Paradigm Signature S8's

[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

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.

 

[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.