B&W CM8's or Paradigm Studio 60's or Paradigm SE series?

If I were you I would pick the studio line over the se series, I Just don't feel like you get your dollar value as much with the se series. The studio series to me is better sound, better product. I like the detail in the studio line and they are made in canada. The monitor line line is built overseas @ the moment. The choice between paradigm and b&w will come down to personal preference. your money , your ears, your choice. I listened to paradigm, psb, b&w and monitor audio, among others. Again just personal perference. What ever you buy, do make sure you try for a discount as many retailers are very willing to move on the price!

Actually choosing B&W is the wrong choice as they are inaccurate and totally overpriced for something made in China (if it even matters). Heck I'd listen to $200 pro monitors as opposed to the top B&W model. Even if you don't care about branding and focuses on specs alone, I think the Paradigms would still be superior for HT.

The Se's to me sound good but not as good as the studio's and they don't go as low as I would like. With the amount of money spent I want as much speaker as I can get. I compared the monitor audio rx6 aand rx8 against the paradigms 3 times and my choice is paradigm every time. Call it personal preference as I don't want to put down monitor audio as they make great products.

I feel like you would have to spend more with monitor audio and move up a line to get what I would be looking for. I picked up my 2nd set of 60's a couple of weeks ago when I compared them again, both my wife and I feel the paradigm sounded just plain better to us. The 10's would be great for surrounds.

A year ago or so another guy from here was interested in the studio's and and I gave him some advice and he went and listened to the studios and also compared them to the monitor audio and he like the sound of the monitor audio, so it can be just personal preference. It's alot of money to spend so in the end it's your choice for what sound you like.

Don't purchase anything untill you are sure of what you like. This is a place thats great for advice but when you walk into the store, then disreguard anything I said as you and only you are the judge. Both brands are great.

As far as surrounds go, if like music in full surround then I would stick with the studio's , but if you only listen to music in stereo than the surround choice is not as important. Hopefully that helps.

When you do purchase, do remember that alot of dealers will discount, some more than others. Better in your pocket than yours.

Um, do you have any data to support that assertion, or is it mainly due to a bad experience you may have had with B&W?

What did you end up buying? When I auditioned B&W CM8s, Paradigm Monitor9s and Studio 60s side by side with the same AVR and in the same room, I found Monitor9s outperformed CM8s especially in the lower region (at half the price nonetheless). Studio 60s are just in another class altogether. In $2-4k range, 60s might be very tough to beat. Yes, Studio v5s are still made in Canada, hopefully that doesn't change in the future.

Note: I also auditioned Totem Forest on the same day in another room at the same dealer, but I went home with 60s in piano black

I'm curious how you came to the conclusion that the CM8's are inaccurate?

I have a few questions.
1) What do you like to listen?
2) What kind of movies do you watch?
3) What are you going to drive said speaker package with?
4) Have you checked out subwoofers?

Just my opinion but dollar for dollar I would pick B&W for my needs as I listen to a lot of music and love action movies. I feel B&W does a much better jon being a double duty speaker package. I find them to be more pleasing to listen to no matter what kind of music I listen to.
Paradigm make a wonderful array of different speakers. The new Monitor series is the best they have ever been. They are a way more balanced sounding line then ever before. The Studio series to me is completely overpriced and don't hold up against others in their respected price class.
I have Installed B&W and Paradigm for many years and B&W always puts a smile on my face as well my customers. Paradigm on the other hand sometimes disappoints , almost all the time me especially for the money.
I really don't like Paradigm subwoofers until you get into there higher end models. They are one not hit wonders and boom out of control at all levels. B&S subs are incredibly musical and fast but sometimes lack sheer force and powerful movies until you get into their higher end models.

If I was to choose either speakers , I would get a subwoofer( 2 of them ) from someone else like Velodyne. They make subs that are both musical and movies powerful. The DD series is amazing and I never had more success in difficult rooms with them. Even the SPL series does wonders in most rooms especially when you run 2. I think all room benefit from 2 subs no matter what sub or subs you are running.

Good luck man

Perhaps he looked at the measurements of the bigger brother (CM9) and figured that same engineering and sound quality was put into the CM8?



^ Veda and I sometimes don't see eye to eye, and his claim that B&W is "inaccurate and totally overpriced" should have been backed up with objective proof, but in this case the B&W CM series doesn't look accurate to me; it sounds pretty lousy too in my opinion (I've heard the CM8's and 9's).

Measurements don't tell the whole story imo.(Not to mention your in room response will be compleatly different from any measurment). l've heard the CM9's and they sound really good. Very detailed and clear on movies and music. To me anyway.

Which is why you have to choose what you like, not what someone else says.

No, but they can tell a person enough and can help weed out the lousy designs.

If the anechoic response is crappy putting the speaker in someone's room isn't going to change the flawed design. If you like the CM9's - great! All that matters is our individual happiness; it doesn't change the fact that those are poor measurements, though.

