AVS Forum banner

Bookshelf Speaker Shootout

70K views 803 replies 81 participants last post by  Electric_Haggis 
#1 · (Edited)
The new theater room is almost complete so now it is time to start having real fun!


I am auditioning bookshelves instead of towers because I unfortunately right now have to do things a little backward. My Paradigm Reference 100v2's will have to stay in service along with the matching center. I just don't have the budget to replace the front 3. So, the bookshelves will be for the side and rear surrounds. My line of thinking is that if I like the bookshelves then certainly the towers will be even better still.


Of course I could have purchased several dozen different bookshelves but I decided to limit myself to 5 or 6 contenders, which will duke it out to see which ones stay. The chosen few in no particular order:
1. PSB Imagine XB

2. Chane A1.5

3. Ascend Sierra 1

4. Aperion Verus III

5. JBL Studio 530


6. Wharfdale Evo 4.1




I wanted to audition Emotiva but unfortunately their bookshelves are out of stock. I'm hoping they will be back in stock so as to add them into the fray. It was also heavily recommended that I listen to Elac but unfortunately they are also out of stock.



The methodology I'm starting with will be as such:
1. Run all speakers through a 72-hour break-in period. Is that necessary? Maybe or maybe not. Will it hurt anything doing it? Nope.
2. Arbitrarily pick 2 sets at a time to go head-to-head. Loser is returned. I will be listening without grills.
3. Listen to the same base playlist then expand from there depending on what I hear. So, for example, if I listen to John Rutter's Requiem and question the choral sound maybe I'll put in something from Chanticleer or King's Singers to investigate more. I'll outline the playlist in the next post, I'm still deciding.
4. Take copious notes along the way of course.
5. Level match using my trusty Radio Shack decibel meter.
6. Run a REW sweep for each speaker from the listening position. I have no experience with this but I do have a UMIK-1 and of course the software so I'll do my best. Great way to learn the basics!

7. Once I think I have a winner from each pairing I'll have my fiancee swap out speakers while I'm blindfolded to either confirm my decision or really confuse me. Or both. I'll also have her stand in front of the speakers while they are playing and have her put the grills on or off without me knowing whether they are indeed on or off, just to see if I can tell a difference.

8. Have a ton of fun!


The system:
1. One of my older PCs running FLAC audio
2. My old Integra 9.9 pre/pro

3. Bryston 9BST amp
4. Analysis Plus Oval 12 speaker cables
5. GLS XLR cables
6. Acme Audio power cable to the amp. With a blue extension cord. The guest bedroom/bathroom suite is all on one breaker save for the whirlpool tub. I can't so much as make the music medium volume without tripping the breaker so I'm having to draw power from the adjacent bathroom.


Now, the room setup. This was painstakingly designed and executed as you can see in the image. The Integra is carefully leveled and placed on acoustic damping material, a medium-nap carpet. The Bryston amp is carefully raised off the acoustic material on custom scraps of 2x4. The speaker stands, as you can see, are custom pieces. I designed them over a duration of approximately 10 minutes using only choice custom materials. The cables are relatively neatly coiled in the back. The seating is a custom pained vintage dining room chair with a newly upgraded memory foam cushion. The umbrella tree in the right corner is about 15 years old and lost some leaves while moving it about. The picture immediately to the left of the computer is my mom's wedding picture. The other pieces of art you see there are from various years of Musikfest (if you are ever in the Bethlehem PA area when its happening, make sure to go!) My connection to the festival runs deep, but I digress.



In all seriousness, I'll position things a bit better but this is pretty much the idea. I'll purchase good speaker stands from either Monoprice or Sanus once the shootout is over.


I'll be listening without a sub. I know myself well enough that if the sub isn't positioned precisely where it should be then I'll be distracted and the decision making process will be significantly complicated and I'll have approximately zero fun with this process. I'll listen to them first full range to see what they can do but I'll primarily be listening to the speakers crossed over at 60. That way I'll have at least a little low end but shouldn't be taxing the woofers. I'm really just listening for timbre/SQ at this point. The subs will be twin Devastators along with my old Velodyne DD15, so I'm not at all concerned about the low end of the system.



What am I looking for? I'm looking for a neutral presentation that does not fatigue in the high end. This is the single most important attribute for me. I need a soundstage that is strong but one that doesn't collapse at high volume. In that regard I'm more concerned with width of the soundstage than I am with depth. I need good headroom. Aesthetics do not matter at all. I couldn't care less if a speaker looks like a dead cat folded up into a rectangle, it just needs to sound good. My WAF is zero. She doesn't care at all. I have zero bias toward any of these speakers. I haven't heard any of them and don't have experience with any. (I have heard PSB and JBL but it has been probably 20 years ago in a showroom so I don't count that as having any experience.)



Please post comments along the way. I've never done anything like this before so I'll appreciate any help you can offer.


So this ends the introduction. If you are so inclined, please join me on the journey!
 

Attachments

See less See more
1
#2 · (Edited)
Round 1, Part 1

Disclaimer for this and all of the review posts that follow:


I am not an audio engineer. I am not a professional audio reviewer. I'm a guy who likes good music in a wide variety of genres and loves when it sounds great. My definition of what sounds great will likely be unlike yours. Neither of us is right or wrong. We just know what we like. With these reviews I am not going to split out treble vs. mid vs. bass nor am I going to create a separate section on imaging. I'm writing these from my notes, which are not focused on each aspect. Also, while I do have a trained ear as a musician and singer as well as a Speech-Language Pathologist, I am not as finely tuned to defining and subsequently describing everything that I am hearing in this shootout but I'll do my best. I listened to these speakers crossed over at 60 Hz primarily although at the end of the round I did some full range listening as well. They were crossed over for most of my sessions simply to level the playing field. I posted previously that these are going to be supplemented with a ridiculous amount of sub power in their ultimate home in a soon-to-be completed theater, so I am not concerned about how they perform as full range speakers. While I listened to a few movie scenes, I did not do a lot of movie listening/watching. My opinion is that if a speaker excels at music then it will excel at movies without question. I am not going to correlate my findings to the REW results. I don't care about that. I care about how they sound, not how they measure. Most importantly, know that I author quite a lot of clinical programs, policies, and procedures but I haven't ever written anything like this before. I am spending a tremendous amount of time putting this together for you so if you are looking for the information, its there, you just need to read through. Take what you can from it and hopefully you will find it helpful. Don't like it? Don't read it. Want to be critical and start an argument? Please don't let the door hit you on the way out. This is supposed to be fun!


Round 1, first match:


Aperion Verus III bookshelf vs. Chane A1.5


Aperion:
I find the aesthetics here to be pleasing. I like a speaker that gets away from a traditional box. It adds a bit of elegance I think. The high gloss finish is of course very finely implemented. Knuckle rap results in no cabinet resonance. The speakers came in very nice blue velvet bags with gold toned pull strings, which really are more rope-like than strings in that they are nice and thick. Here's the problem. I don't need these. Invariably I am paying for them. Please refund me a few dollars and they can have them back. A nice touch, yes, however unnecessary. There is also a nice users manual although truthfully I'm not confident that a user's manual is necessary. Plug them in. Done. Done, right? Well no, not exactly. There is a jumper bar on the back that is labeled as “Treble Mod” and has two positions at 0dB and -3dB, respectively. Presumably this is to compensate for room acoustics although I would have rather the engineer decide how they wanted their speaker to sound and voice it accordingly. The differences in the sweeps was interesting. I anticipated seeing a roll off at the top end but instead there is simply a 3dB decrease, as advertised, as you can see. I think that is well-implemented. The dual sets of 5-way binding posts are solid although the cable jumpers that are terminated with a spade made it difficult to repeatedly connect and reconnect the speaker cable I was using, which is also a spade. I felt as though I had to fiddle with it a little too much and I found it annoying. Using bare wire (used for the A-B switching portion of the show) was a real chore because of the positioning and proximity of the posts to each other. Of course, this would be null and void in most applications as most of us will just connect them and be done.


I did a considerable amount of listening with the treble jumpers in both positions. The 0dB setting was downright painful to my ears. Cymbals sizzled where they shouldn't. Instruments such as the flute and piccolo were decidedly tipped up and at volume were, to my ears, unlistenable. An example of this can be found when listening to Kodo (Japanese drum ensemble). The track Harawataru has several flutes/piccolos playing in the beginning (they are likely traditional Japanese instruments that I don't know the name of, but you get the idea). My one word comment I wrote is “NO.” Painful and far too forward, the sound was grating and the volume had to be turned down significantly, lower than I would have preferred. I listened to Michael Jackson's Billie Jean from Thriller and I found the finger snaps just a little bit too high, the snare just a tad too sharp. Female vocals, as with Rebecca Pidgeon's version of Spanish Harlem from the Chesky Ultimate Sampler, were well rendered with good upper weight but her siblants were every so slightly increased. This allowed me to better hear her inhalations and the movements of her lips with bilabial sounds such as “p” and “b.” That being said I felt as though she were singing into my ear instead of standing a bit away from me. The speakers did compress somewhat at higher volumes. I wanted to listen to some of my favorite songs louder, such as Elton John's excellent Funeral for a Friend from Yellow Brick Road and the King's Singers lovely rendition of “Cecilia” from Good Vibrations but the Aperions were just too siblant.


Switching the jumpers to the -3dB made things much easier to listen to and here is where I spent the majority of my time. Comparing Michael Jackson's Billie Jean now to the original jumper settings however, still left me thinking that the finger snaps were just a bit too high. However the separation in the bass line was more easily distinguished. His voice was believable and had nice air behind it. Rodrigo y Gabriela's track “Tamacun” from his self-titled album revealed what I think was too much upper mid weight to his guitar. There were however very nice dynamics and I felt the imaging was spot on. Very good definition and the track was a lot of fun, particularly the last 45 seconds or so. With Tool's “Ticks and Leeches” from Lateralus there was nice definition of the fingers sliding on the strings of the bass guitar. Overall however I found the sound to be thin, lacking in weight, whereas I'm not used to hearing it like that. With Herbie Hancock's ground-breaking “Rockit” from Future Shock, I heard great detail in all aspects with good integration all the way through the auditory spectrum. My notes however, read “Sweet, too hot with snare?”


I was asked by one of you to include some comments about how a speaker handles bad vs. good recordings. If you listen to a lot of bad recordings (and let's face it, these are easy to come by in any collection), these are definitively NOT the speakers for you. Bad recordings sound absolutely awful. Some of my favorite tracks from my early metal days were downright unlistenable. 80's rock? Nope. Death metal from the 90's? Really nope. Disposable music like rap and modern pop? Well I don't like 99% of that anyway, so I'll reserve comment.


