TLS Guy -vs- Studio 100's

[WmAx]

For those that want to know how to read a waterfall:

The waterfall plot shows, approximately, the energy decay of frequencies vs. time. The top is the on axis response, and the decay should theoretically have an even, gradual reduction down to the lowest point of the graph. The lower frequencies will take a little longer, as you lower in frequency, so the lower frequencies will have a gradual increase in decay compared to higher frequencies. Very few residual ridges should exist, and when they so, should only be present in the very bottom of the floor. Also, note dB range. YOu need at least 25 dB from top of averaged plot to floor. Sometimes, a manufacturer will try to fool you with using only 15-18dB actual signal to floor resolution. Follow the average power of the top response line with a straight edge over to the left to find dB value, and then note how far down the graph floor is from this point. Here is a near perfect theoretical waterfall and on axis response graph, that a speaker should aim for (almost no speaker will come close to this graph - it is shown for example only of what is ideal);

The above waterfall and FR (+/- 0.7dB up to 15kHz) are measured response from my computer monitors.

Also, please realize, the waterfall is useless under 1-2kHz. To analyze decay under this frequency, one needs an anechoic chamber, and use far longer time decay plot axis.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

I hear that you can trade 10 Y2K Focus (is it Foci when you have more than one?) in for a pair of Dynaudio Consequence. I am certain you will be happy with them.

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

 

[ParadigmDawg]

This speaker is only to be used by drunk, rich people who stand on their head when listening to music...

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

 

[STRONGBADF1]

This speaker is only to be used by drunk, rich people who stand on their head when listening to music...

What room are yours in?

 

[Warpdrv]

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

THANK YOU !!!!

I was looking at that speaker layout and design and wondering who the HEL_ was in charge of that speaker.... good lord... Lets aim the tweeter and mid range at the peoples feet and knees and see how that sounds....

I was kinda hoping that they provide the buyer with at least a 40 degree upward angled stand to try to improve things with them...

 

[PENG]

THANK YOU !!!!

I was looking at that speaker layout and design and wondering who the HEL_ was in charge of that speaker.... good lord... Lets aim the tweeter and mid range at the peoples feet and knees and see how that sounds....

I was kinda hoping that they provide the buyer with at least a 40 degree upward angled stand to try to improve things with them...

He turned it upside down before taking the photo, then he sit back and wait for bites.

 

[TLS Guy]

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

I have heard former versions of the Dynaudio Consequence loudspeakers. They have a long history, and go back to the era when the vogue was to chase transient perfect loudspeaker, which meant using a full range driver, first order filters, or the Quad ESL 64. That is still your options, and the late Jim Thiel was consumed with first order filters his whole professional life.

I was caught up with this also, especially after seeing Peter Walker cancel a square wave in free space reversing the connections to one of a pair of Quad ESL 64s. I still regard that as a remarkable feat by the way.

Now back 30 to 25 years or so ago, speaker manufacturers were much more forthcoming about their research drivers and speakers. The founders of Dynaudio, were a very open and decent lot, who would honestly answer anything you asked them. They also made their drivers freely available unlike now.

So smitten with this bug, I went to work on a largely first order filter system for a loudspeaker. The Dynaudio drivers at that time were specifically designed to make first order filters a realistic possibility. I embarked on this about the end of 1982. I had a system up and running by 1984, but it took me a full decade to get it right. It was an absolute nightmare. Like Dynaudio, I ended up using one series rather than parallel filter. These are horrid to work with because both sides of the filter are interdependent. They also present an absolutely grueling load to the amplifier.

I already had a TL with two KEF B139s topped out with four JW modules as a line source biamped at 400 Hz, topped out with a KEF T27 above 6 kHz, built in 1976.

So I decided to revise these speakers. I kept the low end and changed the crossover to 180 Hz third order active between the KEFs and Dynaudio M75 in its own overdamped TL to absorb the rear radiation without coloration, which is a driver in the conquest, but now souped up, mainly with gold trim I suspect. The KEF B139 needs a relatively high order crossover because it resonates violently between 1 and 1.2 kHz. Then I had first order crossover to Dynaudio D54 with a series first order crossover and a parallel first order crossover to a Dynaudio D21. Sounds simple but it proved anything but. I got so frustrated I built another pair of speakers to have something decent to listen to while I labored away on these. I was sorely tempted to ditch the project on many occasions.

Now the reason that the Consequence has to have the tweeter on the bottom is because of the lobing pattern of odd order crossovers. There is 15 degrees of tilt. So you have to put the tweeter high or low, not on the listening axis.

The Consequence uses for the bottom four, updated versions of the D21 AF, D28 AF, D76 and M75, I'm not sure what the woofers are.

The Consequence is actually a very good speaker. Bass is firm and tight and the rest of the range is smooth and articulate. You do however feel as if you are looking down on things. The speaker is sufficiently self effacing to imagine you are up in a balcony. It is quite an unusual design.

For my speakers, I put the drivers the other direction. They ended up really nice speakers. I brought them to Benedict with new lines for the KEFs and used them as the rear speaker, were they continue to shine on SACDs of antiphonal material.

I hate to make a spacer to bring the M75s forward of the other drivers a bit.

The tilt is fortunate, as the speakers are above the chairs, and the listening area is actually on axis.

While they were in Grand Forks ND, they managed to impress the hell out of Bob Carver when he paid a visit.

Really though Dynaudio would be further ahead developing a decent wide band mid and cutting out a couple of drivers.

 

[Alex2507]

The above waterfall and FR (+/- 0.7dB up to 15kHz) are measured response from my computer monitors.

I thought my ears could detect a fourth order ripple in the second harmonic of the 8KHz roll off trickle.

-or-

Is that the best you could do?

These are your rear surrounds ?!?
Now that's just not right. From the pic's in Smug Mug I thought you ran 5.1 and those were bass traps but now I recall your disdain for room treatments. So what are the surrounds like then? Are they as impressive?

I don't suppose anybody ever tells either of you guys to get a hobby.

That comment about the upside down speakers making you feel like you're in the balcony reminds me of how my speakers sounded before I raised them up by 2 1/2" ... except I termed it like listening to a band playing in a pit. Before I heard Chris' speakers I didn't know it was a problem but once I learned to recognize the condition it bothered me enough that I did something about it.

Those Dynaudio's need to be placed upside down in a 4' pit as they appear to be about 7' tall.

 

[TLS Guy]

I thought my ears could detect a fourth order ripple in the second harmonic of the 8KHz roll off trickle.

-or-

Is that the best you could do?



These are your rear surrounds ?!?
Now that's just not right. From the pic's in Smug Mug I thought you ran 5.1 and those were bass traps but now I recall your disdain for room treatments. So what are the surrounds like then? Are they as impressive?

I don't suppose anybody ever tells either of you guys to get a hobby.

That comment about the upside down speakers making you feel like you're in the balcony reminds me of how my speakers sounded before I raised them up by 2 1/2" ... except I termed it like listening to a band playing in a pit. Before I heard Chris' speakers I didn't know it was a problem but once I learned to recognize the condition it bothered me enough that I did something about it.

Those Dynaudio's need to be placed upside down in a 4' pit as they appear to be about 7' tall.

It never occurred to me that someone would think those were anything but speakers, but I suppose they are above average in height!

I need full range powerful speakers there, as I have SACDs where those rear speakers get as big a work out as the fronts, so they have to keep their end up, so to speak. The surrounds are silent on SACD as SACD and a 5.1 layout is different.

So the speakers with least to do are the surrounds, but theses fit in well.
They used to be my location monitors for outside recording and broadcast.

They were built around 1985. These are the only speakers in the room that are not TL. They are minimal ripple sealed speakers with an F3 of 53 Hz. They are 2.5 ways using extended range W-75 EX drivers for the bass and bass/mid, and Dynaudio D28 tweeters. Crossover is at 3 kHz with first order low pass and second order high pass electrical third order composite acoustic and electrical slopes.

One is on the amp case.

You can see its partner on a shelf in this picture.

Here is a picture of one of before they were installed in the studio.

The lobing pattern is downward, so the stand tilts them up. In the current location, the downward tilt is again an advantage.

So there you have the guts of it so to speak.

I must know what I like, as even though there are a lot of different speakers in the room, they all match very closely indeed and the acoustic spectral balance is very even round the room.

This inclines me to regard timbre matching as error matching.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I feel like I should say something on this thread but I've got nothing....

Umm, yeah, you should have said, "I should have bought the Def Tech BP7000s"!

 

[fredk]

... The Consequence is actually a very good speaker...

Just goes to show that things are not always as they seem and there is more than one way to skin, er, wire an electronic cat.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

1. Despite what many think, the only valid research to date done on listening preference tells us that, serious hearing issues aside, we do not all hear differently. It also tells us that, once all bias is removed via DBT, peoples preferences are remarkably similar.

And there are no absolutes.

Regardless of how extensive and massive a research may be, it only tells us of the "General Population", not EVERYONE.

I see on-going double-blinded research everyday at the hospital where I work. If everyone were the same, we wouldn't even need research.

I also went to audition the Paradigm Studio 100 one day. The owner of the store helped me set up the speakers, etc. I brought along my favorite compilation CD.

The owner of the shop thought the Paradigm S-100s sounded great.

I did not think the Paradigm sounded good at all; I thought they sounded TERRIBLE.

