Still in the early stages, so far not a major difference - however, some
noticable difference. >> It may be that the FS52, has more energy up
top (loudness level), where the tweeter in the BS22, is not as loud. >>
Still not an annoyance >> With the FS52, it feels like that I am sitting
closer up, and with the BS22, I am sitting further back. Still no edgy, or
harsh type sound, with the FS52. More to follow.
OK, have done some more in-depth listening - however, I pretty
much knew what I was hearing, with just a few recordings. Some
nit-picking is not intended to down-grade the speakers. They are
still solid and play above standard entry level >>> and out-class
some popular name brands not sold in Best Buy or Fry's.
Even with sitting at the same position the FS52 and BS22 do sound
about the same over-all except for the bass, and what seems to be
more energy going to the FS52 tweeter. >> That energy or the word
that KEW used {shine}, with my word {vivid}, tends to compromise
the sound a little. This is an in-general statement and not for every
song. Both speakers image good for the price, and have a nice sound
stage, while the FS52 seems to expand a little. Both tweeters have
the same wave-guide - and both tweeters are above standard to me.
This some what tweeter difference plays a part with female singing
voices, brass instruments and violins and the over-all fullness of the
sound in general - effecting the treble and midrange balance. > Both
speakers have good detail and plays above the entry level standard
to me. > However, due to the price-point and compromises that need
to be made >> more expensive speakers tend to have more definition
and depth.
Jackie Evancho - the songs Angel and The Lord's prayer >> Plus Dido
White Flags, tend to showcase this. On the 52 the voices were some
what more vivid - however at the expense of some fullness, and also
effect the midrange as a whole. > On the 22 still good and clear, yet
not as vivid - but a little more rich and full. I favor the 22 on this.
On Violin with Lucia Micarelli, the song Nocturne/Bohemian Rhapsody,
The Violin was more vivid, or had some shine along with the Piano ...
however, still sounded somewhat thin - yey more full on the 22. I still
give the edge to the 22. The thin-ness also effects the midrange balance.
With both speakers tending to be lacking in overall definition, that
somewhat different flavor effects the midrange sound. The 52 tends
to sound a little more spacious, >>> and some may use the phrase,
holographic type sound - the 22 seems to be a little more cohesive
sounding in the lower treble and midrange. This is show-cased some
more with Joan Osbourne songs -- War and the song Why Can't We
Live Together. They are both good >> however the midrange seems
more cohesive on the 22. Both speakers still lack the overall extended
definition, that I prefer with more expensive speakers.
Also with Diana Krall there is some difference with the Piano and the
Orchestra. More spacious and somewhat thin on the 52 compared to
the 22 - where the midrange without the vivid/shine does seem more
cohesive on the 22. The choice comes down to preference and taste.
A good CD to test speakers is, YO-YO MA plays ENNIO MORRICONE.
And yes, the Pioneer's can play this type of music. Both speakers did
a good job with Gabriel's Oboe and The Falls. If you do not own this
CD, then check it out. Sitting in the same spot, I feel like I am sitting
closer up to the 52 compared to the 22. The 52 along with the bigger
surface area dedicated midrange, and that somewhat tweeter energy
does fill a somewhat bigger sound-stage. The 22 will surprise you with
its smaller stature, and untill you really begin to push the watts or the
volume, the 22 stands fast - minus the deeper and depth of the 52 bass.
The trumpets, guitars and voice on the Eagles Hotel California, sounded
good on both. >> More vivid on the Big Daddy and More cohesive with a
somewhat fuller midrange on the 22. I am not talking about a head and
shoulders difference in the midrange. I am talking about a small, yet a
noticable meaning-full, difference to me. Some may disagree or may not
really hear the difference. You never know, my ears may be tired.
Now how did they stack up against the modded Cambridge S30 - well,
they both fell short to me. While in some areas the tweeter is better
on both the Pioneers, The Cambridge has the detail and definition that
stands out on the upper and lower treble. >The Cambridge overall has
detail and definition with a more sense of depth. >>> There is a good
cohesive sound, along with good seperation. >> For something like an
orchestra playing, you do hear the orchestra with good resolution. >>
there is not the sense, that some instruments are hidden in the back
ground. With the exception of the towers playing below 60 hz. >>The
bass on the Cambridge seems more tight and clean. >> I also believe
that with the exception of some strong points of the Pioneer Tweeter,
that the Cambridge has better drivers >>> a well buillt cabinet, that
is braced and damped well. >> The stock Cambridge does sell for $220.
I may or may not be on an island by myself >> however the stock S30,
is still my favorite budget speaker.
However overall for me, The Pioneers have raised the bar for the over
all sound quality that you get with their price point, that plays above
some of the big names out there, that are more expensive.
