|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.5.85.248
Have just had these for a couple weeks and am quite pleased. I am really surprised at the bass. No, it's not so deep you wouldn't want a sub but it's quite impressive for the size of the speaker, how it gets so much clarity in the mids and treble and yet doesn't accomplish that by slighting the bass.
What impresses me most about the speakers is that when I listen to guitar reviews on youtube I can suddenly hear differences that I didn't hear before e.g. the distinct sound of the pine bodied Squier telecasters (whatever its ultimate source) or the cheap hb pickups on the thinline. These speakers might not be as dramatic sounding as some speakers but they do seem to be very accurate. When my budget recovers I will get a sub. I am tempted by the Pioneer Andrew-Jones designed sub because it is less than $150 on ebay and gets rave reviews. I am a music-only guy, but I'll probably wait until I can afford the companion sub from BW or some other more elaborate design than the Pioneer. I'm not against 20hz extension but I don't need it and the main thing I don't want is slow sloppy decay that in theory you get with ported designs. John Dunlavy claimed a ported woofer could not decay more than 3db per cycle so if the attack is at 105 db -- not subjectively deafening at 30 hz -- it would take half a second to decay down to 60db. That's half a second of noise that's not on the recording. On the other hand with instruments whose natural decay is slow, you might not notice a port contribution.
It's never too late to turn back the clock.
Follow Ups:
I have a pair of CM1'S that I got not too long before they stopped saying "made in England" on the back. If they sound remotely like these then you have a really nice set of bookshelf speakers. Always like the way they made trumpets sound. I've since moved them to rear for surround.
These are amazing! I currently use them on my desktop, but have used them on good stands and they just present vast musical tapestry.... The S2 version is little different from the S1, but will give other small monitors at 10 times their price run for their money... You need to give them at least 300-400 hours of the break in....Their sonic character undergoes quite a few changes during that period. Also if you d like more bass, don't add a sub, get the CM5 model...These are fantastic as well.
I haven't heard the S2 version of the CM5 but I thought the S1 version did not image as well as the S1 version of the CM1. Even if it did, the price difference is pretty large so it would have to have a lot deeper bass to justify. But I don't rule it out.
It's never too late to turn back the clock.
I did own the CM5 S1s as well :) .... Owned both at the same time in different set ups... The CM5 S1 imaged more tangibly, had more body, the CM1s just disappeared better as a point source....
Edits: 05/22/17
Ported designs can be quite good over hang wise. The designer has great leeway in the way a woofer transitions from flat to 24 dB roll off of a ported design and that transition is critical to the degree of over hang. That said a well designed closed box with low Q( a poor example is the LS3/5a although there is a logical reason for it) closed box inherently has significantly less over hang than a ported one. The only one who might claim other wise is Rock port speakers.
But I'm sure that a designer using ported designs(almost every one) will claim that on balance, a ported design is a better compromise of control AND low end cut off. I don't feel that way. I prefer closed boxes. But I can understand the argument.
I was a fan of the late Geoffrey Horne, the Gramophone reviewer who was always dissing b&W for having joined the movement to ported designs. He made it sound like they had sold out. And in truth, the last BWs I owned before now, the CDM1s, did display a very un-British sloppiness at the bottom of the spectrum, unlike my sealed JR149s which had all the British virtues (still have 'em and if they didn't look so depressing I might still be using them. The tear in one woofer is inaudible as long as you stay away from organ music!) Horne looks like Nathan Hale at this point:
"I only regret that I have but one career to lose defending sealed-box bass!" I suspect his insolence was a factor in the disappearance of Gramophone's great reviewing team in favor of some woo-woos from What HiFi? when Gram changed hands. But Horne claimed the move to ported bass and polypropylene drivers was motivated by SPL per dollar rather than subtlety of sound and was inappropriate at the "high end." Tend to agree. Audio is a Baby Boom hobby and until we boomers hit our dotage we were into LOUD and while imaging is always exciting there's no imaging in the bass. In fairness, I have heard some ported speakers not from B&W that sounded pretty tight in the bass. My DCM Macrophones for example, did not have a lot of bass but for their size they did pretty well. The new Elacs have pretty good bass.
It's never too late to turn back the clock.
The way a ported speaker transitions from flat to the final 4th order roll off is critical to the degree of overhang. Some ported boxes are quite good if not as good as closed boxes which have second order roll off which all things being equal is superior to 4th order inherent in ported designs.
As I mentioned the one case of a ported speaker which seems different are Rockport designs. The designer claims ported 2nd order roll off and I checked a Stereophile test where one of his designs did roll off at a 2nd order rate from about 40 Hz to 20 Hz. But I suspect and the curve didn't extend far enough that below 20 Hz the roll off goes to 4th order. I don't know and I also don't know what that means to the performance. My guess is the best bass control possible from a ported design. And the few times I've heard a Rockport that seemed to be confirmed.
Good to find a speaker you enjoy.
You might look at SVS (sV Sounds) for a great sub at a reasonable price. The little Martin Logan Dynamo subs are good too.
Thanks. Their subs look good though they are at the upper end of my budget. I think their cheapest one might be affordable depending on how much the dentist wants!
It's never too late to turn back the clock.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: