Letters

To Hans Wetzel,

I enjoyed reading your review of the Paradigm Millenia CT and I like the simplicity of the system so much. I was wondering if you could kindly let me know how large the room where you played this system was. Thanks and best wishes in advance for the New Year.

Branon

Hope you have a great New Year as well, Branon. The Millenia CTs were reviewed in a room approximately 18’ x 30’ with a 10’ ceiling. It was hardly an ideal environment for such a modestly sized and low-priced 2.1 system, but the Millenias stayed distortion-free and played as a coherent whole up to pretty high volumes. In a normal-size living room the Paradigms should have no problem satisfying most listeners out there. As for their quality, throw the satellites a few feet away from each other and let 'em rip. They punch far above their weight class, so to speak. The only downside to the system, which didn't occur to me until after I penned the review, is that the remote is the only way to turn the system off and on, so don't lose it! . . . Hans Wetzel

To S. Andrea Sundaram,

I read your review of the Stax SR-507, and I have to say I agree with your comments regarding the other high-end headphones. I have owned the Beyerdynamic T1 briefly and Sennheiser HD 800 for a few months and Audeze LCD-2 for 20 months. The LCD-2 was the most tolerable and I loved ‘em for this time, but a few months ago I bought the Shure SRH1840 and these are the ‘phones I was always hoping for. My system is an Arcam D33 DAC and Borbely all-FET amp. I have recently bought a used Stax SR-507 and am making a Kevin Gilmore SSHV amp to drive them.

Which will become the favored system?

Geoff Clarke

We contacted Shure about getting a review pair of the SRH1840s, but never heard back. I've looked at their measurements on the HeadRoom website, and, though the frequency response looks remarkably neutral, the high-order distortion products are a little troubling. Not having heard them, I can't say which setup would be better. They may have different strengths and weaknesses. When you have your amp built, tell us what you think. . . . S. Andrea Sundaram

To Wes Marshall,

Here is my setup: My front speakers are the B&W 805s. I use the HTM 805 center and ASW subwoofer. The rear speakers are the B&W 686 models. Would an Anthem be a good match in terms of sound and power needed? I am looking at either the MRX 500 or 700. Thank you for your input.

Patrick
Québec, Canada

Nice system. I can see why you want to get a really good receiver. Here's how these power numbers apply: 100W is the conservatively specified output of the MRX 500. That amount of wattage should push an 8-ohm speaker rated at 88dB sensitivity to about 108dB. Moving up to 120W buys you less than 1dB more loudness. The rule is, for every 3dB of added output, you need to double the wattage. Therefore, 111dB, which is a 3dB increase in output, and which is quite a small increase in sound, would require moving to 200W. 114dB would require 400W, etc. And anyway, most speakers are happier operating below 100W.

The problem arises when you are constantly pushing your amp to clipping. That sends the equivalent of ten times the wattage to the tweeters, which then go up in an acrid puff of smoke. The good news is that 88dB is pretty loud already, so 108dB should probably be acceptable to you.

All this is to say, I think you would be quite happy with the Anthem MRX 500. They make superb gear and that is especially true of their amplifier sections. Let us know what you do! . . . Wes Marshall

Hi S. Andrea,

Which connection do you think is better for connecting your preamp to amp? Is it balanced or unbalanced? What are the differences between these two connections? Any advantages and disadvantages?

Thank you,
Mitch

While a balanced connection has the inherent advantage of being less susceptible to noise because of common-mode rejection, the answer to your question regarding which is better depends on your equipment.

If both your preamplifier and amplifier are fully balanced designs, you should absolutely connect them using the balanced connections -- not doing so would be throwing away the better noise and distortion performance that the balanced-circuit topology of your preamplifier provides. If your power amplifier is fully balanced and your preamplifier is not, but it offers a balanced output, you should still use the balanced connection to reduce the possibility of picking up noise between the preamp and amp -- especially if you have an abnormally long cable run. If both your preamplifier and amplifier have balanced and unbalanced outputs but use unbalanced circuits inside, you're probably best off using an unbalanced connection. The balanced connection's greater immunity to noise is likely not worth going through the additional circuitry to convert to balanced then back. If you are not sure which of the above recommendations applies, you should consult each component's owner’s manual. . . . S. Andrea Sundaram

To Doug Schneider,

I’m trying to understand what is actually happening in the current scenario I (and it appears others as well) am experiencing. The second half of my Prometheus Blu-ray has extensive macro blocking and is unwatchable. Are these the possible scenarios?