Chane:
A nice sized black box. Nothing special about the speaker itself aesthetically. Standard black oak. Knuckle rap was without resonance. With this review in particular please keep in mind that I have never heard a ribbon, so this is completely unknown territory. I like the looks of the speakers if for no other reason that the ribbon looks a little alien to me. Thankfully there weren't any jumpers to deal with this time. Good 5-way binding posts with a nice solid feel to them. I like the fact that they are surface mounted and not recessed. Easier to access but it also means the integrity of the rear wall should, theoretically to my mind, be intact vs. having a cut-out for the cup. That's just my thinking, I'm not an engineer and I wasn't about to take them apart.


The Door's “Riders on the Storm” from L.A. Woman provided a nice introductory window for the treble. The rain was believable and the thunder in the distance was nicely spaced. The first high run of the keyboard was well defined. Rebecca Pidgeon's voice on “Spanish Harlem” was absolutely believable. I'm not sure how she did it but she was hanging out right in front of me, singing beautifully. AC/DC's “Nervous Shakedown” from Flick of the Switch was awesome. The cymbals in particular struck me as being particularly well defined and I could hear the full breadth of each crash strike. The decay was well defined and hung in space exactly as I thought they should. Marvin Gaye's “What's Happening Brother” from What's Going On was a good listen although I thought perhaps there was a bit too much upper midrange to his voice. I also felt like I was missing out on the highest frequencies for the triangle as it was struck. There was a lack of “twinkle” and I heard that on a variety of tracks that used similar instruments, triangles, bells, chimes, etc. Phil Collins on “I Don't Care Anymore” from Hello I Must Be Going was great. My notes read “Ooo, quiet with keyboard, drums, voice. Smooth, great balance.” The definition of the stick work on the drum heads was particularly intriguing. This is one of the tracks that made me forget that I was critically listening. This is what it is supposed to be about.


Let's talk a bit about volume. Oh, yes, let's talk about volume. These speakers are listed at a relatively low sensitivity and of course the dial had to be turned up more than with the Aperions. Who cares. These speakers just wanted to play loudly. They didn't compress, they didn't turn painful at all. Now, we aren't talking about 100 dB, that's too loud for me, but listening to Alice In Chains' “Junkhead” from Dirt was just awesome. My notes read “!” That's literally all I wrote. I measured listening at 92-93 dB, which is about my usual max for listening to a track. Layne Staley's voice is traditionally shrill on this track, particularly the “e” in the line “...stoners, junkies, and freaks.” The Chanes handled this well and while it was still shrill it sounded better than I have ever heard without question. I threw in a little electronica here with Uberzone's “Vibrate” from the album Faith In The Future. This was really cool to listen to. There's a bridge of sorts toward the end of the track that can be super annoying on some systems. It's this long distorted sound that sounds like an old school alarm clock that is just stuck playing the tone. After that period the song breaks open again. That sound, I found with the Chane, wasn't really that annoying. It was not shrill at all. I think you can see the trend here that the Chanes were smooth and not treble-forward.


Bad recordings still sounded bad but not nearly as bad as they did with the Aperions. The Chanes did not smooth over those recordings, they just made the negative aspects of the recordings more tolerable. I attribute that to the Aperions having more treble, where the negatives were emphasized. If you listen to a lot of bad recordings, the Chanes are what you are looking for between the two.


Direct A-B comparisons were difficult for my ears as I've never been in a situation where I experienced this. There was a lot of me literally saying out loud to myself “wait, what?” I found it interesting to compare my notes and listen in direct A-B switching. My opinion honestly changed in some aspects but only as a result of analyzing key similarities and differences. Both pair handled dynamic range well and were able to separate sounds quite easily. It was made clear at this point that the Chanes imaged better and had greater detail in the upper range while not being exaggerated like I heard with the Aperions. At the same time I realized the Aperions exaggerated only some of the more obvious details but actually lost some of the minutiae from what the Chanes conveyed. This was particularly obvious in Wynton Marsalis' “Trumpet Voluntary” from the album In Gabriel's Garden. I found that the organ is generally lost in the mix anyway however it was more prominent with the Chanes. The Aperions just lost the organ in the shuffle as if they didn't even want to try to pull it out.


Movies in A-B comparisons were a lot of fun. The opening sequence to Saving Private Ryan was exciting. Bullets were flying everywhere. The explosions were right there in my face. Transformers: Age of Extinction and its nearly constant cacophony of giant robots trying to crush each other into oblivion was rendered well with both pair. All of the scenes I threw at them were a lot of fun to listen to, with the Aperions being more forward. This emphasized some sounds. I was particularly struck listening to the Aperions rendering the clips being ejected from the U.S. M1 Garands (ping!). In every comparison I threw at them both with music and movies, I was more “excited” by the Aperions but at high volumes there was significantly more ear fatigue than with the Chanes. While the Aperions were more “exciting,” the Chanes were more engaging. At various points through the entire listening experience, the Aperions did not sound like they wanted to go any louder (nor did my ears) but it was as if the Chanes were looking over at the Aperions while just shaking their heads as if mocking them. Listening to the Aperions and my brain was stuck in critical listening mode. The Chanes allowed me to let go of everything and ride the music from start to finish. As such, we have a winner.


CHANE moves on to the next match!


The next match was going to be with the next 2 speakers in line while reserving the winner of this match for the next round, however I have decided to move the Chanes on to the next match. Chane and Aperion both have a 30-day trial period, while the rest have 60-day periods. (I'm about 2 weeks into the process at this point and the Aperions are being returned presently). I emailed Mr. Lane and he graciously made it clear that the 30-day period could be extended for the purpose of this shootout. I don't, however, intend to abuse his generosity and so the Chanes will go immediately to the next match.


As a side note, I don't think the remainder of the matches will take nearly as long now that I have a routine for this. My ears are primed for what I need/want to listen for and I have a good expanded foundation of songs (thank you to all of you who provided excellent suggestions) that will serve to illustrate performance characteristics for evaluation. Not to mention that I am very familiar with the Chanes so there really won't be much of a review period for them, it will just be a matter of A-B comparison. I will however also review the competition.


Next match: Chane A1.5 vs. JBL Studio 530
 
#3 · (Edited)
Round 1, Part 2

Chane A1.5 vs. JBL 530


This will be a review of the JBL then I'll get into the A-B comparison. No sense in re-stating the Chane review here. I do want to say that this review was more difficult in some areas. My ears are dialed in for critical listening and so my brain kept wanting to immediately compare the JBLs to the Chanes instead of just listening the the JBLs without comparing them to anything else. It was harder this time around to just get lost in the music but again, only because my brain is dialed in on picking things instead of just letting go to listen without prejudice. As such, you will see some intermixed comments throughout, some direct review and some comparative. I suppose they could be split out but as I've said before and as some of you have graciously identified, I'm spending a ton of time listening and writing so there's only so much editing I'm going to do.


JBL:
Really unique aesthetic here and of course standard black oak. I feel like people either love how it looks or hate it. I just doubt there are many people who are in the middle of the road with something so unique. Personally I thought its pretty cool looking but my goodness keep the grill over the woofer. Without the grill it looks...well, it just looks terrible in my opinion. Honestly it looks like it is still under construction. Not that it matters for sound, but the silver/gray cone on the woofer looks oddly out of place. There is a nice piece of plastic that can be placed under the tweeter that completes the look of the horn but it still leaves the under construction woofer.


By far this is the most poorly constructed speaker of the bunch. Look at the bottom of the speaker and you can clearly see this is MDF construction glued together. MDF, okay that's most of them, I get it, but don't show it to me. Despite it being on the bottom where it will never been seen, the glued seams just seemed shoddy. They didn't even make an effort to make it look more clean underneath. Knuckle rap clearly had some hollow-sounding resonance on the side of the cabinet. It was minimal but compared to the other speakers it was easily detected. Listening to the speaker while placing my hand on the side and I could feel more vibration than I could with the other speakers, so there is cabinet resonance at work. The binding posts will not accept bananas and I thought were more difficult to work with than the others I have listened to so far. Maybe it is the threading as well as them being very close together but I just felt like I had to finesse the spades more than I did with both the Chanes and my old Paradigms. So I started off with a bad impression for the build quality, but I want a great sounding speaker and not necessarily the Rock of Gibralter. That being said however, I expect better construction and posts that accept bananas at this price point. Honestly it was a little difficult to get over this given that the competition presents with significantly better construction.


I listened to a wider range of music this time around and liked what I heard. Steve Vai's “Bad Horsie” from Alien Love Secrets had nice weight. The horse itself was less shrill than I have traditionally heard. There was very strong decay with some of the cymbal effects. The most meaningful of my comments I wrote with this track were, and I quote, “bad ass.” With the weight I heard, I moved on to Queen's “Fat Bottom Girls” from Jazz. This is one of my favorite songs of all time and there should be great weight from what I believe is the drummer's 12” tom (I'm a drummer so that's what I'm thinking it is, its not quite deep enough to be a 14”, but I digress.) In his fill runs this drum in particular is emphasized and the weight was there in spades. The harmonies were layered wonderfully and I didn't notice any particular siblance with Freddie's voice. I enjoyed my go-to female vocal song, Rebecca Pidgeon singing “Spanish Harlem” on the Chesky Ultimate Sampler. Her voice was smooth and convincing and I was particularly impressed at the 1:20 mark, when she drops her register on the lyrics “...to beg your pardon.” I could very clearly hear the change in resonance with her voice with expert transition. There was excellent detail in her articulation. Bass across every track I listened to was shy. There was little bottom fill so you would definitely want a sub with these speakers, more so than with the Chanes.


In looking through my notes I see the world “layers” twice in separate tracks. I have this word listed in notes for Babatunde Olatunji's “Oya” from Drums of Passion (with excellent dynamics at the :53 mark in particular) and Pretty Lights' “Still Rockin” from Making Up a Changing Mind. Detail in general was produced with aplomb and this was abundantly clear on the Stereophile Test Disc #2 with a track by Deen Peer (solo bass) called “Lord's Tundra. I could swear he was there and as I closed my eyes I could very clearly visualize his fingers hard at work on the fret board. If you have not heard this track, find it and listen to it. Paying particular attention to the 1:44 to 2:20 mark I absolutely believed I was listening to a real bass guitar, and this is a real accomplishment given the range from playing straight to harmonics to slap bass. Absolutely brilliant.


The word “believable” showed up three times in my notes for the JBLs, including the classic B.B. King song “Nobody Loves Me But My Mother.” Ol' Lucille was just gliding along wonderfully right before my eyes. (I actually saw him years and years ago at Musikfest in Bethlehem, PA. Fantastic show.)


