|
Post by southpaw on Jan 27, 2010 19:33:32 GMT -5
Yeah, really.... I spent over 2 hours there listening to some tracks and some movies...the general manager that was helping me had this look on his face like are you going to leave any time soon, sir? I've got things to do, you know. 2 hours seemed like 10 minutes....
|
|
|
Post by shawmcbigdis on Jan 28, 2010 0:26:48 GMT -5
So I stopped by a dealer on the way home and listened to some Martin Logans. I've heard them before, but a long time ago, and wasn't really listening as something I would buy.
So I liked them a lot. Problem is you have to get pretty far up the line to get to ones that really blend well between the electrostat and the woofer. The Vantage is the first model I heard were it blended well, at $5700 a pair (looks like they go for about $3500 used). That's to expensive. Their older models can be had for less, and are probably pretty good, but I've never heard them, so I'd need someone local to be selling them so I could hear them first. Dealer also admitted that unless you get another set of full on towers there is really matching surround. They make on wall speakers but they use shallow mount cones with ribbon tweeters, not electrostatic panels.
They also had some Triads, so I listened to the Silver LCR's. Those were pretty darn good. I was surprised given the fairly low price of $2k for the pair. They are ugly though, and not quite full range, the golds are full range enough at 50 Hz, but they are double the price, although on the used market they may be a fairly cheap option, but there aren't that many out there used.
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 28, 2010 4:58:36 GMT -5
OH MY GOD....I just got back from my local B&W retailer and demoed the CM9's. The imaging is so spectacular. Seamless pans across the front soundstage. This is what I want in my home theater. I LOVE the laid back warm tone that they convey without losing any detail or clarity. I also listened to the 683's and while they sounded great and had that same warmth to them, the imaging and soundstage wasn't as enveloping. I am in total agreement now with Shawn regarding the Emotiva 6.3 center. As that is what I'm using now, it's now obvious to me that it is the weak link in my setup. I just couldn't believe how crystal clear dialogue came through on this setup. The sales guy I was working with removed the center channel so I could see the difference in how dialogue came through the mains and I couldn't tell the difference. That speaks volumes. A couple of thoughts/problems: I don't care for the CM1 bookshelf that would be used as surrounds in a 5.1 setup. First, I would need to buy a separate mount to mount them to my wall. Second, they are direct firing and I've gotten use to the dipole/bipole design like the ERD-1's. Second, I loved the way they sounded but do I want to shell out about $3k to upgrade? (difference between buying the CM9's and selling the Emotiva) The retailer did tell me that I could take home their demo units to try in my home to make sure they are a good fit and I love them. Shawn, SeattleHTguy, what do you guys think about using the ERD's as surrounds with B&W's up front? Thoughts overall? That's curious, I find my 6.3 to be incredibly clear for everything, maybe it just isn't matching your mains or the EQ or positioning is not quite right? Or is it your room versus the dealer's demo room? I've seamless pans too - but I have 3 x 6.3s all vertical.
|
|
|
Post by southpaw on Jan 28, 2010 8:51:47 GMT -5
OH MY GOD....I just got back from my local B&W retailer and demoed the CM9's. The imaging is so spectacular. Seamless pans across the front soundstage. This is what I want in my home theater. I LOVE the laid back warm tone that they convey without losing any detail or clarity. I also listened to the 683's and while they sounded great and had that same warmth to them, the imaging and soundstage wasn't as enveloping. I am in total agreement now with Shawn regarding the Emotiva 6.3 center. As that is what I'm using now, it's now obvious to me that it is the weak link in my setup. I just couldn't believe how crystal clear dialogue came through on this setup. The sales guy I was working with removed the center channel so I could see the difference in how dialogue came through the mains and I couldn't tell the difference. That speaks volumes. A couple of thoughts/problems: I don't care for the CM1 bookshelf that would be used as surrounds in a 5.1 setup. First, I would need to buy a separate mount to mount them to my wall. Second, they are direct firing and I've gotten use to the dipole/bipole design like the ERD-1's. Second, I loved the way they sounded but do I want to shell out about $3k to upgrade? (difference between buying the CM9's and selling the Emotiva) The retailer did tell me that I could take home their demo units to try in my home to make sure they are a good fit and I love them. Shawn, SeattleHTguy, what do you guys think about using the ERD's as surrounds with B&W's up front? Thoughts overall? That's curious, I find my 6.3 to be incredibly clear for everything, maybe it just isn't matching your mains or the EQ or positioning is not quite right? Or is it your room versus the dealer's demo room? I've seamless pans too - but I have 3 x 6.3s all vertical. Yes, it could be any of those reasons. I've recently increased the height of my 6.3 center and that helped but I've only played one movie since the change so the jury is still out. Could be EQ - I get more and more skeptical of Pioneer's EQ results using their MCACC calibration. (It's only 5 band) It's also possible that I've got my L and R a bit too far spread but that's the way I have to position them because my screen is so wide. So here is a good example of what I'm experiencing vs. what I heard yesterday. There is a scene in Bourne Ultimatum where someone walks off camera but is still talking. On my system, his voice does not gradually transfer from the center to the right speaker like it should. It just goes from center directly to the right speaker. I thought it would have been recorded as a gradual movement of his voice but it didn't come through that way when I heard it. That same scene played on the CM9's yesterday was a seamless, gradual pan from center to right. There was no jump from one speaker to the other. Unless you are looking for it, it's not horribly noticeable but now that I've heard the way it should sound (by the sound design team of the movie), it's hard to accept what I'm hearing out of the 6.3/8.3 combo. I'm really torn.