1. The disc is bad. (I would think that everyone would then experience this problem. It appears to be a limited number.)

2. My Blu-ray player is bad. (I would think that all my discs would have playback issues. They do not.)

3. The disc is encoded such that some players have issues. (This seems to be what people are thinking, and getting a replacement would not solve the problem.)

If #3 is true, then are the possible solutions:

1. Disc manufacturer changes disc to eliminate problem. (Doesn’t seem likely as they probably do not see it as their issue.)

2. Blu-ray player manufacturer issues software upgrade to address new encoding.

I think I have read about other discs where sometimes they just won’t work on certain players. Can’t there just be a single system of encoding that would assure all discs work on all players? It seems I read that disc makers change the “encoding” (not sure what that really is) in an attempt to reduce illegal copying.

Could you please explain how this all works?

Thanks!

K. White

I feel for you because Prometheus is a great movie and you likely want to know how it turns out. Based on what you’ve described, I’m going to go with your first point -- that the disc is bad. There are various things you mention that point this way. First, if your player was the problem, then a similar problem would likely show up with other discs -- and you said it isn’t happening with others. If there was a problem with the encoding, then it wouldn’t just show up on the second half, but the first half as well. In fact, the disc probably wouldn’t play at all. The point about other people having a similar problem corroborates the faulty-disc premise, since that means the issue is happening on different player types -- providing that their issue is the same.

Discs are sold worldwide in many stores, but they’re made in a limited number of facilities. If it is a widespread problem, then more than likely there was a faulty run when they were pressing them. It doesn't mean that every disc out there is bad, but its plausible that there's more than one that escaped from the manufacturer in bad shape. If it’s not truly a widespread problem, then you might simply have a faulty disc that got damaged somehow. Whichever one it is, head back to the store and exchange it to see if a new disc fixes it up. Please let me know how it turns out. . . . Doug Schneider

To Doug Schneider,

I'm planning to upgrade from a receiver to separates, but I'm having a hard time deciding which of these two amps I'm going to get. Should it be the Anthem P5 or the Emotiva XPR-5?

The Anthem is more expensive than the Emotiva by more than half, but without consideration of the price, which of these two amps do you think sounds better? Any thoughts you can share would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
Mitch

Unfortunately, I can’t tell you much about the Emotiva brand because the company doesn’t send us any products for review. Are they any good? I’m not sure because I know very little about them other than what I could glean from their website, which indicates that they sell factory direct and the bulk of their products are made in China. Those two things go a long way to explain the price difference.

Still, I’d look at the P5 amplifier despite its costing more. There are several reasons. Anthem does send us plenty of products for review, and, to date, all of them have at least been good while some of them have been outstanding. Suffice it to say that the company has an excellent track record. Anthem does have their lower-priced receivers built in China, but the P5, as well as the P2 and their processors, are built in their factory in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. I’ve seen those products go down their assembly line, so I know it to be true. If you take pride in having something built over here, that might sway you.

But the best reason to consider the P5 is the performance. We’ve never reviewed it or the P2, but I’ve had experience with both of those amps over the years and I’ve long considered them to be among the best amplifier values in high-end audio. On paper, the P5 is rated to deliver 325Wpc into 8 ohms, compared to the XPR-5’s 400Wpc into the same load, so on the surface the XPR-5 might seem a tiny bit more powerful. But what’s interesting is that Emotiva doesn’t recommend using the XPR-5 into loads under 4 ohms, while Anthem says that the P5 can deliver 675Wpc into a crushing 2-ohm load. To me, that indicates the P5’s power supply is better and that might be a significant thing if you're planning to use the amplifier with a lower-impedance speaker. The P5’s distortion and signal-to-noise specs are also quite a bit better than the XPR-5's, at least from the information the manufacturers provide. (You can’t always believe everything you’re told by the manufacturers, but nothing in either of their specs seems outlandish to the point of being unbelievable.) This kind of performance the P5 exhibits also justifies the higher price.

