What bookshelf would you pick?

[KEW]

What is even sillier is that the bad reviews are never that bad for this model. So even the people who don't prefer their sound are not blind to the fact that they really work well.

That is the camp I am in!
Imaging like nothing else!
Great detail!
Obviously a high quality speaker.
However, there was something about the dispersion (that is my theory of the measurement that would show this difference) that did not work for me. When I closed my eyes, it seemed like the music was being played in the next room and I was listening through a large opening (say french doors to the next room). A trumpet projects well to my ears, but a piano or violin lacks the in-room ambiance.
For me, the BMR's are the exact opposite.
Certainly not the perfect imaging of the LS50's concentric drivers, but I am definitely in the same room as the music.
Based on conversations I have had with fans of LS50's I know this is mostly me - something I am somehow more sensitive to (or have a different opinion on) than most. I suspect there are plenty who will prefer the nature of the LS50 over the BMR, and I am certainly not posting to say they are wrong and I am right.
I would, however, say that anyone who gets the chance should listen to both the LS50 and BMR, as I think they are both very well executed speakers in so many ways, with this one difference (that I attribute to dispersion, but that is total SWAG) in how they present the sound into the room!
Unfortunately, I did not have both speakers at the same time, or maybe I could better describe the difference and get specific on where in a particular song it is most obvious.
@shady , I know you know the BMR, but am not sure if you have heard the LS50's. If so, perhaps you might comment on what might be the reason for this difference and what your subjective impression of the same phenomenon was. Like I say for me it mattered, but I could easily see someone else thinking it was a wash or preferring the LS50!

 

[killdozzer]

and I am certainly not posting to say they are wrong and I am right.

No, I know, it's easy to pick and choose when they are all up there. I never had the experience you had with them, then again, maybe it's my room that suits them. Who knows? I have them on a longer side of my living room and they get a lot of space on the sides. Also, classical piano constitutes probably the smallest portion of my not so big portion of classical music I like strings, brass, wood... Very little piano. I like some Debussy, Satie, Bethoveen. On the other hand, piano in modern production sounds remarkable. If I had to describe it; speakers are not strugling with articulate representation and don't leave you with the impression of "barely being up to the task", as usually do the cheapper speakers.
This is a good example of what I'm saying (then again this is linear playing, not that many accords):

 

[snakeeyes]

I’m interested in @CB22 comments about keeping the HSU ULS15 after hearing his new Outlaw subs. I’m sure @Danzilla31 is too.

 

[CB22]

I’m interested in @CB22 comments about keeping the HSU ULS15 after hearing his new Outlaw subs. I’m sure @Danzilla31 is too.

Will do, I’ll start a new thread in that this evening or tomorrow. I need a little bit more time doing critical listening with the subs at different settings.

 

[Danzilla31]

Will do, I’ll start a new thread in that this evening or tomorrow. I need a little bit more time doing critical listening with the subs at different settings.

Yes thank you I know I for one would be super interested in your observations

 

[ryanosaur]

That is the camp I am in!
Imaging like nothing else!
Great detail!
Obviously a high quality speaker.
However, there was something about the dispersion (that is my theory of the measurement that would show this difference) that did not work for me. When I closed my eyes, it seemed like the music was being played in the next room and I was listening through a large opening (say french doors to the next room). A trumpet projects well to my ears, but a piano or violin lacks the in-room ambiance.
For me, the BMR's are the exact opposite.
Certainly not the perfect imaging of the LS50's concentric drivers, but I am definitely in the same room as the music.
Based on conversations I have had with fans of LS50's I know this is mostly me - something I am somehow more sensitive to (or have a different opinion on) than most. I suspect there are plenty who will prefer the nature of the LS50 over the BMR, and I am certainly not posting to say they are wrong and I am right.
I would, however, say that anyone who gets the chance should listen to both the LS50 and BMR, as I think they are both very well executed speakers in so many ways, with this one difference (that I attribute to dispersion, but that is total SWAG) in how they present the sound into the room!
Unfortunately, I did not have both speakers at the same time, or maybe I could better describe the difference and get specific on where in a particular song it is most obvious.
@shady , I know you know the BMR, but am not sure if you have heard the LS50's. If so, perhaps you might comment on what might be the reason for this difference and what your subjective impression of the same phenomenon was. Like I say for me it mattered, but I could easily see someone else thinking it was a wash or preferring the LS50!

I said it before... I liked the KEF towers I auditioned, but I am one of the few that got fatigued listening to KEF. There are speakers out there that really do get high praise and even when they aren't liked, its for a subjective, and sometimes silly reason. Had I not had the experience I did with the LS50s much larger brethren, I would totally be into checking them out... Of course, had I not had that experience, I might already own a full set of KEF instead of Philharmonics.

 

[shadyJ]

@shady , I know you know the BMR, but am not sure if you have heard the LS50's. If so, perhaps you might comment on what might be the reason for this difference and what your subjective impression of the same phenomenon was. Like I say for me it mattered, but I could easily see someone else thinking it was a wash or preferring the LS50!

I have heard the LS50s on a number of occasions. The LS50 has a narrower dispersion than the BMT Philharmonitors. If you look at the BMR Philharmonitor's product page, it is directly compared to the LS50's off-axis responses, that is the LS50's measurements that Dennis is using to compare his speakers against.

I wouldn't venture a subjective impression comparing the two because I didn't hear them in the same conditions or at close enough intervals. The only way to really compare speakers like this is to do A/B testing in the same room.

 

[Good4it]

FYI : Many thought that the LS50s are VG. I am giving them another try. FOMO I guess

 

[snakeeyes]

FYI : Many thought that the LS50s are VG. I am giving them another try. FOMO I guess

I haven’t heard them but it’s possible not everyone would prefer them over other speakers in the same price range. Are you considering a return?

 

[Good4it]

I haven’t heard them but it’s possible not everyone would prefer them over other speakers in the same price range. Are you considering a return?

No

 

[John Parks]

I'll be a good boy and stick to the choices available in the poll and select the Sierra-1. I've had them before and, on their own, are fantastic speakers.

 

[CB22]

@shadyJ I see you reviewed both of these speakers - the Outlaw LCRv2 and the HSU CCB-8. Between the two, which would you choose for home theater purposes? You talked a lot about the good "dynamics" in your review of the CCB-8. Did you feel like you got that "wall of sound" effect from the outlaw?

PS: I placed the order for that Umik-1 mic you recommended to me. May need some support from you with that + the REW later down the line.

 

[shadyJ]

@shadyJ I see you reviewed both of these speakers - the Outlaw LCRv2 and the HSU CCB-8. Between the two, which would you choose for home theater purposes? You talked a lot about the good "dynamics" in your review of the CCB-8. Did you feel like you got that "wall of sound" effect from the outlaw?

PS: I placed the order for that Umik-1 mic you recommended to me. May need some support from you with that + the REW later down the line.

Neither speaker creates that 'wall of sound' effect, and really, few home audio speakers do. It's not an altogether desirable trait, to be honest, because it can come at the cost of imaging. That 'wall of sound' effect has nothing to do with dynamics, and has more to do with soundstage.

As for dynamics, the CCB-8 is more sensitive, but the LCRv2 has pretty crazy power-handling. That means that the CCB-8 will have a wider dynamic range with a typical amplifier, but if you give the LCRv2 enough power, it could probably match the CCB-8.

That's good to hear you will be getting into REW. Audioholics may actually be coming out with some content that helps novice users measure their room in the near future, but please ask any questions you have here and I will try to assist.

 

[ryanosaur]

That's good to hear you will be getting into REW. Audioholics may actually be coming out with some content that helps novice users measure their room in the near future,

Oooooh!

but please ask any questions you have here and I will try to assist.

Mwa-ha-ha-haaaaa!

Thanks, Shady!

 

[KEW]

Neither speaker creates that 'wall of sound' effect, and really, few home audio speakers do. It's not an altogether desirable trait, to be honest, because it can come at the cost of imaging. That 'wall of sound' effect has nothing to do with dynamics, and has more to do with soundstage.

As for dynamics, the CCB-8 is more sensitive, but the LCRv2 has pretty crazy power-handling. That means that the CCB-8 will have a wider dynamic range with a typical amplifier, but if you give the LCRv2 enough power, it could probably match the CCB-8.

That's good to hear you will be getting into REW. Audioholics may actually be coming out with some content that helps novice users measure their room in the near future, but please ask any questions you have here and I will try to assist.

Could you name a couple of speakers that you would associate more with the "wall of sound" effect?
I want to make sure that I have the right idea of what that means!
Thanks!

 

[snakeeyes]

Could you name a couple of speakers that you would associate more with the "wall of sound" effect?
I want to make sure that I have the right idea of what that means!
Thanks!

Think I mentioned it the other day on the Def Tech bipolar towers review. I was trying to explain the positives with a bipolar tower. Hope I didn’t come across wrong. (I also mentioned the negatives)

Personally, monopoles are the right choice for Atmos and I’m working on building 5.1.4 right now to try that out.

 

[shadyJ]

Could you name a couple of speakers that you would associate more with the "wall of sound" effect?
I want to make sure that I have the right idea of what that means!
Thanks!

These, to my ears, definitely had that effect:

I also think that some of the larger Wilson speakers that I have heard had this effect. I think one of the ways you can slightly create this effect artificially is raise the tweeter above the listening position so that the soundstage is shifted upward, almost like displays that are mounted a tad too high. But that doesn't quite match the effect that these line array speakers have.

 

[JengaHit]

I bought the CCB-8's from a value perspective. Haven't heard the others but some of them are above my budget range and might indeed perform better. CCB-8's blend nicely, run full-range, with a Hsu VTF2 Mk3 sub. They come pretty close to, but not quite, the enveloping "wall of sound" that my old Mirage OMD-15's generated--in a larger room they might not do so (see my room size below). Soundstage, with the right recording, extends above and beyond the sides of speakers, with decent depth. Imaging, timbral accuracy, and ambience retrieval are quite convincing, especially for orchestral, choral, opera, chamber, and classical piano. (Piano on Liszt B Minor Sonata sounds in-the-room.) They also provide decent stereo imaging off axis (like my Mirages), provided they're set up per Hsu's instructions re extreme toe-in--they do take a bit of work to place, but when dialed in are very good for the money. Their dynamic range also energizes my 15'Wx19.5'Lx8'H room with rock/pop and movies--tackling both dialogue intelligibility (with no center in 2.1 config) and the oomph of Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises, without breaking a sweat. They sound best when paired with quality components. Hooked up to a cheap Pioneer receiver they sounded bright, but in my main Bryston 4B ST/PS Audio PCA-2 system they sang. They're not the last speakers I'll own, but they're an excellent value if you're on a budget.

 

[shadyJ]

I bought the CCB-8's from a value perspective. Haven't heard the others but some of them are above my budget range and might indeed perform better. CCB-8's blend nicely, run full-range, with a Hsu VTF2 Mk3 sub. They come pretty close to, but not quite, the enveloping "wall of sound" that my old Mirage OMD-15's generated--in a larger room they might not do so (see my room size below). Soundstage, with the right recording, extends above and beyond the sides of speakers, with decent depth. Imaging, timbral accuracy, and ambience retrieval are quite convincing, especially for orchestral, choral, opera, chamber, and classical piano. (Piano on Liszt B Minor Sonata sounds in-the-room.) They also provide decent stereo imaging off axis (like my Mirages), provided they're set up per Hsu's instructions re extreme toe-in--they do take a bit of work to place, but when dialed in are very good for the money. Their dynamic range also energizes my 15'Wx19.5'Lx8'H room with rock/pop and movies--tackling both dialogue intelligibility (with no center in 2.1 config) and the oomph of Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises, without breaking a sweat. They sound best when paired with quality components. Hooked up to a cheap Pioneer receiver they sounded bright, but in my main Bryston 4B ST/PS Audio PCA-2 system they sang. They're not the last speakers I'll own, but they're an excellent value if you're on a budget.

That is an interesting contrast, to go from Mirage's to CCB-8s. The OMDs were an extremely wide dispersion speaker, far more than an average home audio speaker, where the CCB-8s are relatively narrow dispersion speakers. There are advantages to each approach, in my opinion, and I have done lots of A/B testing of dispersion types to get a overall sense of the differences that makes. One thing that narrow dispersion speakers can do that wide dispersion speakers can't is have great imaging when not seated in location that is equidistant between them. But, as you say, that can only happen with a hard toe-in like Hsu suggests. Otherwise the imaging always collapses toward the speaker that is nearest to the listener. As far as I know, there is no way to get good imaging outside of an equal distance between stereo speakers other than time-intensity trading (a hard toe-in of narrow directivity speakers). The best solution is, of course, surround sound system with a surround sound mix, but sadly most music is only recorded in stereo.

 

[Grandzoltar]

My vote went to focal on paper having a wider frequency range than the kefs is the big seller for me. The Focal’s have a higher sensitivity dB too. Both brands have many accolades. If it was which wireless Bluetooth speaker should I get for my computer wireless Bluetooth version of the kefs.