A-B Comparisons:
These speakers sound like night and day in switching. There were very few times that I backed up a track to hear particular passages again for clarity of my impressions. Every single track I put on had the Chanes putting forth a presentation that was thick, weighty, and lacking in the upper transparency that the JBLs were throwing at me. I listened to the Branford Marsalis Quintet's “Rhythm-A-Ning” from Metamorphosen. With the JBLs I could clearly hear when the drummer hit the snare just off center. There was even weight in the recording between the bass, horns, and drums. The drum solo is really well done here and it sounded very live and believable. The Chanes presented with some of the detail but not all of it. The snare drum didn't have the same “crack” and I lost the ability to hear exactly the stick placement on the head of the snare. The bass guitar was too fat and by comparison it took me out of the moment. The bass drum on Bjork's “Army Of Me” from Post was also just too thick. When compared to the JBLs it was as if I was listening to the speakers through a pillow, if that makes sense. With Fleetwood Mac's “Go Insane” I noted that the Chanes had too much weight and not enough upper detail compared to the JBLs. The voice was just not believable to my ears.


Imaging was good but I thought the Chanes did it better with better width. The JBLs were much more finicky with positioning. When I pointed them directly at my head the soundstage was the size of a volleyball. Toed out a little bit and I mean a little bit increased the size of the stage but but toe them out a little too much and the center of the image disappeared and I was left with just 2 speakers playing 2 channels of music. I find this to be a problem although I understand it must be due to design. I feel like I would be able to bring a friend over, who maybe isn't as accustomed to hearing good equipment. I'd say, “Well this is may be the best sounding system you've heard. Now, you sit there. No, no, there. Wait, no, look where I'm pointing. Here, a little more to the right. Okay, yeah sit right there. But don't move. At all. Until a break in the songs.” It just felt restrictive with the JBLs and I found it distracting. I'm not saying I want to be able to lie down or sit a whole foot off to the side and still experience the sweet spot but I also don't want to have to make sure I'm sitting in the sweet spot to the inch nor do I want to have to toe the speakers a millimeter at a time to nail it “just right.” They probably would fare better at a listening position farther away and with the speakers wider apart. Unfortunately my excellent, extensively researched, designed, and constructed custom speaker slab isn't long enough to accommodate additional spacing. Toe in/out is critical for any speaker, yes, and certainly taking time to dial it in is important but I just felt like I couldn't get it exactly right where with the Chanes I found it much easier to dial in as they were vastly more forgiving with a much wider sweet spot.


Let's talk about getting loud. Both of these speakers performed admirably in this regard. They both handled soundtracks well and were both able to play loudly without difficulty but there was a difference with increasing volume. The JBLs didn't seem as loud at times because they didn't change in presentation. They just straight up got louder. The Chanes on the other hand opened up more as they got louder. They wanted to be up at higher volumes. The JBLs were just as content being loud as they were being quiet. With loud rock, namely Overkill's “Crystal Clear” and Alice In Chains' “Junkhead,” there was no compression nor breakup in any aspect. At 93 dB I called it a done deal but honestly I think they could have gotten louder still. The soundstage from the JBLs did collapse at higher volumes and this was particularly noticed with Dave Brubeck's “Take 5” from Time Out but the Chanes remained open and distinct. There was less fatigue with the Chanes but at the same time I wasn't being stabbed in my ear with an ice pick with the JBLs.



This revealing A-B switching told me the Chanes were more boxy and “fat” sounding compared to the JBLs. Understand that this description applied to when they were both crossed over at 60 Hz as well as running full range so it is not a matter of bass extension. I think truly with this comparison a decision on which was “better” was much more subjective and a greater compromise than I felt the last round was. In the last round the Aperions were too bright and that in of itself was enough to knock them out. In this round, the Chanes were more laid back and wanted to get louder to truly open up whereas the JBLs were comfortable at any level. The Chanes had a thick presentation with a lot of midbass, the JBLs were more smooth across the spectrum.


Movies were more fun with the Chanes. Explosions in particular had a weight that the JBLs couldn't touch. They both presented with good separation in cacophonous scenes where explosions, lasers/guns and voices going off all at the same time.


As much as I didn't want to consider construction in the reviews, I just have to go back to the poor construction of the JBLs. I apologize for berating them again but its like JBL just told themselves “we have a great easily identified high profile moniker so let's just cut costs and make it a cheaper build to make more money.” Come on JBL, make me feel like I paid for a well constructed and good sounding speaker. Comparatively, Chane decided “let's make a great sounding speaker with great construction and charge LESS than the competition. JBL should be ashamed for charging this price for this speaker. I have read that they go on sale at times but at this price point? No way. It made me think of Bose and their price-to-performance ratio but in this case price-to-construction ratio. That's clearly not a compliment. If I were on a tighter budget the decision would be easy, Chane all the way. For the purposes of this shootout however I am not concerned in the difference with a few hundred dollars, I'm concerned about sound.


A quick note about bad recordings. Bad recordings surprisingly really don't sound that bad on the JBLs. I mean, come on, a bad recording is going to sound back unless you play them on a poorly designed system where everything sounds about the same. If you do listen to a lot of bad recordings I'd still go with the Chanes over these JBLs as the latter has greater detail and will more readily expose poorly recorded material.


All of this being said, I would actually choose either of these over the Aperion. To be frank I came into this thinking the JBLs wouldn't be able to stand up to Chane if only because of the substandard construction (there I go again) and I was hoping Chane would deliver a potential giant killer. Given everything I threw at the JBLs in isolation and subsequently in comparisons with the Chane there was a clear winner.


JBL takes the lead!


In an effort to keep everyone on their toes (myself included), I'm changing the order of the competition again. This whole journey so far has kept my brain churning and there are a lot of aspects that aren't going according to plan. Not good or bad, just one of those shoulder shrugging “it is what it is” experiences. Sometimes surprises can be fun. So, without further delay...


Squad leaders, we've picked up a new group of signals. Enemy fighters coming your way.


Next match: JBL Studio 530 vs. Ascend Sierra 1
 
#280 ·
Bad recordings surprisingly really don't sound that bad on the JBLs. I mean, come on, a bad recording is going to sound back unless you play them on a poorly designed system where everything sounds about the same. If you do listen to a lot of bad recordings I'd still go with the Chanes over these JBLs as the latter has greater detail and will more readily expose poorly recorded material.

All of this being said, I would actually choose either of these over the Aperion. To be frank I came into this thinking the JBLs wouldn't be able to stand up to Chane if only because of the substandard construction (there I go again) and I was hoping Chane would deliver a potential giant killer. Given everything I threw at the JBLs in isolation and subsequently in comparisons with the Chane there was a clear winner.

Next match: JBL Studio 530 vs. Ascend Sierra 1
Funny, from reading your excellent review I think I would actually take the Chanes over the JBL. :)

Guess it just goes to show, everybody values/seeks different things from their speakers.

The Sierra 1 vs JBL matchup will be very, very interesting! When do you think you'll have that written up, next weekend?
 
#4 · (Edited)
Round 1, Part 3

Ascend Sierra 1: This is a gorgeous looking speaker. Piano black, nice rounded edges all around, and absolutely rock solid. You'll make your knuckles bleed before you induce any cabinet resonance. I fell in love with the 5-way binding posts, which appear to be the same as used in the Aperion Verus III. The difference here, compared to that speaker, is that there is only a single pair of posts, they are on the surface of the speaker (with no evidence of a cup whatsoever), and they are spaced very widely. PLEASE will more speaker manufacturers do this! They were extremely easy to work with and locked into place nicely. What I found interesting here is that the posts are just one the surface of the speaker like I said however there is no mounting hardware. The Chanes had the surface mounted posts but there was a mounting plate that I could see. There's nothing here. Just two posts sticking out of a beautiful piano black finish. Of course we try to avoid being biased based on design/appearance but these are classy looking speakers. They do come in several other finishes that I prefer over the black but I decided that all of the speakers in this shootout would be black so as to minimize bias. Of particular interest the speakers come with printouts of the frequency response plots for each individual speakers. So the speakers I received were balanced to each other very closely and I have the printouts to prove it. Everything about the speakers is classy.

This review is going to be a little longer than the others. With prior rounds my choice became clear relatively quickly based on what I am looking for in a speaker. I found this to be the most difficult decision so far and so there was more extensive listening and note taking. As such I don't think this review is quite as well organized but as I've said before, there's only so much editing I'm going to spend time on. Onward we go.
I haven't been commenting much on bass because as you know by now I'm running all of these speakers crossed at 60 Hz for the most part to level the playing field. For burn-in I run them full range. I can tell you that these speakers, by far, have the best bass of the group so far. Impressively so. I was in the basement putting on the primer in the theater-to-be and I could clearly hear the bass lines and could easily tell what song was on. Keep in mind that this is 2 floors down from the temporary listening room with music playing at around 85 dB. I walked in the room a few times during burn-in and honestly I would have thought a small sub was running. Clean, powerful, and articulate. Yes, I think it was that good. Only the Chanes gave them some competition.
The first track for these was the Black Eyed Peas' “Boom Boom Pow” from The End Never Dies. I thought I'd start with something fun to try to get my brain back on track to actually enjoy the speakers instead of being locked into critical listening mode. Frequency range was nicely balanced. I was just jamming along with them and having a lot of fun with it. A promising start. The soundstage extended well beyond the speakers. By a lot. I said out loud, and I quote, “what the hell?” Soundstage was also impressive with Herbie Hancock's “Watermelon Man” from Head Hunters. Nice, wide, and distinct. I noticed this a lot with small group music from a wide range of styles and artists. The best imaging so far although as I've identified previously, the JBLs are more finicky with placement so they may be more competent comparatively regarding imaging. More on that later.


