W, Behringer & Harman/Infinity/Toole they all suck. Based on never hearing them but reading some research of course.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=323973&highlight=dynaudio#post323973

I been stalking Chris for some time now but thanks for the tip on the advanced stalk function. :)

You seem to have an ax to grind. Good luck with that. :rolleyes:

[Matt34]

I think we just witnessed the Paradigm fanboies trumping the Def Tech fanboies as the most tenacious defenders of the brand.:p