|
|
|
Post by shawmcbigdis on Jan 28, 2010 11:48:20 GMT -5
3 vertical 6.3's will be vastly superior to a pair of 8.3's and a horizontal 6.3. 3 of the same exact speaker in the same orientation is by far the best setup for the front soundstage. Next to that the best would be an extremely well matched center to the mains. The problem with the 6.3 is that it isn't really extremely well matched to the 8.3. They only share the same tweeter, not mids or woofer, and the cabinet size and design are vastly different.
The 6.3 also seems to be extremely picky to placement issues, more so than any other speaker I've seen. In my room on the shelf above the TV with it placed on MoPad's angled almost perfectly at the listening position, Audyssey measures a frequency response of only 150Hz for it. I have no other option for where to put the center. It might as well be a tiny little HTB center speaker as far as dynamics are concerned. Yes it's clear, but it has next to no dynamics. Sure the sub picks up those frequencies, but really 150 is pretty high for the sub, so it's probably missing some completely.
Even if it responded to spec, 80 Hz is to high a roll off point for a speaker this big, if you ask me. I like my speakers to be fairly full range. I don't need them to go to 20Hz, but 40 would be nice, but I'll live with 50Hz. I wouldn't want to count on my 1 subwoofer doing all the work it is supposed to do, plus the bottom end of all 3 front speakers, which in modern soundtracks have a lot of dynamic info.
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 28, 2010 12:46:49 GMT -5
That's curious, I find my 6.3 to be incredibly clear for everything, maybe it just isn't matching your mains or the EQ or positioning is not quite right? Or is it your room versus the dealer's demo room? I've seamless pans too - but I have 3 x 6.3s all vertical. Yes, it could be any of those reasons. I've recently increased the height of my 6.3 center and that helped but I've only played one movie since the change so the jury is still out. Could be EQ - I get more and more skeptical of Pioneer's EQ results using their MCACC calibration. (It's only 5 band) It's also possible that I've got my L and R a bit too far spread but that's the way I have to position them because my screen is so wide. So here is a good example of what I'm experiencing vs. what I heard yesterday. There is a scene in Bourne Ultimatum where someone walks off camera but is still talking. On my system, his voice does not gradually transfer from the center to the right speaker like it should. It just goes from center directly to the right speaker. I thought it would have been recorded as a gradual movement of his voice but it didn't come through that way when I heard it. That same scene played on the CM9's yesterday was a seamless, gradual pan from center to right. There was no jump from one speaker to the other. Unless you are looking for it, it's not horribly noticeable but now that I've heard the way it should sound (by the sound design team of the movie), it's hard to accept what I'm hearing out of the 6.3/8.3 combo. I'm really torn. On the EQ front, I was fiddling (it never stops!!!!) last night and as I was testing levels I noticed the "tone" from the different speakers was different, I looked at the EQ curves and some were really extreme - I set them all to flat and re-listed and the match was MUCH better. So I think YPAO may be in the same boat, i.e. more trouble than benefit as far as the PEQ goes. I'm looking forward to Emo-Q as it seems more straightforward and has a wider frequency range so my sub should get some love. Now that I have a rear surround (just 1) I switched the sides to dipole and it does make things smoother, but without the BS speaker I prefered bi-pole on the sides.
