Any complaints about Paradigm Studio100 v2 speakers besides......

[Geoman076]

The power needed to drive them and their weight?? I just read over 50 reviews on audiogon.com and I think I am sold. Loud enough for Rock, great value for the price, and alot of other great things to say about these speakers. I love how they look also!

The Mcintosh MC202 amp I'm getting should be plenty of power.

If anyone has these speakers and does not like them, please let me know why. Otherwise, TIME TO SHOP!!!:) :) :) :) :)

[Jason Brown]

I have the 60s. Just be aware - unlike I was - that the version 3s are coming out right now.

And do they look cool!

[audio]

CAUTION! METAL TWEETERS!!

[ksmitty]

I have the 60's as well and just love them. It seems no matter how much volume I give them from my NAD C-370 Integrated that they sound better.
Virtually no distortion even cranked at very high volume. I would like to have purchased the 100's but had to keep the budget a little lower when I was speaker shopping so went with the 60's and am still very content with their performance. I know that the new models are right around the corner though so I would hold off awhile. The good thing about that though is you would probably be able to purchase the 100 V2 models at a very good price when the V3 version hits full sail.

[Jason Brown]

From what I read elsewhere, if you had to order the Studio 100s new, the v3s are what you would receive.

The new Paradigm signature series that's due in a few months should be interesting as well. I would love to hear what Paradigms sound like at three times the price.

[Geoman076]

Prix,

Why are metal tweeters bad, and what would you recommend??

[audio]

Originally posted by Geoman076
Prix,

Why are metal tweeters bad, and what would you recommend??


Well, I'm going to open a can of worms here, but basically.....metal tweeters are harsh. Metal rings. Unless the tweeter is extremely well designed, and most of them aren't, you are going to get a headache, my friend. Don't plan on listening to your metal domes for more than a half hour at a time. I would suggest looking for a soft dome or other type of tweeter design. Trust me, I learned this one the hard way. Furthermore, for the same price I think you could do MUCH better than the Paradigms. Okay, now I've said it. Let the games begin. Metralla?? AudioEnz??

[Upstateaudio]

With the studio series paradigms, it depends on what you match them as far as electronics go.

I have the 60s, I am not experiencing the metal tweeter nasties that the paradigms have been noted for. I use B&K and Classe electronics which should tame the potentially bright tweeters.

My previous speakers the Paradigm 7semk.3's had silk dome tweeters and did have the brightness nasties.

[Gary]

Originally posted by prix
CAUTION! METAL TWEETERS!!


I agree 100%. Sounds great, detailed, etc. but after some listening time, my ears hurt....

I'm not talking about the P's here but metal tweeters as a whole...

[Metralla]

Originally posted by Gary
I'm not talking about the P's here but metal tweeters as a whole...
There is no reason that metal tweeters cannot sound great. Perhaps the use of really poor metal tweeters in equally poor loudspeakers has given them a bad rap.

I can say from personal experience that I've owned two pairs of speakers that used metal-domed high frequency units and under no circumstances were they harsh, no way.

One of these was the Yamaha NS1000, which used a beryllium dome tweeter and that speaker was legendary in the mid-band and the top end. The bass was a little slow - a big 12" paper cone. But the sweetness in the high frequencies was to die for.

The other was (actually "is", as I still have these) the original Celestion SL6 with a copper dome tweeter. Beautifully balanced, open and extended in the highs. Very inefficient little speaker without deep bass, but I drive these with a 100w class A solid state amp, and they are alive.

I just mention these two examples to buttress my point that metal-domed tweeters are legitimate. Metal does ring - but that ringing can be controlled as the resonance point can be set way out of the audio band.

There are many other examples of good metal-domes. The Focal (JM Lab) tweeters in the JM Lab Utopias, both the older ones (Telar 57 metal) and the new ones (beryllium) are wonderful and come to mind because they were sounding damn good at HE2003.

That said, my current speakers are Coincident Super Eclipse (ScanSpeak Revelator silk dome tweeter) and the JM Reynaud Twin Mk III (tweeter has an impregnated fabric dome in silk and polyester). I do tend to lean towards these now.

I also have a pair of Paradigm MiniMonitors and they have a metal-domed tweeter, but the Twins have replaced these; twice the cost, but way more than twice as good. Comparing the Paradigms and the Twins does offer some weight to the argument that metal-domed tweeters are not as good, but I think it's all in the implementation.

Because metal-domed tweeters are reasonably cheap these days (though once they were not), they are used in inexpensive speakers and are often given a little treble lift through the crossover design - to sound bright and clear in the top end on electric guitar etc. If used with cheap solid-state electronics and crummy interconnects and cables you will hear all the bad things that the other posters are talking about.

But I don't think that there is an inherent problem with metal domes.

Regards,
Geoff

[GregM]

Geoff, what was your impression of the new beryllium JMLabs vs the previous version? It was difficult for me to get a sense of it at HES, although I enjoyed the JML/Bel Canto room. I've never been able to demo the JMLabs in a "nearfield" setup, but I think they would really shine.

[Metralla]

GregM,

A couple of years ago I had a long audition of JM Lab Mezzo Utopias at Sound Perfection in Mountain View. The electronics were conrad-johnson and the source was a Marantz SA-14. I was left alone in the demo room for an hour or so, and my chair was positioned pretty close to the speakers, so I'd say it was nearfield listening.

I thought that the Mezzos were a very fine sounding speaker, and found it hard to think of any area of deficiency. They seemed to do everything right, especially in the bass on "Time Out" and in the top end on "Sketches of Spain" - and that SACD has a pretty vicious treble. The Mezzos imaged like a champ in this environment, and it was hard to end the audition. The sound of this demo stayed with me for quite some time over the following months as I heard other speakers, and I think I would have been happy with them.

Although I loved the sound, these were expensive speakers (and the pair was a demo pair at around $11k), but I felt that too high a percentage of the cost was involved in the high-grade finish and appearance, and thought I could get similar sound for half the price if I looked for a speaker where the cosmetics were not quite so overcooked. I also thought that being an import from France, they were not as good a value as locally made speakers.

The units I ended up buying are made in Canada but NAFTA ensures that there is no import duty. I bought directly from Coincident and had them shipped to San Jose. Some say that Coincident speakers are also overpriced, and perhaps that's true; but they hold their value and don't come up that often on the used market.

At the show, I listened to the Grande Utopias in the Bel Canto room too, and marvelled at the sound. I also enjoyed the Shunyata room, where the smaller beryllium speakers were teamed with Manley power amps and Electrocompaniet CD player and preamp. There was another room with the JM Labs too - but I can't recall the rest of the gear. I know I enjoyed the JM Lab speakers on each occasion.

It would take an experienced listener to be able to draw conclusions with respect to the differences between the previous JM Lab Utopias and the new ones, and I'm not that experienced.

Regards,
Geoff