Paradigm Cinema 100 Review (home theater speakers)

[beagleman]

I'm beginning to doubt the validity of your posts...that you shouldn't be taken too seriously......or do you just like internet jousting & cluttering up threads!

Think you hit the proverbial nail on the head.

 

[uwotm8]

Paradigm has in the past and even now claimed to use NRC research in its design process

Huawei claims to use Leica lens
But the result is everything, right? Cheap Paradigm line I've heard sounded "typically bad". Their newer speakers tested here didn't show leading performance as well. Again, not totally bad. Just "hmm well I'll try something else".

 

[kwoketl]

In Armin's review >> Vertical directivity is better going up than down so don't put the tweeter below your ear axis:

Can someone explain to be why when "Vertical directivity is better going up" then don't put the twitter under the ear axis, I thought it would be the other way round.

 

[Bear123]

Thanks- that's very helpful. I have F208s but probably need a couple subs when not listening in 2 channel.

I would suggest that using subs for 2 channel is just as important since sound quality is an important goal for music.

 

[Rottmannash]

I would suggest that using subs for 2 channel is just as important since sound quality is an important goal for music.

I'm certain you're correct but I have nowhere to put them. Very crowded space unless I had a wireless system- then I could place 2 but away from the main system. Doesn't Monolith make a wireless transmitter system?

 

[AdamG]

In Armin's review >> Vertical directivity is better going up than down so don't put the tweeter below your ear axis:

Can someone explain to be why when "Vertical directivity is better going up" then don't put the twitter under the ear axis, I thought it would be the other way round.

Welcome Aboard @kwoketl.

 

[krabapple]

Huawei claims to use Leica lens
But the result is everything, right? Cheap Paradigm line I've heard sounded "typically bad". Their newer speakers tested here didn't show leading performance as well. Again, not totally bad. Just "hmm well I'll try something else".

This is why we have 'speaker correction' (aka 'room correction'). It can't perform magic but it can polish up a non-'leading performer'. See for example in this very thread.

(Which I think may actually terrify some speaker brand cultists. )

 

[krabapple]

This makes intuitive sense. Despite this, my AVR (an older Marantz with an older version of Audessey) chose to make my bookshelf front LR speakers large. I am too lazy to figure out how to override this, and it still sounds “good enough”. But it seems strange to me that after testing the frequency response of an old speaker (2nd Gen PSB Alpha) with only a 6.5 inch woofer, it chose to assign it full range. Maybe my sub sucks?

It called them large most likely due to boundary reinforcement of bass frequencies when speakers are near a wall . You should still set them to 'small' and choose a crossover commensurate with the 'anaechoic' performance of the speaker.

 

[krabapple]

Ya I agree, these speakers are too small.

well, I *don't* agree, obviously, since I'm using 'em!

I have serious misgivings about anything smaller than a Neumann KH80 used as a surround speaker even at shorter listening distances. And even that's the lower end, I'd say 5-6" woofer is a reasonable compromise of capability and aesthetics/placement for most people.

I have misgivings about many speakers of many sizes, absent some kind of correction.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...eview-home-theater-speakers.22597/post-752705

Again, the fun here, if you're committed to a certain form factor, is the challenge to make them sound better than they do out of box.

Amir has reviewed plenty of speakers that can be helped with some EQ, so this should not be heresy.

 

[uwotm8]

This is why we have 'speaker correction' (aka 'room correction')

Strange point. Room correction means correcting resonance modes etc what affects your "good speakers" sound in your specific room/location. Buying objectively bad or average speakers purposefully to correct them is just absurd as far as you can buy good ones for the same price.
However, buying "objectively bad" speakers if you like their specific sound is a point. Just be honest with yourself

 

[krabapple]

Wrong on both counts.

Correction software doesn't know or care if the anomaly it's measuring and correcting is due to the room or to the speaker, and above Schroeder it can easily be a combination of both. What it alters is speaker output. When Amir adds EQ correction to the speakers he tests, it's based on the behavior of the speaker, not the measured room acoustic.

I'm not talking about 'buying objectively bad or average speakers purposefully to correct them'. I'm talking about buying speakers within real-world constraints, and correcting them to the extent possible if needed. If a 'leading performer' is a candidate within those constraints, of course, choose that.

