Paradigm Studio/20s vs. 1982 DCM Time Windows
Written: May 07 '00 (Updated Feb 09 '01)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Ease of Use: |
 |
|
| Durability: |
|
|
| Flatness: |
 |
|
| Imaging: |
|
|
| Overall Sound: |
|
|
|
Pros: excellent imaging, tight bass, nonfatiguing
Cons: bottom octave
The Bottom Line: An excellent small speaker, lacking only in the bottom octave
|
|
|
| Horswispr's Full Review: Reference Studio/20 Speaker (Gold) |
A friend was shopping for speakers recently, and he liked my system, so he brought each of his candidates over to my house and we compared them with my reference speakers, 1982 DCM Time Windows, the ones with the Phillips tweeters.
The DCMs are great and musical speakers, but they're a bit imprecise by today's standards, with slightly diffuse imaging and less than the tightest bass. Still, they're very musically satisfying and have outlived Vandersteen 2Cis, Snell EIIIs, and Spica TC 50s in my system.
The rest of my system: B&K 202 amp, conrad johnson PV10 preamp, Rotel 855 CD, AR ES1 table, Shure V15IV cartridge, M&K subwoofer (not used in most comparisons).
The results:
The Paradigms imaged much more precisely than the Time Windows. Individual voices could be heard more easily within a chorus, and instruments could be localized in space much more easily. The Time Windows produce a musically satisfying "wall of sound." The Paradigms produced a layered, yet not etched, presentation of musicians in space.
The bass of the Paradigms was tighter than that of the Time Windows, though it did not seem to go quite as deep. The sound of an acoustic bass player's fingers on the strings was better rendered on the Paradigms, as was the texture of moderately deep (60 hz range) bass notes. The Time Windows provided a slightly greater (and sometimes more satisfying) amount of heft to well recorded male voices, such as Greg Brown on "The Poet Game" and "Further In." But the Paradigms were generally tighter and more accurate. Both speakers needed the subwoofer to adequately portray the deeper bass tones such as the Organ in Saint Saens Organ Symphony (Symphony #3).
On female voices, the Time Windows were slightly more soothing. On Enya's "Watermark," for example, the Time Windows lured you into the performance, while the Paradigms simply accurately presented what was on the recording. Both were musically satisfying, though the Time Windows' "euphonic coloration" may have given them the slight edge here.
The fatigue factor with the Paradigms was surprisingly low given the fact that their treble did not seem to be sloped down. One reviewer (I forget which publication--probably "Stereophile") said that the Paradigms could be slightly aggressive or forward at times, but we did not find this to be the case. Although treble notes were slightly louder or more prominent than with the Time Windows (which are probably sloped down in the treble), the excellent imaging of the Paradigms led triangle tones (and overtones) to be perceived as fairly distant within the soundstage. They were obviously clearer than with the Time Windows.
Overall, I'd rate these speakers very highly. I enjoyed them more than the Vandersteens, Snells, and Spicas, though of course the 'Steens and Snells could go lower in the bass. I'm in love with my ancient Time Windows and will continue to use them as my reference. But I could easily live with the Studio/20s. For deep bass (under 40 hz or so) freaks, I might consider adding one of the Paradigm subs reviewed elsewhere on epinions.com.
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 600
|
|
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.