[cltang]

Hi,


I recently auditioned the B&W 685s, studio 10s and 20s. I am looking for a sleek small bookshelf speaker.


I love the sounds of the studio 10s and 20s, but wanted some advice regarding how they stack up against the B&W CM1s which I have not listened to yet.

 

[Erik Tracy]



Quote:
Originally Posted by cltang /forum/post/16870010


Hi,


I recently auditioned the B&W 685s, studio 10s and 20s. I am looking for a sleek small bookshelf speaker.


I love the sounds of the studio 10s and 20s, but wanted some advice regarding how they stack up against the B&W CM1s which I have not listened to yet.

I've read some glowing recommendations of the CM1.


Good question - a head to head death-match of the CM1 vs Studio 20!

 

[markwriter]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Tracy /forum/post/16870414


a head to head death-match of the CM1 vs Studio 20!

There are objective measurements of the speakers taken at the NRC and the CM1's don't look too good. That's quite a big valley between 1100hz and 5khz, not to mention the big bass bump at 80-90 hz.


B&W CM1

Paradigm Studio 10 v5

Paradigm Studio 20 v3

 

[Erik Tracy]

Maybe that is what folks mean by a 'laid back' speaker??

 

[markwriter]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Tracy /forum/post/16871726


Maybe that is what folks mean by a 'laid back' speaker??

When I used to have a graphic eq on my receiver back in the '80's, I'd arrange the sliders in that 'smile' pattern.

 

[///3oris]



Quote:
Originally Posted by markwriter /forum/post/16871698


There are objective measurements of the speakers taken at the NRC and the CM1's don't look too good. That's quite a big valley between 1100hz and 5khz, not to mention the big bass bump at 80-90 hz.


B&W CM1

If these measurements are accurate then how can the manufacturer claim +/-3dB 55Hz - 22kHz? Again, assuming the measurements are accurate, isn't that just false advertising? What's to stop any audio/speaker manufacturer from claiming anything they want? Etc?

 

[markwriter]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ///3oris /forum/post/16871857


If these measurements are accurate then how can the manufacturer claim +/-3dB 55Hz - 22kHz? Again, assuming the measurements are accurate, isn't that just false advertising? What's to stop any audio/speaker manufacturer from claiming anything they want? Etc?

One of the first things you'll learn if you read Floyd Toole is that the +/- spec is worthless, particularly when not accompanied by the actual graph and/or off-axis measurements.

 

[VectorLabs]

Or better yet! A pair of used Paradigm Signature S1 v2.

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls....gnature-S1-V2-

 

[rotel/b&k]

I have auditioned a pair of studio 10 and cm1 very recently. First, lets put their price on the equation. Studio 10 is about $200 less the cm1. As for dimension, cm1 is smaller than studio 10. Their firing port also must be included. Studio is at the front, so it has an advantage over cm1. For placement its very flexible. Rear ported speakers tend to dislike being too close to a wall.


As for sound quality, I would personally say its the studio 10 produced better sound quality than cm1. Material used was the blu ray version of dave mathews and tim reynolds radio city album(crash into me). Studio 10 really picked up their acoustic guitar high notes. It does not sound like its rolling. Can hear details during guitar strumming and picking.


My only comments is its matching center channel. Its too boxy and very expensive. But I think I would settle for a pair of studio 10 for now. I listen mostly to music and tv programming anyway.


My modest rig consist of:

B&K ref 20

B&K avr 5000 series II 125wpc x 5 amp

samsung bdp1600

samsung hdtv 1080p capable 24"


Good Luck!

 

[cltang]

Thanks for all the info. I am going to audition the CM1s myself to make my final decision. But I did love the Studio 10s.


If I go with the studio 10s I will pick the following setup:


Studio 10s LR

CC-490

ADP 590s surround

Ultracube 10

Denon 2310 receiver


I heard the cc-490 as well but not the cc-590.


Is it alright if I just got the cc-490 and not the cc-590.


I listen to 50/50 music and movies. My room is large (30x15x11), because it is joined to the dining area; the distance from my sofa to the speakers will be about 14 feet. Will my setup be loud/powerful enough?

 

[warpdrive]

Since I own both the CM1 and Studio 10, I'll put in my two cents.


I use the Studio 10 for my TV system, and the CM1 as part of my HT system.




I find the treble quality of the Studio 10 a bit too bright overall, which does grate on me for long listening sessions. The CM1 has a more natural treble quality which I can listen to for longer but it tends to dull the sharpness of high hats and cymbals just a little bit, so I find it useful for harsh recordings that are all too common these days. For the bass quality, both have very tight bass, but the slight bit of midbass hump for the CM1 works to its advantage when you are running them without a sub which helps balance off the rest of the spectrum in a larger room. With the Paradigms, they sounded a bit thin overall until I paired them with a sub and even then I find it sometimes is missing a realistic weight in the vocals. If I use some top quality recordings, the Studio 10 tends to emphasize the natural sibilance a bit more than I think is realistic, but the Studio 10 tends to reveal detail better just because it sounds a bit more forward overall.


I'll leave it up to you to hear them for yourself, but I'd say they are very different sounding speakers. If you already like the Studio 10 in auditions, I think you'll find the CM1 sounding kind of dull in comparison. In my own room, the CM1 works better for me.


The only other thing about the Paradigms that turned me off is that they were sloppily assembled. My first pair was defective and my second pair has cosmetic defects that don't affect the sound but make me wonder if every workday at Paradigm was a Friday.


And I almost forgot, I saw your recent post and I would not actually recommend either in the room you have. My CM1 works ok in my 18x14 room with a large ported sub crossed over at 80Hz (the ideal crossover for this speakers) but any larger than that, you need to step up to the CM5 or Studio 20. As well, the Ultracube 10 is only really suitable for small room, it doesn't offer the extension or output to do justice to your open area room. I'd buy an Ultracube for my computer system or den, but for your size room, you should really consider Paradigm's larger subs or go for something completely different (SVS makes the $700 SB12 which is better sounding, and is comparable to the Ultracube 12 in output )


One speaker you should also consider is the NHT Classic 3. It's better than the Studio 10/20 IMO. I found it worked well for my room, a listenable sound that was not fatiguing for long sessions. There are a couple of things that I liked about the CM1 more which is why I sold the C3 and kept the CM1, but now that they reduce the price and sell direct, it's a great deal. It's just a very solid performer and I recommend it to everyone.

 

[Erik Tracy]



Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdrive /forum/post/16872961


Since I own both the CM1 and Studio 10, I'll put in my two cents.


I use the Studio 10 for my TV system, and the CM1 as part of my HT system.


I find the treble quality of the Studio 10 a bit too bright overall, which does grate on me for long listening sessions. The CM1 has a more natural treble quality which I can listen to for longer but it tends to dull the sharpness of high hats and cymbals just a little bit, so I find it useful for harsh recordings that are all too common these days. For the bass quality, both have very tight bass, but the slight bit of midbass hump for the CM1 works to its advantage when you are running them without a sub which helps balance off the rest of the spectrum in a larger room. With the Paradigms, they sounded a bit thin overall until I paired them with a sub and even then I find it sometimes is missing a realistic weight in the vocals. If I use some top quality recordings, the Studio 10 tends to emphasize the natural sibilance a bit more than I think is realistic, but the Studio 10 tends to reveal detail better just because it sounds a bit more forward overall.


I'll leave it up to you to hear them for yourself, but I'd say they are very different sounding speakers. If you already like the Studio 10 in auditions, I think you'll find the CM1 sounding kind of dull in comparison. In my own room, the CM1 works better for me.


The only other thing about the Paradigms that turned me off is that they were sloppily assembled. My first pair was defective and my second pair has cosmetic defects that don't affect the sound but make me wonder if every workday at Paradigm was a Friday.


And I almost forgot, I saw your recent post and I would not actually recommend either in the room you have. My CM1 works ok in my 18x14 room with a large ported sub crossed over at 80Hz (the ideal crossover for this speakers) but any larger than that, you need to step up to the CM5 or Studio 20. As well, the Ultracube 10 is only really suitable for small room, it doesn't offer the extension or output to do justice to your open area room. I'd buy an Ultracube for my computer system or den, but for your size room, you should really consider Paradigm's larger subs or go for something completely different (SVS makes the $700 SB12 which is better sounding, and is comparable to the Ultracube 12 in output )


One speaker you should also consider is the NHT Classic 3. It's better than the Studio 10/20 IMO. I found it worked well for my room, a listenable sound that was not fatiguing for long sessions. There are a couple of things that I liked about the CM1 more which is why I sold the C3 and kept the CM1, but now that they reduce the price and sell direct, it's a great deal. It's just a very solid performer and I recommend it to everyone.

Thanks for that 'review'! Very informative.


You bring up another speakers I've been researching as well - the NHT Classic 3.


How would you rate it against the CM1? Brighter or more laid back? Does it have more mid-bass punch?


Thanks,

Erik

 

[VectorLabs]

The term I would use to characterize the CM1 is smooth. Honestly no matter what you listen to with this speaker just puts a smile on your face. Whereas other speakers can sound bad on certain types of music the CM1 just make everything sound nice. It's the kind of speaker that you can just sit back and relax and listen to for hours without ever getting fatigued.


As far as the Studios go I haven't listened to the new v5 so my opinion is based on the last gen v4. While they were a nice speaker and sounded better than the CM1 on some material, it didn't sound too good on some. I found the low end a bit boomy on some rock albums like Queens of the Stone Age.


Honestly you have to go out and listen to both. If you just want a speaker that sounds good no matter what you throw at it I would go with the CM1. If you want something a bit more analytical that doesn't sound great on everything then go for the Digms. Although I should warn you that those little CM1's absolutely love power so the more juice you give them the better they sound. Don't take their small size fool you as I heard them being powered by a McIntosh amp and no matter how loud I cranked them they loved the power.

 

[warpdrive]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Tracy /forum/post/16874642


Thanks for that 'review'! Very informative.


You bring up another speakers I've been researching as well - the NHT Classic 3.


How would you rate it against the CM1? Brighter or more laid back? Does it have more mid-bass punch?


Thanks,

Erik

I liked the NHT Classic 3 a lot. First, they imaged very well, you could always precisely place performers, and its bass was very believable, tight but authoritative when needed. It doesn't have the mid bass elevation that the CM1 does but it doesn't need it, the bass is natural sounding without sounding weak and being sealed, you can even nudge it very close to the wall. With the CM1, it comes with port plugs which I use to help tame the hump in the midbass. In the C3 piano always had the right weight throughout the whole range. As far as tonal brightness, it's almost in between the Studio 10 and CM1 in terms of balance, not really bright at all. I found the CM1 smoother in the top end, but the C3 is definitely more realistic than the Studios for that reason. My only knock against the C3 is it tends to sound a bit more metallic than the CM1 in the upper mids, and that's why I ultimately preferred the CM despite the C3's technical superiority in other respects. Also, I didn't like the way the C3 sat on my stand, there are two rails to help it stand on its rounded bottom surface which was less stable and didn't look as good.


Again if I had to choose the Studio versus C3 on sound alone, the C3's win out by far. I think the C3 will be a better fit for most people's rooms. If you have a highly damped room, the Studio's more lively sound will be more suitable.


The C3 is more efficient than the CM1, so it can even work acceptably using a small desktop amp like the Nuforce Icon (for a small room like my dining room pictured here)

 

[syd123]

..If you're left with choosing b/w just two speakers you're in luck as it shouldn't be too difficult. Grab some CD's (or LPs) and head to a dealer and give it a whirl.


For my $.02 I'll say that I've spent quite a bit of time listening to live, un-amplified music and to my ears, the previous Studio v.4's (I haven't heard the v.5) sounded very smooth and natural when listening to well-recorded music. ..Not bright at all.


Like any good speaker, the Studios COULD sound either bright OR dull when listening bright or dull recordings. ..And this is how it should be. The goal should always be for a speaker to reproduce as faithfully as possible the signal that its fed. The FR graph of the Studio is one piece of evidence that it does this well, and your OWN experience is another that may (or may not) confirm this.


Not to take get off topic, but I don't think its wise to chose a speaker that corrects for mistakes made in the recording process. If a speaker smooths out the rough edges of some music, then it's bound to sound dull on other music. Hence, IMHO, It's better to chose an accurate speaker and then use your bass/ treble controls or an equalizer to adjust to taste. I realize this is a heretical notion to some audiophiles, but they should know that EQ's are used extensively in the recording process so they're refusal to use them on the playback end is somewhat silly.

 

[warpdrive]



Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 /forum/post/16879977


..If you're left with choosing b/w just two speakers you're in luck as it shouldn't be too difficult. Grab some CD's (or LPs) and head to a dealer and give it a whirl.


For my $.02 I'll say that I've spent quite a bit of time listening live, un-amplified music in my life and to my ears, the previous Studio v.4's (I haven't heard the v.5) did not sound at all bright when listening to well-recorded music.


