floorstanders advise

[hybridauth_Facebook_664715932]

Will audition the new pmc series.

There don't seem to be many BW fans in this forum......?

I have the B&W 705 S2 and love them. *biggrin*

Clearly better than the CM6 S2 imo.

how would you compare cm6 to 705? What areas do you feel 705 does better or significantly better than cm6?

 

[ErwinC]

how would you compare cm6 to 705? What areas do you feel 705 does better or significantly better than cm6?

In short, the 705 S2 is a more 'natural' sounding speaker imo.

The treble has more air and is slightly more detailed and is less forward/metallic sounding.

Midrange is less colored with more detail and better separation and the bass has more texture and is a lot tighter and better defined. The 705 S2 can also be placed close to the back wall without problems. This was not the case with the CM5 S2 and CM6 S2.

The last 10 years i owned (next to many other speakers) the B&W CM5, B&W CM5 S2 and had the CM6 S2 in my setup for testing on several occasions.

I liked the easy-going romantic sound of the original CM5, but these speakers were lacking detail and dynamic expression. This was a speaker for the heart.

The CM5 S2 and CM6 S2 had more detail, more dynamic expression and a wider bandwidth than the original CM5 but lacked the romantic signature of the original CM5. This was a speaker for the brain.

The new 705 S2 combines the best of both the previous models and adds more detail, is more dynamic and has a much better defined and tighter bass. This is a speaker for the heart and the brain

.

 

[plastic penguin]

Just go and listen to few different brands. That's the only sure fire way of deciding.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

how would you compare cm6 to 705? What areas do you feel 705 does better or significantly better than cm6?

In short, the 705 S2 is a more 'natural' sounding speaker imo.

The treble has more air and is slightly more detailed and is less forward/metallic sounding.

Midrange is less colored with more detail and better separation and the bass has more texture and is a lot tighter and better defined. The 705 S2 can also be placed close to the back wall without problems. This was not the case with the CM5 S2 and CM6 S2.

The last 10 years i owned (next to many other speakers) the B&W CM5, B&W CM5 S2 and had the CM6 S2 in my setup for testing on several occasions.

I liked the easy-going romantic sound of the original CM5, but these speakers were lacking detail and dynamic expression. This was a speaker for the heart.

The CM5 S2 and CM6 S2 had more detail, more dynamic expression and a wider bandwidth than the original CM5 but lacked the romantic signature of the original CM5. This was a speaker for the brain.

The new 705 S2 combines the best of both the previous models and adds more detail, is more dynamic and has a much better defined and tighter bass. This is a speaker for the heart and the brain .

one of the things I’ve heard some people say when moving from b and w to good pmcs, is that b and w’s are easily undone, and they wouldn’t go back to b and w. My impression of listening to many sub £2000 b and w designs is that they get let down on things like dynamics and bass responsiveness, which pmcs do really well. Also b and w seem to have this characteristic of open often quite hissy treble whereas pmc are more relaxed and natural. I’d listen to better b and w’s to yours but I still don’t think you’d get better than pmc twenty5 21s or 22, especially with your amplifier, and to your tastes. What you’d absolutely notice I think is not only the detail and treble you like in these pmcs, but dynamic prowess and bass response - the taughtness of a bassline etc, which is very pleasing indeed in a speaker. Sorry for sounding like a pmc fanboy, but they are really very good.

 

[davedotco]

Worse than that, you are beginning to sound like a paid shill!

I rarely comment on the qualities or otherwise of specific components but whenever I read your posts I get the urge to do so.

So, in general terms I find smaller PMCs to lack dynamics, particularly micro-dynamics, the sort of thing that gives some notes their explosive edge. I find the the 2 ways to lack clarity in the midband and high frequencies to the extend that the presentation is generally too dark for my tastes.

Of course this is only my opinion, just as your views are yours and in any case, there are those on here who consider me to be 'on commission' from some sort of 'active lobby'.

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_664715932]

I liked the easy-going romantic sound of the original CM5, but these speakers were lacking detail and dynamic expression. This was a speaker for the heart.

couldn't agree more, i loved the cm5. Cm5 and creek evo50a was a match made in heaven.

if i ever have a 2nd system I won't have anything other than that combo.