Dire Straights playing “Brothers In Arms” from the album of the same name had me hearing the distant thunder continue for longer than I remember hearing it before, good production of detail in the background. The level of revealing detail on these speakers was enriching, enlightening, and exciting. On Kodo's Mystery album there is a track called “Kei Kei” that has their ensemble playing multiple layers of instruments as usual. Of note here is a hand cymbal of some kind (I'm not familiar enough with Japanese instruments to hazard a guess as to what exactly it is) but the detail on it was spectacular. At the 2:55 mark the cymbal becomes more prominent in the mix and it was clear that it was not being mixed as its own track, the player just was playing it louder. I don't remember hearing it quite like that before. The distinct tone of that cymbal reverberated in my brain for a long time afterward. One of those moments where you stop and say to yourself “so that's how that was supposed to sound.” I have never heard anything like the Ascends. The level of detail was amazing and it opened up nuances in recordings that I thought I knew like the back of my hand. This is the first time that I dipped more deeply into classical music. I won't get into specific tracks because we'd get into a lot of information for me to type to outline them all. It is safe to generalize that with everything I threw at them the sound stage was enormous, deep, and wide. I regularly attended concerts at Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. And so I know very much how an orchestra should sound. Piccolos and flutes were well defined. Tympani drums commanded attention, violins were beautiful with the first chair being precisely positioned in space. The subtle facets of every instrument was conveyed with absolute razor sharp clarity. Even the acoustics of the performance venue were absolutely realistic. Closing my eyes there was no question that the orchestra was in front of me. It was mind boggling to say the least. The only other time I have heard such an accomplishment was sitting front of an actual orchestra. All of this pristine detail however came at a price.
I have been rediscovering the excellent Rykodisc/Hannibal double-CD set “The Best of Both Worlds.” If you have a vague interest in world music this is a must have sampler and you can find it readily on auction webites. I listened to The Trio Bulgarka performing “Snoshti Sem Ninal, Kuzum Elenke” (do you have any idea how many times I had to make sure that was spelled that right) and the recording conveyed very strong voice reproduction with perhaps a hint of sizzle with sibilants. This perceived tipped up treble continued with several different tracks. Stevie Wonder's “Superstition” had the same sibilant exaggeration. Miles Davis and John Coltrane playing “Bye Bye Blackbird from Roundabout Midnight had the same exaggeration of high treble energy in the horns. I continued to notice this with other tracks, including Dave Matthew's “Too Much” from Crash, Prince's “Mellow” from The Rainbow Children and Fear Factory's “Act of God from Archetype. I wondered to myself if it was the recordings?
Speaking to pure volume, I listened to Type O Negative playing “Everyone I Love Is Dead” from World Coming Down. This I played far louder than usual with the mic recording peaks at 95 dB. These speakers did not so much as break a sweat. There was no compression, there were no steadily increasing deficits in reproduction. They sounded exactly like they did at low volume but just got real darned loud and didn't think twice about it. I've been talking about Alice In Chains' “Junkhead.” It was here that I noticed that Lane's voice was shrill at times as I have heard in the past however it was not intolerable. I ran them full range then with another track, Fear Factory's “Act Of God” from Archetype. There is a transition at about the 3:45 mark when there is a big “holy war” lyric repeated. It was big, in my face, and impressive but darned that perceived hot treble.
Let's talk about ear/listening fatigue. This is not anything that I really gave a lot of thought to up to this point simply because the differences and my preferences in the speakers were clear. When I was A-B comparing the speakers there wasn't any reason for me to want to listen to extended periods to the “loser” because I didn't care for them as much. By way of review, it was readily apparent that the Aperions were too bright. No denying it. The Chane A1.5 were too laid back and perhaps on the warm side of the spectrum and needed to get loud to really come into their own. Now however things are getting very close. So I had a listening session with the Ascends for a touch louder than usual and a lot longer. I averaged about 82-83 dB and listened to almost 2 hours. Ouch. My ears felt like they had been shattered. As time wore on the higher frequencies sounded like they were higher still. It completely took me out of the game and disallowed me to continue to enjoy listening. There were times when a song would come on and I wanted to crank it up but couldn't because my ears were already telling me that enough was enough.
A-B Comparison:
This was by far and away the most difficult listening comparison. I was having a lot of trouble with decision making and so I pulled my lovely fiance into the mix. I played 3 tracks for her. As with everything up to this point regarding my comments, her comments here, when quoted, are exactly what she said. First up was Dave Matthews' “Too Much” from Crash. She thought the JBL was “deeper” whereas the Ascend was “more like a live version.” Moving on to Prince playing “Mellow” from The Rainbow Children, the thought the JBL sounded “more distorted when the song was busy.” The last song I played for her was one of her current favorites (I like it a lot too ), Lil Na X's song with Billie Ray Cyrus, “Old Town.” She said the Ascends sounded “more clear” and like she could “hear different sounds more.” The JBLs she described as it “sounds like someone brought something down to make it sound not so live.” I agreed with her wholeheartedly and I think she described what I had heard very well on all the tracks. As an aside, if you want to watch something funny while listening to a pretty cool song, look up the video for Old Town. Good stuff.
All through my extensive A-B listening I had the same general comments on nearly every single track. There was more air under voices and generally more shimmer in the treble. I consistently thought that the Ascends were vastly more detailed and realistic, by far the most detailed as any speaker I have ever heard. This however worked to their detriment on a lot of music because any little irregularity in the recordings became glaringly obvious. If a recording had any amount of tip up in the treble it became readily apparent. I mean painfully obvious (literally and figuratively).
I played around more with positioning for this round because the match was more difficult for me. Imaging on the Ascends was otherworldly. They were incredibly forgiving with toe-in and spacing. Sound stage was wide, deep, and generally vast. Pinpoint placement of instruments was readily identifiable. This was the best imaging I have ever heard from any speaker. The JBLs comparatively were incredibly unforgiving. They needed precise placement to image. That being said, when I was able to get them to image well, it was a believable sound stage. I also truly believe that at a farther position they would open up the image much more. However imaging is not an absolutely critical component for me. As long as a speaker does reasonably well then I'm fine with that. In this regard, I'd be happy with either pair but I was blown away with the Ascends.
Let's talk about bad recordings as we have for the other rounds. Bad recordings are bad recordings however they didn't sound that bad with the JBLs. They didn't exaggerate any aspect of poor recordings however they didn't hold back to let you know the recordings were made by a bunch of guys either working on bad equipment and/or were drunk. Or stoned. Or both. So shrill highs were still shrill but not overly shrill. Muddy bass was muddy but not overly muddy. However, throw on some bad recordings with the Ascends and you're in trouble. The level of accuracy is devastating to poor recordings. The Ascends will let you know that your bad recordings are indeed bad recordings and they will punish you playing the track on them. Shrill recordings were very shrill. I mean ice pick in your ear shrill. Muddy bass was very muddy. I'm attributing this to the fact that the speakers are reproducing precisely what was mastered in the studio (or in the case of “mastered” we are perhaps using the term loosely, more like “decided to print”). The JBLs were reasonably revealing as well but not nearly as much as the Ascends. The JBLs were more far more forgiving. By contrast, the Aperion Verus IIIs made bad recordings absolutely horrible but this was, I believe, because they were voiced hot in the high end and weren't necessarily indicative of what was in a given recording. For those of you who perhaps listen to a lot of relatively poorly recorded music, the JBLs would be the winner without any hesitation whatsoever. It wouldn't even be a close competition.
When both of these speakers were played loudly with rapid switching, the volume characteristics were similar although the JBLs did not like to reproduce bass with any kind of authority. Using even a small sub is a requirement with these speakers. The Ascends handled bass with significantly greater ease although of course they had their limits.
Listening/watching movie scenes was fun as always. Both speakers handled raucous scenes without difficulty. I thought that the Ascends were more “fun” than the JBLs and I attribute that to the greater level of detail I heard. Breaking glass was notably more believable. I thought back to a memory I have from long ago when I helped dispose of a lot of glass recyclables into a large dumpster at a local recycling facility. It made me remember how that sounded. It is an experience is substantially impactful if it makes you remember something from long ago that you haven't given thought to in a long time. I thought the JBLs handled voices a little bit better but at the same time I felt a constant need to reposition them because the sound stage was just taking me out of the moment. I wasn't as worried with this though because of course they would be paired with a matching center channel should they win out.

With the Ascends, the fit and finish is in a completely different class than the JBLs. Absolutely no competition there whatsoever. The aesthetics I think are both good. I like the unconventional look of the JBLs and I also like the looks of the classy Ascends. In my situation, the decision between these speakers comes down to two central questions. Do I want a wider sound stage with a relatively wide sweet spot? Do I want that to be coupled with detail that is above and beyond anything I have ever heard but with treble that is perhaps slightly forward and less forgiving? Or do I want a speaker that is more sensitive to positioning to get a strong sound stage and noticeably less sibilant? The answers to these questions are difficult to develop and I had an extremely hard time figuring this out. We know already that my temporary listening room itself is problematic and that the speakers' permanent home will be significantly better. We know that there will be quality acoustic treatments in place as time moves forward. We know that there will be extensive time spent with speaker positioning. We also know that the equipment that will be in place is vastly more powerful (Monoprice HTP-1) vs. what is in place now (Integra 9.9) and powerful room correction software will be in play with Dirac. These things were important when this started but becomes more important to consider given that, with this match in particular, things are a lot closer than what I experienced before.
It was genuinely frustrating going back and forth because at one moment I'd say “ahhhh, that's great” then switch to the other pair and say “ahhh, that's great” referring to something different. It was something of a crap shoot as to which was “better.” It just wasn't clear. There were a few nights I came down from listening and told my fiance "I don't know what to do with this round."

I think it is important to note that the Ascends are relatively expensive speakers at almost $700/pair compared with the $600/pair for the JBLs but as I have read and have seen, these go on sale often for far less. Sometimes you get what you pay for, and with the Ascends you do without question. The problem I had with them is that they were absolutely unforgiving 100% and unless a recording had good mixing and attention to mastering they were fatiguing and discouraging in that getting into the music for pure enjoyment was difficult at times. I think of all the times I want to just be like the guy in the old Maxell advertisements and be blown away into my arm chair. The JBLs will give me that. So will the Ascends except that my ears would also be in flames potentially permanently dislodged from my head.

JBL moves on to the next match!
I've got to say I was extremely surprised here. I really wanted to fall in love with the Ascends. I did, too, but they were just so unforgiving of even average recordings and caused ear fatigue such that I felt like I wouldn't enjoy them as much over the long haul. I do want to say that if you are after an incredibly detailed speaker with an unworldly sound stage that is capable of bomb blast volumes without compression, you need to have the Ascend Sierra 1s on your short list. It has enlightened and educated me in a profound way that will have serious repercussions as we move forward in the competition.

So the JBLs have moved on for the second time in a row. Let's see how they fare against our neighbors up north.
Next round: JBL Studio 530 vs. PSB Imagine XB
 
#394 ·
I really wanted to fall in love with the Ascends. I did, too, but they were just so unforgiving of even average recordings and caused ear fatigue such that I felt like I wouldn't enjoy them as much over the long haul. I do want to say that if you are after an incredibly detailed speaker with an unworldly sound stage that is capable of bomb blast volumes without compression, you need to have the Ascend Sierra 1s on your short list. It has enlightened and educated me in a profound way that will have serious repercussions as we move forward in the competition.
Wow.

