Pioneer Andrew Jones SP-PK52FS review

[jm78]

Mine are 5 and a 1/2. feet from my couch.

I'm guessing they sound good to you at that distance. Well, I wouldn't have to get stands too which is nice.

 

[nogaro]

Has anyone compared these to the EmpTek E5Ti? The glossy finish to the Empteks looks very attractive in pictures, but, ultimately it's the SQ that will win for me. Given Empteks fantastic return policy, I'll just have to try out the E5Tis, but I can't do that until January! So, it'd be great to hear from those of you who've already had the chance to hear/compare both.

 

[gene]

All listening was done in the 80dB range to avoid room issues (see my post above).
Pioneer SP-FS52 vs. Salk Songtowers RT
I already had the Salks hooked up, so I compared them. The Salks unquestionably dominate in bass. Also, the Salks had a fuller sound. But what really surprised me was how close the Pio tweeter performed to the ribbon tweeter on the Salks. When I first hooked up the Salks, I had all speakers facing straight forward. In this position, the Pio’s were better sounding in the treble region. Once I properly toed-in the Salks, they proved better, but not by as much as I expected.
You will note that I make no mention of midrange performance. That is because I could not make any clear distinctions. The increased bass output of the Salk’s was the dominant factor and changed the tone between these speakers enough that I was not confident in any midrange differences.
There is no question that the Salks are better speakers, but if you eliminate the bass difference by using a subwoofer, the difference between these speakers will really leave you wondering about whether it is worth the price difference. This is not a criticism of the Salks, I would say the same thing about my Paradigm S-2’s or Focal Solo6Be’s.
The question is how good is good enough, and, for me, the Pioneers get amazingly close to this mark at a very low price.
Pioneer SP-FS52 vs. Infinity P363
I have always felt that the P363 was not as articulate with bass as I am used to. Comparing it with the Pioneers underscored this. The P363 definitely puts out more bass energy, but the Pioneer is clearly more articulate. To use TSLGuy’s terminology, my sense is that the P363 commits sins of commission while the Pioneers only commit sins of omission. The Pioneers are decent as full range speakers - for most music I was content with the bass provided when I listened to them at length. However, more bass is welcome.
The mid-range sounded very close to me. With the change in bass between the speakers, I really could not detect differences in the mid-range.
On the upper end, the Pioneer tweeter really outclasses the P363 tweeter. They are not close. The Pioneer tweeter is much closer to the Salk’s ribbbon than to the P363’s. I feel the Pio tweeter is the equal of the tweeter in my EMP-41Be speakers.
Conclusion
I think these are the new standard bearer for budget speakers. They clearly outperform the P363s (though arguably someone who wanted more bass and was willing to sacrifice articulation and HF extension might prefer the P363) at a lower price!
This option is especially exciting for the beginner on a budget. A pair of these will give you very good sound as a standalone solution. Everything on these speakers seems well balanced - bass being the biggest compromise. Later adding and tuning a good sub will get excellent sound.

I figured as much. The Infinity tweeter is really a disappointment in the overall design of the speaker. I tried to tell this to Harman but they weren't too receptive. They used a 4 ohm driver and the speaker measured 4 ohm as a result yet they called it an 8 ohm speaker. Overall the P363s are a great deal at $200/pr but now that Pioneer introduced these speakers, it changes everything. I have a pair coming to me next month. I can't wait to dive into more detail with these superbly engineered speakers at unbelievable price points.

 

[Transmaniacon]

If you are using a 7channel receiver for stereo. You will have no issues at all.
I cannot address comparison with horn loaded speakers.

Thanks, I am really tempted to give these a try, especially since I can run down to best buy and grab a pair

 

[zieglj01]

Thanks, I am really tempted to give these a try, especially since I can run down to best buy and grab a pair

Have no fear, take them home and audition.

 

[ahblaza]

In case you missed it, here is a review with measurements for the BS41.

Pioneer SP-BS41-LR loudspeaker | Stereophile.com

By specs, it is a difference between 55Hz and 65Hz on the low extension.

It is a curiosity that there is no SP-BS42-LR.

