or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Paradigm Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Paradigm Owners Thread - Page 948

post #28411 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljaycanuck 
You really seem to want to use a Studio 20 as your CC speaker. IMO, you should buy a Studio 20 and use it as your CC speaker.

You will have three of the same speaker across the front - which is the ideal configuration - and you will be happy

Well, I haven't made up my mind as of yet. smile.gif The idea was the c690 as the center with Studio 20's for the mains. As weird as it sounds, the 690 might be more acceptable from an aesthetic point-of-view given the orientation of the speaker vs the Studio 20. My cabinet will be low profile so if I go for the Studio 20 it won't be in the way of my display, but from a looks perspective, the traditional center speakers look more natural than 3 bookshelves across the front stage, at least that's what I think.

I appreciate your opinion concerning the 690. It's hard to imagine that it wouldn't be able to handle the content with ease. But then if I have a chance of going for the ideal .... LCR across the front stage, then .... dang, it's I'm just finding it hard to make up my mind. The other problem is that a 690 will look so out of place in an apartment with two small bookshelf speakers.
post #28412 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

I never thought Paradigm sold single speakers. Always assumed it was a pair. That actually makes a hell of a difference because having 5 x Studio 20's, or 3 x Studio 20's with a pair of in-wall surrounds would be a kick ass system with seamless panning.

The only thing I don't know is whether a Studio 20 v5 for a center would offer better dialog intelligibility over a cc690. Also in terms of dispersion wouldn't a 690 be superior to a Studio 20? Thoughts?

I've been thru a lot of centers, and I now have a studio 60 v.2 for a center.....never going back. This is with a screen right above it, and my hopes in the future would be an AT screen with this center speaker behind the middle of the screen....that's my ONLY gripe wink.gif
post #28413 of 30095
Quote:
... dang, it's I'm just finding it hard to make up my mind.
IMO, you're really overthinking this. wink.gif

The 690 is an excellent CC speaker. It will sound great (as will a Studio 20).

The Studio 20 is the ideal match for Studio 20 mains. It will provide a seamless front soundstage (not that the 690 doesn't).

Both speakers will give you clear and intelligible dialogue.

Flip a coin, buy something and start enjoying. smile.gif
Edited by eljaycanuck - 7/15/13 at 12:31pm
post #28414 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

The only thing I don't know is whether a Studio 20 v5 for a center would offer better dialog intelligibility over a cc690. Also in terms of dispersion wouldn't a 690 be superior to a Studio 20? Thoughts?

I had three Paradigm Reference LCR-450a speakers (yes, from the early 2000's) across the front - L and R on edge and the center on its side as recommended by Paradigm. I really liked them but never really had anything to compare them to.

Recently, I decided to upgrade to a more "modern" center channel when I saw a great deal on a CC-590. Because this new center was so efficient, I then upgraded the L / R to Studio 40's to match. Even though they are not the same speaker in all three locations (and are even 2.5 way / 3 way), I am amazed at how well they blend across the front. But what is even more amazing is how clear dialog is from the CC-590 - so clear that it sounds like someone talking to you in the same room.

I was always a firm believer in L/C/R speakers as well, but Paradigm's new center channel speakers are amazing - the vertical array tweeter / mid closely flanked by the woofers just has some kind of magic. As that article states, the tweeter / mid are NOT in the same horizontal plane so the speaker is effectively upright when on its side. The trade-off between W-T-W on its side and a smaller speaker with the tweeter above a single woofer is gone and the speaker is the best of both - clear dialog and wide dispersion.

I wanted a CC-690 as well, but I am so happy with the CC-590 I've stopped thinking about it - for me the CC-590 (or C3) is all the center speaker I need - it has such good mid-bass that the only reason to have the CC-690 would be if you didn't have a sub and wanted full range all the way around.
post #28415 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtn-tech View Post

I wanted a CC-690 as well, but I am so happy with the CC-590 I've stopped thinking about it - for me the CC-590 (or C3) is all the center speaker I need - it has such good mid-bass that the only reason to have the CC-690 would be if you didn't have a sub and wanted full range all the way around.

I'd have to disagree with you there. I had the CC-590 and upgraded to the CC-690. I also have a sub and am crossing the 690 at 80 Hz. It's a much better center than the 590. Dialog is clearer and just sounds better overall.
post #28416 of 30095
^ What he said. smile.gif
post #28417 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljaycanuck 
IMO, you're really overthinking this. wink.gif

The 690 is an excellent CC speaker. It will sound great (as will a Studio 20).

