|
Thorwart Unregistered guest | The Paradigm Studio Reference 20's with the Ascend 170's or Energy C3's |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 3202 Registered: Mar-05 | order a pair of the Ascends and take them into your local Paradigm dealer's shop for an AB comparison. If they allow it, of course. |
|
Anonymous | Hard to say as each person's tastes are different. You might find yourself more than satisfied with the C3 or 170 and not need any more than that. Conversely you might find them to be atrocious and need something along the lines of the Studio 20. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6795 Registered: May-04 | I think that's one of the silliest questions I've seen posted on this forum. |
|
Thorwart Unregistered guest | Mr. Vigne, I take it that all of these comparisons of the Ascends to the Ref 20's are bogus (to your ears)? |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 555 Registered: Dec-04 | I can top that |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 557 Registered: Dec-04 | Jan is playing his pompous @ss card tonight. Too bad that Bono has that play down in spades already. |
|
Anonymous | "I think that's one of the silliest questions I've seen posted on this forum." No way Jan! If he can carry either the Ascend 170's or Energy C3's he can get as close to the Paradigm Studio Reference 20's as he likes. He can even touch them if he wishes. So how close can he get to the Paradigm Studio Reference 20's with the Ascend 170's or Energy C3's?. Answer: very close. Not a silly question at all! And wasn't it you who said there is no such thing as a silly question? Or was this one an exception? Here's another one: How close can I get to a Bentley with a Volkwagen? Answer: Very - but I'd want darn good insurance. Hey, what to you get when you cross a Bentley with a Volkswagen? Answer: A bentwagen! (giggle) Thowart, you have a free consultation at the Ministry Of Silly Questions. Good Luck. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 563 Registered: Dec-04 | Thowart, free reign, then! |
|
Silver Member Username: Touche6784USA Post Number: 778 Registered: Nov-04 | nuck, i honestly havent seen you make too many helpful remarks so i dont see why you are going after jan now. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 564 Registered: Dec-04 | I am going after nobody at all! Slight response to an earlier bit. If I were going after Jan, I would be undergunned. However, I will stand my nuck-ground. |
|
Thorwart Unregistered guest | Not an audiophile, so my original question was not posed in proper "audiospeak" per se, but I remember hearing the old active Paradigm bookshelf speakers some years back. Anyone know why they stopped making those? My search for something similar led me to the Studio 20's and various internet forums. Somehow the Ascends seem to always make their way into the discussions, which prompted me to wonder how comparable they were to the 20's. Thanks |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6798 Registered: May-04 | ! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2372 Registered: Feb-05 | Thorwart, the way I heard it from my Paradigm dealer they weren't selling enough of them. I had the active center channel in a HT system and it was awesome. I have Studio 40v3's and 20v3's and like them very much. The Energy speakers you mentioned are very good value for dollar speaker but aren't in the same league with the Studio's to my ears. I'm not sure about the Ascends. They are supposed to represent good value as well but then again so are the Studio 20's. http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/paradigm_studio20_v3.htm |
|
Anonymous | I once heard a guy say (figuratively) that the 20's were the Ascends with deeper bass. Sorry, haven't listened to Energy speakers in many, many years. |
|
dana s Unregistered guest | Let's be clear on this: the Ascends are a VERY NICE speaker for the money, but are IN NO WAY a match for the Paradigm Reference 20's. Matter of fact, if you are going "internet direct" in your bookshelf choice, the Axiom M22ti's sound better to my ears. They CAN be bright, but sound very good with the right equipment and placement. |
|
Bronze Member Username: QuinnPost Number: 85 Registered: Aug-05 | We had the 170 and the M22 at a gathering of 25-30 people and the only one that preferred the M22 to the 170s was the owner. There were 2 Ascend owners there. I you can wait 6 weeks for the Ascend 170 SEAS Edition they will beat the Studio 20s from the upper 50s up. The Studio 20s are rated at +/-2dB from 54Hz the 170SE will be with-in 5dB or less of matching that. The present 170s are preferred by many that have compared them to the Studio 20 outside of bottom end extension. Get a pair of each and return the ones you don't like. |
|
Anonymous | My daddy can beat up your daddy! |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 595 Registered: Dec-04 | aee what Anon's breed??? Sad, really sad... I am REALLY looking forward to the new ascends |
|
Anonymous | I just love these little sh!t kicking contests. "The new Ascends will beat the Studio 20's!!!!" ; "Ascend isn't in the same league as the Studio line!!!" ; "They both suck, go with Athena!!!" Unfortunately they start to get old after awhile. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 597 Registered: Dec-04 | And your new line would be...? Vooldemort? |
|
Anonymous | !? Nyuck? |
|
Bronze Member Username: QuinnPost Number: 86 Registered: Aug-05 | "I just love these little sh!t kicking contests. "The new Ascends will beat the Studio 20's!!!!" ; "Ascend isn't in the same league as the Studio line!!!" ; "They both suck, go with Athena!!!" Unfortunately they start to get old after awhile." Exactly why my last line was, "Get a pair of each and return the ones you don't like." Your tastes and mine may not be the same. |
