Pioneer SP-BS41-LR loudspeakerfor $99 at the Egg
Just a heads up to polkies. Title says it all. I've been wanting to try these little guys ever since the Stereophile review
http://www.stereophile.com/content/pioneer-sp-bs41-lr-loudspeaker
Thought they would not be too bright since they have a cloth dome tweeter. Curious if they will blend reasonably well with my (presently boxed up) CS20.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/pioneer-sp-bs41-lr-loudspeaker
Thought they would not be too bright since they have a cloth dome tweeter. Curious if they will blend reasonably well with my (presently boxed up) CS20.
MAIN: Polk Lsi9s; Polk PSW505; Lsic (in box); Onkyo SR-875; Parasound 2250; Cambridge Audio 740C; LG BD370
OFFICE: Polk Lsi7; REL T3; HK 3490; CA 840W; Onkyo C-S5VL
BENCHED: CS20; OWM3s
OFFICE: Polk Lsi7; REL T3; HK 3490; CA 840W; Onkyo C-S5VL
BENCHED: CS20; OWM3s
Post edited by NewHTguy on
Comments
-
99 dollars, not bad. I've heard the BB versions (I believe they are smaller); and wasn't impressed. The Polk TSI-100s stole the show from those. But this model is the one that was reviewed, right? So maybe that is the more fair comparison.
However, with the extremely low efficiency of this speaker, I wonder what the designer was thinking. Most people who would buy these are NOT going to be running anything but a low end AVR. So why not make the speakers at least 90 db efficient instead of mid-80s?
Would be interested in your review. I saw that Face gave them a whirl and sent them on their way?
cnhCurrently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!
Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
[sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash] -
Thought they would not be too bright since they have a cloth dome tweeter. Curious if they will blend reasonably well with my (presently boxed up) CS20.99 dollars, not bad. I've heard the BB versions (I believe they are smaller); and wasn't impressed. The Polk TSI-100s stole the show from those. But this model is the one that was reviewed, right? So maybe that is the more fair comparison.
However, with the extremely low efficiency of this speaker, I wonder what the designer was thinking. Most people who would buy these are NOT going to be running anything but a low end AVR. So why not make the speakers at least 90 db efficient instead of mid-80s?
Would be interested in your review. I saw that Face gave them a whirl and sent them on their way?
cnh
As for the efficiency, it's a matter of trade offs between efficiency, low end extension, and cabinet size. You can't have a small cabinet, deep bass, and high efficiency due to Hoffman's Iron Law. The designer(Andrew Jones of TAD), decided to give up a little efficiency for some low end extension in an average sized cabinet. Unless you plan on reproducing a live Aerosmith concert in your living room, mid 80's isn't bad. You'd be surprised how many OEM's exaggerate on speaker efficiency, especially when it comes to bookshelf speakers...
They sound nice, but sound best near boundaries as they do have some extension for a bookshelf, but are missing some umph when placed out into the room. They were replaced by a much more expensive pair of Tannoys for my bedroom rig.
They're still for sale and would be willing to sell them for $50 plus shipping."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
Face,
That would have been an awesome deal. Unfortunately, I hit purchase when I saw them, which was before my post. Someone wrote a letter to Stereophile complained that after their review it was impossible to find them. speakers were Didn't even think to look in the flea market...MAIN: Polk Lsi9s; Polk PSW505; Lsic (in box); Onkyo SR-875; Parasound 2250; Cambridge Audio 740C; LG BD370
OFFICE: Polk Lsi7; REL T3; HK 3490; CA 840W; Onkyo C-S5VL
BENCHED: CS20; OWM3s -
99 dollars, not bad. I've heard the BB versions (I believe they are smaller); and wasn't impressed. The Polk TSI-100s stole the show from those. But this model is the one that was reviewed, right? So maybe that is the more fair comparison.
However, with the extremely low efficiency of this speaker, I wonder what the designer was thinking. Most people who would buy these are NOT going to be running anything but a low end AVR. So why not make the speakers at least 90 db efficient instead of mid-80s?
Would be interested in your review. I saw that Face gave them a whirl and sent them on their way?
cnh
Well, I just got them. The Pios are similar in height and depth to Lsi7s, but are curved toward the rear. Basically if you have a space that allows one pair of speakers it will allow the other set. They are roughly half the weight, however (10 lbs each).
Right now I'm listening to Adele 21. Since they haven't broken in I'll postpone forming an opinion for a few days. I will say that right out of the box they sound nice to my ears. They don't impress upon a first listen the way the Lsi7s did, but at one fourth or fifth of the price of the Lsi7s that would obviously be an unfair comparison. I wish I had a pair of Polk monitor 30s or 40s. That might be a more fair comparison in terms of price.
Without a doubt if I someone had $100 for bookshelf speakers these would be top contenders. At $50 plus shipping (assuming Face is still offering that deal) they are an absolute no brainer, IMHO.MAIN: Polk Lsi9s; Polk PSW505; Lsic (in box); Onkyo SR-875; Parasound 2250; Cambridge Audio 740C; LG BD370
OFFICE: Polk Lsi7; REL T3; HK 3490; CA 840W; Onkyo C-S5VL
BENCHED: CS20; OWM3s