• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Infinity Primus 150 spinorama measurements (CTA-2034)

What are your thoughts about this speaker?

  • Very good

    Votes: 29 27.4%

  • Above average

    Votes: 49 46.2%

  • It's ok

    Votes: 25 23.6%

  • Below average

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • Poor

    Votes: 2 1.9%
  • Total voters
    106
tw 2022 said:
Sorry to impose with such a trivial question sir, but do you recall who designed the crescendo line in the early 90s?.. And are you aware of any reliable measurements anywhere.. I can't find either.. I happened to acquire a pair of 3006's by pure chance and can't find much if any reliable info... Thanks
Click to expand...
These were designed in the days before comprehensive, accurate, anechoic measurements were being done at Harman and Infinity. I joined Harman in 1991, so this is all unknown to me. In those days loudspeakers were highly variable in sound quality - no blind listening tests. Sorry.
 
Floyd Toole said:
These were designed in the days before comprehensive, accurate, anechoic measurements were being done at Harman and Infinity. I joined Harman in 1991, so this is all unknown to me. In those days loudspeakers were highly variable in sound quality - no blind listening tests. Sorry.
Click to expand...
thank you sir ... :) i very much appreciate the response...i'll keep digging , and like the previous poster suggested , i may try to measure them myself or get them out to Erin or Amir...
 
Floyd Toole said:
Any component replacement/improvement scheme can improve sound quality only if it improves the anechoic measured performance of the loudspeaker. In many cases such replacements change the measurements, and therefore the sound. Is it an improvement? Psychologically, there is an expectation that more expensive capacitors and air-core inductors should sound better - lower non-linear distortion - but the reality is that what we hear is dominated by linear behavior: amplitude vs. frequency response. Even phase response is not audible. So, if the original electrolytic capacitors have deteriorated, a not uncommon phenomenon in old loudspeakers, it might - might - be enough just to replace them with new versions, assuming that the right values can be found. Otherwise the loudspeaker is being redesigned without the benefit of trustworthy engineering measurements. If such measurements are available, then have at it, and you might indeed improve the sound.

But humans are flawed, and if we believe we hear something, often we do.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this insight, I've reflected on it much. I have a question, the Revel "PerformaBe crossover networks utilize all film capacitors and air core inductors in the midrange and tweeter circuits.". In what measurements would you expect to find the benefits of such high-end components?
 
paulgyro said:
Thanks for this insight, I've reflected on it much. I have a question, the Revel "PerformaBe crossover networks utilize all film capacitors and air core inductors in the midrange and tweeter circuits.". In what measurements would you expect to find the benefits of such high-end components?
Click to expand...
Film capacitors tend to have better controlled values - a manufacturing benefit for consistent product performance. They also have longer life spans than electrolytics. Air core inductors won't saturate, and change their value or generate distortion if driven very hard, but frankly well designed iron core inductors work just fine. At some point it becomes expected in high-end products and the additional cost is not great.
 
Ageve said:
I don't know if Infinity were highly regarded back in the day, but Stereophile seemed to like this speaker as well. I dont usually pay much attention to subjective reviews, but in this case I agree with their conclusion. At it's best, it sounds surprisingly open and detailed, especially on female vocals.

The Primus 150 has achieved a standard of performance at the $200-or-under price point that I didn't think was possible. Moreover, in the area of its greatest strength, its midrange detail and low-level dynamic resolution, it sounded like a $1000/pair speaker.

It was backed up by measurements as well:

Although I was a little bothered by its midrange resonances, the Primus 150's overall measured performance is excellent, considering the Chinese-made speaker's bargain price.

Infinity Primus 150 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Sidebar 3: Measurements A fundamental choice faces every designer of small speakers: extend the low-frequency performance but accept a low sensitivity, or maximize sensitivity and live with the curtailed bass response? The Primus 150's designer has chosen the latter course; while Bob Reina noted...
www.stereophile.com www.stereophile.com

The overall tonality could be described as a bit "cold", but not really v-shaped - It doesn't sound bright, but a bit thin due to the lack of bass below 80 Hz.

As for the cabinet resonance att 300 Hz, it could be audible, but maybe not. Those kinds of measurements are done with an accelerometer attached to the cabinet. It's not an acoustic measurement.

I bought these speakers after reading the Primus 360 review by Erins Audio Corner. I know this one is probably not as good, but still a nice budget speaker. :)
Click to expand...
I bought the Infinity Primus 150s and years later the P163s, both times on closeout for less than $70 the pair. I also bought a pair of the Pioneer Andrew Jones designed towers, ver 2 model, on closeout, for $130 the pair. I keep rotating them out of my system and they are all enjoyable, but the bookshelf speakers do need a sub. Luckily I bought one of those on closeout too. (just call me Cheaperaudioman.)
 