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 28, 2010 12:50:09 GMT -5
3 vertical 6.3's will be vastly superior to a pair of 8.3's and a horizontal 6.3. 3 of the same exact speaker in the same orientation is by far the best setup for the front soundstage. Next to that the best would be an extremely well matched center to the mains. The problem with the 6.3 is that it isn't really extremely well matched to the 8.3. They only share the same tweeter, not mids or woofer, and the cabinet size and design are vastly different. The 6.3 also seems to be extremely picky to placement issues, more so than any other speaker I've seen. In my room on the shelf above the TV with it placed on MoPad's angled almost perfectly at the listening position, Audyssey measures a frequency response of only 150Hz for it. I have no other option for where to put the center. It might as well be a tiny little HTB center speaker as far as dynamics are concerned. Yes it's clear, but it has next to no dynamics. Sure the sub picks up those frequencies, but really 150 is pretty high for the sub, so it's probably missing some completely. Even if it responded to spec, 80 Hz is to high a roll off point for a speaker this big, if you ask me. I like my speakers to be fairly full range. I don't need them to go to 20Hz, but 40 would be nice, but I'll live with 50Hz. I wouldn't want to count on my 1 subwoofer doing all the work it is supposed to do, plus the bottom end of all 3 front speakers, which in modern soundtracks have a lot of dynamic info. I did find playing with the position did make a difference (as has been discussed). Did you get any joy from playing with the switches? I'm finding mine very dynamic crossed at 80 or 90 to my wee 10" Monitor Audio sub. The sound stage is so realistic and enveloping even given my crappy room.
|
|
|
Post by shawmcbigdis on Jan 29, 2010 0:19:05 GMT -5
I did find playing with the position did make a difference (as has been discussed). Did you get any joy from playing with the switches? I'm finding mine very dynamic crossed at 80 or 90 to my wee 10" Monitor Audio sub. The sound stage is so realistic and enveloping even given my crappy room. Actually that's a good point. I actually turned on the boundary comp when I set the speaker up since it is fairly close to the wall (compared to the others) and then has the back side of the TV in front of it. I will turn that off and re-run Audyssey and see what it gets. I'm hesitant t ditch the Audyssey correction all together, because it really does seem to help, especially on the low end, it really cleaned up the transition from the mains to the sub. SO I just switched back to the Emo's and me and the wife listened to some of the stuff we listened to the other night. She is sticking ot the idea that she likes the Emo's more. But I got her to explain more what she likes and doesn't like. And Seattle pretty much had it right, she likes the speakers that sound worse. She admitted to being able to hear that the B&W's were technically better, and hear what the Emo's were lacking in comparison. But she just prefers the lesser speaker. WTF!? What am I supposed to do with that? I'm taking that as no matter what speaker I bring in she won't like it if it's really good. It will be to clear for her, and she just wants muddy. I basically told her that she's making me want to just discount her opinion and keep the B&W's no matter what. She said that is what she thought I was going to do anyway I swear she has no faith in me. I think I'm still going to take her to listen to the Martin Logans. I don't think those are really options, but I can only assume that those will be the closest thing to the Gallo's that I can listen too. If we do get rid of the B&W's the Gallo's are the only thing that is really in the running right now. The "O Brother Where Art Thou" Soundtrack is playing as I write this. And the Emo's are actually really nice speakers. For $1600 brand new, they would be darn hard to beat. Since I'm willing to spend more, and buy used though, that makes them less of a player. But I do want to point out that they are darn good. They just aren't as good as a $4500 (MSRP) pair of B&W's, and really I don't think anyone expects them to be. I might choose them over a pair of brand new 683's though, and that is saying a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 29, 2010 6:04:45 GMT -5
I have all my switches "standard" i.e. compensation off, even though they are fairly close to the walls and the right one even more so (only 10cm or less). Audyssey may well be better than the YPAO on my RX-V2500. The trick seems to be to play with things - what works for one set of speakers may be totally wrong for another. The same with rooms.
|
|
|
Post by LuisV on Jan 29, 2010 6:37:14 GMT -5
Told ya it was going to be a tough decision...
|
|
|
Post by SeattleHTGuy on Jan 29, 2010 11:49:51 GMT -5
shawmcbigdis,
Your comments on the 683s vs the Emo's makes perfect sense to me.
