PSB Speakers Owners thread - Page 75

Originally Posted by Vise

For about the same price I could go with the T5 main, C5 center, and S5 surround (my original preference) or alternatively the T6 main, C5 center, and B5 for surround. This is for a 5.1 setup with an SVS PB10 sub in a 13x15 basement rec room used mostly for TV/movies.

Originally Posted by scientest

That's a pretty small room, as such I'd probably go with your first choice. Two reasons:

1) you don't need the T6 in that size room;

2) you are likely to have to have the surrounds somewhat close to your listening position in that size room. As such I'd want them as diffuse as possible.

Third reason is that I like the PSB S5 in general (or at least it's predecessor, which I have), but that's a personal bias...

Originally Posted by Pete

Why would anybody buy an older less-advanced speaker design when the new more-advanced model is readily available? I could see buying last year's automobile if all you need is transportation. But PSB wouldn't introduce a new range of speakers unless they felt that they could deliver significantly better performance for roughly the same money.

There are deals on T45's and 65's because I'm sure PSB dumped their old inventory to those dealers that like to promote big "save" stories. If you want the best performance, buy the new Image. If you want a low price, buy the old Image. Just remember that anything you think you may be saving will be accounted for in the re-sale value.

Originally Posted by 3db

More features on the new series than the old Yamahas but also 10 10lbs lighter. That to me shows a serious compromise on the power supply design of teh new series.

Originally Posted by scientest

Power supply design has come a long way in the last 10 years. Switching power supplies are now the norm: they use smaller transformers which results in way lighter designs and better conversion efficiencies. The net result is a far better design than the older heavier power supplies.

Originally Posted by 3db

There are no switching power supplies in the Yamaha receivers so that cannot be used as an excuse for Yamaha's weigh reduction.

Originally Posted by 3db

Switching power supplies have been around far longer tha people realize, approximately 30 years if not longe, first used in military aircraft applications.

Originally Posted by scientest

Even regular power supplies are getting more efficient, takes a lot less metal to get better efficiencies these days. Similarly, designs don't run class A or AB any more; the concept of switching has moved out of the PS and into the entire amp design. Makes a lot of difference to efficiency.

Originally Posted by 3db

So far none of the receviers have been tested yet to see. The efficiency rate must be made very high to shed 10lbs of weight.

Originally Posted by Emil Faber

Power amps have always been judged by weight as bigger heavier power supplies (read large transformers and capcitors) can store more energy for the amp section to draw against during loud passages.

Originally Posted by Emil Faber

Two of the transformers on your Michaleson and Austin were for the output stage, not the power supply. Tube amp output transformers are very common to match impedance between the final amplification stage and the speakers.

Originally Posted by Emil Faber

Your Sonos most likely contains a switching power supply and a class D switching power amp.

Originally Posted by Emil Faber

As far as "sound," tube vs transistor quickly becomes a holy war. My preference is for tubes, but it is more and more difficult to find good tubes at a good price these days

Originally Posted by 3db

Don't be so over zealous about new designs being better than old ones. There are many cases where older designs were better. Take the new mid level entries from Yamaha as an eg. More features on the new series than the old Yamahas but also 10 10lbs lighter. That to me shows a serious compromise on the power supply design of teh new series. The amplfier section in my 4 year old Yamaha RX-V1800 will mop the floor with Yamaha's new RX-V2065 dispite that the RX-V1800 is liek 4 years older because the power supply is way more substantial.

You really need to get past this paradigm (excuse the pun) and sit an audition the two series. If the older T45s sound just as good to you as the new Image T5s, why would you shell out more cash for the new speaker? Doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by jedcaum

Okay, I've made up my mind to take advantage of the prices on the old PSB Image line for a 5.1 setup, and I need some advice on the following setups...

T45/C40/B15 because they are all size matched, but I'm worried about losing the bottom end as I'm doing 50/50 HT and music. Also worried for multichannel music that I'm giving up range in the rears with the B15. Best price, too.

T45/C60/B25 because of the above and size-placement constraints, but I'm concerned about the size mismatch not being optimal. From what I've read and heard, though, this is probably my preference for each piece of the system.

T55/C60/B25 because by all accounts the T55 sounds richer and goes deeper and they are size matched, but I'm concerned that the T55 has been reported as "boomy" and not as accurate as the T45. I'd love to go T65, bt I'm stretching at this point as it is.

Help! The room is 16x22x9. I have a decently musical Polk PSW111 sub that I will be replacing or adding to with a HSU or SVS as $ and the missus permits.

Any input is appreciated. I'm itching to pull the trigger and stop driving myself and the wife mad with indecision.

Originally Posted by Vise

So figured the PSB experts could help out with a dilemma I'm having... found an excellent price on a set of the new Image series but just trying to decide what setup to go with. For about the same price I could go with the T5 main, C5 center, and S5 surround (my original preference) or alternatively the T6 main, C5 center, and B5 for surround. This is for a 5.1 setup with an SVS PB10 sub in a 13x15 basement rec room used mostly for TV/movies. My debate is mostly on which surround to go with, I currently have a compact monitor for surround (on stands to either side of the couch directly against the back wall) but have always wanted to go with a bipolar surround; just not sure if it is worth it vs going with the bigger main. Any thoughts/input would be appreciated.