Yep, when Circuit City went BK I ended up with more Primus speakers that I could use in the basement because they were so cheap. One kid was given then 230s in college (which I thought were very decent sounding) and blew out the crossovers and tweeters somehow. The 150s from this review always impressed me for imaging but they have since moved on. Am still running some 140's as surrounds, impressive little 4 inchers.
 
I actually have the newer Infinity Primus P143 and I don't think they all that great. When I bought them, they were strictly surround speakers to go with my infinity Reference 2000.4 tower speakers.

I have compared them to my best 2 speakers I have, the tiny Polk Blackstone TL1 and Elac Debut 2.0 B6.2 speakers. I have gave away worse sounding speakers, as some bookshelf Boston Acoustics, Infinity Entra Point Fives, Bose Interaudio 4000, Infinity RS5 (bookshelf), and Polk TSI100s and others. My Infinity RS 2000.4 bit the dust as animals and children don't mix well with Tower speakers. No loss, they were ear bleading bright sounding as when I was younger, I was about dazzle and not as much about natural sounding speakers.

The Infinity P143 speakers sound thin and bright next to my Elac B6.2 and Polk TL1 speakers. I tried using the Infinity P143 in a system in my bedroom and grew tired of the thin and bright sound. I replaced them with another set of Polk TL1 speakers I had. I tried to like the Infinity P143 but just couldn't. Good for a background music garage/shop speaker but not a main listening speaker.

Now the Infinity P143 has a 4" woofer and a 3/4" tweeter opposed to the Infinity P150's 5-1/4" woofer and 3/4" tweeter. So maybe the P150 is a much better sounding speaker but being in the general series, I can't think they are all that different sounding. Bare in mind, my better Polk TL1 speakers only have a 2-1/2" woofer and 1/2" tweeter and they have a warmer sound.
 
Floyd Toole said:
These were designed in the days before comprehensive, accurate, anechoic measurements were being done at Harman and Infinity. I joined Harman in 1991, so this is all unknown to me. In those days loudspeakers were highly variable in sound quality - no blind listening tests. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Dr @Floyd Toole were you around Harman for the design / release of the JBL L7 then? Looks like they were released in 1992 and seem to hold many of the design goals you have espoused. Interesting review of it by Don Keele here. https://www.gammaelectronics.xyz/audio_12-1992_jbl.html
Any thoughts or experience with this speaker?
 
Mike Up said:
I actually have the newer Infinity Primus P143 and I don't think they all that great. When I bought them, they were strictly surround speakers to go with my infinity Reference
Infinity Primus 143 speakers freq resp 2 - Copy.png
2000.4 tower speakers.

I have compared them to my best 2 speakers I have, the tiny Polk Blackstone TL1 and Elac Debut 2.0 B6.2 speakers. I have gave away worse sounding speakers, as some bookshelf Boston Acoustics, Infinity Entra Point Fives, Bose Interaudio 4000, Infinity RS5 (bookshelf), and Polk TSI100s and others. My Infinity RS 2000.4 bit the dust as animals and children don't mix well with Tower speakers. No loss, they were ear bleading bright sounding as when I was younger, I was about dazzle and not as much about natural sounding speakers.

The Infinity P143 speakers sound thin and bright next to my Elac B6.2 and Polk TL1 speakers. I tried using the Infinity P143 in a system in my bedroom and grew tired of the thin and bright sound. I replaced them with another set of Polk TL1 speakers I had. I tried to like the Infinity P143 but just couldn't. Good for a background music garage/shop speaker but not a main listening speaker.

Now the Infinity P143 has a 4" woofer and a 3/4" tweeter opposed to the Infinity P150's 5-1/4" woofer and 3/4" tweeter. So maybe the P150 is a much better sounding speaker but being in the general series, I can't think they are all that different sounding. Bare in mind, my better Polk TL1 speakers only have a 2-1/2" woofer and 1/2" tweeter and they have a warmer sound.
Click to expand...
I will politely reply that these are great measuring speakers. The graph from https://averagejoeaudiophile.blogspot.com/2014/08/battle-of-harman-kardon-budget-brands.html shows a very flat frequency response. I've used them nearfield in a bedroom with a subwoofer which may explain the difference in preference. I'm currently using them as rears in a 5.1 system with the Primus 150 fronts, a Beta C250 center speaker and a Wharfedale Sub. Notwithstanding you don't have to like what I like. ;)
 
Well I have them, and I doubt that graph was done correctly. I used them in my bedroom as well but at 10' away. I couldn't really call that nearfield.

My Elac Debut 2.0 B6.2 speakers are a flat measured speaker as measured by Erin's Corner and ASR. Those speakers sound excellent. These Primus speakers lack lower midrange and because of that, sound thin. They are also elevated in the upper midrange and treble giving them a brighter sound. They do not sound very good next to the tiny Polk TL1 speakers which have a fuller, warmer sound and much better imaging. I guess if you prefer a brighter sound, they may be more appealing.

Each to their own as everyone has different likes and dislikes.

