Originally Posted by Ferdinand77
DLPkid-- great! do you feel that the 100s are better than the 60's ? in what way do you feel better if indeed they are better ?
Yes, I do think the 100s are better than the 60s......for what I was looking for with my mains, that is.
The major differences.
1. As JohnG pointed out....significantly better bass response.
2. The 100s are dedicated 5 driver true 3-way design, while the 60s are a 3 driver 2 1/2 way design.....i.e. the 100s have a more advanced internal crossover network.
3. The 100s can play louder than the 60s.
4. The 100s need more power to extract their maximum potential.
5. The 60s are ported in the front and rear, while the 100s are front-ported only (more of a design observation).
6. The 100s are about 4 inches taller and do have the propensity to overwhelm a smaller space such as a family room.
Not to downplay the 60s by any means (I do think they are superb towers, especially considering that they are ~45% cheaper than the 100s), but the 60s are essentially 40s in a larger cabinet. The cabinet does, however, make a significant difference in bass response. Based on my listening, the 60s did have the bass response of towers, while the 40s sounded like what they were.....very good bookshelfs.
I struggled a lot with my final decision, given that the 100s are a good deal more expensive. I was also more focused on music than HT and 2-channel listening was certainly high on the priority list. The 60s mated to the Yammy 4600 weren't doing it for me in terms of low-end extension. As I said in my previous post, I do honestly believe than an external amp would have improved the low-end of the 60s a good bit. I found the 60s getting harsh when cranking up the dial (what I now believe was a by product of the low-end not being able to keep up with the mids and highs due to insufficient amplification power, resulting in a tonal imbalance as the output increased).
I often listen to the 100s without any bass management or sub filler.....and I absolutely love them.
I posted a lot of when I was making my decision and one of the folks on the forum made a simple statement that pushed me over the edge. He simply said "Go for the 100s or you'll always wonder what if...". I'll also add that I absolutely blew my budget as my original intent was for a pairs of 40s powered by a receiver. I spent about 10 hours in total at my local store listening to the entire Studio lineup, using my CDs and a very wide variety of listening material. The Studios just had the type of sound I was looking for and hence, I didn't stray very far from them. The interesting part is that I ultimately went for the 100s even though I demo'ed them with only a Yamaha receiver. Little did I know their full potential until I drove them with more power.
By the way, not to create any more controversy, but IMHO I don't believe a bookshelf speaker + subwoofer is a substitute for a full range tower. Again, not just mouthing off, but speaking based on my audition of the Studio line with a PW2200 sub (and a good deal of tweaking while listening as well).