You're probably right. Plus I'm trying to decide what type of surrounds I want to use as I have limited space in my place. Studio 10's are no longer available apparently, so if I were to go for surrounds they would have to be Studio 20's which are not small. I don't have much in the way of side-walls, so I'm limited in what I can do. I wish I had a town house. biggrin.gif
post #28418 of 30095
Sadly I spent years with direct-firing surrounds in rooms way too small for such an application. I thought bi poles would just be too defused but boy the 590s were exactly what the doctor ordered. I rarely even notice the surrounds, thats the idea and they deliver in spades.
post #28419 of 30095
But would you recommend the ADP590's on the back wall, since that's really my only real option in my current space? Well, either that or big bookshelves. Just not sure how well dipolar surrounds will work on a back wall as opposed to side-wall mounting. Anyone who has experience with back wall mounting and can share their thoughts, please do. I'm all ears. biggrin.gif
post #28420 of 30095
What does your room look like? How will you be placing your furniture and gear in it? (Apologies if you've already posted a pic and I missed it.)

I know a couple of guys who've put Paradigm ADP-390s on their back walls for 5.1, but only because:
- their sofas had to be right up against the back wall;
- fitting bookshelf speakers somewhere at the back wasn't really feasible; and
- ceiling mounted satellites were out of the question.

Although I wouldn't have mounted them quite so high up (they had them roughly 72" up the wall - I wouldn't go over 60"), the compromise actually worked quite well. Not as good as direct-firing, perhaps, but good enough to get decent surround audio and effect.

That said, if you can fit bookshelf speakers into your space, I'd go that route. And the Studio 20s aren't that much bigger than the Studio 10s (roughly 2" taller, 1" wider, 2" deeper).
Edited by eljaycanuck - 7/16/13 at 8:59am
post #28421 of 30095
Dipoles FTW.
post #28422 of 30095
My room is rectangular and I'm sitting the short way in the room. It's around 12 meters x 4. My couch will be close to the back wall. I can put bookshelf surrounds behind me, but then I'm going to be right next it, basically. But if ADP590's will also work on the back wall, then I would prefer it. It also looks nicer.

I can place them above ear height, but my main question is really - can dipoles work well in my type of environment? It's a compromised space, like most, but mine is a little extra compromised. However I've taken steps to address SQ issues by ordering some bass traps and treatment for first reflection duty. People normally recommend dipoles be positioned on the side-walls, so I'm just a little worried that back wall positioning, especially if my couch is going to be 15-20 cm away from them, is going to be a problem.

Maybe I'm worrying for nothing, but I've never had dipole surrounds so I'm not entirely sure whether it's effectiveness will be reduced in my situation.
post #28423 of 30095
IMO, ADPs will work. Whether they will work better / sound better to you than S20s on stands at both ends of your sofa, I can't say.
post #28424 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

My room is rectangular and I'm sitting the short way in the room. It's around 12 meters x 4. My couch will be close to the back wall. I can put bookshelf surrounds behind me, but then I'm going to be right next it, basically. But if ADP590's will also work on the back wall, then I would prefer it. It also looks nicer.

I can place them above ear height, but my main question is really - can dipoles work well in my type of environment? It's a compromised space, like most, but mine is a little extra compromised. However I've taken steps to address SQ issues by ordering some bass traps and treatment for first reflection duty. People normally recommend dipoles be positioned on the side-walls, so I'm just a little worried that back wall positioning, especially if my couch is going to be 15-20 cm away from them, is going to be a problem.

Maybe I'm worrying for nothing, but I've never had dipole surrounds so I'm not entirely sure whether it's effectiveness will be reduced in my situation.

This is the million dollar question for me too. I have a similar setup: 14 x 20 ft room with the main listening position a couch directly up against the long wall. Directly to the left 5 feet is another wall with a smaller couch perpendicular to the main couch. However, the wall to the right is about 12 feet away. The 20s would not work because they would be adjacent to the main couch right in the ear of the person in the main listening position. So I picked up a pair of ADP-590s. The 5 foot vs 12 foot disparity in distance seemed too great to mount the 590s on the side walls. The question I have is whether to mount them on the rear wall right above the couch, or mount one on the wall to the left (five feet away) and the other on a stand five feet away on the other side of the main couch. I'm going to try the rear wall first and see how they sound.
post #28425 of 30095
In addition, I plan on placing three broadband traps directly on the back wall. The dipoles, if I were to buy them, would be on either side of the panels. Would absorbing reflections on the back wall negatively impact on the dipole performance?
post #28426 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Civik99si 
he question I have is whether to mount them on the rear wall right above the couch, or mount one on the wall to the left (five feet away) and the other on a stand five feet away on the other side of the main couch.

Interesting dilemma you have there. smile.gif All I'll say is that if you intend to put a single 590 on a stand while the other is on the wall it most likely won't look very pleasing to the eye. Performance-wise, not sure which would benefit you. I think two stands for the 590's directly to the sides of the couch would be the ideal, but again, two stands with 590's might look horrendous. Or not. Personal preference I guess.
post #28427 of 30095
Quote:
... I plan on placing three broadband traps directly on the back wall. The dipoles, if I were to buy them, would be on either side of the panels. Would absorbing reflections on the back wall negatively impact on the dipole performance?
I don't see how they would. The tweeter-mid assemblies on either side of the 590 don't fire directly to the side, they fire at a slightly "forward" angle. So, unless the traps are very thick and placed very close to the speakers, interference with audio from those assemblies shouldn't be an issue.
Quote:
... two stands with 590's might look horrendous. Or not. Personal preference I guess.
Based on this pic, I vote for "not".