Like any good speaker, the Studios COULD sound either bright OR dull when listening bright or dull recordings. ..And this is how it should be. The goal should always be for a speaker to reproduce as faithfully as possible the signal that its fed. The FR graph of the Studio is one piece of evidence that it does this well, and your OWN experience is another that may (or may not) confirm this.

.

I tried the 10V5 with a range of recordings and rooms and still do find it tonally tilted whereas the CM1 always sounds smoother and the Classic 3 is just right. If you were to go on FR plots alone, the C3 is the speaker to get anyway since it objectively beats the Studio (the Studio Plots clearly show that it does tilt upward hence the brighter sound)
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...classic_three/

 

[markwriter]



Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 /forum/post/16879977


I don't think its wise to chose a speaker that corrects for mistakes made in the recording process. If a speaker smooths out the rough edges of some music, then it's bound to sound dull on other music. Hence, IMHO, It's better to chose an accurate speaker and then use your bass/ treble controls or an equalizer to adjust to taste.

This makes sense. Why would anyone want a speaker that puts it's editorial stamp on every single thing they listen to? Do all recordings have the exact same flaw? Of course they don't. For that matter, a compensating tone curve in a speaker doesn't really fix anything, it just masks it. If the recording engineer cranks up the treble on a few tracks in the mix, then just those tracks are going to be forward and sizzly. Playing such a recording on a speaker with poor treble response is going to muffle the whole recording, not just the overemphasized tracks.


Buying flawed speakers is not a way to fix flawed recordings.

 

[syd123]



Quote:
Originally Posted by warpdrive /forum/post/16880091


..If you were to go on FR plots alone, the C3 is the speaker to get anyway since it objectively beats the Studio (the Studio Plots clearly show that it does tilt upward hence the brighter sound)
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/mea...classic_three/

I don't see the plots b/w the NHT and Studios as being all that different, nor do I recall seeing any other graphs of Studios that would evidence an audible upward tilt. ..Nonetheless, each person needs to make their decision as to what sounds good or not, regardless of what a FR graph indcates. The point I'm making is that the goal should be (imho) to buy a neutral speaker rather than one that has a particular character.


..As to your comment about the Studios grating on you after a long listening session, I'll point that it may not be the speaker imparting it's own character but rather the nature of the music itself. As much as I love live music, live woodwinds, strings, and certainly brass instruments WILL begin to grate on me a little after a while, particularly in a confined space. ..So if this happens with my hifi, it isn't necessarily the hifi doing something wrong. if someone's idea of a smooth speaker is one that allows them to listen to brass instruments for hours on end, then they're not really after an accurate speaker but rather a more veiled sound, which isn't a bad thing.

 

[warpdrive]



Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 /forum/post/16881271


I don't see the plots b/w the NHT and Studios as being all that different, nor do I recall seeing any other graphs of Studios that would evidence an audible upward tilt. ..Nonetheless, each person needs to make their decision as to what sounds good or not, regardless of what a FR graph indcates. The point I'm making is that the goal should be (imho) to buy a neutral speaker rather than one that has a particular character.

The emphasis of sibilance is one thing that grates on me, and the Paradigm Studio does seem to be less forgiving of sibilance in a recording compared to the other two speakers mentioned. To me, it is imparting its own character. I can see that the Studios do seem to have an elevated response above 10Khz in the listening window measurement, but the C3's tend to roll off more gently.


There are things about the way the Paradigm 10 renders my favorite female vocals that I didn't like, and the C3 just does it better in that regard as well. The only flaw in the C3 is that the upper mids are a bit elevated giving female vocals a slight drier/glarey sound sometimes


If you go purely by graphs, you could pick either and be done with it, but listening to both in my own real environment, I would pick the C3. Even though their graphs sort of resemble each other, the C3 is tonally a better speaker. This is very obvious when I actually had the two speakers side-by-side, level matched. The Paradigm just didn't have the warmth, and treble accuracy of the NHT. The bass quality of the NHT is just better as well, something which is not that obvious just looking at a few graphs.

 

[cltang]

I just got back from the audio dealer, and he is discounting the Paradigm S1 v.2 ALOT. this is making me rethink my planned setup to this:


Paradigm S1 fronts

Paradigm Signature C1 Center

Paradigm ADP-590 Surrounds


Instead of


Studio 10s X 2

CC-590

ADP-590s


My question is is this setup better than what I originally had in mind? The price difference for the 2 setups is about 500 bucks which I am willing to shell out. My main hesitation is about using the adp-590 surrounds since I can't afford the signature surrounds which are well over 2 grand a pair.