That said, seek out the P5 for an audition and see if it floats your boat. If it does, I think you’ll find your money well spent if you buy it. If not, check out the XPR-5. As you pointed out, it’s cheaper, and from what I learned from their website, they have a 30-day money-back guarantee should you not like it. In either case, it’s hard to see how you could go wrong. . . . Doug Schneider

To Hans Wetzel,

I just found your review of the seemingly excellent Paradigm Millenia CT. Seems like just what I need. I recently borrowed a Yamaha YSP-2200 and was amazed by how poor it was. I preferred the sound quality of my new Pansonic 65ST50 plasma television on its own. The YSP sub was barely detectable and not better than the set's own bass and, even more troubling, the YSP had a disturbing amount of time lag -- the sound arrived after the picture. I fiddled to no end and quickly returned it to my local dealer thankful for the opportunity to have tried it before I bought it.

My key question to you is whether you noticed any lag in the sound arrival? Also, did you try the optical input (how I have to connect), and if so did it work well?

The nearest Paradigm dealer with stock is likely 1000 kilometers away from here, so I may have to buy from Apple or such.

Thanks,
Derrick

I can't comment on the Yamaha set, but the Paradigms are excellent. The sub is surprisingly tuneful, while the satellites are just terrific. I used the optical input throughout my review period and did not experience a lag issue, or issues of any kind really. It is worth noting that it does take a few seconds for the system to start playing once a signal is fed to the control box. But, again, there is no lag between the audio and video once everything is playing. For a system to partner your television, which is also how I am now using it, I think you'll be impressed by the Paradigm's functionality and performance. . . . Hans Wetzel

To S. Andrea Sundaram,

So, the market is back up and I’m contemplating improved cans. My problem is, I like to stick my iPod in my pocket and walk around the house or airport, etc., so a dedicated amp is out of the question, unless it’s muy pequeño. Even then, I probably wouldn’t want a separate amp. If someone perfects a better iPod, I might go in that direction. But anyway, this isn’t the point.

I am curious about your advice in the under-$600 range. It can’t favor any type of music, because I listen to everything. Well, that’s not entirely true. I draw the line at lieder and misogynistic gangster rap. Otherwise, bring it on. So I need headphones with similarly catholic tastes. And I trust your judgment and opinions.

Carl

If you are going to be running the headphones directly from an iPod, you might want to consider the PSB M4U 2. Their active mode essentially gives you that extra amplifier that you don't want to carry around. In that mode, they have deep, powerful bass, an even midrange, and well-judged highs; they work with most genres. The only drawback is a little bit of hiss. Without dedicated amplification, I'm not sure that any $600 headphones would really sound that much better. You might get a little more openness, air, and detail, but most will lag significantly behind the PSBs in bass extension and dynamics. . . . S. Andrea Sundaram

To Roger Kanno,

I've read your reviews online of the Definitive Technology BP-8080ST and Mythos STS [on SoundStage! Hi-Fi] and they were very helpful. But have you ever tried the Mythos ST? How do they compare? 

I am in the market for speakers and looking into DefTechs. What do you think the best DefTechs are? I was thinking of Mythos ST for front L/R, BP-8080HD for center, and StudioMonitor 65 for rears. Would you suggest this combination? Or do you think they wouldn’t match well? Should I match speakers within the same series?

I am more of a guy who considers movies/music/games to be equal and want the system optimized in that way, but I guess there isn't one perfect system, so I'll prioritize more for games/movies and music second. Please let me know your advice.

Thanks,
George

I have not had the Mythos ST in my system, but I can say that I slightly preferred the BP-8080ST over the Mythos STS for its added bass extension and "big speaker" sound.

I am not sure why you would consider using the BP-8080HD center-channel with Mythos STs. I would just stick with the Mythos Ten as a center-channel if using the Mythos STs. I am currently using a system that comprises BP-8080STs, a BP-8080HD center, and StudioMonitor 45s used as surrounds with excellent results.