|
Anonymous | Quinn: Keep in mind that my critique is not solely aimed at you. However, ten lines beating the Ascend drum and throwing in one bit of objectivity at the end does not make the greatest of posts. I do commend you for at least putting in that objective line though. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 599 Registered: Dec-04 | Vooldemort, what would your speaker be, in the SAME price/performance bracket? |
|
Anonymous | If our original poster really likes the Paradigm sound and cant afford the Studio 20, he might look at the Mini-Monitor. However, there are far too many speakers in the price bracket for me to determine what might be the best match for him. |
|
New member Username: ChewbaccaPost Number: 1 Registered: Dec-05 | Very competative market there. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6801 Registered: May-04 | "I think that's one of the silliest questions I've seen posted on this forum." Thorwart Unregistered guest -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Mr. Vigne, I take it that all of these comparisons of the Ascends to the Ref 20's are bogus (to your ears)?" Not to my ears. Like many of you, I've never even heard an Ascend speaker. And it's been several years since I sold the Energy products. No, I just think the question is ridiculous and I'm amazed at the responses. The idea of holding a speaker as the reference and not a word about "music" just strikes me as completely silly. Talking about how this speaker does better bottom end extension and that speaker is rated at this response. And not a word about music. Now you guys are arguing how far away from the Paradigm can you get. And not a word about music. The speaker is what you are comparing the other speakers to. Not the music. That is just one of the silliest things I've ever read on this forum. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 608 Registered: Dec-04 | But using a known source, which may be common to the listener, should be a solid demominator as THE reference, no? I figgur that is a good place to start as an A/B for speakers, be it Stravinsky or pink noise. |
|
Anonymous | @Lady J: The only thing that I find ridiculous is you wanting to debate "music" or "music theory" as it pertains to the sound of a loudspeaker. You can't battle an army with a handgun so go sit your tired, pompous behind down somewhere and study your thesaurus for a few days. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6802 Registered: May-04 | Nuck - I don't understand what you just posted. What reference? What listener? What "solid denominator"? What "known source"? Do we know what the source was for the original poster? What the hell do we know from the original question? Not much! How do any of you know what the sound of the Paradigms is suppoed to be compared to what the original poster heard? You don't know what that person listens for or heard. You don't know what that listener found attractive about the Paradigm. You don't know what music the poster listens to or used for an audition; or if there even was an audition of the Paradigm, the Ascends or the Energy's. You don't know anything other than there have been three speakers mentioned. But, off you go trying to make comparisons that mention bottom end and how flat the measured response of the Paradigm is in an anechoic chamber. "How close can I get to ... the Paradigm Studio Reference 20's with the Ascend 170's or Energy C3's?" Anon's answer posted Thursday, December 01, 2005 - 11:45 pm: is the only answer that can be made. There may not be any silly questions (though I'm rethinking that), but there certainly are silly answers to an imcomplete question. Why hasn't anyone asked the original poster some questions to determine what it is they want? Why hasn't music been mentioned? Doesn't that just seem like something that's obvious? You don't compare speakers to speakers. You compare the music reproduced by various speakers to the real thing. But, yet, not a word about music in the responses. That is just plain silly. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6803 Registered: May-04 | It seems the forum is headed back toward the wonderful kindness to other members that we had when Paul was around. Too bad. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6804 Registered: May-04 | How close to blue can I get with latex or oil based paint? |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 614 Registered: Dec-04 | Jan, use your head for something other than holding your hat, here. A KNOWN source, A/B speakers. Apart from the start of the thread, that was all I was commenting on. It is the oldest and best A/B, with your own material? Relax, mano. Why can't a simple A/B speaker comparo work for you? OK, heck, it can be James Taylor's 'Mexico' for ya |
|
