Has anybody done an A-B comparision of B&W's to LSi's?

john22614

Just curious if anyone has done an A-B comparison of B&W 705's or 805's to Polk LSi9's.....and what your impressions were......using decent electronics, of course.

mantis

As awesome as the Lsi's are, the B&W 705 and N805 are better sounding speakers. I have never had them side by side but I have heard and Installed them many times with many different gear.

If your looking at N805's then lsi9's are not going to compare. They just don't. They are not as detailed or a percise. The 705's are closer to the Lsi's but still ahead in overall detail.

Don't think for a minute the Lsi's are not great speakers, they are, they are probably one of the very best in there class but they have there place like all the rest.

Dan

john22614

To Mantis and Zero....thankyou very much for your enlightening comments. I listen mostly to smooth jazz and vocals broadcast over subscription internet radio...upsampled to 192k digital compression.....so while respectable, I suspect some of the detail is lost in the transmission. My LSi's sound good, but a little conjested and veiled....but perhaps that's the digital compression?

Yashu

I think it is the compression.

What bitrate is the original streaming signal? There are not many streams that do more than 128k, and this bitrate with mps, AAC, ect, is never going to sound like the "real thing". Also, your upsampling might be making the problem worse (I know that when I tried it, it only compounded problems)... you should try to conserve as much of the original signal as you can.

I can tell you that better speakers are just going to better amplify the shortcomings of bad recordings or digital compression. I listen to uncompressed redbook but also high bitrate mp3s, M4as, and so on, that are hard to find on better formats, and it is a very hard line to walk finding something that can suit a proper uncompressed recording but still sound ok with high bitrate lossy.

I would be very careful with what you choose and try in-home auditions if you can, or you can just keep two sets of speakers around like me... hehe...

john22614

Yashu.....not sure.....listening to subscription Sky.FM......I think they actually broadcast this at 192k which is not so bad, although their free internet radio station is 128k.....I find that unlistenable (my new word for the day). Fortunately, Itunes is now making a near lossless rate available at thirty cents more per song....so I'm good with that and like building my music library that way instead of CD's. And, by the way, my LSi's are great for HT and Dolby Digital TV.

Yashu

192k is not bad for streaming. That is well above average. I listen to a few shoutcast streams and 128k is as low as I go, but there are only a handfull of stations over 160k. Sounds like I misread what you were saying. I thought you were taking a regular net stream and then decoding and upsampling to 24/192k via software (such as winamp ASIO plugin or Foobar2k). In this case you seem to be saying that the stream is at 192kps (either via mp3 or AAC)...

Anyway, I still suggest you test in-home. Depending on your associated electronics, there could be any number of factors leading to the sound you do not like. It may not be the speakers. With PC audio, you have to take care with every link in your chain.

RuSsMaN

I'll agree and disagree with Dan. I'd put the LSi9 between the 705 and 805. The 700 series has been a let down overall for me, they just don't do what the old CDM NT series did.

mantis

RuSsMaN wrote: »

I'll agree and disagree with Dan. I'd put the LSi9 between the 705 and 805. The 700 series has been a let down overall for me, they just don't do what the old CDM NT series did.

I'm a bit suprised. I found the 703 to sound bit refined compared to the older cdm9nt's. Both are fantatic speakers but there is something about the 703 that brings me closer to the N series.

As said everyone hears differently and is looking for different things.

I just read your listening to 192k. Well thats not going to make any speaker sound it's best. Streaming music, mp3 , ipods etc just don't sound that great. They don't ound as good as a cd at 320k.

john22614

I agree.....but 192k is not too bad.....and Itunes Plus at 256k is really pretty good. But, ipods sound awful.

cfrizz

I would choose the LSI's over any B&W's. For me that clarity that you like so much from the B&W's will give me a headache within the hour thanks to the metal tweeters.

Some prize that clarity, while I will take the more mellow sound of the LSI's. If that means I lose some of the clarity it is worth it not to have a headache.

venomclan

I think that the B&W's really shine on jazz. I owned the CDM1NT for 2 years, the predecessor to the 705's. They were excellent as surrounds or 2 channel use. The 805's were even more so, smoother top end. The Lsi9's I never owned but demoed. A great little speaker that could hold its own. "British" sound tends to be on the laid back sound. Of all the music I played on my B&W's, jass, classical and acoustic were by far the best. Heavy rock, rap and dance not so much.
Venom

Yashu

In this case I am in the LSi camp. There is a such thing as too much resolution, and like I said, you don't want to "get closer to the music" when the closer you get, the more distortion you hear.