You continue to defy seemingly "logical" expectations, Gary! And I mean that in a good way. :)

Seems like those Wharfedales might have an ice-cube's chance after all...but I shall hereafter keep all of my predictions/expectations buried under a truckload of salt. :D
 
#5 · (Edited)
Round 2, Part 1

PSB Imagine XB Here is the most diminutive of the competition. Standard small black box but with an attractive yellow cone and a nice phase plug that I think is rather handsome. Adds a bit of style in the “hey look at me, I'm another black box that makes noise” bookshelf category. Knuckle rap is solid and I would expect it was easier to brace a cabinet that is notably smaller than the competition. Nice 5-way binding posts but as I've said with a lot of the competition, I wish they were spaced more widely apart. (Will the other manufacturers please look at the back of the Ascend Sierra-1 and make your speakers like that!)

I mixed it up once again right off the bat and had a prolonged louder-than usual listening session. Average was 85-86 dB with peaks up to 93 dB on some songs. This is a little louder than my usual listening habits. The PSBs do compress at higher volume. Interestingly they don't compress in as ugly as a way I've heard before. Prior to this speakers that I have heard that don't like to be pushed compress and turn downright ugly, turning any given recording into an unlistenable disaster. The PSBs by contract demonstrated dynamics that disappeared as if they have been leveled off in both directions. They got to the point where they clearly didn't want to be pushed further and compressed relatively quickly. It was as if I was turning up the volume and all of a sudden they said “whoa, wait a minute, stop right there.” I was, in fact, afraid to push them harder because I really felt as though they could be damaged. Interestingly though, despite high volume I did not experience any appreciable ear fatigue. This was evident on every song I threw at them regardless of music type and recording quality. It simply was a function of speaker design and their lack of ability to handle high volumes.
During this initial session I listened to mostly rock. “Gasoline” from Seether's Disclaimer II was handled wonderfully. The distorted guitars stayed distorted as they were recorded and didn't seem to be negatively impacted by moderately high volume. I have mentioned Alice In Chains' “Junkhead” from Dirt and so I will do so here as well. My notes say “this is it.” The parts with Layne's voice that are shrill were still shrill but not nearly as much as some of the other contenders. It was loud, it was listenable, and it was really darn awesome. Stone Sour's “Pieces” from Audio Secrecy was equally powerful. During this session I did come across tunes that I would have liked to be just a little bit louder but the speakers couldn't keep up with that desire.
Silly Wizard's “Lover's Heart” from the Green Linnet 10th Anniversary 2-CD set was reproduced very convincingly. His voice was believable and the imaging on this one had him front and center with the rest of the arrangement to his sides. Sting singing “I Hung My Head” from Mercury Falling revealed the breathy quality of his voice flawlessly. There was fantastic air under it. Instruments were believable but were presented with a hint of muddiness, a little too much bloat to make me believe they were actually playing in front of me. Hooking up Rebecca Pidgeon singing “Spanish Harlem” from the Chesky Ultimate Sampler, I heard wonderful things. Her breaths and lips moving were wonderfully precise but I have heard better from the prior competitors. I put on Skrillex's Scary Monsters and Nice Sprites from the album of the same name. I don't do very much dubstep at all but there I was. All of the Bwaaa bwaaa bwaaa wub wub wub was reproduced...um...believably? Yeah, that's what I'll go with. Believable. The dynamics when those sounds kicked in was good. Sound stage was as good as can be expected with dubstep. Hey it's a cool song and I liked listening to it. (As a side comment, please note that dubstep is not, and I repeat not of any help in A-B comparisons. Just saying.) Moving on to some other music I listened to Yo-Yo Ma, Edgar Meyer, and Mark O Connor play “Butterfly's Day Out” from the album Appalachia Waltz. Really great track played by masters of their instruments. Here again I felt like there was some thin quality to the strings, it was missing some body to it. I wanted to hear a little more middle weight to the cello and it just wasn't there. It was hidden by the same mild bloat that I heard before. It wasn't too far off but enough for me to take note. Microdynamics were displayed very nicely. I found this to be the case throughout the listening sessions.
That can segue into our brief bass section. Rocking bass? No. No not so much. There was a little bit of it here but I'm not so sure it would be adequate for a listener who wants even a medium amount of bass. The woofers didn't want to go into a whole lot of excursion without putting up a fuss at the port. You'll need a sub without question. Want more bass in your bookshelves and you need to look more toward the Chane A1.4 and particularly the Ascend Sierra-1, which by far and away are the bass kings thus far.
Let's talk about bad recordings. If you listen to poorly recorded music then you're going to be just fine with the PSBs. They glided right over some of the poorly recorded music. They tended to hide details that would otherwise call out the deficiencies. They weren't bright enough to stab you in the ear with anything at higher volumes. However they also didn't play as loudly as the competition without starting to fall apart. They didn't really have much bass to screw up whatever was on the recording to begin with so that part would be fine. The JBLs however do even better with poorly recorded music. The amount of slightly increased detail I thought would kill them but it actually added up well in a lot of songs. They provided more crunch and depth to electric guitars particularly those that use a lot of stereo chorus effects like Zakk Wylde, most notably on the Ozzy Ozbourne album No More Tears. To those who aren't into a lot of rock and/or who aren't metal heads, believe it or not there are huge differences in how guitarists set up their rigs for distortion. I would say to this point the poorly recorded reproduction kings are between the JBLs and Chane A1.4. That being said if you like your material loud then the Chanes are where you want to go without question but understand you'll be losing some detail that you might miss.
A-B Comparison:
Let's get right to the music. Badi Assad's “Rhythm” from the album of the same name was beautifully reproduced by both speakers. They both had a good amount of detail and clarity with her voice being realistically conveyed. Upon switching however it was evident that the JBLs squeeze just a hair more detail from the music. The comparison I would say was like the PSBs were behind through a thin sheet. Just a touch less detail, just a tad muted, just a little too fat. For example, the echo/reverb with “Rhythm” was just more noticeable with the JBLs. With Candlebox's only real hit, “Change” from their self-titled album there is some extremely subtle snare drum work that is lightly audible beginning at the 0:40 mark. It is hard to hear at times but it is there. It was harder to hear on the PSBs to the point where I had to roll back the song several times over the same mark to make sure I was hearing what I knew was there. If I didn't already know it was there I'm not sure I would have noticed it unless the JBLs were playing it. I put on a few tracks by Global Noize from the album A Prayer For The Planet. I noticed the same pattern on all of them. My notes say “...just a light veil (over the) details.” One of the songs that really struck me hard was Lamb Of God's “Ruin” from Ashes In The Wake. Even if you don't care for metal, please listen to the song starting at the 2:30 mark. One of the very best drum fills of all time can be heard around 2:40. It is literally legendary in metal circles. With that fill there is a lot of rapid fire bell work on the cymbals. The PSBs notably muffled this whereas it was crystal clear on the JBLs. There really was absolutely no comparison. None. Listening to Barry White's unmistakable voice on “Let the Music Play” from the album of the same name was recreated with good weight on both speakers however the PSBs sounded like they were trying too hard to make sure that weight was there. It was overly weighty. Micro-dynamics in general I felt were better portrayed with the PSBs than the JBLs. Macro-dynamics however the JBLs handled with much more authority but some of the changes as with an acoustic guitar being strummed only mildly more aggressively from stroke to stroke were more clearly differentiated on the PSBs.
Movies with these speakers were a lot of fun as always. They both handled everything well but the JBLs could handle wide dynamics better than the PSBs. It was not significant, but it was there. As far as quality of presentation I'm not sure there was any appreciable difference between the two when taking them as a whole although the PSBs did throw a wider sound stage. The greater detail in the JBLs lent themselves to some sound effects like the dripping water as the marines enter the compound in Aliens. Truly it was too close to call in scenes where there is a lot going on as with pretty much any battle scene from any Avengers movie. I doubt that most of us would be able to hear any difference at all without careful listening and A-B switching. Did I mention before that watching an action scene on a tiny 17” TV positioned on the floor while switching back and forth sucks? Well it does and I do not recommend it.
The JBLs continue to frustrate me with imaging because I know they are capable of doing more but I have not the room to allow this yet. They try hard but the PSBs outmatched them easily. The PSBs were more seamless in side-to-side transitions and sounds projected outside of the boundaries of those little black boxes. This was so pronounced that there were at least a few times I stood up and leaned my head close to the speakers to make sure which one I was hearing. To that effect keep in mind that a lot of the time I did that the JBLs were the outside pair. As such the PSBs were projecting well beyond the sides of the speakers whereas the JBLs were relatively isolated within their own bodies. I hope I'm explaining that adequately.
I want to dedicate a few sentences here to my fiance's impressions because she really nailed it this time. In each of the 3 songs I played she had similar comments. Lil Nas X with Billy Ray Cyrus performing “Old Town Road,” Elton John's “Think I'm Gonna Kill Myself” from Honky Chateau, and Lenny Kravitz playing “Fly Away” from his “5” album. In each song she described the JBLs as having more detail. The comment that rocked me was when she said the JBLs “were like being in the VIP section” whereas she described the PSBs as sounding “like I was getting a drink” (from the bar in the back of the club). When I asked her to elaborate she said “like it's at a far distance.” Interestingly with all of the words I've used here she put into only a sentence or two precisely what I had been hearing all along.
I believe truly that having listened to the excellent Ascends really tipped me off as to what is possible in a loudspeaker for detail, dynamics, and straight up balls out volume and it let me fold the rest of the cards into place more easily. The PSBs and JBLs are very similar with the JBLs being capable of getting louder without compressing and reproducing small details more effectively. Both of these speakers are very, very close to exactly what I am looking for. It was close but at this point my ears are very dialed into what exactly I'm hearing and so the choice became clear.
JBL moves on to the next round!
Gentlemen we started this journey a few weeks ago with 6 pairs of speakers. Some decisions were easy and some were critically difficult. Ultimately we have come down to the last 2 survivors. We have two very different designs coming up head-to-head.
Final match: Wharfdale Evo 4.1 vs. JBL Studio 530
 
