General HiFi question - could use some insight (thanks).

[Brian G McMahon]

Hey folks –

Apologize if this subject is in another post. I don’t want to waste anyone’s time but I have a question regarding a pending purchase that I could use some help with.

As far as speakers are concerned here are my comments on what I have owned.

· Polk TSi500s

o My first speaker and I loved it. I learned however that it was much too large for my listening space. This space is roughly 11 feet from front to back and about 15 feet wide. The distance between myself and the speakers was only about 9 feet.

o They did nothing for me as far as the higher frequencies but overall they did sound good to my ears at that time.

· B&W CM5s (Yamaha Aventage 1010)

o Feel in love with this speaker. The tweeters were right up front and I loved their crisp sound. I’m not much into music with piano but I would listen to such music because it sounded so good. Same with acoustics. The bass response was great and aesthetically they were VERY pleasing.

· Klipsch R-PM 15

o This is where the experience became interesting. A speaker less than half the price of the B&Ws and sound very good. That being said I do recognize where they differ significantly but they made me realize that I spent WAY too much money on the B&Ws when comparing their sound sigs.

Here are the speakers I’m considering:

1. ELAC uni-fi

2. ELAC debut b6

a. Initial impression of both from reading is that they are bass heavy and lack in presentation in the high frequencies. Is this true?

3. Klipsch RP 160

a. Considering these because of my current experience with the R-PM 15.

4. Wharfdale 10.2 or 225

a. Leaning toward these because they look so damn good and most of what I have read is very positive. Does anyone have direct experience in comparing the 10.2 and 225s and would you mind explaining the difference in their sound characteristics?


My application would be 95 percent music and I don’t know if I’ll ever expand into home theater. I really don’t care about that. With that said when I read reviews I find that when folks say they sound great they are primarily referring to bass response. I don’t care about that much either and will be using a sub. Currently have the PSW108 and will upgrade later. For the money I think it sounds really good and I have no interest in room rumble or enhancing movies.

Are there other speakers I should consider and what are your thoughts on the ones above. As I mentioned I’m leaning toward the Wharfdales but not sure which series to go with. For the pair I’m willing to go beyond a 500 budget but not by much. 800 tops.

Any insight you could provide would be much appreciated.

 

[lovinthehd]

Speakers are highly subjective so hard to tell you what you may/may not like. Do what you're doing and listen to a bunch. I'd recommend an in-home listen if possible as the room has a great influence as well.

Another very nice pair of inexpensive speakers is the Philharmonic AA; I have built the kit these are based on and can recommend them. A pair of Ascend Acoustics 340SEs may be a good idea as well.

Just about any sub would be an improvement on the Polk you have so you have much room for improvement there (and I'd look at sub specialists like SVS, Hsu, Power Sound Audio, Rythmik, etc).

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

I think for 2.1 MUSIC system it would be worth to consider upping a budget a bit and go with these:
http://philharmonicaudio.com/Mini-Monitor.html - since you'll be using a sub, going with a bit less bass on sealed version shouldn't be an issue.

Alternatively these (exactly same $550 budget):
http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/speakers/cmt340m/cmt340m.html

Both excellent speakers. MM's would be just a bit more accurate, but CMT340 would have more gusto (ie louder)

 

[KEW]

Brian,
I have compared the Ascend CMT340 against the Philharmonic Audio Affordable Accuracy, and honestly, unless I absolutely needed the extra SPL, I preferred the Affordable Accuracy - it sounded more neutral to my ear.
A $210 speaker out performing a $500 speaker may seem strange, but if you consider that the CMT340 is more or less a CBM170 with the extra SPL and efficiency from the second woofer, you see you are paying a lot for the second woofer (including larger cabinet and associated shipping costs).
To me, the Philharmonic Mini-Monitor with the world-class RAAL ribbon tweeter offers a substantial step up over the competition.
However, as BSA mentioned, you would definitely need a sub with the mini-monitors and if you really like to listen loud, they may not be what you want.
You mentioned looks and neither the Ascends or the AA's are anything special to look at. The Mini Monitor is definitely a step up on that count.
Wharfedale makes fine speakers and while I don't think they offer the value of Philharmonic speakers, I think you would regret them.
At $320/pr, the Klipsch RP-160m is not a bad option. I really feel that Klipsch made decisive improvements with their new RP series. I have a pair of RF-82 ii's in my HT and feel they got left behind when the RP series was introduced. Whereas I really don't consider the RF-82ii a good music speaker (I'm pretty picky and have some nice speakers), the new RP series impresses me for music as well as HT!
Personally, the Elac B6 and Uni-Fi just sound dull and disappointing given all of the attention they have received.

 

[Brian G McMahon]

All - Just wanted to thank those that responded with great suggestions and introducing me to other options. Many thanks.

 

[Mikado463]

Brian, I believe you have gotten some good advice so far, as lovin suggested (along with many others) the Philharmonic line plays well above their price point.

 

[zieglj01]

I am going to throw in one more --

Canton Chrono bookshelf
https://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/cantchrono5032blka/canton-chrono-503.2-7-2-way-bookshelf-speaker-black-pair/1.html

https://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/cantchrono5022whta/canton-chrono-502.2-6-2-way-bookshelf-speaker-white-pair/1.html

 

[speakerman39]

Brian, I have owned both the Wharfedale Dentons and the 220's. Both were warm speakers for the most part. However, the 220's gave up some warmth in the mids to gain in the low end. The Dentons were noticeably warmer in the mids, but certainly needed to be used w/a sub. Furthermore, the Dentons had more detail and were more refined over all.

The 220's really do not need a sub for most music, but is a bit more on the neutral side of scale. Personally, I prefer a more warmer sound signature b/c of my preference is on music. The Wharfies are excellent speakers inmho. Best wishes!


Cheers,

Phil

 

[KEW]

Brian,

Wharfedale makes fine speakers and while I don't think they offer the value of Philharmonic speakers, I think you would regret them.

Brian,
Apologies for the typo here. Should read "I don't think you would regret them."

 

[yepimonfire]

I'll also second the RP-160m. They sound very neutral and accurate, and do not require a sub with most music, as you can usually get 35-40hz in room with them. In my opinion, you will be hard pressed to find a speaker that outperforms them for the price, and even above.

Sent from my LM-X210(G) using Tapatalk

 

[PENG]

The CM5 and the Philharmonic line have my votes. In the old days, Wharfedale speakers did not sound transparent enough for me to ever consider them but I have not auditioned the more recent models. As mentioned, it is highly subjective so it is best to go with speakers that measured well in terms predicted neutrality, and accuracy on the bench.

 

[Brian G McMahon]

Brian,
Apologies for the typo here. Should read "I don't think you would regret them."

Thanks for the clarification on the typo. Figured that was the case as I haven't heard many bad things about them although now I have a few more options to consider. Thanks for you replies.