[/quote]

 

[nopiano]

Having considered all the options, room size and advice from all of you. I have now abandoned the idea of floorstanders. Instead, i will upgrade my standmounts. These are the ones I would like to listen and get advice upon:

kef ref 1

bw 805 d3

and a pair of focal in the same price bracket.

these options, however, push the price way out of my budget so I may have to hold fire for 6 more months or maybe next xmas (i like buying stuff for xmas) unless of course i find good deals on them this xmas.

many thanks

Have you ever seen the KEFs or checked the dimensions? They are almost 17” deep, or 430mm if you prefer. That’s quite a bit out of your room when you add the distance to the wall behind. For me they really require floorstanding space, and simply present a different visual. They actually sound huge!

The B&W have a more conventional footprint. There’s an interesting review in Absolute Sound magazine online, but I’m too tactful to link it here. Of the two, I’d lean towards the B&W in your room. But I’ve a hunch you get better results from the supposedly more modest culprits, already mentioned, such as the KEF LS50, the ATC SCM19s, or the award winning Revel that I heard recently, the Concerta2 M16. Don’t be fooled that cheaper necessarily means inferior overall sound in your room.

 

[grimharry]

I liked the easy-going romantic sound of the original CM5, but these speakers were lacking detail and dynamic expression. This was a speaker for the heart.

couldn't agree more, i loved the cm5. Cm5 and creek evo50a was a match made in heaven.

if i ever have a 2nd system I won't have anything other than that combo.

[/quote]

personally I’d recommend the creek destiny and Russell k’s but I’m unashamedly biased. *biggrin*

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Worse than that, you are beginning to sound like a paid shill!

I rarely comment on the qualities or otherwise of specific components but whenever I read your posts I get the urge to do so.

So, in general terms I find smaller PMCs to lack dynamics, particularly micro-dynamics, the sort of thing that gives some notes their explosive edge. I find the the 2 ways to lack clarity in the midband and high frequencies to the extend that the presentation is generally too dark for my tastes.

Of course this is only my opinion, just as your views are yours and in any case, there are those on here who consider me to be 'on commission' from some sort of 'active lobby'.

No I’m not paid nor do I have any inclination to represent a brand, only just a love of hi Fi. I wish I was paid though!

I think what you describe is somewhat true with the mid range on some pmcs. That’s why you tend to need really good amps, or the right amps, but as to lacking dynamics couldn’t disagree more. The characteristics you describe do depend on which pmc you go for. Dynamics is one of the things that really sets off pmcs if driven well, and the twenty5 range are different in that the mids are much more projected and these speakers have clarity in high frequencies. If you’ve heard this range? I think you’d agree. One track I like playing on my system by orbital on the snivilisation album called attached, really conveys the clarity of the treble. The way the high frequency synths come at you. Play this on twenty5 range pmcs with good amps, and you can really feel the frequency of these sounds.

I don’t know what you mean by micro dynamics. I’d call dynamics the high and low volume parts of music and ability to shift with speed and accuracy to get there quickly. So a drum beat getting to the high and low parts quickly presenting as real. Or alternatively high and volume music shifts in classical music, vocal dynamics in this respect. And pmcs do dynamics very well as I’m sure lots of people agree.

i wouldn’t say you are on commission but I do find some of your views on some aspects of hifi unusual as an ex hi Fi dealer, but in my opinion that doesn’t seem to be unusual for some hi Fi dealers.

 

[CnoEvil]

I don’t know what you mean by micro dynamics.

DDC is probably thinking of the term as used by Bob Katz in his book "Mastering audio: The art and the science".

The relevent quote: "The art of manipulating dynamics may be divided into Macrodynamics and Microdynamics. I call music's rhythmic expression, integrity or bounce, the microdynamics of the music. I call macrodynamics the loudness differences between sections of a song or a song-cycle."

I think that Micro Dynamics are really subtle and involve much smaller changes in volume of delicate, low level detail....it requires not only good speakers, but a great amp and source as well. If there is a high noise floor, they will be covered up. I've seen them described as, "The fine shadings, within the dynamic envelope."

I'm sure DDC will clarify, in case I'm wrong.