#6 · (Edited)
Final match

LAST MATCH Gentlemen we started with 6 contenders. We are left with 2 finalists. Who will prevail? Time for these two heavy weights to duke it out in the finals.
Wharfdale Evo 4.1 vs. JBL Studio 530
Wharfdale Evo 4.1
I love the look of these speakers. There, I said it. These speakers are just awesome looking. They ooze class all over the place. Sturdy construction of course, with a knuckle rap yielding no resonance whatsoever. The 5-way binding posts on the rear are oddly spaced. They are staggered with two rows that are offset from each other and that protrude from the back at angles. The jumper bars on the posts appear to be pretty cheap generic metal, a surprise given the fit and finish for the rest of the speaker. Due to the angles of the posts I found it a little finicky to connect my spades as one terminal was to the side and farther up the back instead of having them horizontally even. In the end the cable had to be oriented partially from the side at a rather awkward angle to make it easier to clamp them down. This put unnecessary pressure on the cable where it splits into positive and negative. It wouldn't be an issue if you make your own but my Analysis Plus Oval 12s did not like it at all and neither did I. It was even worse with the Oval 8s with which I traditionally run my mains. Wharfdale continued to take things further to differentiate their design from the competition with their slot loaded port. I was not familiar with this design and so I looked it up. This description that follows was copied from the internet and certainly isn't copyrighted nor proprietary so I feel comfortable placing it here:
The EVO 4.1 utilizes a slot-loaded distributed port design, where the internal port tube opens into a slot formed between the speaker cabinet and the plinth. This reduces the turbulence and audible "chuffing" suffered by conventional ported systems, which is caused by the sudden out-rush of high-pressure air into the low pressure in the room. A further benefit is the increased efficiency of energy transfer from the bass reflex tuning to the room. Both ends of the port feature a semi-parabolic entry and exit curve that control airflow through the port tube and allow increased air volume in the slot-loaded system for further improvement in the loudspeaker's low-frequency output performance.
It's interesting to be able to look through the bottom of the speaker, although I strongly doubt anyone would sit and stare at that as the clear view is available to you only through the sides. Otherwise it presents itself as a simple gap. It just is one more way these speakers look wicked cool. The speakers also came with white gloves. That's right, you read that correctly. White gloves. I would be willing to bet quite a bit of money that even if someone actually uses them they'd be used once and forgotten about. Wharfdale please take the white gloves and give me a few bucks back. Same thing as with the Aperions and their blue velvet bags. Classy touch? Yes. Necessary? No.
Before we get started with the review I do want to say that up to this point the speakers all had roughly equal playing time. The Wharfdales hadn't been listened to save for a song or two. As the rounds carried on and the JBLs kept winning I ran them more and more as the JBLs continued to win. I did this with the other speakers as well. I feel confident that their playing time ended up being close to what the JBLs had been run. I include this note for those of us who believe in break-in to let you know that just because these were last up to the plate they were played just as much as the other contenders.
I'll say in advance that the Wharfdales were a much tougher onion to peel. They presented themselves incredibly differently than anything I've ever heard before. I have to attribute it to the design, the port design and ribbon in particular. It took me a lot longer to figure out what was going on here. My ears were hearing things very differently and I'm not sure my brain knew what to do with it right away. I figured it out in the end, but it took more work. Those of you more familiar with a wider range of speakers might be able to review a speaker like this in a paragraph or two. I can't. This was the only speaker that I felt took serious work to review. This might be the longest review to date and the only one my patient fiance got annoyed with me writing. She said at least a few times “and you're not getting paid for this?” I'm not going to do a word count but you might want to refresh your beverage and get comfortable for this one.
Let's get started listening. I played one loud track to begin the review (as has been the methodology from the start). I cranked up Seether's “Gasoline” from Disclaimer II. It would not have been possible for me to get into it more. “Damn You” from Steve Vai's Fire Garden was also incredible. Bobby McFerrin's “Friends” on Bang Zoom was a lot of fun. My brief notes read “Immediacy, smooth, even, great treble.” I moved on several other rock songs and I was amazed. Jet's “Cold Hard *****” is a song I've listened to a few times in this shootout. My notes say “Oh man” and “That's it.” I got chills as the volume crept up to the 94 dB mark. One of my loudness tests has been Suicidal Tendencies playing “Which Way To Free” from Art of Rebellion. The woofers weren't at all happy at high volumes but otherwise the song was just playing relatively well at 94 dB. At that point while the woofers definitely weren't pleased, the tweeters started showing some signs of strain. Pushing slightly beyond that level to 95 dB and the Wharfdales were clearly unhappy. They didn't compress and they didn't distort, which makes this difficult to explain. It just sounded like they didn't want to be pushed that far, like the sound was starting to fall apart. Sort of like looking at something and shaking your head back and forth a few inches to each side as fast as you can. Your vision isn't really blurred but more like you just aren't focusing, the scene you're looking at starts to fall apart. The other loudness kings, the Ascend Sierra-1 and Chane A1.4 didn't strain at all. The Chane is actually measured as less sensitive at 84.5 and the Ascends at 86.5 so I can't attribute sensitivity as contributing to the strain. Neither of those speakers broke a sweat compared to the Wharfdales being rated at 87. Perhaps it is the AMT ribbon driver or some interaction between the speaker and the amp. I can't be sure as I have no experience with said driver up until now. Regardless, while I don't usually listen to such high volumes, I wanted to push the envelope just a touch further and the speakers didn't do well when I did. This also got me concerned about loud movie scenes and I'll talk about that in a bit.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, these speakers didn't want to wake up at low volumes. They didn't sound like they were trying to do much of anything below about 78 dB. They were just kind of hanging out waiting for more volume. I consistently noticed that around 78-79 dB they started to open up and got into stride at about 80-82 dB. The only other speakers that were similar were the Chane A1.4s. They wanted to be louder. The difference being that the Chanes wanted to get louder and louder but the Wharfdales didn't want to be pushed too terribly hard so the sweet spot was a relatively narrow band compared to the competition.
Other than high volume, through all of the listening sessions the Wharfdales were generally smooth, sounding like a high quality milk chocolate feels in your mouth. These were the first speakers where I immediately dropped all of my critical listening and just got into a flow right off the bat. There was nothing right away that took me out of the music. It was incredibly impressive, more so than any of the other speakers so far. However I started to become aware of something happening in the treble that I didn't like. It took me a while to figure out and I'll share that too in a bit.
I'm going to say here that you are going to read a lot about sound stage. You're going to read about it perhaps up to and including you getting really sick of reading about it. I talk about it a lot because it is an incredible strength of these speakers. Sound stage on everything I threw at them was wide and deep. The only speakers that even came close were the Ascend Sierra 1's. Nine Inch Nails' Into The Void from The Fragile was awesome. The opening of the song literally had me believing there was a left side surround in play. That is not an exaggeration. Uberzone's “Vibrate” from Ideology was wild. There was imaging with this piece that I've not ever heard before. It was absolutely all over the place and I mean that in a very good way. Symphonic music was completely mesmerizing. Absolutely there was a full orchestra right in front of me. I felt as though I was perhaps 12 rows back and I could see the main hall in Kennedy Center. It was incredibly believable. This was the deepest sound stage I've heard so far and this was particularly noticable with the tympanis in some of the larger orchestral works. Herbie Hancock's “Heartbeat” from Man Child had only one descriptor written in my notes, “sound stage.” The sound flowed from left to right seamlessly and I would have thought there was indeed a center channel at work. These are the only speakers in the competition where I could safely recommend them to run as part of a phantom center setup. I truly haven't ever heard anything like this before. The Ascend Sierra 1's have met their match in the sound stage department. The Wharfdales are the imaging kings. This was the only speaker that truly made me think there were more than 2 at work.
Bass was satisfying, very much so at that. It was smooth and it was consistent. As much as I'm not a huge fan of the word, I'm going to call it nice. Warm. It was different from the others but no matter how much I listened to it I couldn't exactly find words to adequately describe it. I think I'll leave it saying that you'll want a sub of course however if you aren't looking for a lot of bass and value accurate bass over volume then the Wharfdales should be in serious consideration. Ascend is still bass king and Chane is good, too. Wharfdale is just...different and I'm sorry that I can't describe it more fulfillingly. Maybe it is a function of the rather unique design? You might be able to answer that question more adequately than can I.
I have been including a short section about bad recordings, so here we are. Bad recordings were an odd lot. It is here in some cases that the warmth that I heard with the bass started to work to their detriment. Poorly recorded bass tracks on rock songs sounded too forward in the mix, more forward than I knew they were. This was evident in tracks I know like the back of my hand. Van Halen's “Drop Dead Legs” from 1984 struck me in particular. As I was getting into the groove I realized something was wrong. Something was off. That bass line was just too much. The rest of it sounded fine, but the bass was off. I heard that consistently through my more poorly recorded music, older recordings mostly, early death metal (worst recordings ever) and 1980's rock fared the worst. The rest of the music sounded okay but the bass I knew shouldn't be there was indeed there. Generally speaking you'd be okay with Wharfdale with poorly recorded material but you'd still be better off with JBL or Chane.
A-B Comparison
This is the first time through this entire endeavor that I had trouble. Usually after a few A-B sessions the winner started to become steadily more clear and eventually there was little question left as to which speaker should move on. I was confident in my opinions. I had significantly more A-B sessions this round. I usually listened with my eyes closed, fingers fixed on the switches unless I took notes. This time though I opened my eyes at one point, shut off both pair, and said out loud “I don't know what I'm doing.” I literally said that. I don't think these speakers could be any different in their presentation (unless we start talking about electrostatics, which we aren't). On one hand I had the JBLs. Presentation up front and personal. Tight quarters. You're right there in the recording studio. On the other hand with the Wharfdales there isn't any recording studio. (There is no spoon. Sorry, couldn't resist.) The Wharfdales had an unnatural ability to convince me that there were no walls containing the speakers. None. I mean, what they were doing was almost supernatural. I'm not here being overly dramatic. If you haven't heard these speakers in a direct comparison, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. Go forth immediately and listen.
So there I was with speakers that presented completely differently. Compression horn vs. ribbon. Geez, good luck making a decision, Gary. Notes before this were clear, concise, and well organized. With this round I had notes all over the place on the pages. I have to tell you honestly that at one point I got very frustrated, turned the music off, and in big letters all across the entire page I wrote in capital letters, and I quote: “FU**.” Except without the asterisks. Then I proceeded to laugh my ass off at myself while my fiance called upstairs and asked me “Everything okay up there, honey?”
So anyway, let's actually get to the music. In every single track I threw at these speakers the Wharfdales absolutely blew the JBLs away with soundstage. It is akin to listening to a full orchestra in an outdoor venue vs. listening to the same orchestra stuffed into a walk-in closet. If I listened solely to small jazz ensembles, acoustic material, opera, and orchestral material there would be zero competition. This round would have been over in less than 10 minutes without question with the Evo 4.1's winning easily. Unfortunately I listen to a lot more than just that. With rock it sounded like I was pushing an old-school “loudness” button when I switched over to the Wharfdales. Definitely a more “fat” sound, and that's not a bad thing for some folks. It was bloated and sounded artificially tipped up in the mids. Switching back to the JBLs was jarring. Sound stage completely collapsed and any semblance of perceived bass pretty much disappeared however the sound was more immediate. Switching to the JBLs made it initally sound like the they were a cheap speaker playing from a cardboard box. No flavor, no character. However, get your ears used to it going back and forth over and over again and the Wharfdale's big mid bass reveals itself as a detriment to rock. With rock the JBLs were more in your face. My fiance said it best, it is like being in the VIP section. This is the first A-B comparison I had so far wherein the genre of music is what created a “make it or break it” situation. As I said before, turn on acoustic material, opera classical, and the Wharfdales dominated with that beautiful big mid bass. No competition. Put on more fusion, electronica, and rock and the Wharfdales revealed that big midbass as a big weakness.
Specific notes. I listened to Lacuna Coil playing “Swamped” from Comalies. The JBLs were notably more smooth across the frequency range. They didn't exaggerate anything. The Wharfdales however conveyed some of Christina Scabbia's background vocals as almost ethereal, well beyond the boundaries of the room. There was something in the treble though that I couldn't quite figure out and for whatever reason I finally nailed it down in one single note. I listened to Slash and Myles Kennedy performing “Back from Cali” from Slash's self-titled album. There of course is a guitar solo and the very last note of the solo is almost exactly at the 2:19 mark. For whatever reason, after hours and hours of listening my brain took the time to kick my ears and say “Hey, hey! This is it! This is what you've been hearing!” When Slash picks that last note there is a slight “chirp” to it through the Wharfdales. Once I had that dialed in it was as clear as crystal on every recording that followed. There was an ever so slight falsely exaggerated attack on instruments like electric guitar and piano. This took a very long time and took a ridiculous amount of listening but once I had it I heard it in every recording and it stood out like a sore thumb compared to the JBL's even presentation.
Movies this round were also extremely different. I watched a lot more than I have in the past. Let me stress again. Movies. 17” TV on the floor. Switching box. NOT recommended. At any rate, the soundstage is what kept making switching so jarring. Countless movie scenes sounded like the Wharfdales had built-in surrounds. I can't tell you how many times I had to check the Integra to make sure there wasn't any processing on. I kept thinking to my self that there was some way some sort of matrix mode was operating but only on the Wharfdales. I think in some instances the sound stage was almost too wide, making some of the sound effects almost too far apart. Or maybe that's what they were supposed to sound like in the first place. It is important to note that while the sound effects were wide apart there was still a very strongly stabilized center. This reinforced what I was hearing in music listening sessions also, wherein the sound crossed so seamlessly from side-to-side. Like I said before though I was concerned about high volume movie scenes, so I did much more movie watching with the speakers hooked up directly to the amp vs. running them through the Niles. The Wharfdales did okay with loud movie scenes but that was the problem, they did just okay. Average, nothing particularly special regarding dynamic range. It was like they forgot that sometimes in loud scenes there are louder parts within that scene. They just got loud and hung around until all the action died down. It was disappointing because man, that sound stage is unbelievable. The Wharfdales didn't take me out of the movie and I doubt anyone would be able to pick up on it without having more than one speaker for comparison. However, knowing that there were dynamics within loud scenes made it clear that the Wharfdales couldn't keep up with the JBLs in action films. Now, put on something that is dialogue-based with no real high action then the warm Wharfdales just killed it. I'll again attribute it to that warm, full midrange.
This round was by far the most difficult. My ears had zoned into the JBLs to the point that they were the reference. As well they should be, given that they handily took out some fierce competition. With having established them as a reference though it was sometimes difficult to take myself away from their sound and listen to the nuances the Wharfdales were offering. I went into this round, in fact, thinking the Wharfdales had no chance. Everything I had read about Wharfdales is that historically they are a quite warm sounding speaker not really given to demonstrating any real excitement. I didn't really have any frame of reference to define a “warm” speaker but I now know that the Wharfdales meet that definition. I had a vision of people listening to Wharfdales with low-wattage triode tube amps listening to nothing but Chopin and Brahms (and I guarantee that they are very happy campers). Eventually that vision in my mind started to be reimagined.
The reformed vision involved an image of the JBLs being this stoic stone structure, strong, reliable, immovable. Then the Wharfdales entered the picture. They are stoic, too, but they have some filigree to the design, more delicate carving, more curves. They had a more delicate side to them that lent themselves very specifically to the genres of music I've already talked about here. When I started this round I didn't think the Wharfdales had any chance whatsoever to take out the JBLs. In the end, they put up an epic fight. However the consistent neutral performance of the JBLs across every genre of music I threw at them as well as their performance in high action movies was a more appealing sonic solution for my appetite.
JBL WINS THE COMPETITION! (insert applause, cheers, and sounds of fireworks here)
I wouldn't have thought in a thousand years that JBL would be able to come out on top. They are a seriously highly overlooked speaker. I looked at them as though they would be standard big box store fodder and the impression of the construction was (and still is) decidedly poor. However I wanted to pay for a speaker that I thought sounded better to my ears than the rest and so here we are!
I have to give the runner-up spot to the Ascend Sierra-1's. They are formidable speakers and should be considered required listening material for anyone considering upgrading. Actually they should be required listening period, they are truly excellent speakers. I want to add here that Mr. Fabrikant with Ascend was kind enough to take the time to educate me that the better match for the towers would be the Sierra 2EX then the Sierra 2 after them. I thought this was important to state here because as we know I will be getting towers to match the bookshelves. So anyone in the same boat should probably consider listening to the Sierra 2's to get a better idea as to how the towers might sound.
So the journey has ended...but wait, there's more!
I'll be posting a follow-up regarding the return process for these speakers so hopefully all goes well there. I can assure everyone reading that the speakers were all handled with utmost care and are all in pristine condition. Heck I even put the desiccant packs back in the boxes. I'm also going to be posting some thoughts about the speakers that I listened to in a different room with a more proper setup.
I'll also be posting a sort of “final thoughts” post that I think you might find interesting so don't unsubscribe from the thread just yet!
I want to thank all of you sincerely for all of the support through this process. The interest and enthusiasm for the thread was way more than I anticipated and I am truly honored that all of you took the time to follow along. This was a first for me, so I learned a lot about critical listening and formulating what my ears heard into words my hands could write. This took a lot of time and while I lost a considerable amount of money in return shipping I feel like I ended up with the speakers that best suit my sonic appetite. Please keep in mind that your mileage most likely will vary!
Always, always, always buy the speakers that let YOU experience YOUR material in YOUR space in a way that is meaningful to YOU.
 
#7 · (Edited)
What I Learned and Final Thoughts

I thought it might interest you if I posted one final formal post in this thread to share a few things I learned along the way. Enjoy the read and thank you to all of you for helping this to be a wonderful journey!


What I Learned
I thought some of you might be interested in hearing what I learned through this experience. First and foremost, thank GOD that I didn't try to do this with towers. I think if I had to do it over again I'd have done the trials in the theater after it was done. I had myself convinced though that when the theater was done it would be move-in day for everything and so that's what I stuck to.


As has been said before, A-B comparisons are critical. There is no way I would otherwise be able to have chosen the best speaker for me. I think without that level of immediate, level-matched switching there is just no way to fully compare and contrast speakers against each other. Just no way. You can get an idea of voicing and you can still make a great decision about any given speaker but doing those A-B comparisons really solidified what I was hearing. Sometimes it was confirming what I was hearing but sometimes it was revealing to the point where it changed the course of my decisions.


Be careful of measurements! While there is a correlation between measurements and what will subjectively be perceived, there are just too many other dynamics to consider. Listener hearing acuity, room acoustics, perception of sound, listener preference, and the list goes on and on. If I were to have decided based solely on measurements I can't be confident I'd be as happy with the speakers that would have ended up as permanent residents in the theater.


We all know this but I think it is important to reiterate that a listening test has absolutely got to be with the music that speaks to you. They might look at you really oddly if you go into a salon with a stack of Slipknot, Pantera, and Obituary CDs under your arm but they'll get over it. That being said though, if you even occasionally listen to a different genre, experiment with that, too!


Try your best to listen to candidates for purchase in your own home, on your own equipment, with your music, and according to your schedule. A salon is fine to get a feel for things but there are about 1.7 million variables that are inherent in a space like that that are completely out of your control. Take advantage of internet sales with good return policies and look for brick-and-mortar stores that have the same. If you go with internet sales, don't worry if you have to eat some shipping costs. It is only by getting speakers in your home that you will have the confidence that you made the decision to buy the speakers that are best for you.


Read some reviews but don't fixate on them. There are often a dozen or more reviews available for a given speaker. There are some consistencies but there are more inconsistencies. I read a review...I think it was for the Ascend Sierra-1s where the reviewer stated he got the best sound by moving the speakers 10 FEET from the rear wall. In most of our houses I say good luck with that. The vast majority of us can't do that. Reviews can color your opinion of a speaker and can make it sound like a great candidate when really it isn't and vice versa. I have to mention too that I watched a review on YouTube for a speaker, I think it was the Aperion Verus III bookshelves. It was great to actually see him panning the camera around the speaker to highlight what it looked like but then he proceeded to perform a listening review. With his iPhone. Over the internet. 'Nuff said.


Get second opinions. Get someone else to listen to some songs, preferably with A-B listening and listen to what they have to say. Its helpful to hear another opinion from someone who doesn't know what you're listening for. It makes input subjective for them but can actually be considered rather objective for you because you already know what you heard. I remember vividly when my fiance' was doing a little listening with me and I asked her opinion. She said that the JBL Studio 530 sounded like she was in the VIP section in a club. Brilliant! One sentence summed up exactly what I was thinking! (Yes she's awesome and no she doesn't have any single sisters)


Final Thoughts
This was a journey that was fun, exciting, and stressful at times. I almost bought another speaker pair or two just to keep riding the wave but going through this 6 pair was a LOT of work. Would I do it all over again? Oh, probably...yeah, probably so. Let me say clearly that being locked into critical listening is not particularly enjoyable at times and I found it to be mentally exhausting. I really mean that. For those of you who might always be locked into critical listening or looking at graphs and data points without actually letting yourself go to actually enjoy what you're listening to, well, I'm sorry for your dilemma. Have more than a few drinks and/or smoke something and relax.


I want to thank all of you sincerely for following along with this journey. The number of positive and encouraging comments were overwhelming and really made this worth while. Hopefully I've created a thread that people can look at for a long time to come to help them make decisions for what is important to them. I love reading reviews of speakers but many of them are written by guys that have VASTLY more experience than do I. I think particularly about any review in Stereophile where they have readily available speakers that sell for thousands and thousands of dollars. These professional guys are no doubt experts in their field and their reviews are a lot of fun to read. Sometimes however its a good experience to read a review from just an average guy who loves music and movies. Who knows, maybe I'll do some additional reviews in the future.