Look, to the OP, please let us know your other components. If you have a PC based system, I need to see what kind of gear you have, whether you are using a soundcard, or a USB DAC or s/pdif adapter, what kind of DAC, what kind of pre, amp, receiver, what software (and plugins) you use for playback, and so on. I honestly don't think that LSi 9s are the "weak" link here. B&W is a major brand that many people look to for superior sound, and they make great speakers, but the LSi9s are no slouches, and I don't want to see you buying new speakers and having the same problems, if for instance, the problem is not the speakers afterall.

I have a PC based system, and I know how difficult it can be to set one up properly... especially if you plan to play lossy material along with true uncompressed material.

So... you need to give us more info about the rest of your setup.

haimoc

I compared Polk Lsi9s and B&W 703. To my ears, I'd like the Lsi9s better.

john22614

Yashu.....my sig at the top of the thread describes my setup....everything runs through the Outlaw 970, the Yamaha is used just as an amp for the surrounds. I listen a lot to iTunes 192k and 256k streaming from my Macbook through Airport express ethernet with an optical connection to the outlaw and it works well. The Anthem MCA 30 is a solid 3 channel amp for the LSi's at 225 wpc at 8 ohms and the Denon 2910 is well above average CDP. I'm really not all that disappointed with my polks, they have a relaxed quality about them, and cfrizz is right, you can listen to them all day.....but sometimes have wondered how the B&W's might sound.

Face

I heard 683's hooked up to a Rotel amp in a treated room. They sounded impressive, but then again, it was a fully treated room.

Yashu

I would look into the USB MHDT Paradisea. Tubed output buffer and NON-OS design. Incredibly musical, and does not overly highlight digital artifacts. Many DACs such as this are wonderful values and they can make music listening an absolute pleasure (hehe and yes even with mp3s).

The airport-outlaw combo... I am not knocking it, but there are a couple things here that could be an issue. First, a dedicated DAC is almost always ideal over anything that is a "built in" on a/v equipment... especially for 2 channel music. 2nd, do you know if you are getting a bit-perfect signal from the airport? I am more familiar with the PC side of things, but I can tell you it is VERY important that your computer hardware does not do any internal resampling to 48khz before outputting the s/pdif. I don't know if the airport does this, but it is something you need to look into. Since you have the a/v DAC inside the outlaw, this should be easy to test. Download the uncompressed DTS test .wav file. Play this file and see if the outlaw correctly detects it as a DTS signal. If it does not, then you have some kind of resampling going on, and this is going to have a tremendiously negative effect on sound quality.

A USB DAC would eliminate any of these problems, give you a great dedicated 2channel DAC, and still allow you to use your a/v equipment for movies.

The previous poster is also right about some tweeters definately not behaving well with some types of artifacts. Looking at your equipment, I really don't think the B&Ws would help. They may certainly sound different, but I do not think you will enjoy them any more than the LSi 9s w/ PC audio. There are upgrades that you can make, such as the USB DAC, that would make a much more positive difference and also may not cost as much.

TitaniumMan

I'd have to agree with those who prefer the LSi sound to the B&W. I haven't heard the 800 series, but I have enough experience with the 700s to know I never want to hear them again.

Yashu

That and those horrid tweeter pods. The LSi 9s look so nice, and the OP has the LSi center channel... not sure why he would want to break the consistant voicing across the front.

john22614

Thank you all for your comments, they have been very helpful.....I will check into a DAC, that sounds like the perfect next step for my listening habits. I will be putting this B&W option to rest. By the way, if I were to have made a change it would have involved the entire front sound stage...including the LSiC.

Yashu

You are going to love the external DAC. Look into MHDT, Scott Nixon, TADAC, Benchmark DAC1, and so on. I know the MHDT DACs have a USB option, and also the Benchmark. Finding one with USB would guarantee that you are getting a bitperfect signal without any worry of jitter.

If you want a DAC with no USB option, I would look into the Trends UD-10 USB s/pdif adapter. It has optical, coax, and XLR output, and can give you a clean jitter free signal from any PC or MAC.

john22614

Thanks Yashu.....I really appreciate yours and others suggestions, they have been very helpful.