Speakers are objective. I auditioned Klipsch, Polk, Magenpan, NHT and Paradigm before settling on the CM9/CMC2/CM5. Nothing matched the soundstage, clarity or smoothness of the B&W's. They're revealing things in my collection I've never heard before. Does that make me "right" and other opinions "wrong"? No, we're talking about speakers. What sounds golden to me may sound like fingernails on a chalkboard to you. As far as accuracy goes they're the most neutral speakers I've heard. No peaks or boominess. Just very smooth.

No one is arguing the subjectivity of this hobby. Measurements are not subjective, though; they are objective. They aren't biased.

Veda nor myself are saying that someone who enjoys the CM9's (or 8's) is foolish; far from it. I'm simply saying they measure poorly. Period. Many people cannot correlate measurements to perception. Some prefer a recessed midrange and a bright sounding high frequency. To each their own, so long as they are happy. But you cannot argue with objective anechoic (quasi) measurements, which is one of the cool things about having them to refer to. I'd never buy something based on measurements alone, but I would definitely cross a speaker or amplifier off my list based on them.

Getting back to the OP, sfeldman721, which did you end up choosing? If you haven't chosen yet, I'd like to throw in a couple other suggestions.

Salk Sound SongTower's
Ascend Sierra Tower
Soundfield Audio Monitor 1 (this is a bookshelf style, though)

All three speakers measure better than the Paradigm's and B&W's, and they sound better too (I haven't heard the Soundfield's, so my comments apply to the Salk's and Ascend's). Also, have you checked out the Kef Q900 or Monitor Audio RX6 or RX8?

Oh the speakers you listed, the Paradigm Studio 60's will sound better to most people, most of the time. I have heard the B&W CM-8's a bunch of times and hated them every time. The first time I demo'd them, they were set up with a CMC center channal, and, to my ears, that was one of the worst theater setups I have ever experienced. It just sounded lifeless, dull, and very underwhelming. I do, however, think the CM-8's beat the Paradigms in 2 channel, music only settings. Also, I got to demo the CMC2 with the CM-8's at a later time, and let me to you, the CMC2 sounded a lot better than the CMC. I think part of the reason I disliked the CM-8's in a theater setting was because of the lack of performance of the CMC. Either way, no way I would ever bother with the CM series for theater.

I used to own a pair of the Paradigm Monitor 7's, and later, the Monitor 11's. They did the job well, but overall, they just added to much color to the sound for my liking. The Studio 60's are excellent choices and sound very good.

The best advise I can you is to try out either the Ascend Sierra-1's, or, Sierra Tower, or the Salk Song Tower's. Either one of these will be much much better than the speakers you are looking at now. Both Ascend and Salk have 30 day return policies. So what I would recommend is to go audition the Studio 60's and B&W CM-8's, then order one of the speakers I mentioned above to try out for the 30 day trial period, then, and only then, make your decision.

Since everyone hears differently, throwing out a speaker based on measurements rather than how you perceive them seems shortsighted. The variance in the CM speakers in that graph is about 5-7dB across the range. I looked at the Paradigm Studio 60's measurements. Across the range they also vary 5-7dB in different places. Would those be discounted as well?

Be known your 30 day trial period will cost you since you are paying shipping both directions. I keep seeing people say go listen to the big box speakers in store, then come home and order ascends or salks for in home audition.

It depends on what you're looking for in sound quality. For someone who wants dead accuracy, yes, they'd be discounted.

The everyone hears differently theory is nice, but it doesn't exactly hold true to audio, which was proven by Dr. Sean Olive in 2003. He conducted a case study in which five groups of people listened to four different pairs of speakers under blind, level matched conditions (using Harman's special speaker shuffler, as to put them in the same place). The groups of listeners were novices (college students I think), audio salesmen, marketers, audio reviewers and trained listeners. The results show that an overwhelming majority of the listeners preferred the speakers in order of flattest on and off-axis frequency response; even the novices preferred this. I've posted the case study here before numerous times, but here it is again (attached to this post).

Again, it depends on what you're trying to achieve sound quality wise, which is highly subjective, but if you want an accurate sound you need to start with accurate speakers.

Well worth the price of "admission" know you picked the absolute best speaker to suit your needs for your hard earned money.

 

Olive_2003.pdf 270.64453125k . file

Can you show an example of an accurate speaker then? Edit: I looked at the Saulk's in your quest link and the turbo model does have flatter response (3dB variance), the non turbo has around the same variance as the B&W's and Paradigms (5-6dB). Don't get me wrong I do pay attention to measurements and their importance with this hobby. With speakers I tend to listen first, record my impressions, compare and then listen again. Looking that the measurements and professional reviews are part of the process, but not the definitive one.