I did give away to Good Will, my Infinity Entra Point 5s that were also reviewed well but sounded like they played from the inside of a cardboard box. No treble and very boxy sounding with hardly any imaging. Can't say these sounded Warm or bright, just boxy.

I kept the P143 because they were better and could use them in a non-critical system for background music. They have no bass to speak of but when coupled with a sub like I had them, they were full range.

Don't get me wrong, they are better than a lot of the cheaper speakers out there, and the reason why I kept them. To me, they just don't hold a candle to the current cheap Polk TL1s (which I consider one of the best budget speakers if you don't mind a lower output), or the Elac B6.2s. The P143 were my side surround speakers for years as the Entra Point 5s were my back surround speakers. Now I've changed everything in my main setup from a 7.1 to a 5.1.2 and have much better sound as the speaker system is setup ideally for my room and the newer speakers sound so much better for my main priority, MUSIC, and Atmos/surround.
 
Last edited:
Ageve said:
Here are some measurements of the Infinity Primus 150 Bookshelf speaker.

The MSRP was $198/pair back in 2003.

View attachment 436659


Specifications:

Frequency range: 58Hz - 20000Hz (+/- 3dB)
Recommended Power: 10 - 100W
Sensitivity: 88 dB
Nominal impedance: 8 ohms
Crossover frequency: 3300 Hz; 24dB/octave
Low-frequency driver: 5-1/4" (130mm) MMD
High-frequency driver: 3/4" (19mm) MMD
Weight: 13.5 lb (6kg)


My measurements are quasi-anechoic, with near-field port+woofer, corrected for baffle edge diffraction, combined with gated measurements at 1m distance.

I have attached a 1m vs 2m comparison, pair matching and measurement axis comparison for those who are interested. I used the speaker with the smoothest response for the spin.

Recommended listening height is with the tweeter "approximately at ear level" according to the user manual. I got the flattest response ~40 mm below tweeter axis, so that's what I used for the spin.


Here's the CTA-2034 data:

View attachment 436660


It looks surprisingly good considering how inexpensive this speaker was. Most of the response errors should be fixable with EQ thanks to the smooth directivity.


Early reflections:

View attachment 436663


Horizontal, and total early reflections:

View attachment 436664


Estimated in-room response:

View attachment 436665


Quasi-anechoic response:

View attachment 436693


Horizontal directivity:

View attachment 436667

View attachment 436668

0-90 deg compared to measurement by John Atkinson:

View attachment 436669

View attachment 436670

Infinity Primus 150 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Sidebar 3: Measurements A fundamental choice faces every designer of small speakers: extend the low-frequency performance but accept a low sensitivity, or maximize sensitivity and live with the curtailed bass response? The Primus 150's designer has chosen the latter course; while Bob Reina noted...
www.stereophile.com www.stereophile.com


Vertical directivity:

View attachment 436671

View attachment 436672

View attachment 436673


Near-field response:

Steep roll-off thanks to the 24dB/octave crossover, but there are clear port and/or cabinet resonances, and a woofer resonance at ~8 kHz.

View attachment 436674


Distortion:

View attachment 436675

View attachment 436676


< 1% THD from 75 Hz and up. Very low tweeter distortion (less than 0.1%).


Comparison with Stereophile, 30 deg horizontal listening window:

View attachment 436677


Overall, I'm quite impressed by this speaker. It sounds better than most of the budget speakers I have measured so far. Sure, it's not perfect, but frequency response is ok, horizontal directivity is excellent, and distortion is quite low as well.

There's no deep bass though. A subwoofer is definitely needed.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt these would fail a sighted test while actually being fantastic :) the optics are just yuk ! They are incredible ugly the newer infinitys where never visually appealing to me , so i could not have these in my house .
Wonder how such good speakers would have performed on the market with a bit more care for the design ?

I mean look at them , looks exactly like the stuff that came with a 80’s stereo packet :) wonder if not the looks are the sole cause for the brands demise, the light faux wood combination with silver grey is horrible and the chamfers and rounding looks cheap :P

Anyway thankyou for the measurements and good review .
 
Mnyb said:
I mean look at them , looks exactly like the stuff that came with a 80’s stereo packet
Click to expand...
Nah, even back when these were released I knew the build quality was better than supermarket stereos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ageve
  • Poll Poll
Triangle Titus EZ spinorama measurements (CTA-2034)
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
18K
Billy Budapest
Billy Budapest
Ageve
  • Poll Poll
Audiovector M1 Super Spinorama measurements (CTA-2034)
2 3
Replies
48
Views
16K
bytek5
B
amirm
  • Poll Poll
Palmer Orbit 11 Monitor Review
26 27 28
Replies
557
Views
89K
Bwaslo
B
amirm
  • Poll Poll
Ascilab C8C Active Speaker Review
31 32 33
Replies
654
Views
81K
Paul7777x
Paul7777x
amirm
  • Poll Poll
PSI A21-M Monitor Review
5 6 7
Replies
121
Views
19K
VSem
V
Back
Top Bottom