Anonymous | OK lady J, how about using George Clinton and the P-Funk All-Stars live at the Beverly as a reference? Maybe we could use Drugs: The Prescription for Mis-America? How about a voice recording of any stumbling, bumbling, George Bush speech on "staying the course"? |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 617 Registered: Dec-04 | vooldemort, uhh, you said that out loud. Different conversation, maybe? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6805 Registered: May-04 | I wasn't suggesting music to audition the speakers with. Anyone can use any music they wish. That was not my point. As I said before, we don't know what the poster listens for in a system. We don't know the room or system the speakers will join with. We don't know whether an "A-B" is possible nor, and I'm going to assume Thorwart has not heard the current Paradigm since all comments refer only to hearing the old Paradigm, whether the original poster has even heard the speakers he wishes to hold as a reference. It appears Thorwart has only been reading about speakers. I was trying to point out that the question as posed made no sense. There is incomplete information to allow anyone to proceed (obviously I'm wrong there) with a reasoned answer. The most important point that everyone consistently misses on this forum is you should be comparing the "sound" of speakers to the sound of music. Comparing one speaker to another without a reference for music, and how any one person hears music, is ridiculous. But, that is what's done on this forum over and over again. No one listens to music nor even mentions how music sounds through a speaker. Instead, almost everyone would rather copy and paste plus and minus specifications of frequency response and discuss "bright" or "warm" or "more bottom end". None of those things are descriptive of how a speaker sounds in a particular room and have nothing to do with how a human voice or a piano sound through a system. We have tried on this forum to agree on what is "warm" and we cannot gain a consensus. I think most of us would agree that more bottom end is not necessarily better bottom end. To attempt a comparison between speakers in such a void and without discussing music at all is like posting a book review and only speaking to how many pages are in betweeen the covers and not even caring whether the reader likes mystery novels. However, if that is what the original poster wanted as information, then proceed along as usual. Thorwart gets what Thorwart has asked for. As to why active speakers do not sell; it is simply marketing. Few people understand the advantages of active speakers and few salespeople can make a persuasive argument for buying an amplifier that has been specifically matched to the speaker's needs and vice versa. An active speaker is, in most technical matters at least, the most logical way to build a system. The audio press and shops, however, work against selling this concept by constantly promoting new amplifiers which offer "jaw dropping" performance upgrades over what was available just last week. No one wants to buy an active speaker which locks them into using the same amplifier for months if not years when such marvelous improvements in sound quality are constantly advancing upon the state of the art at a rate faster than the magazines can print. I know of no active speaker which has remained in the line up of a consumer audio company despite the reviews the speaker might have received. I have had my say on this matter. Proceed with the comparison to the Paradigms. |
|
Anonymous | A Paradigm shift in other words. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2385 Registered: Feb-05 | "The most important point that everyone consistently misses on this forum is you should be comparing the "sound" of speakers to the sound of music." Indeed. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 619 Registered: Dec-04 | Jan, as usual, you have driven the thread into a 'Q' space, where one was not needed or warrented. This is a side by side A/B for 2 sets of speakers. Period. Use a bugs bunny cartoon, Dark Side of the Moon or Stravinsky as your source, but it is a simple A/B, using known electronics. Devilishly simple in execution. Yes, the sound can always be bettr, and yes, your choices in music are far more refined than mine, but this thread is about A and B. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6808 Registered: May-04 | What are the electronics? Should the "A" be music and the "B" be the speakers? Don't tell me you don't get this, Nuck. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 620 Registered: Dec-04 | i get it Jan. And yes, my electronics stink, granted, but why should a simple A/B be so complicated? Same room, same electronics, same Simply Red cd, just A/B the speakers, and choose. Simple, no? Indeed my pieces could and should be better, but a simple side by side should be easier than this. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 621 Registered: Dec-04 | Its like snow tires. A set of Brigestone's and a set of Goodyear's. Drive and compare, in the same set of conditions. Then pick. The engine has nothing to do with braking, or handling(other than momentary mass, but is equal in both cases). A/B |
|
Thorwart Unregistered guest | Well...thanks to those that tried to help me out (sorry to the others for not knowing how to properly word the question). |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 71 Registered: Apr-05 | If I got it right, the original question was whether or not the Ascend 170s or Energy C3 speakers sound like Paradigm Studio Reference 20s. Appearently they would like to have speakers with the qualities of the Paradigms, for less price, correct? The answer to the question should be fairly straightforward for someone who has listened to them. I gotta agree with Nuck on this one, what you are listening to actually shouldn't matter that much. Yes different equipment may intereact with different speakers, uh, differently, but the changes from speaker to speaker through different equipment should be minimal if the speakers are "similar sounding", correct? So does anyone know if the the Ascend 170s or Energy C3 speakers sound like Paradigm Studio Reference 20s? |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 622 Registered: Dec-04 | THIS JUST IN... In a startling reversal of forum decorum, the original post has been brought back to life! A/B Thanks Peter |
|