IIRC, the bottoms of the 590s aren't perfectly flat, so judicious placement of felt or rubber pads will likely be required.
Edited by eljaycanuck - 7/16/13 at 11:40am
post #28428 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljaycanuck 
I don't see how they would. The tweeter-mid assemblies on either side of the 590 don't fire directly to the side, they fire at a slightly "forward" angle.

Oh, okay. Thanks! I wonder how many ADP590 owners there are here who mounted their speakers to the back wall in a 5.1 configuration. Not many I imagine.
post #28429 of 30095
Heres a mantle/wall install.

post #28430 of 30095
I browsed the forum concerning the dipoles mounted on the rear wall and came across this :
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani 
A dipole speaker has 2 sets of drivers wired out of phase to create a null (quiet zone) at the sides of the speaker. The idea is to place them directly to your sides so that all the listeners are in the null. This way, they hear very little direct sound from the speakers and are instead enveloped by reflected sound from all around the room.

Placing the dipoles on the back wall will leave all the listeners out of the nulls, the exact opposite of what is intended. At least one set of drivers on one of the speakers will be pointing towards the listeners, beaming direct sound towards them rather than reflected sound. In which case it's pointless to spend extra on dipole speakers when you're not going to use them for what they're designed to do.

If I had to place my surrounds on the back wall, I would use direct radiators or bipoles, and spread them as far apart as possible. The wide spead will make the speakers themselves a little less noticable, while improving envelopment and allowing you to better hear left-vs-right separation of stereo surround channels.

His explanation makes a lot of sense and I think for the reasons stated I don't think I'll be using dipoles. I'll either have to go for in-wall surrounds, or Studio 20's - Studio 20's sound like a lot less work.
post #28431 of 30095
The 590 is a bipole, not a dipole.
post #28432 of 30095
Quote:
I'll either have to go for in-wall surrounds, or Studio 20's - Studio 20's sound like a lot less work.
They're less work to "install" and, because they're not in your wall, they offer much more flexibility for placement (should you decide, say, to move your sofa forward, or re-orient your furniture, etc.).
post #28433 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Type A 
The 590 is a bipole, not a dipole.

Everything bit of literature I read about these speakers suggests they are dipoles, not bipoles. Where do you get the bipolar from?
post #28434 of 30095
From what I understand only the tweeters are out of phase, that is where the dipole moniker comes in. However the woofers, that are directly facing the listening area, are in phase as in a bipole. Meaning you dont have a null like you would with a traditional dipole design.
post #28435 of 30095

The 590 is a di-pole and that is why it has a separate left and right speaker.  The forward firing speaker needs to be in phase with the front. BTW, if you use di-poles for the rear as well as sides you should reverse the left and right configuration for the rear speakers.  Bi-poles do not have an out of phase driver and left/right placement would not matter for them.  Di-poles have gotten a bit of a bad name and some professionals do not like them and why I don't think Paradigm markets it that way. Plus it's not a 'true' di-pole with a forward firing driver but that's a different discussion.  Atlantic technology use to call this design a tri-pole.  

 

In the ideal world identical speakers would be used but in reality it is not always practical.  We use a different center because of form factor and monopoles if placed too close to a listener is going to give the speaker in the ear effect. Di-poles can be a good solution depending on the situation.  It is about using the right speaker for the application.

post #28436 of 30095
Hi Bob. So in your opinion, you wouldn't use dipole surrounds on the back wall, especially if the couch is going to be positioned close to it?
post #28437 of 30095
I just noticed that Paradigm has new web site, looks nice. Moreover - they show MSRP prices, finally!
post #28438 of 30095
What would really be great is if they brought back their product archive.
post #28439 of 30095
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

Everything bit of literature I read about these speakers suggests they are dipoles, not bipoles. Where do you get the bipolar from?

His psychologist. wink.gif
post #28440 of 30095

Goneten,

 

  Di-poles work best when people are positioned close to them.  When people are close to a direct firing speaker they get what I call that speaker in the ear effect.  That one speaker very close to them will call attention to itself.  Di-poles work good for that scenario as drivers are not aimed at the listener.  There is no problem using di-poles for back speakers but you have to make sure the phase is correct.  To do that you reverse sides of the back speakers, left speaker goes on the back right and right speaker on the back left.  This is if you are using di-poles for the side surrounds as well.  The backs don't need to be reversed if the side surrounds are direct firing or bi-poles.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Paradigm Owners Thread