I know the floor-standers cost twice as much as the bookshelves, but you are getting the capability to play much louder, the security of knowing it is the latest generation (I don't think Pioneer/Jones would have bothered with redesign unless they saw opportunity), reduced distortion since the 5.25" mid is not having to play bass at the same time, and enough bass to stand alone without sub. IMHO, the extra $100 is worth it, and I wouldn't even look at the BS unless you already have a good sub and cannot fit the FS. I am a fan of BS speakers because I feel cabinet resonance often interferes with the SQ. The cabinet design/construction of the Pioneer FS is incredible for a $100 ea speaker!

Hey Kurt, I found it odd that Pioneer didn't come out with the BS42 also. I have the 41's and can't say enough about them, they are remarkable sounding speakers for the $85 I paid new. I've compared them to some other BS's I had on hand and was quite impressed how well they stacked up against BS's costing a lot more. I use them in a desktop configuration and also as rears in a small den application. I guess you hit the nail on the head when you said "I don't think Pioneer/Jones would have bothered with redesign unless they saw opportunity". I really don't think they 41's could have been improved without considerably more cost. I think he (Jones) did improve on the BS21 with the 22's as I was not impressed with the 21's. Thank you my friend for this in depth comparison and review, I guess I'm off to BB to get me a pair of the 52's, I wonder if they price match other ID companies like TD.
Thanks again, Jeff

 

[zieglj01]

I'm guessing they sound good to you at that distance. Well, I wouldn't have to get stands too which is nice.

Sometimes it is a compromise > Some people also like to
listen close-up. I always like to give speakers some space,
and breathing room to open up. I am a nit-picker for good
imaging and soundstaging.

Just as a side note, I listen to the BS22 bookshelf 10 ft back.
They can also work nicely near-field. >> If you can make the
towers work for you, then go for it.

 

[Transmaniacon]

Hey Kurt, I found it odd that Pioneer didn't come out with the BS42 also. I have the 41's and can't say enough about them, they are remarkable sounding speakers for the $85 I paid new. I've compared them to some other BS's I had on hand and was quite impressed how well they stacked up against BS's costing a lot more. I use them in a desktop configuration and also as rears in a small den application. I guess you hit the nail on the head when you said "I don't think Pioneer/Jones would have bothered with redesign unless they saw opportunity". I really don't think they 41's could have been improved without considerably more cost. I think he (Jones) did improve on the BS21 with the 22's as I was not impressed with the 21's. Thank you my friend for this in depth comparison and review, I guess I'm off to BB to get me a pair of the 52's, I wonder if they price match other ID companies like TD.
Thanks again, Jeff

I remember seeing in the Pioneer thread on AVS Forums, that there was a rumor the BS42s would be released later in the year. I do not know how credible the source was, but I would imagine if they were going to re-design the 41, it would have been included with the new models.

 

[KEW]

Hey Kurt, I found it odd that Pioneer didn't come out with the BS42 also. I have the 41's and can't say enough about them, they are remarkable sounding speakers for the $85 I paid new. I've compared them to some other BS's I had on hand and was quite impressed how well they stacked up against BS's costing a lot more. I use them in a desktop configuration and also as rears in a small den application. I guess you hit the nail on the head when you said "I don't think Pioneer/Jones would have bothered with redesign unless they saw opportunity". I really don't think they 41's could have been improved without considerably more cost. I think he (Jones) did improve on the BS21 with the 22's as I was not impressed with the 21's. Thank you my friend for this in depth comparison and review, I guess I'm off to BB to get me a pair of the 52's, I wonder if they price match other ID companies like TD.
Thanks again, Jeff

Happy to help!
It is unusual to redesign a good selling budget speaker after only one year.
Likely, they saw the opportunity for both cost reduction and SQ. In his interview he speaks of a 5X (IIRC) increase in the cost of neodymium magnets and how he was happy to figure out how to get equal performance out of ceramic magnets, so I'd bet that is one item of change.

By all accounts, the 41's are great speakers, but it looks like they have been discontinued (and out of inventory at Pioneer). I'm guessing people were mostly buying the FS51 with the BS21 for surrounds and the BS41's didn't sell in high volumes so they discontinued production. They are not listed among current products:
Home Theater Speakers | Pioneer Electronics USA

Let us know if you can hear any differences between the 41's and 52's aside from the bass.