Silver Member Username: TwebbzAnn Arbor, Michigan USA Post Number: 303 Registered: Apr-04 | I have the Energy C-3s and they are a "nice" sounding speaker (sorry, Jan). They are a bit inefficient requiring a two to three notch increase with the volume control to get them to the level of my Athena AS-F1s. At low volume they are light on bass but at moderate volumes the bass is more balanced. Still, I like a bit more bass in my music so I'm interested in a sub. They are neutral, clear and detailed, very pleasant and easy to listen to. My friend has the Studio 20s and I find them rich and overall very pleasing but I have only heard them with classical music. I don't know if they can rock if that is your taste. The Energy C-3s sure can! You have to figure in cost too. You can find the C-3s at half price now, since they are being replaced by a new C-Series line. I paid $229 for a new, in the box pair on Ebay. You're not going to get any discounts on Paradigms at your stereo shop. Not at mine at least. Ultimately the choice is yours. Go to your Energy dealer and have a listen. (My dealer no longer had them.) The Paradigms may be for you too. Go have a listen. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6809 Registered: May-04 | I don't remember even suggesting the Energy's weren't "nice". My comment was I haven't sold them nor heard them in several years. Obviously what appears plain to me has not been understood by anyone except Art; and there is no reason to belabor what apparently does not need to be discussed. Carry on! |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 73 Registered: Apr-05 | Thanks for your permission Jan! |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 623 Registered: Dec-04 | Smells better already! A little less pompous, a tad less pious and a whole lot less dour. Like Fabreeze for audio. BTW, Jan, I have made posts that were understood by only 1 member. That usually means that it was a poor one or at least deserving of a mail instead of a post. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6811 Registered: May-04 | No need to thank me, this was going to happen no matter what I said. Nuck/Tom Thumb/Helen - I honestly can't remember how many of your posts I've not understood. Many of them in the past week alone. You are correct, your posts have been rather poor. In this case, mine was just too far ahead of all you "warm/bright" guys. Some of you may get it someday. Hopefully. Now, you can continue to prove you do not get my point or you can continue to "answer" Thorwart's "question". Neither seems to me to be very productive, but I would guess Thorwart would appreciate the latter. |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 74 Registered: Apr-05 | Jan Vigne: far ahead of us mortals... |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 625 Registered: Dec-04 | But you didn't promise to go away, Jan.. That's my favorite part And you STILL cannot accept a simple A/B, you and PB, cannot or willnot accept a simple question without twisting it your own little, feeble small minded way' You missed small little bits of my shorts |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6812 Registered: May-04 | Nuck, you're being an idiot. The forum has been quiet for sometime now. Now you've decided you want to stir up trouble. Is there a reason you've decided to become a total pain? It serves no purpose. You're not going to bother me and you'll just look like a bigger fool than your made up thread showed you to be. Is that it? You're really embarrassed by that stupid thread? In your little fantasy where you got to play at being Helen, you said it was all about showing how someone gets treated on this forum. Kind of sounds like that whole business was just made up too. So why'd you decide to become Helen after being "roadwarrior"? Just wanted to be Helen for awhile? Guy, there's some crazy stuff going on in your head. Now that you've proven yourself a fool several times over you think blowing it out at me is a good idea, eh, Helen? Here's the deal. I didn't start anything with you, Helen. You're the one who made all this up; and now I'm being pompous? You're really off the meds aren't you, old girl? Look, Nuck, I didn't start anything with you and I am not looking to get into anything on this forum. At the moment I want to have nothing to do with you. Why don't we just leave it at that? Why don't you just drop this crap before you make a bigger fool out of yourself than you already have? The forum doesn't need anyone causing trouble. OK? Answer Thorwart's question or move on. |
|
Bronze Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 34 Registered: Nov-05 | I think Nuck/Helen/whoever is simply going for gold and writing the first thing that goes through his/her/its head. Sorry Nuck, but I agree with Jan. Personally, I have things I'd like to share at present on this forum but I can't bring myself to do it just yet as I think between the flood of panny threads and tripe like this one serve no purpose other than to raise ones posting numbers. I would like to see some interesting topics that create friendly discussion without deteriorating into rubbish like this. So I shall be waiting to see if Ecoustics Home Audio forum improves with adults being sensible, interesting, while having a friendly sense of humour to break any monotony. Until then. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 628 Registered: Dec-04 | Ok, I'll shut up and behave. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6813 Registered: May-04 | Thank you, Rantz. Thank you, Nuck. |
|
Silver Member Username: TwebbzAnn Arbor, Michigan USA Post Number: 304 Registered: Apr-04 | Jan, I believe you where saying in some other thread that you sold a lot of "nice" equipment, generalizing in a somewhat condescending way when talking about higher grade equipment...Not talking about the C-3 specifically. If I'm mistaken then, sorry. |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 78 Registered: Apr-05 | I think, however ill concieved and carried out, Nuck may have a point about how people are treated in this forum. Often, someone will come here with a question about audio and, due to their lack of knowledge on the subject, they will be ridiculed on the quality of their post before any tries to answer. It is not always blatantly obvious, but some times it is. Often I bet the poster is long gone before anyone tries to answer them. Take this thread for instance, Jan (and I'm not "going after" you, its just a good example). The poster asked a question, may not have been worded in "audiophile" terms, but it made sense to most of us. The first post you chimed in with was "I think that's one of the silliest questions I've seen posted on this forum." That doesn't really encourage participation and isn't very firendly. Maybe try to clarify first? There have been numerous examples; in nuck's "actual Wilson review" thread, the poster tried to give an opinion about wislons speakers, owing to all the "controversy" and got A LOT of flack about it, and this was before Nuck's little ruse was up so to speak. That is 2 examples, but it hapens all the time. I myself, know little about audiophiliosity (nice made up word that) and don't post a whole lot, but I do lurk and read, trying to learn more. In the past when I do start a thread, it seems half-the time it gets ignored so the "in-crowd" can continue their latest, whatever. Now I'm not saying everyone does this, or that it happens all the time, but it does enought to be noticed. My point? This isn't and has never been the most friendly forum, which discourages new member participation. I know that in the past we have lost members to that also. |
|
Bronze Member Username: 2morexExmore, Virginia USA Post Number: 40 Registered: Nov-05 | It's Sunday so all I have to say is "Amen". Very well stated. I like that new word also. I agree, most of "us" novices knew what the original question addressed. In fact, isn't that what most of us strive, "close" to a percieved standard with a lower cost? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6819 Registered: May-04 | RZ - Yes, I have sold some very "nice" equipment and some stinkers along the way also. My opinion of Energy as a product line (from the last time I heard any of the product back in 2001) is of a very good company which benefitted greatly from access to the Canadian National Laboratories. While I cannot comment directly on the current Energy line up, they would have been my choice for how to get closest to another Canadian speaker line (Paradigm) since there appears to be an emerging "Canadian speaker" sound, eh! However ... RD - Despite some confusion on the matter, I have, to the best of my knowledge, never disparaged anyone based on what they own at either end of the dollar amount. As a matter of fact, I have stated on this forum that many times I feel the need expressed by some contributors for constantly having something more impressive (or just different) is exhausting and I have personally considered removing all the audio from my home other than a Tivoli table radio. And, while I do own a Tivoli, I can't quite bring myself to let go of the big system. (The HT system is a nuisance though, in my opinion, and could easily be replaced with a nice stereo set up.) Price and value are determined by personal choice and I cannot dictate what is a good value for anyone other than myself. What you feel comfortable spending is your business and your business alone. But, whether you are spending lots of dollars or minimal funds, my position on this issue has always been to not ask what sounds the most like a speaker. Instead, the question that should be asked is; what sounds the most like live music? That should always be how a system or component is judged and that is the point which seems to be missed by most everyone who has read my statements on this thread. I not looking to rehash the argument; but I would say a speaker should only "sound" like the music played through it and can have no sound until it is reproducing music. (This in no way suggests what music should be played through the speaker; another misunderstanding of my position.) To this end I would ask; what is the goal of owning a better than average audio system? To best emulate the sound of live music? Or, to merely emulate the "sound" of a hifi system? I have sold many, many systems that were judged based on the sound of the owner's car stereo since that person never listened to live music. (This issue has been discussed on other threads and has found not much more acceptance than in this case.) My personal preference, and advice, is to have a reference for what live music sounds like to you - whether that be rock, jazz, classical or what have you and heard from whatever position in the auditiorium you choose. After you've established that as your preference, then you should judge audio equipment by how closely it emulates the sound and effect of live music as you remember it. Without live music as a reference, however, you are merely choosing what pleases you at the moment you audition a product. If your mood changes, you may want to change equipment. Now, if a speaker is your reference and you wish to emulate its sound, it is your right to purchase whatever pleases you at the moment. I am not arguing that you cannot make the purchase. But, for us to answer which speaker sounds the most like the other speaker, we must first know what you heard in the speaker you like so much. None of us hears exactly the same and no one of us listens in exactly the same fashion. I can tell you I like this speaker. Unless you know