Paradigm Studio 100 owners (1 Viewer)

[Anthony_Gomez]

Brian is right.

An MTM has a much smaller vertical dispersion and a wide horizontal disperson. if you put it on it's side, it will sound uniform in the center position when you stand up, but side to side, there will be a suckout. If you want, I can dig up some hard proof of this...just need to find the URL

Some of the BETTER side MTM's have low XO points with odd order acoustic slopes. this helps the suckout. The best implimentation is a WTMW like the AUDAX HT setup. the other is a TM in the normal orientation.

you can click on my sig file and look at my system to see the TM option.

 

[Todd_RIC]

Thanks for the info and comments. These speakers are going into a theater room with a front projector, so I don't care if the speaker is on its side, standing straight up, or twisted backwards on its head... I just want the best sound. I can't use a Studio 100 standing up vertically because it's too tall... I would have to have an "acoustic screen" and I'm not willing to shell out the $50,000 that they charge for those... plus it would "cut" my viewing distance from the screen by another two feet, which is something I can't afford to lose. I could, however, use a Studio 40 standing vertically beneath the screen as a center channel... the drivers are the same and it should sound better than the Studio CC... at least in theory. I'm going to audition all three set-ups (Studio 100, Studio 40, and Studio CC) and see which sounds the best from various seating positions. Man, is my Paradigm dealer gonna hate me... ;-)

 

[Paul Bryan]

You are definately buying a pair of 100's & either a 40 or a CC, your dealer won't hate you... He'd probabaly do back flips if you wanted him to... That sale should be more that worth the effort to re-arrange a few speakers

Have Fun...

--Paul

 

[Todd_RIC]

Actually, I'm buying a pair of 100s, two pairs of 20s, and some form of center channel... he'll still b*tch about it until the cash register goes "ding"... ;-)

 

[James Bergeron]

Well personally I have 4 studio 40's (Front and rear) and a CC in the front. I could use a standard 40 in the front but it would almost be on the floor due to it's height under my screen in the front. Maybe a 6" stand to hold it up.

My dealer promised me I could swap the CC for a 40 within a year if I wished to at no extra charge. It was up to me, if I liked the CC I could keep it. It hasn't been a year yet (almost) I cannot tell the difference in movies. I have sat off centre, dead centre and WAY off centre. The damn thing sounds amazing.

I haven't critically listened to music on the system too often. I have listened to Diana Krall live in paris and didn't notice any problems. So to sum up I am happy with the setup. I always think about switching for the 40 for better bass response as it goes lower than the CC but I'm not sure I would be able to tell.

I could like a 40 on it's side where the CC is right now, what do you guys think about that?

I guess if I ever get around to it, I could take a 40 from the rear and try it as my centre.... hmmm maybe I'll do that tomorrow!

 

[Mat_M]

Actually, I'm buying a pair of 100s, two pairs of 20s, and some form of center channel... he'll still b*tch about it until the cash register goes "ding"... ;-)

Man, if he's gonna bitch at you even when there's a possibilty that he could sell you THREE (count 1,2,3...not two) 100's, he should be kissing your feet!

 

[Todd_RIC]

James,

I'd be real interested in hearing about using a Studio 40 standing upright and angled up slightly towards the primary listening position. See if you can tell any difference from various seating positions. If all this "speaker engineering" discussion is accurate, then you should be able to distinguish vocals and other center channel sound easier than with the CC. Of course, quality of sound is highly subjective, but please let me know if you can determine a difference.

Matt, that's just the nature of most salespeople... it's not a knock or an insult, it's just the nature of the beast to complain about having to do something out of the ordinary. Most salespeople (I used to be one and have trained many) are just order takers... the 80/20 rule is a definite reality in sales. That is, 20% of salespeople make 80% of the sales... the rest would rather complain about not making sales instead of working on their skill sets and being excited about finding ways to earn customers business. My two cents worth...

 

[James Bergeron]

I just remembered to try this, I'm heading to the basement to try RIGHT NOW!