Edit: I posted this before I read Transmaniacon's post. Maybe the 42's are already designed, but they decided to change over production for the 52 and 22 first then add the 42 later.

 

[jm78]

Sometimes it is a compromise > Some people also like to
listen close-up. I always like to give speakers some space,
and breathing room to open up. I am a nit-picker for good
imaging and soundstaging.

Just as a side note, I listen to the BS22 bookshelf 10 ft back.
They can also work nicely near-field. >> If you can make the
towers work for you, then go for it.

Yes, I guess I have to try it out myself. It does seem that more people go for bookshelf speakers for their pc setup. The more drivers a tower has, the more issues with driver integration it might have at nearfield.

 

[jonnythan]

I wonder how these speakers compare to NHT SuperOnes/SuperZeroes

 

[ahblaza]

Happy to help!
It is unusual to redesign a good selling budget speaker after only one year.
Likely, they saw the opportunity for both cost reduction and SQ. In his interview he speaks of a 5X (IIRC) increase in the cost of neodymium magnets and how he was happy to figure out how to get equal performance out of ceramic magnets, so I'd bet that is one item of change.

By all accounts, the 41's are great speakers, but it looks like they have been discontinued (and out of inventory at Pioneer). I'm guessing people were mostly buying the FS51 with the BS21 for surrounds and the BS41's didn't sell in high volumes so they discontinued production. They are not listed among current products:
Home Theater Speakers | Pioneer Electronics USA

Let us know if you can hear any differences between the 41's and 52's aside from the bass.

Edit: I posted this before I read Transmaniacon's post. Maybe the 42's are already designed, but they decided to change over production for the 52 and 22 first then add the 42 later.

That sounds like what Pioneer/Jones is doing with the 42's. the 41's haven't been available on their site for a long time. The 41's are amazing, well constructed, attractive (to me), good binding posts and sound great. They are lacking in the bass but crossing over at 80Hz they integrate well with sub. You got me all excited about the 52's and will do a comparison with the 41's aside from bass of course, if they (52's) have that sweet treble of the 41's and dig fairly deep I think we may have the best budget speaker to reco to anyone looking to get into this hobby on a shoestring budget. With the money saved there could be more $ to be spent on a quality sub(s). I like that. Will get the comparison up soon my friend.
Jeff

 

[Transmaniacon]

That sounds like what Pioneer/Jones is doing with the 42's. the 41's haven't been available on their site for a long time. The 41's are amazing, well constructed, attractive (to me), good binding posts and sound great. They are lacking in the bass but crossing over at 80Hz they integrate well with sub. You got me all excited about the 52's and will do a comparison with the 41's aside from bass of course, if they (52's) have that sweet treble of the 41's and dig fairly deep I think we may have the best budget speaker to reco to anyone looking to get into this hobby on a shoestring budget. With the money saved there could be more $ to be spent on a quality sub(s). I like that. Will get the comparison up soon my friend.
Jeff

Yea this is a great price point. Typically people look to spend about $1000 and this lets you get a 5 channel setup and still afford a nice sub from HSU, etc.

 

[ahblaza]

Yea this is a great price point. Typically people look to spend about $1000 and this lets you get a 5 channel setup and still afford a nice sub from HSU, etc.

You're right my friend. I don't see why Pioneer/Jones would not make a comparable sub to pair with the 52's, I don't think the new sub is any different than last years, I don't recall any positive reviews of this sub, I'm not judging it as I have not heard it, but from Kurt's (KEW) 52 comparison's I would imagine the sub being the weak link in a 5.1 Pioneer rig. I've heard some good things with the CC, Mains and surrounds but not much about the sub, someone care to enlighten me. Take care Trans
Jeff

 

[KEW]

You're right my friend. I don't see why Pioneer/Jones would not make a comparable sub to pair with the 52's, I don't think the new sub is any different than last years, I don't recall any positive reviews of this sub, I'm not judging it as I have not heard it, but from Kurt's (KEW) 52 comparison's I would imagine the sub being the weak link in a 5.1 Pioneer rig. I've heard some good things with the CC, Mains and surrounds but not much about the sub, someone care to enlighten me. Take care Trans
Jeff