This hobby is so much more than just a hobby. It is a lifestyle. That sounds cliché and maybe melodramatic but its true. It is a means by which we can connect to things that are meaningful to us. Music and movies is a means by which we can have a deep connection to people we have never met before.


Let's consider music. Music allows us to develop commonalities with people and establish friendships in a matter of minutes. Introduce me to someone who can recite the lyrics to Pink Floyd's “The Gnome” like I can and I'm pretty darned sure we will have a lot to talk about. Music is truly a universal language. I don't have to understand a scrap of another language to appreciate songs. Heck there don't even need to be any lyrics to be able to follow a song at all. Being in this hobby is to experience things that excite us and can change our mood in a matter of minutes. I can get chills just hearing a song (the Imperial March from the Empire Strikes Back or Starship Troopers by Yes for examples that come immediately to mind).


Now what about movies? I'm sure that there are movies that have cameos for maybe literally a few seconds. You find someone else who saw it and is as geeked out as you are and you've got something to talk about (don't even get me started on my Star Wars passion). I can get excited and clearly bring to mind a strong visual by thinking about a movie line (“Sir, where's the rallying point?” “Anywhere but here!” (Saving Private Ryan) or “All you people are so scared of me. On any other day I'd take that as a compliment” (Pitch Black).


Memories are inherent in this hobby/lifestyle. I can remember vividly the theaters where I was when I first saw certain movies and certain concerts. I can envision memories in college, where we would spend endless nights playing 5-song shuffles on my trusty Adcom GCD-700 5-CD changer (still have it, original box and all). I remember when my mom let me play hooky when she took me to go see The Dark Crystal in D.C. Those are the moments we should all be looking for. No arguing about which equipment is best. No feelings of superiority just because you can afford the Focal Grand Utopias where someone else can't go above the used (insert manufacturer name here) market. Maybe you have a 400” screen with quad projectors complete with holographic image and smell-o-vision but the guy next door loves his 55” TCL and Vizio soundbar. He gets into movies just as much as you do and in fact he might know more about them than do you. My point here is just meant to convey that we should all give ourselves a gut check every once in a while. Appreciate what others have but don't think for a minute they are better or worse than you. Watch movies. Listen to music. Listen to your emotions. Laugh, cry, or get chills (or all of the above)! Ride the wave of movies and music and don't look back. Life is worth living, and movies and music make it all the better.
 
#10 ·
How can anyone take you seriously when you use a BLUE extension cable?
Every Serious Audiophile(tm) knows that for the best sound quality, you need a YELLOW extension cord. Even though it can't be measured doesn't mean that the speakers will sound more "open"...
 
#12 ·
How can anyone take you seriously when you use a BLUE extension cable?
Every Serious Audiophile(tm) knows that for the best sound quality, you need a YELLOW extension cord. Even though it can't be measured doesn't mean that the speakers will sound more "open"...

I know, I know, but the ORANGE ones were even better and more expensive than the yellow ones but they were out of my budget. :)
 
#13 ·
zieglj01--I considered those Wharfdales but my reading suggested they may be a bit too much on the warm side.


Vergiliusm--Yes, only lonely twins. Driver will be the LaVoce SAN214.50 but sometimes I'm vacillating between that and the Eminence NSW6021
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vergiliusm
#14 ·
I'm betting he will like the JBL 530's...they can be a little warm or laid back for movies but music it doesn't get much better...my opinion of course...[emoji16].. loudness wars in movies?..…Maybe so.... especially in 2 channel like I'm doing....movies are alot lower than music with same volume.

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
 
#15 ·
I'm betting he will like the JBL 530's...they can be a little warm or laid back for movies but music it doesn't get much better...my opinion of course...[emoji16].. loudness wars in movies?..…Maybe so.... especially in 2 channel like I'm doing....movies are alot lower than music with same volume.

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE


Can you explain a little more what you mean? It seems that if they are warm/laid back for movies then it should be the same for music. You mentioned too that "movies are alot lower...." I don't follow what you mean?
 
#20 ·
Well this isn't part of the official review process but the PSBs arrived the other day. They have so far undergone approximately 24 hours of break-in and they are playing about 12 hours/day. So I'm in the basement priming the walls/ceiling/etc in the theater. Came up to take a break and I hear one of my favorite songs came on (among the probably 2.7 million of my favorite songs), Slash "Back from Cali" on the self-titled album. The PSBs are better sounding than my Paradigms. Cranked them up and they just kept pace. Surprising bass, not fatiguing. Oh man am I in for some fun with this shootout!
 
#21 ·
i wouldn't get too caught up in "break in" it's debatable that it exists.. and most that believe in it are talked into it be dealers worried about returns.. jmo ymmv .. i'd give em an hour break in and get to it .. i think that @PhilharmonicDennis and @Ascend, and a few others here might agree,, just trying to save you some time and effort...;):)
 
#22 ·
Nice....going back a few yrs....I compared PSB, Paradigm and Energy( when they were under the API label). I wound up keeping the Energy RCs. They were basically in between the other two. The PSB sound had a completely neutral soundstage, veiled so to speak...like many folks like to described as "warm"...the digms OTOH... highs were exaggerated somewhat, detailing and imaging was adequate ...RCs... upper end I found was a tad more recessed vs. the digms not as aggressive I suppose... imaging was more inline with the PSB sound.

I..ordered the Sierra 1 nrt...to compare and eventually sold the Energies. The S1 by comparison have a rolled off upper end but I've not heard them per se...the Nrt version provides a bit more extension into those upper frequencies taking imaging to another level hence my decision to audition and eventually sell my old speakers.

By the sounds if you're enjoying the PSB XB currently...you might take a liking to the Sierra1...but how they both compare to the others...I'll follow along and await your impressions.

Re,

Bill
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lp85253
#25 ·
Break-in, yes, a highly debatable topic. I personally do think it makes a difference but I'm not sure I can really qualify that. I'll cut down the break-in period to about 15-20 I think. In that regard, the PSBs are ready to roll and I have turned off the system. I do feel like I need to do the same break-in period for the others because my OCD will absolutely not allow me to convince myself that they don't all need that same break-in period. Whether or not it will make a difference, maybe, but I can hear my mind already saying "but are you SURE you really don't like them as much as the other ones because you know they didn't break in!"



@ lastplace--yes, lonely chair and I'm going to have my fiancee sit in for a little while but she doesn't have a trained ear at all. For example, my temporary setup just for TV is in the living room. I snake the wires across the floor and put the surrounds on either side of the sectional for surround with my sitting position exactly in the middle. It was like that for NCAAF season and some movies. She eventually had me move them and for a while I had them just hanging out at the front facing the wall behind the TV. It drove me absolutely bananas. She didn't hear a scrap of difference. Another example: when she first got her new car the stereo was of course absolutely horribly calibrated. I played around with fade, equalizer, etc. and it sounded worlds better. She couldn't tell that I had done anything. :confused:


@ PhilharmonicDennis--great suggestion. I have several good Stereophile CDs that I have in FLAC and I should be able to employ those to good effect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lp85253
#26 ·
Driver will be the LaVoce SAN214.50 but sometimes I'm vacillating between that and the Eminence NSW6021
The LaVoce is no slouch, but the Eminence would be the way to go if you can swing the extra money. With those midbass monsters and smaller bookshelves, I'd experiment with a higher crossover point than usual.

It should be interesting. It'd be hard to predict, but that is half the fun to see how close we come to the final pick.

I would expect the PSB, Chane, and Ascend to all be very neutral. I'm not familiar with the Aperions, but they look good on paper, and the compression driver on the JBL will be the wild card. My bias would lean towards the Chane and Ascend, since I'm a fan of Jon and Dave's design philosophy from their participation here, but I imagine they are all solid performers.

It'll probably come down to the little things like the minor differences in voicing and your preference for a particular profile. I own the Chane A1.4, so picking them would be too predictable.

My prediction: Ascend Sierra 1 :)
 
#27 ·
I like the predictions, that's cool! The Chanes came today and I hooked them up immediately. Cranked them up for Alice and Chains "Junkhead" off Dirt. Wow. Better bass than the PSBs immediately. Smooth. Sounded like they just wanted to keep getting louder but it was plenty loud for me. I have them running upstairs now. Jon has been EXTREMELY helpful, a very personal touch that I think is exemplary.



The Ascends are scheduled to be here tomorrow and I think the Aperions on Tuesday.


I agree that the JBLs will be the wild card with the compression drivers. The Chanes of course are also outliers with the ribbon. I still am really hoping the Emotivas get back in stock soon.


So the first round is set. PSB vs. Chane. I'll be taking notes and of course listening extensively and will post in the Round 1 slot when finished.
 
#28 ·
Another quick first impression. The Aperions showed up today. Listened to Slash, "Beautiful Dangerous" from his self-titled album. Siblant, pronounced high end. Not at all a fun listen. I could barely discern when the drummer hit a crash through the treble. Nothing sounded delineated nor clear. Not distorted, just very bright and without definition. There is a jumper on the back to tone down the treble by -3dB but my opinion is that it shouldn't be needed. I'll be interested to see what REW shows. The presentation wins by far. Blue velvet bags with gold toned draw strings, microfiber cloths for cleaning. The problem is that I don't want to pay for blue velvet bags nor microfiber cloths. We will see how they fare in the end.
 
#30 ·
Gary, thanks for this shootout; they are always enlightening.

One tiny suggestion.

When you mention a speaker can you mention the entire model to make it easier to follow as not all of us recall one day to the next the exact model.

Or maybe put the models in the signature line so they appear every time you comment?

For others, Gary's first impressions of the Aperion Verus III bookshelf at an msrp of $800/pair are described above.

Keep up the good work and thanks for the effort.
 
#29 ·
I'm wondering if I should consider the Martin Logan Motion 35XT. Any input on that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctors11
#31 ·
Worth considering.

I do enjoy the sound of my smaller Martin Logan LX16s which compared favorably to the Q Acoustics Concept 20s I tested them against on AVS a few years back, (I'd have been happy with either pair), and they trounced the KLH Albanys I tested them against 6 months ago or so.

Those went back and my friends got the LX16s instead which in Cherrywood looked stunning compared to the very nice but rather plain Piano Black on mine.
 
#39 ·
Enough



If we get another report on this thread. Infractions will be issued and members will be banned from posting in the thread. I realize with everything going on we are looking for diversions...but expending this much time and energy to argue about something this benign seems pretty petty right now.
As you wish.

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
 
#40 ·
Amen....over 700k infected and 33k have passed away.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top