 

[iceman16]

Worse than that, you are beginning to sound like a paid shill!

I rarely comment on the qualities or otherwise of specific components but whenever I read your posts I get the urge to do so.

So, in general terms I find smaller PMCs to lack dynamics, particularly micro-dynamics, the sort of thing that gives some notes their explosive edge. I find the the 2 ways to lack clarity in the midband and high frequencies to the extend that the presentation is generally too dark for my tastes.

Of course this is only my opinion, just as your views are yours and in any case, there are those on here who consider me to be 'on commission' from some sort of 'active lobby'.

I also found smaller 2 way speakers not only PMC’s lacking in reproduction of double bass

 

[ErwinC]

one of the things I’ve heard some people say when moving from b and w to good pmcs, is that b and w’s are easily undone, and they wouldn’t go back to b and w. My impression of listening to many sub £2000 b and w designs is that they get let down on things like dynamics and bass responsiveness, which pmcs do really well. Also b and w seem to have this characteristic of open often quite hissy treble whereas pmc are more relaxed and natural. I’d listen to better b and w’s to yours but I still don’t think you’d get better than pmc twenty5 21s or 22, especially with your amplifier, and to your tastes. What you’d absolutely notice I think is not only the detail and treble you like in these pmcs, but dynamic prowess and bass response - the taughtness of a bassline etc, which is very pleasing indeed in a speaker. Sorry for sounding like a pmc fanboy, but they are really very good.

I have owned the PMC Twenty.21 and 22 after the CM5 S2. Now i have the 705 S2 and don't miss the PMC at all.

 

[davedotco]

This shows why I rarely give opinions on the perceived sound quality of individual components, you end up having to justify your view when really, all you want to say is that it 'doesn't sound right to me'.

I find few hi-fi speakers, of reasonable cost, to sound right in dynamic terms, they are simply too slow, too constrained and too soft to sound convincing dynamically. I much prefer good high sensitivity designs, preferably with valve amplification, to pretty much any other way of doing things, but for me this is not practical, size, price and domestic acceptability rule that out.

Some years ago my ARC/Sonus Faber system gave me much of what I wanted though the reletively low sensitivity of my Electa Amators meant that they were not as dynamically explosive as I would have liked, mind you 60 wpc of KT88 goodness helped a lot. Not cheap though, in modern terms we are probably looking at five figures.

Which goes some way to explaining my preference for active designs, good ones, even at reasonably affordable prices, do this dynamics thing better tham most other speakers and as that is important to me. In a domestic situation, I would find it hard to go beyond a pair of my favourite Unity Audio 'The Rock' compact monitors, they are quite small, house trained at the bass end and seriously revealing. At about £2.5k a pair, not that expensive either.

As a dealer I heard (and got to know) an awfull lot of product over the years, whatever your 'professional' views might be, you do get a really good handle on what works for you, what a lot of enthusiasts come to like and what is absolute tosh.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

one of the things I’ve heard some people say when moving from b and w to good pmcs, is that b and w’s are easily undone, and they wouldn’t go back to b and w. My impression of listening to many sub £2000 b and w designs is that they get let down on things like dynamics and bass responsiveness, which pmcs do really well. Also b and w seem to have this characteristic of open often quite hissy treble whereas pmc are more relaxed and natural. I’d listen to better b and w’s to yours but I still don’t think you’d get better than pmc twenty5 21s or 22, especially with your amplifier, and to your tastes. What you’d absolutely notice I think is not only the detail and treble you like in these pmcs, but dynamic prowess and bass response - the taughtness of a bassline etc, which is very pleasing indeed in a speaker. Sorry for sounding like a pmc fanboy, but they are really very good.

I have owned the PMC Twenty.21 and 22 after the CM5 S2. Now i have the 705 S2 and don't miss the PMC at all.

what amps are you using and what didn’t you like with the pmcs out of interest?

 

[Gazzip]

Worse than that, you are beginning to sound like a paid shill!

I rarely comment on the qualities or otherwise of specific components but whenever I read your posts I get the urge to do so.

So, in general terms I find smaller PMCs to lack dynamics, particularly micro-dynamics, the sort of thing that gives some notes their explosive edge. I find the the 2 ways to lack clarity in the midband and high frequencies to the extend that the presentation is generally too dark for my tastes.