 

[James Bergeron]

Ok I did the comparison, phew, those speakers are heavy.

First thing I did was listen with the centre, I listened to the same scene a few times for sound effects talking voices etc.

Then I replaced the CC with a 40 on it's side.

Right away I noticed it seemed "louder" The highs were more crisp is what I noticed. Then I remembered the 40 is 1 db more efficient so I compensated for this with the level adjustments. Then I listened again and again. Hmmmmmmmm it's really hard to say.

I tried the 40 on it's side one way, then the other, then I tried it standing up on my centre stand which makes it almost level with my left and right. I couldn't tell the difference between it standing or on either side. No way no how.

So I put the CC back to make sure the "loudness" factor was just imagination but it now seemed "muffled" OK now lets not blow this out of proportion. I am using muffled just to describe the difference the highs just were not as loud/clear, but the difference was so minute. So I listened again and again, then I put the 40 back in it's place and it did seem a tad cleaner. So I put the CC back and turned up the level in the centre just to be sure it wasn't a matching thing, but still it seems a TAD less clear.

Now like I said don't constru this. I tried like 10 times, I can BARELY tell, it's so damn close. The CC matches almost (better than almost if that exists) to the Studio 40 it's insane.

I'm not sure I would go with a studio 40 even though I can. The 40 would impede my screen abit forceing me to make another centre stand, the 40 is a TAD wider resulting in height difference from the CC on it's side.

I could not tell the difference between standing and on it's side, although I know I have heard a B&W 602 and when they turned it on it's side there was a HUGE difference. If I could have had someone turn it while I listened I might have heard a change????

But flipping it and sitting down yielding nothing. No funny cancelations or "chesty" sounds.

So conclusion, if I was getting a studio 100 I would CRITICALLY listen to the CC centre and the studio 100 just like I did. I'm not sure if the 100 sounds THAT much different from the 40's or not. The 40's sounds IDENTICAL to the CC as far as I am concerned I could not discern the difference.

 

[Martin Rendall]

James,

Great post! Thank you! What's interesting is that the difference is so small that asthetics becomes the deciding factor.

Martin.

 

[James Bergeron]

Thanks Martin, I can't stress how close, you almost need a double blind test to tell and even then, It probably would be difficult to pick out "the better" one. The 1db volume difference seems to make a difference if not accounted for.

 

[Brian Bunge]

But flipping it and sitting down yielding nothing. No funny cancelations or "chesty" sounds.

James, did you do any off-axis listening at all? This is where you would notice these issues.

 

[James Bergeron]

Yup, my chair is off-axis although not a whole lot. I walked around the room. Maybe my room helps me out, it's only 10.5 feet wide, so I don't have a HUGE off-axis area. I don't have a chair dead centre either, most of my listening was in "my" chair which is off to the left.

 

[Todd_RIC]

James,

Thanks so much for sharing your experience and going through the trouble of trying out this little experiment. Looking at the Paradigm specs, the Studio 40 and the Studio 100 have the exact same sensitivity rating and voice coil size. Looks like I'll go with a Studio 40 (aligned vertically) for the center channel.

One more question, however. Why did you go with the Studio 40s for surrounds as opposed to the Studio 20s or the Studio ADPs? Do you listen to a lot of multi-channel music? Do they make a big difference over the 20s in an HT environment? Your thoughts please...

 

[James Bergeron]

Todd, I just wanted to have matching speakers all around. Originally I thought I would use them a lot for multi-channel music because I did in my old place. After moving I rarely use my theatre for anything but movies. In hinde sight they were a "waste" of funds, but since I got the pair for $800 cdn it wasn't a huge deal. 20's would have made more sense.... oh well.

 

[Anthony_Gomez]

If you are playing some inconsistant sources (ie music/movies) while doing the test, it is invalid as you have no reference.

here is ACTUAL DATA showing that a horizontal MTM on it's side IS NOT GOOD! It also shows that an TM also will ALSO not be good (but not nearly as bad) unless you angle it so that the normal plane (perpandicular to the tweeter and woofer) is pointed to ear level.

http://members.chello.se/jpo/papers/mtm/MTM.html

 

[Anthony_Gomez]

Also
"
I think the more important issue is this: The lower the crossover point and the closer the woofer spacing, the smoother the vertical response would be.

