Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Help need advice

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    77

    Question Help need advice

    I was wondering if anyone has heard the PSB image line speakers. I'm thinking about buying the T65's for mains B25's rear and the C60 center. I just sold a pair of Paradigm studio 60's. I loved these speakers, however I have to down grade because of finance issues. I can get the PSB set up for about the same price I paid for the Studio 60's alone. I also love and have owned Ascends 340 across the front and 170's rears. So I know what these speakers are capable of. IMHO I think that a good floor standing speaker will out perform a good bookshelf speakers in all aspects. That's why I'm not going with Ascends again. Any response will be very much appreciated. Thanks
    Last edited by qqkltb; 05-08-2005 at 09:30 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oaktown, CA
    Posts
    226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qqkltb
    I was wondering if anyone has heard the PSB image line speakers. I'm thinking about buying the T65's for mains B25's rear and the C60 center. I just sold a pair of Paradigm studio 60's. I loved these speakers, however I have to down grade because of finance issues. I can get the PSB set up for about the same price I paid for the Studio 60's alone. I also love and have owned Ascends 340 across the front and 170's rears. So I know what these speakers are capable of. IMHO I think that a good floor standing speaker will out perform a good bookshelf speakers in all aspects. That's why I'm not going with Ascends again. Any response will be very much appreciated. Thanks
    I have been auditioning the B25's and comparing them to the 170's. I will be comparing them to the 340's on Tuesday (when the 340's arrive).

    If you are interested in my impressions of the B25's v. 170's, and think that it would be of any use to you, let me know.

    cheers.

    shane
    Yes Eve, I like to watch.

    My setup:
    http://www.fototime.com/5EF1F78FC789849/orig.jpg
    HT: 340SE's Front & Center - 340 Classic's Surround, SVS PB110-ISD.
    Office (2-ch): 170SE's

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Yes I'm very interested. Thank you

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oaktown, CA
    Posts
    226

    Default

    Of course I must begin by saying I am no expert...

    It would almost seem that the Stereophile reviewer was auditioning different PSB's. He praised them for neutrality. I disagree. While I did find them warm and 'enveloping', I also found that same 'warmth' to be it's downfall. It rendered acousical instruments very well... cello, piano, violin, etc., but vocals were as if sung through a tube. The richness of the sound, while extremely inviting and pleasant, was colored and false.

    The imaging of the PSB's was phenominal. The soundstage was broad, wide and 3D. It's clarity was wonderful and it's articulation was supurb. I really liked the PSB's... a lot. These are GREAT speakers.

    The problem with the 'warmth' and richness, as I said was mostly in the vocals. While they appeared up-front and spatially correct, the 'tube' quality was most disconcerting. It was, at times almost painfully incorrect.

    This is in direct opposition to the 170's, which I found to be 'neutral to a fault'... if there can be such a thing. The 170's did not have the same spacial qualities of the PSB, but they rendered the sounds with extreme faithfulness. The over-warmth of the PSB's were replaced here by a thin coolness. the soundstage of the 170's didn't appear as wide and dispersed as the PSB's, nor as 3-dimentional. They (in comparison) came off more planar and directional. I was much more aware of the 170's presence than I was of the PSB's. But not enough to be distracted or annoyed.

    Articulation and clarity of the 170's surpassed the PSB's. Their 'transcient' impact was superior, and their imaging, while incredible, was a little less than the PSB's, who's front-firing port might have helped in this regard.

    The 170's did nothing wrong. In fact, for every type of music, vocal, percussive sound, whatever, this speaker excelled. I can not say the same for the PSB's. I just can't get past the odd quality of the vocals in order to enjoy the warmth of their richly colored sound.

    If all I listened to was classical or jazz instrumentals... and I wanted that resonant warm sound, the PSB's would be the perfect choice. They are wonderful speakers... truly.

    But the cool honesty of the 170's won me over.

    The reason I am getting the 340's is in hope that they lay somewhere in between these two. I am hoping that the dual cones will impart a greater fullness to the sound that is somewhat lacking in the 170's. If this is true, and I am even more impressed by the 340's than the 170's, then the 170's just might turn out to be my rear-chanel speakers.

    One other thing to note. I have recently gotten the SVS PB10-ISD. This fills in the very bottom end of the spectrum nicely, and without it, any bookshelf speaker would seem deficient. I don't know if you intend to get a sub with a set of floor-standers, but you would need one with any of these others. But I'm sure you know that.

    As a side note. All the testing and comparing of these two were done without the sub. The speakers were set to 'large', adn the receiver (Denon 3805) was set to Pure Direct, with an optical feed from the CD player. No analog sources were used. SPL levels were checked for balance and uniformity.

    I hope this helps...

    cheers

    shane
    Yes Eve, I like to watch.

    My setup:
    http://www.fototime.com/5EF1F78FC789849/orig.jpg
    HT: 340SE's Front & Center - 340 Classic's Surround, SVS PB110-ISD.
    Office (2-ch): 170SE's

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,034

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qqkltb
    IMHO I think that a good floor standing speaker will out perform a good bookshelf speakers in all aspects.
    I think it depends on the circumstances, and costs.

    Take the CMT-340 for instance, on its own, it does not have the bass extension as say the Studio 60 does....but it is also one third the cost. For mids and highs, I would say the two are at least comparable. Throw in a sub, and that bass advantage goes away.

    Now if you make pricing equal, IMO you will not find a floorstander that can compete in overall sound quality with the CMT-340.
    -curtis

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charter Oak, Iowa
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shane55
    Of course I must begin by saying I am no expert...

    Shane,

    For not being an expert you did one helluva nice job on this comparison. I envy your ability to put your thoughts into words. I think a very able audiophile has joined our ranks!! Welcome!!

    Randy

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oaktown, CA
    Posts
    226

    Default

    I appreciate the compliment, Randy. Thanks.
    Judging things like this is so painfully subjective, sometimes I feel that anything I say, pro or con will inspire a rash of flames. That's one reason for the qualifiers ("...I'm no expert").

    I wish I had the Studio 60's to compare these two (and eventually 3) sets of speakers to. Actually... I just wish I had the Studio 60's

    While I have heard the 20's, I don't have a pair currently, but remember them as being outstanding speakers. Though my memory gets worse with age, I seem to remember them somewhere between the two reviewed above. A rich-sounding speaker, but not overly so. At some point memory just turns to fantasy...

    Anyway, the very best of luck to you in your quest for the perfect sound.

    cheers

    shane
    Yes Eve, I like to watch.

    My setup:
    http://www.fototime.com/5EF1F78FC789849/orig.jpg
    HT: 340SE's Front & Center - 340 Classic's Surround, SVS PB110-ISD.
    Office (2-ch): 170SE's

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qqkltb
    IMHO I think that a good floor standing speaker will out perform a good bookshelf speakers in all aspects. That's why I'm not going with Ascends again. Any response will be very much appreciated. Thanks
    Too many variables for that to stand up. I look for value and bookshelves give me that. In my previous life as an audiophile, I bought only floor standers. I've changed and so have my preferences. Speakers come in all shapes and sizes for a reason.

    David

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Thanks for the post Shane and others. What about the PSB T65's, have you heard them? I assume your refering to the B25's in your comparison. Surely the T65's are better speakers. The ascends are very very nice speakers and when comparing them to the Studio 60's they do everything equally as well, except the low end and with a subwoofer, I agree they don't miss a beat. I will be visiting the local PSB dealer to hear the T65's within the next few days, I've heard some wonderful things about them. I'll make sure post my thoughts after hearing them. Thank you

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,034

    Default

    How much are the T65's?
    -curtis

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •