Has anyone tested and compared B&W DM 600 and CBM 170 (front/surround)?
Same between B&W LCR 60 and CMT 340 (center)?
And subs B&W ASW 600 vs Hsu STF-1?
Thanks for any guidance.
Printable View
Has anyone tested and compared B&W DM 600 and CBM 170 (front/surround)?
Same between B&W LCR 60 and CMT 340 (center)?
And subs B&W ASW 600 vs Hsu STF-1?
Thanks for any guidance.
There is a post from way back from someone replacing his B&W 600 series bookshelf with the 170's.
IMO, you have to get to the 700 series to really get comparable with the Ascends' sound outside of the bass.
I auditioned the 602s3, LCR600, and ASW650 before I bought Ascend. The 602 was one of my favorites in my price range from a b&m store, although I preferred the Paradigm Studio 20. The midrange of the 602 was very full, but somewhat unnatural when compared to the Studio 20. I thought the Studio 20 had a smoother top end as well. I would take my 340s over Studio 20s any day of the week.
I think the LCR600 is a closer match to the 340C than the LCR60. I felt the LCR60 was a bit anemic when paired with the 602s. The 600 had a more involving presentation and it seemed that dialog was noticably clearer. I don't think the LCR60 comes close to the 340C. They're in different leagues.
The ASW650 is a nice sub, but the output and extension are average when compared to other offerings from Hsu, SVS, and others. I have to say though that the Hsu and SVS subs are all ported, and thus more efficient. If you're looking specifically for a sealed sub, the 650 is fine, but I would take a look at other offerings including the Rocket UFW10. It has similar specs to the 650, but also includes a 1 band parametric EQ, and costs a bit less.
The B&W 600 line is solid, but based on my auditioning and preferences, they aren't as refined or neutral as the Ascend 170 or 340.
So Curtis, you say Ascends 170/340 match to B&W 700 series? I've A/B tested B&W 705 against the 600 line and I think it is "another planet" (and price confirms so). Then it means Ascend equals B&W 700 series in quality and 600 series in price...?!
It is a pity that Ascends look like a coffin, but sound is for the ears, not for the eyes. If they were nice looking they'd be perfect: good, beautiful, affordable.
As far as the sound, yes, IMO, they outclass the 600 series, and compare to the 700 series.....with the bass extension disclaimer.
I think B&Ws (The 7 & 8 series) sound quite different than my 170s. B&Ws sound warm and laid back to me, things that greatly annoy me. The Ascends have a much more neutral sound like Paradigms upper offerings, although the tweeter seems a hint less sharp.
I'm leaning to the Ascends. Now, I wonder if I should pair the 170 fronts/340C with sub STF-2 or SVS PB-10, for better music performance (DVD concerts and cds).
Has anyone compared both?
Jorge59,
I own the SVS PB-10 ISD.
For what it's worth, I have the 340's across the front and the 170's for sourround. I have not listened to / compared the Hsu, but if you are interested in any feedback I have on the SVS, please PM me, and I'll be glad to share my observations with you. Again... for what it's worth. :)
cheers!
shane
Trying to establish a reference from the one's I have auditioned (B&W), and considering the 170 are "above" the B&W 600 line, I thought maybe the B&W DM 600 would be a closer match to the HTM-200.
Both are primarily designed to be used as surrounds, but might be used as fronts in small rooms.
I guess the 600 have a slightly wider frequence response, specially in the bass extension (75 Hz with 5" cone vs 80 Hz with 4"). However, the 200 have dual speakers so, would they have a fuller sound...?
Has anyone set this comparison?
I have Hsu VTF2 MK2. It works seamlessly with the CBM and CMT front. I place the sub in the back of my seat and noone thought the bass come from my sub including my father in law (he's really into audio). Everyone thought my CBM and CMT produce that deep punchy bass and they love it. Hsu sub is awesome and plent extremely well with Ascend.Quote:
Originally Posted by shane55