Observe the response of this system with a 9" woofer to woofer spacing and a 1850 crossover point:

http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/au...eaker10-fr.gif
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/au...ffvertaxis.gif
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/au...ffvertaxis.gif
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/au...ffvertaxis.gif

Some MTM's cross over so high that there is serious lobing anywhere past +/- 5 degrees.
"
I highly doubt the comercial speakers can use such a close ctc spacing and XOpoint. To prevent the high demands on the tweeter, you would need a 3rd order or so XO which almost all comercial speakers won't use. open them up and you will see. Most likely, they are first order with a single cap and maybe a coil up at around 3-3.5k.

 

[Todd_RIC]

James,

Thanks for the honest response. I think I'll go with the 20's for surrounds.

Anthony,

It should be noted that your references are SIMULATIONS and NOT actual data. I don't expect the average Joe (or James in this instance) to have professional measuring equipment laying around his house... I just wanted to get his opinion about what he heard. His method of listening to the same scene over and over from different speakers and different configurations is close enough to scientific for me. In fact, I think that's how people should compare AV equipment when they are purchasing it. It may not be a "valid" method, but it's the only one that works in the real world for us non-engineers. ;-)

 

[Anthony_Gomez]

the first link is simulation of "perfect drivers" at a typical XO point. the second set is what you can achieve IF you have a really close ctc spacing AND really low XO point...which you won't find in retail speakers. the second set is actual measured data.

It doesn't matter if the average Joe doesn't have measuring equipment. it won't change if the speaker acts that way or not.

"Most" people here on this forum have extremely little if not no XO/measurement experience (radioshack SPL meter with subs doesn't count ). I personally have little "first hand XO experience", but a have bit of measurement. I have also been around the XO/measuring crowd for a long time. They will tell you time and time again what I have already stated.

You wouldn't ask a social ecologist (no matter how good of one they are) on the workings of quantum tunneling unless they have research it or have been taught it by a qualified institution. What is happening here is you have a bunch of social ecologist (all with PhD's in social ecology if that helps but only Hollywood knowledge of quantum tunneling) trying to explain quantum tunneling.

I am not trying to knock anyone. I just think that sometimes you need to take the advice of those with the necessary experience in the field. (note: I am not saying that I know all in this particular area, but I do have experience with it. heck, I used to bug the hell out of the experts trying to get a good, wide dispersion side laying MTM).

 

[James Bergeron]

Anthony, although I don't doubt the scientific data, REAL world listening is what counts to me, I can't tell the difference. I'm actually a computer engineer and did must with filters in electronics. The graphs with real world data aren't even all that bad, they may look bad on paper, bu real world is where I live. I'm sure others can't tell the difference either. If you can tell the difference and enjoy a standard speaker as centre, great for you. Like I said I could use the 40 as my centre no skin off my back, but why? I can't tell the difference.

The original question was "should I get a Studio 100 for my centre channel". My complete answer was "Listen for yourself in the end." Even though I gave MY opinion after spending an hour in my theatre switching speakers back and forth.

Hey I'm just like the next guy and love an upgrade, especially if it's cheap or free. In this case it would cost me $2 in gas to drive to my dealer and swap the CC for the 40. But why bother? I love the way my theatre sounds, I couldn't tell the difference and nobody has said otherwise. I have had many people comment on how great it sounds, even people who frequent this forum.

The MTM is a compromise, I use to have 3 B&W 303's along the front of my theatre no compromise, so I know what it sounds like to have 3 identical speakers. I honestly can't tell the difference on the studio line though. I also use to have the JBL N series ND310's and N-Centre, the centre did sound VERY close to the main's but there was a slight difference that was audioable.

P.S. I did forget to note that my speakers are set to small, when set to large I believe there would be a larger difference (no pun intended) as the 40's go lower than the CC centre.