340SE impressions

[cyberbri]

I had a few HT friends over for a listening session yesterday to check out my 340SEs, 170SEs, and VTF-3. He wrote up some thoughts here. He really knows his stuff when it comes to speakers and sound. My follow-up is the 3rd post there (as cyberbri).

[j_garcia]

Figured I'd post this here too, but looks like you beat me to it

[curtis]

Hey John....welcome to the forum.

[j_garcia]

I came here a while back, I believe on your urging, when looking for someplace to audition these guys. I didn't find someone here, but inadvertently managed to locate cyberbri right in my area through other channels

[curtis]

I came here a while back, I believe on your urging, when looking for someplace to audition these guys. I didn't find someone here, but inadvertently managed to locate cyberbri right in my area through other channels

OK...welcome BACK then.

[Lou-the-dog]

Good stuff John and Brian. Thanks for posting the links.

Randy

[azanon]

I only had 45 minutes or so to spend with my 340se's so far (L/R, no center), but my "first impression" is that the difference between them and my 170 classics are/must be relatively subtle (both are being played with a VTF-2, 2 HTMs in the rear, and on logic 7 mode). I tend to prefer logic 7 mode (H/K proprietary soundfield) over just stereo on my H/K, because stereo just makes the speakers seem too bright, and i like that added bass associated with Logic 7 music.

I"m not saying i dont like them. They sound wonderful, and look great too (cause they're the same height as my LCD) ergonomically. But the downside is that the CMB-170 is such a great speaker, that its hard to improve on "great".

I'm going to enjoy them and i'm glad i got them, but again, my take is the 340's are just an exclamation point, a cherry on top if you will, compared to a 170. I presume the differences are even less subtle with the 170SE.

I realize the way i'm playing them, that it isnt exactly a fair comparison. If i were to cut out the sub, and the rear speakers, i'm sure it would be easier to tell the difference.

Regardless, what a wonderful speaker. A+ on both the 170 and the 340. I"m an ameteur, but gosh my system sounds good!

Azanon

[MikeS]

I spent some time comparing the 340SE and the 170SE a while back. Using test tones and my spl meter I found that the 340SE could play louder with less distortion and less port noise. For example, at 40hz, I could get 86dB with no port noise on the 340SE. Whereas, on the 170SE I got port noise at 81dB.

Even with the speakers set to small (crossover at 80hz) I found that when my Onkyo receiver was set to volume 40, I still got port noise with the 170 with a 70hz test tone. While the 340SE had no port noise even at volume setting 50.


Other than these test tone measurements, I also found the 340SE to have more precise imaging when listening to music, in stereo of course. I generally don't like to use psuedo surround sound modes since they are changing the music into something it's not.

The 170se are still awesome speakers. They actually played flat down to 40hz in my room the same as the 340se. I may get a pair of 170se for my rear speakers.

[azanon]

I did notice the added volume at a given receiver setting, but even that difference was also subtle.

I'm definitely a surround sound junkie and do like soundfields; but i mainly just like the regular ones (not ones like "hall", "concert"). Stereo is so 1950s. Its DPL II cinema/music, DD 5.1, DTS, and Logic 7 for me all the way.

[MikeS]

Well, that is caused by the higher sensitivity rating of the 340SE over the 170SE. The ability to play higher volumes with less distortioni is definately an advantage for the 340SE over the 170SE. Although you may not play at high volumes very often, it is nice to know that you have that headroom if you need it.