What bookshelf would you pick?

[JengaHit]

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.

Yes, the time-intensity trading trick does work nicely. I can sit on the far side of my long couch, about 3 ft off axis, and still have a decent center stereo image with the CCB-8s, though not quite as precisely drawn as on axis. But as I said, this takes work with the extreme toe-in; these aren't speakers you can casually plop anywhere. The generous sweet spot was a selling point as various practical room considerations make a 5.1 or 7.1 system complicated (to say nothing of Atmos), so I've made due for now with a 2.1 system. Now, the Mirage's do surpass the CC-B 8s in casting an even larger sound stage, which I like from years of going to live symphony and chamber concerts. The Mirage's are excellent at recreating concert-hall ambience. On movies they also throw an enveloping enough surround field with just 2 speakers; I have had guests ask me where the surround speakers were during movie night. They also image decently--a friend who had PSB Stratus Golds thought the Mirage's were comparable. And their "omnipolar" dispersion images well from many off-axis listening positions, more so than the CCB-8s--you can sit in a side chair well off axis or get up and move about the room, and still hear a stereo image and not have it collapse, despite not being equidistant from the speakers. (I've read Ohm Walsh and mega-expensive MBL speakers have similar abilities, with various trade-offs.) But while the CCB-8s sweet spot isn't quite as big as the Mirage's, they image more holographically and precisely than the Mirage's. With the Mirage's, dialogue intelligibility could suffer with movies having wide dynamic range, forcing me to turn up the volume to hear actors, and then racing to turn down the volume during an action scene. (With acoustic music the Mirage's imaging was decent and lifelike, closer to what you'd hear in a live concert hall or venue, slightly favoring hall ambience over image specificity.) I've not had that problem with the CCB-8s. Images are palpable, precisely drawn, and dialogue is clear (yet ambience is still abundant), so I haven't found a need for a center channel so far. Overall, they're a nice balance between pinpoint imaging and a very wide sweet spot with a stable stereo image and generous soundstage for multiple listeners.



Sent from my Galaxy Tab A

 

[enrique]

voted ls50's due mostly cause only one I have heard.Had a chance to get them but I opted for Dynaudio excite x14's.Just like them better.

 

[mdinno]

NHT C3 should be on that list also.

 

[JengaHit]

NHT C3 should be on that list also.

Impressions or review? Would be interested, as I had NHT 2.5i towers back in the day, and I liked the NHT house sound.

 

[Phase 2]

I'm glad for you. I see impressive slightly different, I can be impressed with something I don't like. Mercedes, for example. I doon't like it, but...

nicely said,

 

[KEW]

Agreed.

@snakeeyes got me thinking about a bedroom set up but I can't afford that now. Ya the Sierra2's do look very nice. For the poll I was trying to keep the budget in the $800-1k range.

Yes, the time-intensity trading trick does work nicely. I can sit on the far side of my long couch, about 3 ft off axis, and still have a decent center stereo image with the CCB-8s, though not quite as precisely drawn as on axis. But as I said, this takes work with the extreme toe-in; these aren't speakers you can casually plop anywhere. The generous sweet spot was a selling point as various practical room considerations make a 5.1 or 7.1 system complicated (to say nothing of Atmos), so I've made due for now with a 2.1 system. Now, the Mirage's do surpass the CC-B 8s in casting an even larger sound stage, which I like from years of going to live symphony and chamber concerts. The Mirage's are excellent at recreating concert-hall ambience. On movies they also throw an enveloping enough surround field with just 2 speakers; I have had guests ask me where the surround speakers were during movie night. They also image decently--a friend who had PSB Stratus Golds thought the Mirage's were comparable. And their "omnipolar" dispersion images well from many off-axis listening positions, more so than the CCB-8s--you can sit in a side chair well off axis or get up and move about the room, and still hear a stereo image and not have it collapse, despite not being equidistant from the speakers. (I've read Ohm Walsh and mega-expensive MBL speakers have similar abilities, with various trade-offs.) But while the CCB-8s sweet spot isn't quite as big as the Mirage's, they image more holographically and precisely than the Mirage's. With the Mirage's, dialogue intelligibility could suffer with movies having wide dynamic range, forcing me to turn up the volume to hear actors, and then racing to turn down the volume during an action scene. (With acoustic music the Mirage's imaging was decent and lifelike, closer to what you'd hear in a live concert hall or venue, slightly favoring hall ambience over image specificity.) I've not had that problem with the CCB-8s. Images are palpable, precisely drawn, and dialogue is clear (yet ambience is still abundant), so I haven't found a need for a center channel so far. Overall, they're a nice balance between pinpoint imaging and a very wide sweet spot with a stable stereo image and generous soundstage for multiple listeners.

FWIW, your description closely mirrors my experiences comparing speakers with wide dispersion (Mirage OMD-5's, for one) vs speakers with fairly aggressive wave guides.