So 2 guys who obviously love this hobby who were standing in the exact same room within 2 ft of each other thought completely different things about the same exact speakers. I have no reasons to dislike Paradigm. I have friends who love these speakers.

Research gives us a great starting point and guideline. But there's a lot more to enjoying your music than research alone.

And since ParadigmDawg or Warp think that the S-100 sound absolutely amazing, I believe them 100%. I may not PREFER the sound of these speakers, and it is just simply that. No research is needed for me to conclude.

 

[Warpdrv]

Well, as far as the 100's go, I have had them for a couple of years, and the more and more I auditioned speakers, I knew I could do better - they are really good for HT for sure, and pretty good for music for the price, but obviously there are better speakers out there.

The tweeters have gotten to be a bit edgy for me.... Which is why I have been waiting to get the Sig S8's, which are in a whole new league... The Be tweets and mids on the new Sigs are far superior in comparison.

 

[PENG]

I may not PREFER the sound of these speakers, and it is just simply that. No research is needed for me to conclude.

No research is needed for me either. I have no doubt speakers sound quite different among one another and that's why when I was shopping for them I brought my own classical music CDs. I know how the symphony orchestras sound and I don't care if the Paradigm sounds different to B&W or not, the one that sound more like an orchestra will be my choice.

 

[fredk]

Regardless of how extensive and massive a research may be, it only tells us of the "General Population", not EVERYONE.

Depends how you do the research. At a minimum, if properly done, it will also tell you the distribution within a population.

No doubt there is variation and there are outliers, but, if we remove all sources of bias people pretty much prefer the same sound.

Warp. No doubt if you have the cash and the time, you can find something better than the Studio line. It just drives me up the wall the yardsticks some people use to measure against. Put me next to Tiger woods and I am a miserable failure at golf who should never pick up a club again. Put me next to my son who, bless him, has no coordination at all and call me a champ. Neither is a reasonable yardstick.

To compare the Studio 100 to something like a B&W 800 series speaker is a similarly unreasonable yardstick for most of us.

 

[PENG]

To compare the Studio 100 to something like a B&W 800 series speaker is a similarly unreasonable yardstick for most of us.

I agree with you but in one post it was compared to something much less, even boom box (I assume it was pun intended).

 

[TLS Guy]

Depends how you do the research. At a minimum, if properly done, it will also tell you the distribution within a population.

No doubt there is variation and there are outliers, but, if we remove all sources of bias people pretty much prefer the same sound.

Warp. No doubt if you have the cash and the time, you can find something better than the Studio line. It just drives me up the wall the yardsticks some people use to measure against. Put me next to Tiger woods and I am a miserable failure at golf who should never pick up a club again. Put me next to my son who, bless him, has no coordination at all and call me a champ. Neither is a reasonable yardstick.

To compare the Studio 100 to something like a B&W 800 series speaker is a similarly unreasonable yardstick for most of us.

I disagree, because there is a very poor correlation with price and performance. For instance the much cheaper infinity speaker mentioned has a much better water fall plot then the Paradigm studio 100, although I have not heard the later speaker, it looks more promising by far. And by the way, a speaker at the price of the Paradigm 100 has no business having a water fall plot like I have discovered it does. There is good correlation between the waterfall plot and the quality of a speaker.

 

[Alex2507]

... the much cheaper infinity speaker mentioned has a much better water fall plot then the Paradigm studio 100, although I have not heard the later speaker, it looks more promising by far.

It does look more promising. However the it doesn't tell the whole story nor am I able to tell the whole story but my subjective impression of the apples to oranges comparison that I am able to comment on is that Greg's Studio 100's completely won me over with their ability to go from 0-60 on a vocal solo in the 4th movement of Beethoven's 9th. It was an amazing thing for me to experience and it's with a type of music that you appreciate. Technically the Primus 360's might perform more accurately but let's not forget that sometimes music need to be turned up, way up. So at Greg's when watts start pouring into those 100's from whatever unholy amp he has powering them and that sub woofer starts assisting and that soloist screams out that foreign mumbo jumbo loud enough to arrest time ... you just gotta love it.

I don't think my Primus 360's could fill their shoes ... but I still love 'em.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

No doubt there is variation and there are outliers, but, if we remove all sources of bias people pretty much prefer the same sound.

Really?

So my wife hates ALL kinds of Bass and I love all kinds of Bass.

She loves Bose speakers because they don't have any bass.

She makes me turn off the subwoofer when watching movies together.

So you think bias caused her to hear the bass?

My BP7000SC can crank out some serious bass that a B&W 800D cannot possibly keep up. I love it.

You think my wife won't HEAR the bass if I blind-fold her eyes?

 

[MinusTheBear]

Ouch! Paradigm is taking quite the beating in this thread, though I don't find this thread as interesting as bashing Definitive Technology.