PMC Twenty.21 Bookshelf Speaker Review

[BikeSmith60]

More subjectivist vs objectivist debate inspired by this very review:
https://community.naimaudio.com/t/s...perience-how-can-they-be-so-different/9722/16

 

[AudioSceptic]

Swiss Cottage

That's it, thanks.

 

[Sonny1]

I could do, but I've done so much REW/Dirac measuring that I'm frankly tired of it...The room dimensions and acoustic properties will not change and I've seen plenty of equipment come through this same room in the last 26 years. I'm experienced enough to hear the problems in my context and I think I will let my ears decide. I know precisely what to listen for and how it should sound (to me...).
I will gladly report back on the ATC vs PMC battle in my application, but that may not be of value to others as we all have different rooms and expectations. What irks me a bit is the gratuitous PMC-bashing based on the dismal measurements. I do not own PMC and perhaps I never will...but I also believe that excellent measurements do not guarantee excellent musicality and listening pleasure...and vice versa. There is a fine line between science/physics and subjective pyscho-acoustical appreciation.

Not joking, no offense to you but you realize this is AudioSCIENCE Review where they measure gear and give objective data, along with a subjective impression. I put more stock into the objective measurements but trust Amir more than other reviewers from audio sites, especially ones who rave about $10k power cables. After seeing the measurements, I wasn’t expecting a positive listening impression but it was probably a bit worse than I expected.

PMC has a loyal fan base and I’m sure reviews like this are not even noticed. I was a bit surprised because they struck me as a company with a solid engineering base. That could be true but I expected better measurements.

 

[ttimer]

You are kidding, right? The economic concept of pricing depends on rational consumers that obtain and use easily available information. The problem is that the overwhelming majority of consumers are neither 1) rational, or 2) for the most part willing to perform quantifiable research to identify fair value. This leads to premium pricing, where manufactures charge a higher price, solely for the purpose of creating exclusivity and/or increased perceived value.

Or much more likely: Their utility function and perception of value is totally different from the members of this forum. ZU for instance might appeal to a specific kind of tinkerer, for whom the constant changing and "tuning" of their audio system is as much part of the enjoyment as the actual listening. In a sense they are not so different from many members of ASR who seem to derive immense enjoyment from the process of measuring, tuning, optimizing, and generally faffing about with audio gear and software.
Others want an expensive status symbol and couldn't care less what it sounds like (analogous to expensive but impractical cars). Others again want a beautiful piece of furniture which just so happens to emit passable sound.

Additionally, to many people, the realized differences in sound quality are probably not big enough to warrant serious research to identify fair value. Think of another product with hard to identify value and an almost impenetrable market, clothing. Yes, there will certainly be a slightly better looking jacket out there for less money, but i'm not willing to spend a month researching and hunting around for one.

 

[edechamps]

Sorry about that. Just added to the review.

Thanks! I have added the PMC twenty.21 to Loudspeaker Explorer where it can be compared to to other speakers.

Good consistency within the listening window:

 

[AudioSceptic]

Unfortunately this exists at large scale in audio. Heck, we have people buying stuff left and right which have no impact on the sound of the gear! Yet people buy them because they believe they do, or perform improper listening tests where their brain says it does something it doesn't.

The upshot is that economic success in audio is no proof that the product has merit. The consumer simply doesn't have the fact to know if merit is there or not.

Not just in audio. I recommend Francis Wheen's book 'How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World'

 

[Lao Lu]

I feel a apology on behalf of my nation is in order ..,


Sorry to the rest of the world for PMC and us fostering it's underserved reputation,

Sincerely

Great Britain.

One more call for ATC to be tested....certainly there must be a pair of the 11s in the Seattle area...does Hawthorne Stereo still sell them?

 

[AudioSceptic]

This is true (passive speakers are generally not a good fit for pro applications anyway). Question is, why did they, with the same ears used to develop pro speakers, thought this is how said content should be consumed. They really think everything mixed and mastered should be re-EQed by the end user this way?

This is a mystery to me too. You have a reputation as a pro-audo company, which helps you sell to the consumer market, but you sell them something very different. If I buy something based on a "pro" reputation, I expect to get something at least related to that, with concessions to styling in a domestic setting. That's what ATC do, for instance.

 

[ROOSKIE]

This speaker measures "horribly", in every parameter measured here (especially for the price).
This makes it the PERFECT candidate for a blind listening test again a fantastic measuring system.

Currently my fantasy double blind monitor test is a four way with something like...

REVEL M106 ($1k each) *wide dispersion perfect harman curve contender
KEF R3 ($1k each) *narrow dispersion/coaxil contender
Infinity R162 with EQ applied ($100 each on regular clearance) *current budget champ with EQ & ability to play very loudly unlike pioneer
& finally this PMC ($2k each) * expensive, poop measured performance, will it hold any weight blind??

 

[Vintage57]

The history of PMC from Peter Thomas

Part #1

If you choose to, Part #2

 

[amirm]

This speaker measures "horribly", in every parameter measured here (especially for the price).
This makes it the PERFECT candidate for a blind listening test again a fantastic measuring system.

I can't hold on to an expensive speaker like this for such testing. I will be returning it in a couple of days to the owner.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I can't hold on to an expensive speaker like this for such testing. I will be returning it in a couple of days to the owner.

You could model it in a filter...............

 

[ROOSKIE]

You could model it in a filter...............

Only the frequency response.
The dynamics, dispersion, transient response, distortion, resonances, bass characteristics and much more would not be the same.

 

[carlosmante]

not so in the audio-world, because people... ZU audio is a prime example of HORRID speakers selling like hotcakes. i dont believe good measuring products are selling more than others either.
listen to Steve Guttenberg with decades of listening experience: "i dont believe in measurements" yes that dilution can continue forever.

"yes that dilution can continue forever"?
Talking about Homeopathy.

 

[beefkabob]

Good inconsistency within the listening window:

FTFY.

The difference between a flat and less flat response is obvious, IMHO. Doesn't take a trained listener. Just somebody who cares even slightly. Doesn't take hearing to 20k or training. It's just in your face better when flat.

 

[Ericglo]

I remember deciding the ATC SCM50 was so well regarded I should buy some, about 30 years ago. I found my local dealer and organised a demo.
I was not particularly overwhelmed by them, I had Yamaha NS1000Ms at the time (still have them in fact) so did not buy. The bass and mid units have been around a l-o-n-g time, I do have a pair of Proac EBS speakers which use the same ATC mid and bass units in my study.

I believe those Yamahas were the first to use Beryllium. Troels did an update on the crossover. I recall asking Floyd about them. He said the designer brought them to Canada and realized he should have followed Toole's theories.

 

[infinitesymphony]

Some dude in Baltimore scored some drivers and raw cabinets for a pair of Fact 3 monitors several years ago, along with one actual assembled speaker he borrowed from a friend, and asked me to measure the completed speaker and then try to replicate its response. His friend wouldn't let me check out the stock crossover and trace through the circuit, so all I could do was measure the completed speaker, and then start from scratch by installing and measuring the the drivers in the raw cabinet and importing that data into my design software. This was as close as I could get. The guy has since disappeared and hopefully I won't be called upon to build the crossover and actually listen to the thing.
View attachment 71277

The perfect speaker for people who hate G#.

 

[Robbo99999]

I could do, but I've done so much REW/Dirac measuring that I'm frankly tired of it...The room dimensions and acoustic properties will not change and I've seen plenty of equipment come through this same room in the last 26 years. I'm experienced enough to hear the problems in my context and I think I will let my ears decide. I know precisely what to listen for and how it should sound (to me...).
I will gladly report back on the ATC vs PMC battle in my application, but that may not be of value to others as we all have different rooms and expectations. What irks me a bit is the gratuitous PMC-bashing based on the dismal measurements. I do not own PMC and perhaps I never will...but I also believe that excellent measurements do not guarantee excellent musicality and listening pleasure...and vice versa. There is a fine line between science/physics and subjective pyscho-acoustical appreciation.

If it didn't cost $2000 then there would be a lot less bashing, I mean if it went for $100 or something!

 

[Frank Dernie]

Transcriptors Reference

I so wanted one of them!
Luckily for me in my 2nd year at Imperial College (1970) the guy in the next door room was a very wealthy Persian, Iranian now I suppose, and he was a hifi fanatic. Not a music fanatic - a hifi fanatic. He bought whatever was well recommensed in the magazines at the time.
He had several setup records, almost no music and a Transcriptors Hydraulic Reference with ADC 26 cartridge.
I had a shed load of LPs and he invited me in to listen to them often, since he didn't know much about music. It was a good fit!

 

[tuga]

However, in today's Western capitalist marketplace any company regularly proposing poorly-designed products would neither survive nor gain legions of customers.

You are assuming that:

a) customers can recognise an accurate speaker,

and/or

b) that customers don't like the sound of less accurate speakers.

Besides, if all speakers of identical size and price sounded more or less alike then the only thing differencing them would be the "looks", and this might be counterproductive from a marketing/business perspective.