I think a minimal sub to pair with these speakers would cost around $350, and $600 would do them justice. While we Audioholic types see that as a viable option, the typical Best Buy customer (and thus, Pioneers marketing dept.) would not understand spending almost twice that cost of a pair of speakers for a sub. Perhaps Pioneer/Jones could do some of their wizardry, but in the end for subs, you have to increase size (cabinet and shipping cost) or invest in a $$amp and a $$driver to handle the power.
Jones had the expertise to work magic with the speakers because he knows drivers, crossovers, cabinet, etc. Subs are simple enough that I'm not sure he brings anything special to the table. An 8" 50W (FTC rating) sub without any special technology is nothing to get excited about.
Jeff, I'm glad to know I helped in your decision to get them. You convinced me to go ahead and get a pair of 41's while NE still had them for $85/pr. So tit for tat, my friend!

 

[KEW]

Yes, I guess I have to try it out myself. It does seem that more people go for bookshelf speakers for their pc setup. The more drivers a tower has, the more issues with driver integration it might have at nearfield.

I think it is having a desk right in front of them that causes people to go with bookshelf speakers for their PC's.
Not saying you don't have a decent point about multiple drivers and nearfield, but I think you are over-estimating the sophistication of the average PC speaker consumer.

 

[ahblaza]

I think a minimal sub to pair with these speakers would cost around $350, and $600 would do them justice. While we Audioholic types see that as a viable option, the typical Best Buy customer (and thus, Pioneers marketing dept.) would not understand spending almost twice that cost of a pair of speakers for a sub. Perhaps Pioneer/Jones could do some of their wizardry, but in the end for subs, you have to increase size (cabinet and shipping cost) or invest in a $$amp and a $$driver to handle the power.
Jones had the expertise to work magic with the speakers because he knows drivers, crossovers, cabinet, etc. Subs are simple enough that I'm not sure he brings anything special to the table. An 8" 50W (FTC rating) sub without any special technology is nothing to get excited about.
Jeff, I'm glad to know I helped in your decision to get them. You convinced me to go ahead and get a pair of 41's while NE still had them for $85/pr. So tit for tat, my friend!

Kurt, how easy I forget that we are not typical and to me that is a viable option. I just thought Jones might make an exception with a sub that would do justice to both us Audioholics and the 52's. I really would have no qualms pairing the 52's with a $600 sub, this would reinforce my impulsive over spending ($200) for a pair of magic makers Glad I could return the favor my friend. Haven't heard that phrase in a while "tit for tat" I like it.

 

[Transmaniacon]

You're right my friend. I don't see why Pioneer/Jones would not make a comparable sub to pair with the 52's, I don't think the new sub is any different than last years, I don't recall any positive reviews of this sub, I'm not judging it as I have not heard it, but from Kurt's (KEW) 52 comparison's I would imagine the sub being the weak link in a 5.1 Pioneer rig. I've heard some good things with the CC, Mains and surrounds but not much about the sub, someone care to enlighten me. Take care Trans
Jeff

I think the general consensus in the AVS thread is the SW-8 is just an average entry level sub woofer, comparable to Polk/BIC (Venturi)/Dayton. I think pairing the 52s with an HSU STF-1 would make for a great ~$500 stereo setup.

 

[zieglj01]

I would only buy a cheap sub to go with cheap sounding speakers.
The Phase 2 Pioneer speakers are really good, and I would spend
for a bigger sub, with tight and controlled bass to mate with them.

I would prefer, that Pioneer put their budget and design to something
like their speakers - there are plenty of good sub options around.

 

[ahblaza]

I would only buy a cheap sub to go with cheap sounding speakers.
The Phase 2 Pioneer speakers are really good, and I would spend
for a bigger sub, with tight and controlled bass to mate with them.

I would prefer, that Pioneer put their budget and design to something
like their speakers - there are plenty of good sub options around.

Good point Zieg, put the budget where it belongs, speaker upgrades. The problem with the 51's (last years model) was the cab height, Jones took care of that along with some other driver and cab refinements with the 52's and keep the budget in check. Thanks.
Jeff