Originally Posted by jedcaum

Okay, I've made up my mind to take advantage of the prices on the old PSB Image line for a 5.1 setup, and I need some advice on the following setups...

T45/C40/B15 because they are all size matched, but I'm worried about losing the bottom end as I'm doing 50/50 HT and music. Also worried for multichannel music that I'm giving up range in the rears with the B15. Best price, too.

T45/C60/B25 because of the above and size-placement constraints, but I'm concerned about the size mismatch not being optimal. From what I've read and heard, though, this is probably my preference for each piece of the system.

T55/C60/B25 because by all accounts the T55 sounds richer and goes deeper and they are size matched, but I'm concerned that the T55 has been reported as "boomy" and not as accurate as the T45. I'd love to go T65, bt I'm stretching at this point as it is.

Help! The room is 16x22x9. I have a decently musical Polk PSW111 sub that I will be replacing or adding to with a HSU or SVS as $ and the missus permits.

Any input is appreciated. I'm itching to pull the trigger and stop driving myself and the wife mad with indecision.

Originally Posted by Vise

Anyone else have thoughts on my setup based on the new Image series? As of now I'm thinking about spending the extra $300 to move up to the T6, this will be my last speaker purchase for a while so figured it won't hurt to get the best in the range. My setup would be T6/C5/S5... but any input/thoughts would be appreciated.

Originally Posted by scientest


People got all bent out when Denon did the same thing going from he 3808 to the 3910. I don't get it, these days, judging an amp by it's weight makes about as much sense as expecting a sports car that performs well to weigh a bunch more than a poorly performing one... Save those materials, reduce the inefficiencies in design: smaller, lighter, more features, better performance, all sounds like a win to me.

Originally Posted by 3db

Plewas ekeep it in thi scontext without throwing other exmaples that bears no resemblance to what Yamaha is doing. Yamaha Class A/B amp, 10 lb weight reduction in the same size chaissis doesn't add up.

Originally Posted by scyan

It's only going to be temporary as I'm delaminating them all in a couple weeks and refinishing them all in maple veneer probably in a shade thats a mix between mahogany and rosewood. I wanted the maple finished psbs to have the silver face on the speakers They're the only ones with it. I will also buy the black grills instead of the silver ones. Altough the silver grills would look totally incredible on someone that has Black speakers. Ohhh, if anyone wants to trade me black for silver grills, mine are BRAND new

Originally Posted by nlpearman

Brother, I too am struggling with which Image package to pick up.

The C5 is a given.

Surrounds are a personal choice - I lean towards direct radiating surrounds, preferring to believe that sound engineers can record the required "diffuse-ness" of a particular surround environment right into the surround channel information and it can be accurately reproduced by direct radiating speakers (with no added diffusion needed from di/bipole surrounds). But that's just me, and I'm nobody special. I'd likely get the B4's actually (smallish family room, WAF concerns, etc).

Lots of well respected people advocate di/bipole surrounds though so, if you prefer them, by all means get them. Something tells me you'd always be wondering if you didn't get 'em...

Like you, my big question is T5 vs T6. Again, I'm in a smallish living room, so there's no need for the T6, plus it's bigger (WAF again), but there's the draw of having the best in the line... especially since I suspect that it'll be a thousand years before the Finance Committee approves another upgrade. Also, there's enough of a difference in design between the T5 and T6 that I wonder if the T6 is much better. I have a sneaking suspicion it might be, so I'm looking forward to the reviews...

If I was in a basement rec room like you, I'd go T6 all the way!

T6/C5/S5 is my vote for ya.

Originally Posted by Pete

I grant that there may be some instances where older designs are better...just not very often and not in this instance. I'm familiar with old Image and new Image, and the new Image is better (better imaging, better low end loading, better power handling, better looking). I'm not being over zealous. I'm just stating what for me is a fact. Others who have not compared these two series of speakers or who are not familiar with my impeccable judgement, might confuse my statement of fact for an opinion.

Originally Posted by scientest

Well if you're really worried about this, it's completely off topic for this thread so you might want to take your concern elsewhere... FWIW, the Denon and the Yamaha weight reductions are very similar (non) issues!

Originally Posted by Vise

Thanks for the input, its appreciated. At this point I think I'm pretty much set on the T6/C5/S5 setup, as you've mentioned I am intrigued by the bipolar surround and based on what I've read here and elsewhere I think they would be a good fit for my room (surrounds are on stands on either side of the couch). I have monitor speakers as surrounds now (Paradigm Titans) and I do notice them more than I should hence my plan to try the bipole.

Similar to you once this upgrade goes down my own Finance Committee (hah) won't be approving any additional speaker expenditures so it would be easier to go with the T6 now vs changing course down the road. They are a bit larger than the T5 and my current mains but I have the space on either side of my TV stand and enough depth so that they can sit about 8" or so away from the front wall so that should work. They will certainly be overkill in my room but so are most of the other setups posted on AVS...