A real world example of speakers and differences in hearing came from going to some DIY speaker building events with a couple friends who build their own speakers. 2 of us agreed on the top 3 speakers, though not in the same order. The other liked only one of the speaker sets we did. After the event we talked with other spectators and found that while the majority seemed to like the same 6 pairs, the order differed. On listening to the speakers that my friends built I found the one who differed the most had made speakers that were essentially dead in the upper ranges. His hearing sensitivity just wasn't there. So I guess what I am saying is that measurements, while important, should not override how you perceive a speaker. Also don't go into a comparison with a bias on what speaker you're going to like. You'll end up convincing yourself it won.

I'd agree with all of that. What are you talking about when you mention turbo model, though?

Here's a plot of the SongTower's:



Here's another very accurate speaker:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...ers/kef_201-2/
http://www.stereophile.com/content/k...r-measurements

Well I'm not about pissing money away. I could take the money spent on shipping back and fourth an applying it to a set of speakers i actually want to buy that i have listened to in person. If you have money to basically throw away for auditioning, more power to you. Many do not in today's market.

I think people who do buy salks or ascends really know what they are looking for in a speaker. It makes there purchase much easier because they know the dynamics those particular speakers have. I have heard very positive things about both speakers, but I have not heard them myself.

Pretty sure that is the one. Very impressive indeed! The KEF linked is fairly flat it looks to have a 5dB variance on the extremes, but 1-3 for most of the range. Which is great.

I've had Studio 100 V.5 with CC-590 set up before. After 3-4 months of listening, I am sure that the "very detailed" and "accurate" part that they say about the Studio 100's doesn't apply to me. I feel it is more on the bright side as I get ear fatigued after a couple of hours listening to music or watching movies. I have Anthem MRX 700 receiver which is a perfect match for these speakers.

I changed my set up to B&W CM9/CMC2/CM5 combo and sound is a lot better for movies. With the Paradigm set up, the CC 590 can't cope with the Studio 100 power and the dialouges are a bit underwhelming. CC 690 is a better match if you decide to get the 100. 2 channel listening, I will give it to S100, that is if you listen to music less than a couple of hours. It's got more bass authority but again, too bright for me.

Don't believe on measurements that companies post on their website. They might have 'ideal' room where their speakers sound best. I got all the ARC measurements of both speakers in the same room and same set up and it shows what I am hearing on both speakers is correct.

I know this is not what you are asking but the Studio 60 and CM8 are both step down from these speakers and they might sound similar to Studio 100 and CM9.

Where do you see a 5dB variance with the Kefs? Off axis sure, but that doesnt start until you get 45 degrees off-axis. Just look at that on axis! The latter is just as impressive as the former. Sound power is extremely important, especially considering we listen to speakers in a room, not an anechoic chamber. The Kef Reference series is a serious speaker, and it should be considering the cost.

The measurements I posted were anechoic and quasi-anechoic measurements, which trump in room measurements from ARC or Audyssey every time. They are third party measurements, not the manufacturer's measurements. In room measurements are only useful for each individual, not the masses. Also, you're wrong about manufacturer posted measurements; they are usually quasi-anechoic, not in-room.

Very odd, im curious how your avr was setup. I've never ran across someone complaining of fatigue listening to a movie. Music, yes, but not a movie.

Studios are hardly bright to my ears, but that's the beauty of the audio business. There are speakers built for everyone's sensitivity and tastes.

The CM9s were equal to the Studio 100s in my book. But after listening to the diamonds, I realized you need to draw the line in the sand. I loved the diamonds but they didn't fit within the budget. CM9 and S100 audition was just about equal, but the CM9s did throw out more bass during movie playback. What sealed the deal for me was music through the S100s.

I've noticed some who feel the studio 100s bright during music generally lean toward buying dynaudio excite 32s. It's critical you bring familiar listening material so you can get an accurate audition.

I have an issue with B&W manf their speakers in china and still asking high prices. Paradigm only manf's their monitor line in china and from the reports of dealers, paradigm may be bringing back assembly of the monitor line back to Canada.

I didn't mean the in room response will be better or worse. Just different. I've read comments on the CM9's sounding too bright and another saying sounding too warm and laid back. 2 completely different rooms of course.

And i don't really see poor measurements in that graph. The variance across is not that large. I don't want to sound like im defending the CM9's, im not. I don't even have them, i have definitive technology speakers. It's just from the year+ i've l've been listening to different speakers i've learned not to focus on measurements too much. I hardly hear what they show. Some speakers with good measurements i didn't like and the bad ones didn't sound bad at all. It depends though.

The 683's measurements are not much to look at but Thomas J. Norton loves they sound-

http://www.hometheater.com/content/b...m-measurements

Who cares about measurements? Your ears are going to tell the story in the end anyhow. Same thing with amps... People become obsessive over distortion %'s....And by the way, I'll lead you onto a little secret... Every human hears things differently

Lots of people and lots of manufacturers, and many people can correlate measurements to perception and correlate what they hear to measurements.


Are you talking about the CM9's? If so there's a wide bandwidth 5-6dB variance, which is huge and very audible.