What you have is a big goliath speaker company with very real and solid engineering trying to bring their product down to a more affordable price point. With the 683's,they figured out a way to utilize the FST with a much cheaper assembly. B&W dumped the internal Matrix bracing, ditched the tweeter enclosure, put the driver in a far less expensive box and then slapped Vinyl all over it. They did stick all their very capable sound crew on the project and viola, you have a solid Chevy from a company more in tune to building BMW's.
Emotiva, on the other hand takes a very different approach. They use a great deal of modular style manufacturing. (Same crossovers, in the case of amps, internal parts, etc..). They outsourced a touch of the speaker engineering and design, and tried to develop a line of speakers that use solid components, good (and frugal design engineering), a very efficient sales model, and of course this forum to talk about them. Emotiva also makes no secret about manufacturing in China. It is part of their core structure. B&W, on the other hand is sort of building these thing in China as a reluctant nod to the cost structure at home. Emotiva - from day one corporate structure. B&W - reluctant requirement to cut costs. So, B&W bad ju-ju! (I'm weird this way - I look for motivations)
If it were me, I'd give a great deal of thought to the Emos over the 600 series B&W's. I would rather have a lean sales model companies product that is reaching for excellence over a company that highly relies on its expensive (and pretty good), dealer network. B&W is trying to cut a product lines cost enough to get a larger part of the market.
Actually, if it were me, I'd keep your B&Ws. You haven't really gone over this very well but you got a good used price on your 804s. They will hold their value for the next 5 to 10 years - easy. Why, oh why would you want to replace them with something new that is guaranteed to immediately depreciate? Other than oppportunity cost on your original purchase, you have no increased financial risk here! I'd have THAT conversation with the misses.
"You know me... and you know I love you, but realistically, even though I should keep these speakers until our kids our married; it'll never happen". "We paid $6,000 for the B&Ws. In 10 years they should still be worth $4,000, the Emos do not have a resale track record yet, but given their value approach, we can assume that they will be worth less a third what we bought them for". "Given this info, does that affect your decision on which ones to keep?"
I know that my finance nerdness rears it's ugly head but what's the true cost of ownership over 10 years with money market rates yielding less than 0.3%....
Crap, I hijacked. Sorry man....
|
|
|
Post by shawmcbigdis on Jan 29, 2010 14:20:18 GMT -5
Seattle,
That is hilarious that you bring up the long term value aspect of it. I actually already started with that conversation. I was pointing out that the B&W's will be worth a lot more for a very long time, so if we ever really needed the money I could very easily sell them off. Her come back was "when would you ever sell these?" Which is a good point, we'd have to be in really bad shape to get me to get rid of them.
I still have the issue of do I ignore my wifes dislike of them and her preference for the much cheaper speakers, and just keep the ones I like? Or do I go searching for something we both like?
The Emo's are going back for sure. I'm going to give them a few more listens on movies this weekend, after I play with the switches and re-run Audyssey on them. But I don't think there is anything they can do to get me past my issues with them.
I'm going to take her to listen to some Martin Logans. If she likes those I will pick up a pair of Gallo 3.1's and see what we think of them. From the reviews, they may be able to put up a fight against the B&W's. They may not be better, but they may be close enough that if the wife likes them I can be happy with them. And I'm a nerd, so there is enough cool technology and spaceship looks to keep me happy with them. I doubt they will hold value like the B&W's, but they won't be as much up front either (won't be much less, but enough less to make a difference.
Of course I'm assuming that the Gallo's and ML's have a similar sound. I could be totally wrong on that.
|
|
|
Post by southpaw on Jan 29, 2010 15:09:35 GMT -5
Here's my opinion.... Give in to your wife and keep the Emo's. Then sell me the 804s for what you paid for them! Gotta keep the wife happy is what I always say.
|
|
|
Post by devani on Jan 29, 2010 15:37:42 GMT -5
you don't want to give in to your wife...i know I regret selling alot of my stuff to make room...now I am trying to find something that will make me happy....do the same
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Ben on Jan 29, 2010 15:49:37 GMT -5
Maybe you can do something to alter the sound of the B&W's, to better match your wife's tastes, for when you're not alone. For example, you could set up some sort of equalization which is more to her liking, or maybe put a simple buffer in the line. If the B&W's are clearer than your wife likes, you should be able to find a way to muddy them up a bit, which you can defeat when you're alone.