why I like that speaker, you cannot begin to tell me what else I might like. And, I promise you, I base this on many years of responses to, "What did you just hear?", that surprised me to no end. What customers heard and what I heard from the same system were often worlds apart. In this thread I asked for an explanation of what we were supposedly trying to use as a basis for comparison. That was my intention no matter how it was taken. PR - Yep! That's what I said. And, I meant it. I probably failed to realize that when I made that statement, more people would not have asked, "Why do you think that? What do you find 'silly'?" Please, PR, go back and look at how the responses to my post came in. Once again some people turned this into a "let's go after Jan" thread. So I would like to turn your theory around and ask why, if someone makes a comment and then tries to explain what was meant, do other members decide to resort to name calling and abuse? Because that, as I see it, is what you are talking about. I said the original post was "silly". "Silly" can be taken in many ways and anyone who gets their feelings hurt by being told they were "silly" really shouldn't be dealing with adult company. "Silly", as I see it, is hardly a perjorative term. From there the thread eventually wound around to comments directed at me such as, " ... go sit your tired, pompous behind down somewhere and study your thesaurus for a few days", and, "Smells better already! A little less pompous, a tad less pious and a whole lot less dour." In case anyone needs reminding, those were not comments I made! First, I am not going to apologize for using words which anyone on this forum needs to look up in a dictionary. A bit of education everyday is good for the mind. A lack of curiousity has the worst effects. Second, instead of deciding I should be the focus of the thread, the original post should have been questioned and answered. That made the responses to the post even more "silly". And, so, PR, I would say to you in reference to my tired old behind and so forth, "That doesn't really encourage participation and isn't very firendly. Maybe try to clarify first?" In regard to Nuck's Wilson "review", please remember who among us encouraged the review to continue despite the following comments; "I don't give a rat's patootie if you don't care", "FU anon", "All I asked is 'does anybody care?' Thats all, and all this grief?", "And still fu anon", "Eat my shorts, Jan", and "I might suggest 'Uugly F-U-K '". I bring this up not to revive a battle I would prefer ended, but to clarify what position I have actually occupied on this matter. |
|
Bronze Member Username: 2morexExmore, Virginia USA Post Number: 42 Registered: Nov-05 | I fully understand and comprehend your position. You may rest assured that RD has no beef with you. As for your posts, I believe that many viewers (not too sure everyone reads than all!) do not have the grasp of audio speak that you possess. This may lead to a view that you are a "snob" which any reader of his forum knows that you are certainly not. You attempt to help everyone, maybe sometimes at you own expense. Most readers appreciate your input and deeply desire that you keep it up. |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 80 Registered: Apr-05 | JV, That was a very long post to basically say, "it's you, not me". Reread your fist post on this thread and tell me it doesn't sound snobby and wouldn't put a newby off the forum. You never tried to answer thowarts question (although you suggest to answer it or move on), you insulted him/her. How about, instead of saying the question is silly, ask for specifics; I've seen you do it before. Or even simply explain why you think the question is silly. Personally, I even think your entire arguement is a little shakey. Yes, it may be very important what music Thowart is planning on listening to throught he speakers, but (if I am getting this correctly) his question can be boiled down to: I like the way speaker A sounds, does speaker B or C sound like speaker A? Is that not a valid question? You say without the proper frame of reference (i.e. music) the question cannot be answered, which may be a valid point, but did you ask what kind of music Thowart plans to listen to? No you called his entire question silly and dismissed him form the get go. So you can stand by your original statement all you want and defend it till your ears bleed, but all you are doing is defending your rudeness. JV, I've seen you be very helpful on this forum, and generally think your advice sound; this was not one of those times. "Once again people turned it into a lets go after Jan", that's ridiculous. The name calling was between you and Nuck and was exacerbated by your own posts. I used ths thread to exemplify the point that this forum can be put-offish to new members. Will you argue that? I'm sure you will. Oh, and use all the big words you want, I can handle it. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6822 Registered: May-04 | Well, of all things, if this isn't getting sillier and sillier!!! PR - Didn't say what you said I said. So there. Nyahhhhh!!! Did my comment sound snobby and put-offish? I guess if you think it did, then it did and I can't help that. Was Thorwart put off? Doesn't seem like it from his comment immediately following my post. Tell you what, instead of telling me that my comment would put off someone; why not ask poor Thorwart? He's the one who would have been offended and he's been rather lost in all this back and forth. He hasn't been heard from since Friday. Gosh, I wonder if it was something I said?! If he's still around, ask if he found any of the comments I quoted above to be "friendly" and inviting to new comers. Maybe that's why he backed out on Friday, eh? PR, you still don't seem to understand my position here. I cannot answer Thorwart's question until I have some more information regarding what, if anything, he has heard in the Paradigms that he finds appealing. From what I read he has not actually heard the Paradigm he asks about. So how can anyone possibly answer his question? I certainly cannot. That is why on Friday, December 02, 2005, at 09:49 PM, I did respond to Thorwart's direct question to me and I explained why I thought the question and the responses were "silly" and even "ridiculous". Go back and check it out please. I did not "dismiss" Thorwart. I gave everyone the reasons for my considering the thread to be silly and the original question incomplete. But it seems no one, with the possible exception of Art, has understood what I wrote. I've read again exactly what I have put in print and, despite Nuck's suggestion to the contrary, I find it to be lucid and complete in its logic. Why no one can follow and understand my point of using live music as a reference and asking how close a speaker comes to reproducing that reference is beyond me. It is not about what music Thorwart listens to, per se. It is about listening to live music and not holding the sound of an audio component as the final reference for comparison. Yes, I will suggest since we have no idea what music Thorwart listens to, we should have that information before we can even begin a comparison of two or more speakers. If one speaker does well on classical but sucks on hip hop, shouldn't we know whether Thorwart listens to hip hop before we go recommending, or even comparing, speakers which we did not hear with hip hop? How can we compare what we did not hear? That seems to be the plainest, simplest logic I can muster. That, however, still avoids the issue of what we use as a reference and how we approach buying a system. My contention remains; the sound and effect of live music that is our personal recollection of the actual event should be the reference against which you judge any system. That seems to be beyond the comprehension of several people on this thread. Why? I cannot comprehend why. It seems to be the most basic concept of putting together an audio system. If anyone who understands what I've said can help, I would appreciate this being put in other words. Mine have proven ineffective against an immovable opposition. Can this forum be put-offish to new comers? When threads degenerate into this type of "you were rude" - "no I wasn't, I just wanted more information" squabbles, I don't see why a new comer would want to stick around. On that we can all agree. What we seem to be battling over is what turned off Thorwart. To that exact point, we have not heard from Thorwart in quite some time. Was it because of something I said? Not likely would be my guess. If anyone feels differently about that matter, that is their perogative. But I think Thorwart has possibly left for greener pastures while we continue to struggle with whether "silly" is a rude word. BTW, PR, the "big words" comment was rude. Of course, it was meant to be. |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 81 Registered: Apr-05 | So all well and good, JV, you did explain why you believe the question to be silly; a day later and it was kind of hard to follow. After your first post was brought into question and you made one of your wonderful punctuation posts. "PR, you still don't seem to understand my position here. I cannot answer Thorwart's question until I have some more information regarding what, if anything, he has heard in the Paradigms that he finds appealing." Then ask him, don't call his question silly and leave! He posted several more times, there was ample opportunty to try and halp him out. Go for it! My point here from the beginning has been, don't be an a@@ to new posters just because you don't think they asked their question well. Even if Nuck had pissed you off before. Several people were trying to help by the way, if you don't understand/agree with their reasoning, explain why or just ignor it. "Can this forum be put-offish to new comers? When threads degenerate into this type of "you were rude" - "no I wasn't, I just wanted more information" squabbles, I don't see why a new comer would want to stick around." Exactly my point. I reread what you posted again and you never asked Thowart any clarifying question, you just posted condescending drivel, over and over. Now as a said before, you generally are one of the more knowledgable and helpful posters. I am fairly certain you have anwsered threads I began with, what I took to be, good info. The point is, this forum has a reputation for being "hard" on newbies and members alike and I don't think we are helping that by responding to new posters question's with condescention. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6823 Registered: May-04 | After 65 posts mostly about me, unless Thorwart returns, I think my work is done here. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 714 Registered: May-05 | So guys, Which speaker is closer to the Paradigm Studio 20s, and which version of the 20s are we talking about, huh? Are we talking about the stain color, proximity, speaker components or something else? Hey, I just didn't think this thread should end before I got my 2 cents in and I'm been very busy and couldn't play before today? Anyway, I suggest that Thorwart consider listening to the Studio 20s, version 3 first. Then, he can go find a pair of Epos to A/B and do the same with the Ascends. Keep the one he likes and can afford and return the others. Jan, although I agree with your thinking on the important of a speaker representing the music, whatever that music is that plays through it, in my now 4-5 months here I've noticed that seems to be a really pointless point. People A/B speakers all the time and pick the one that think sounds best without reference, at least an expressed consideration of comparing it to a source sound, i.e., music, and buy the speaker they think "sounds" better. In fact Jan, your own experience confirms that many people do so even when they're in an audio shop with multiple choices, listening to various source components and different music genres. Yet, they cannot define what it is exactly that they hear, want to hear or are using as a standard to compare what they hear. Do you listen, anyone? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6832 Registered: May-04 | No, they don't! I know that from experience. That doesn't make it correct. As I said in "DYL", I was always amazed at the number of people who never hear live, unamplified music and have no reference for what audio gear they choose other than, "I like that one." That the idea of using the music event as a reference can be called "condescending drivel" and "kind of hard to follow" is ... well, just plain silly to me. |
|
Thorwart Unregistered guest | Is it possible for me to delete this entire post from the board? |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 82 Registered: Apr-05 | Thorwart, I am sorry that your first thread here at the forum turned into such a turketshoot. Unfotunately threads have a way of getting away from topic if there is even a hint of controversy in it. For my part, I was trying to get people to focus on answering your question witout being rude, but appearently just made matters worse. Sorry for that. The truth is though, this forum does have many intelligent, knowledgable, if stubborn, posters (Jan amoung then) that can and will answer questions about speakers and audio in general. You just have to learn to wade through the poo to get to the goods. (If you want to see poo look at the "Wilson speakers ripped big time thread") Anyhoo, I hope this hasn't completely turned you off of the forum here. Peter |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6839 Registered: May-04 | Thorwart - I thought you had gone! If you would prefer to have the thread deleted, just go to the "Suggestions" section of the forum and make the request of the administrator. Please understand I was not intentionally "rude" to you. I found your question too incomplete to give a reasoned reply. To me, it is a matter of how you design an audio system. You need a reference point to aim at as you choose equipment and a speaker should not be the reference. That point is lost too many times and this thread is no exception to that fact. Please continue to post on the forum. Hopefully there will be more useful infomation available as you go along. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 723 Registered: May-05 | Jan, It may not have looked like it BUT I was agreeing with you. My point was simply that although your point was well taken, and probably deserves some additional well thought out debate and discussion, even beyond what's on "DYL", my point is that although you've correctly stated the problem, very few people on this site care to look at their purchases in this fashion, myself included with my not so recent choice of the Ascend speakers. I listened to 15-20 speakers, culling them down, checking my budget, listening to music that I knew and picked the one that sounded best to me within my budget. It wasn't until after we started playing with "DYL" that I started considering whether what I was hearing from these speakers represented "live music" and "live instruments." Fortunately for me, they seem to do a pretty good job in this regard. I may have been lucky or, subconsciously, that may be how I listen to music, I don't know. BUT, my point was that what seems to be common on the site is exactly what Thorwart asked in the first place. Not how do I get a speaker that accurately reproduces music but how do I get a speaker that sounds like that speaker I really like that costs a heck of alot more money. Having now listened to the $20,000 a piece Vandersteens, I can see how well Tim's Lings performed in a whole nother light. Are they as good, "heck no!!", but are they incredibly good at their price point, "YOU BET!" Sorry about the yelling, I got carried away. LOL |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6842 Registered: May-04 | Well, you see I was agreeing with you in that I knew you were agreeing with me. Sorry if you thought my agreement to your agreement was a disagreement to your disagreement because there was actually agreement in both cases. I sincerely hope we do not disagree on that matter. And, yes, whether you compare it to live music or just to a more highly regarded speaker, the Ling does most things very well for a speaker at any price range and exceptionally well when compared to speakers in its price range. |
|
New member Username: DionPost Number: 9 Registered: Feb-05 | funny, i knew that 72 posts ago |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6846 Registered: May-04 | Knew what "that"? |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 724 Registered: May-05 | Jan, I tend to agree that we probably weren't disagreeing but I think we should just disagree to agree at this point so that no one will know where we stand, BUT, I don't know if we can agree on that? DN, I doubt that you knew what you think you knew because we never talked about the Ling as a speaker in the mix, but then, you knew that I knew that you didn't know that, didn't you? I tried this yesterday with rhyme and asked for extra credit but it's too hard to twist my brain like that a second day. So, what you got is what you get. LOL |