One thing to keep in mind: If you are using the system for home theater without an added subwoofer, the added bass performance of the BP-8080ST over the Mythos STS is a great advantage. I cannot comment on how the BP-8080ST would compare to the larger Mythos in this regard, but I suspect that the BP-8080ST would be better than even the Mythos ST. . . . Roger Kanno

To S. Andrea Sundaram,

I have had the pleasure of reading your detailed and well-argued headphone reviews, and I've come to look forward to future ones. It's not easy to find good and serious reviews on the Internet, let alone well-written and documented ones that rest on solid criteria. My greatest appreciation.

I recently bought a Violectric V100 headphone amplifier, and saved some extra to complement it with a pair of headphones. I currently own a pair of Grado 225i's, because their sensitivity and low impedance allowed me to use them with an iPod and they don't necessarily require dedicated amplification.

I would like to spend above $500, that is, a little above the price range of the usual suspects directly below that amount -- the AKG K 701s, the Sennheiser HD 650s, and the Beyerdynamic DT 880s -- yet less than the +$1000 flagships, like HiFiMAN HE-6es, Sennheiser HD 800s, Beyerdynamic Tesla T1s, Grado PS1000s, or Audeze LCD-2s. I have, however, not come across a group of just-as-clearly-declared best headphones in that intermediate price range. I have considered the HiFiMAN HE-500s and recently also the Ultrasone Pro 2900s. (As you probably noticed, my interest lies with full-sized open headphones.)

My premier candidates were the K 701s, but you have mentioned the Pro 2900s offer even more detail than the K 701s, along with very precise imaging and a wide soundstage rivaling that of the HD 800s, as well as very good bass extension and impact. All in all, they appear to do what any of the usual suspects under $500 can't achieve on their own, and what the otherwise well-balanced HE-500s don't fully accomplish.

More than a "hi-fi-er," I consider myself an audiophile; that is, even though I greatly value accuracy and detail, I primarily want to enjoy my music. So, even though I am inclined to the detail, wide soundstage, and accurate imaging of the K 701s, I still want to have some bass extension to feel the body of the music. I would also, nevertheless, avoid the more indulgent hedonistic extreme, such as the LCD-2s. (Ideally I would go for the Stax headphones you reviewed, but they clearly exceed my current budget, so maybe for the next step up.)

As you have come to portray the Pro 2900s in your reference to them along various reviews, they appear to me as though they would achieve everything the K 701s do greatly, and even better, as well as provide what the K 701s lack in bass extension, impact, and sheer body. Plus, they lie precisely in the very middle of the price range, which is my aim.

My question would thus be if I have understood your characterization of the Pro  2900s correctly, or if I may have taken some aspects out of context?

The only objective reference to the Pro 2900s I have been able to find, are the measurements made by Tyll Herstens from Innerfidelity.com, yet without a review or comment.

I hope you don't find my question and understanding of your reviews and comments to be an oversimplification and that you can point me in the right direction. Thanks again for some valuable, informative, and entertaining reading.

Greetings,
Camilo Rodriguez

Thank you for writing, and I appreciate the obvious care with which you've read my headphone reviews. I never did a full review of the Ultrasone Pro 2900s, because I had just reviewed the Edition 8 and Pro 900 when they were released. They do offer substantially greater bass weight, punch, and extension than other open-back models -- especially the K 701. The abundant detail is at the expense of some overall brightness, which could detract from your enjoyment of some music, if it is already mixed a little hot. The offset drivers that Ultrasone uses create an excellent soundstage when they work, but they don't seem to produce the same effect for everybody. (That may depend on how closely your head and ear shape match those of the generalized model they used to create the design -- mine apparently match well.) For that reason, they demand a personal audition.

The HiFiMAN HE-500s can't compete with the Pro 2900s for detail or soundstaging, but have a more neutral tonal balance with strong, but not overblown, bass. For general enjoyment -- rather than critical analysis -- they do quite well. You may also wish to consider the Beyerdynamic Tesla T 90s. I recently reviewed the closed-back T 70s, and found them to offer excellent detail and soundstaging with tight and tuneful bass -- though a bit of peakiness in the mid-treble. These are the models that I think best fit your criteria. Choosing among them is about priorities and preferences -- not absolutes. I hope this aids in your decision. . . . S. Andrea Sundaram