|
|
|
Post by stuofsci02 on Jan 29, 2010 15:51:27 GMT -5
If it were me, I'd give a great deal of thought to the Emos over the 600 series B&W's. I would rather have a lean sales model companies product that is reaching for excellence over a company that highly relies on its expensive (and pretty good), dealer network. B&W is trying to cut a product lines cost enough to get a larger part of the market. What about sound? I would rather have the speaker that sounds best at the price point. The companies organization structure is low on my list. The best sound could be the Emo, it could be something else. I believe B&W has done a fantastic job on their entry level speaker series. Heck.. Thats what got me into it. Now I have 804s. If 800's was all B&W had, then I would definately not own any. I have owned several 600 series speakers (including the 683) and have heard the whole lineup. It is a fantastic speaker series for the money. The one thing about B&W, is you get the B&W sound in all of their speakers. If you like it, great.. If not, then don't bother with any of them..
|
|
|
Post by shawmcbigdis on Jan 29, 2010 22:13:51 GMT -5
So I turned off the boundary switch on the 6.3, and I set all the mid and tweeter switches to +2, with the tweeter extension to high. Reran Audysesey, and it set the 6.3 crossover at 120Hz. It just won't go lower than that.
Going to watch Indiana Jones tonight and see what I think. There really isn't a way I will keep these now, the B&W's have just spoiled me, but I am going to give them a fair shake.
|
|
|
Post by Stevens on Jan 30, 2010 4:38:40 GMT -5
Reran Audysesey, and it set the 6.3 crossover at 120Hz. It just won't go lower than that. Don't know how your Onkyo behaves, but my Yamaha 663 will set the crossover at whichever is the highest drop-off frequency for any of the main & surround speakers connected (but disregards the presence speakers). In other words, if I connect great front speakers and tiny surrounds, the YPAO will still set the crossover for all speakers to fit the surround speakers. I would then manually lower the crossover frequency in the receiver and accept that there would be a frequency gap for the surrounds. Anyways, the automatic set-up values are only a starting point. I think we're expected to adjust any and all of the settings afterwards. On the Yamaha, there is even a small red YPAO light on the display that stays on if you don't tweak the settings after the YPAO auto set-up...
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 30, 2010 7:32:08 GMT -5
So I turned off the boundary switch on the 6.3, and I set all the mid and tweeter switches to +2, with the tweeter extension to high. Reran Audysesey, and it set the 6.3 crossover at 120Hz. It just won't go lower than that. Going to watch Indiana Jones tonight and see what I think. There really isn't a way I will keep these now, the B&W's have just spoiled me, but I am going to give them a fair shake. There is something very odd there I think (the room maybe?) YPAO on my Yamaha sets cross-over at 100Hz - and that is with 5 x ERD-1s in the mix, two of which are powered by "crappy" 50w receiver outputs. So having your fronts set at 120Hz by audyssey just looks odd, others have reported their 6.3(s) get crossed at 60Hz by Audyssey. What happens if you manually set them to 60? And with that fixed, play with the switch combinations. Wouldn't it be a shame to send them back if there is something you can do to get them "more B&W"/to your taste?
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 30, 2010 7:34:00 GMT -5
Reran Audysesey, and it set the 6.3 crossover at 120Hz. It just won't go lower than that. Don't know how your Onkyo behaves, but my Yamaha 663 will set the crossover at whichever is the highest drop-off frequency for any of the main & surround speakers connected (but disregards the presence speakers). In other words, if I connect great front speakers and tiny surrounds, the YPAO will still set the crossover for all speakers to fit the surround speakers. I would then manually lower the crossover frequency in the receiver and accept that there would be a frequency gap for the surrounds. Anyways, the automatic set-up values are only a starting point. I think we're expected to adjust any and all of the settings afterwards. On the Yamaha, there is even a small red YPAO light on the display that stays on if you don't tweak the settings after the YPAO auto set-up... This is very true (and what I was getting at in my post about my system) but I think the Audyssey (certainly the newer/better ones (like with Emo-Q) can set the cross-over separately for each channel grouping. My RX-V2500 does not have that red light - but I much prefer the x-over at 80 or 90Hz rather than the 100 it sets. I get more mid-bass that way and mid-bass I believe is quite important. If the 6.3 is crossed at 120 I think a lot of the mid-bass may be lost which is where the B&Ws may well sound better (possibly just because of the cross-over setting?). I am really looking forward to having Emo-Q and being able to set my 6.3s at a lower crossover or at least independent of the surrounds.
|
|