Of course this is only my opinion, just as your views are yours and in any case, there are those on here who consider me to be 'on commission' from some sort of 'active lobby'.

Different people like different sounds, we just need to get used to that. One man’s lack of dynamics is the next man’s acoustic richness. Put a Benchmark DAC through a Hegel amp in to ATC loudspeakers and your sound will be tight, dynamic and all about heavily damped (some might say brutal) control. However put the same DAC through a Sugden amp in to Vienna Acoustics loudspeakers and the sound will be a polar opposite (some might say woolly) rich sound. There is no right, it is all about personal taste.

To the OP, if you know the brands you like then try to listen to them. That would be my starting point.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

I think we are used to that and each to their own, but it is possible to come to objective consensus within tastes rather than put it down all to many many subjective opinions. I don’t think you could trade off dynamics for richness as ideally if you like richness and dynamics you can often get both. But I get the premise of your point. But sometimes it doesn’t really come down to much between tastes. I think the big division is mainly on the treble and bass balance issue which is the ops matter in getting best possible speakers. Everything else is to be welcomed like detail, dynamics, accuracy and speed, good midrange, soundstage etc.

 

[Gazzip]

Not sure I agree with that, but there you go. Subjective is subjective surely?

 

[ErwinC]

what amps are you using and what didn’t you like with the pmcs out of interest?

I used and tested several Naim amplifiers with my PMC speakers.

I did like the Twenty.22 a lot but i also like the 705 S2 a lot.

I did not like the Twenty.21. It was really lacking bass and did not sound good at lower volume settings.

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_100004211376004]

The twenty 21's need very specific siting to sound anywhere near there best and good amplification to get the current needed for those little drivers to work well.I have no problems at lower listening levels......but it's all about expectation I suppose.the difference between free space and close to wall siting is night and day in my experience.....but if you're used to big standmount or floorstanding speakers then they will come across as lacking bass.....give them time and get used to them and there speed and timing is exceptional for the money.

 

[davidf]

The size of the room the speakers are being auctioned in (and the size of room they’ll end up in) will play a big part in how they compare. After listening to something like Twenty.22s in room th other side of average, the Twenty.21s may well come across as lacking. Heard in isolation though, and in a room to suit them, I doubt that’d be the case (ignoring any natural limitations of driver size etc).

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

I agree with Mark that the speed and timing of the twenty series is great and you need great amplification to do them justice, but reading between the lines I think the reason ErwinC you are saying you like the b and w’s is because of the better bass/treble presentation with the pmcs being a bit too smooth, and that’s why you are getting a better balance with naim and b and w for this taste.

With respect to Marks taste that’s why I’d never pair pmc twenty with naim, as it just becomes too smooth, lacking detail and not that dynamic, certainly for my tastes.

 

[ErwinC]

I agree with Mark that the speed and timing of the twenty series is great and you need great amplification to do them justice, but reading between the lines I think the reason ErwinC you are saying you like the b and w’s is because of the better bass/treble presentation with the pmcs being a bit too smooth, and that’s why you are getting a better balance with naim and b and w for this taste.

With respect to Marks taste that’s why I’d never pair pmc twenty with naim, as it just becomes too smooth, lacking detail and not that dynamic, certainly for my tastes.

I use a Marantz PM14S1-SE amplifier with my B&W speakers.

BTW, many people use Naim together witn PMC. It is a good combination according to me.

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_664715932]

I know i am going to have to push my budget to limit and may be a little bit beyond .

How about a pair of used focal sopra1? Boy they look stunning!

is there any retailer in midland who will have them for demo?

 

[iceman16]

I know i am going to have to push my budget to limit and may be a little bit beyond .

How about a pair of used focal sopra1? Boy they look stunning!

is there any retailer in midland who will have them for demo?

Or Dali Epicon 2*diablo*

 

[plastic penguin]

You said in a earlier post that Naim can sound smooth. Not sure how you think that: I've heard most of the entry-level/midrange Naim integrateds (5i, 5i, XS), and I've owned the CD5i. They are very attacking in presentation and can sound cloying if partnered with the wrong speakers. To my ears they ain't smooth.