 

[kwoketl]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Paradigm Cinema 100 CT HT speaker. It is the mains (left and right) of a 5.1 package which was kindly sent to me by a member and costs US $1099 (for all six speaker).

The Cinema 100 is elegantly finished in its little package:

View attachment 124696

There is a removable stand that also routes the speaker wires to the small terminals in the back. It is an attempt to hide the wiring on the back in case the speakers are exposed.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

I performed over 800 measurement which resulted in error rate of roughly 1% to 2%.

Testing temperature was around 64 degrees F.

Reference axis for measurements was the center of the tweeter (by eye). Grill was not used in either measurements or listening tests.

Measurements are compliant with latest speaker research into what can predict the speaker preference and is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 ANSI specifications. Likewise listening tests are performed per research that shows mono listening is much more revealing of differences between speakers than stereo or multichannel.

Paradigm Cinema 100 Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:
View attachment 124697

The frequency response error is quite obvious to see. It first droops but then rises starting at 1 kHz until it finished in a large tweeter resonance around 15 kHz:

View attachment 124698

Early window mimics the same for good and bad:
View attachment 124699

Final predicted in-room response tells us what we can already guess with too little bass (this is a sealed box) and too much highs:

View attachment 124700

Distortion is under control although that is mostly because the woofer is not allowed to play low:

View attachment 124701

View attachment 124702

Directivity scales with frequency which means there is not much control:
View attachment 124703

View attachment 124704

Vertical directivity is better going up than down so don't put the tweeter below your ear axis:

View attachment 124705

Finally, here is the impedance and phase:

View attachment 124706

Listening Tests
I listened to the Cinema 100 without its sub (which I did not have). As expected, it sounded tinny and bright. Attempts at EQ were not successful. Likely needs to be tuned with its sub playing at the same time.

Conclusions
I like to evaluate speakers as stand-alone units without a sub. Here, it is impossible to do since a sub is supplied normally with the unit. Even so, it is clear the company wanted to let the highs play brighter as to sell better in a showroom. How critical do we get in this class of speakers though? I don't know. I let you decide. I have no recommendation one way or the other.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150

In the review >> Vertical directivity is better going up than down so don't put the tweeter below your ear axis:

Can someone explain to me why when "Vertical directivity is better going up" then “don't put the twitter under the ear axis”, I thought it would be the other way round.

 

[Spkrdctr]

What is interesting for me as a long time lurker and now forum member, is how many times (A LOT!) that Amir does a great job of showing very bad test results and in the thread, about half of the people are trying to say the speaker is ok. For example on this system, there are probably 12 sound bars out in the market that would easily trounce this system. It is a pretty bad system and that's all that can be said. Many did post how you can easily and cheaply buy MUCH better performance today. As a new forum member I figured I'd say this as I have thought it on MANY threads over the last couple of years. Just something to think about. My opinion, not that anyone cares is that if we as a customer base do not call out very bad product (junk?), then it will not push the industry to make better products. Just my two cents that I gave for free because no one will ask!

 

[AdamG]

What is interesting for me as a long time lurker and now forum member, is how many times (A LOT!) that Amir does a great job of showing very bad test results and in the thread, about half of the people are trying to say the speaker is ok. For example on this system, there are probably 12 sound bars out in the market that would easily trounce this system. It is a pretty bad system and that's all that can be said. Many did post how you can easily and cheaply buy MUCH better performance today. As a new forum member I figured I'd say this as I have thought it on MANY threads over the last couple of years. Just something to think about. My opinion, not that anyone cares is that if we as a customer base do not call out very bad product (junk?), then it will not push the industry to make better products. Just my two cents that I gave for free because no one will ask!

Welcome Aboard @Spkrdctr.

 

[Hugh Jass]

What is interesting for me as a long time lurker and now forum member, is how many times (A LOT!) that Amir does a great job of showing very bad test results and in the thread, about half of the people are trying to say the speaker is ok. For example on this system, there are probably 12 sound bars out in the market that would easily trounce this system. It is a pretty bad system and that's all that can be said. Many did post how you can easily and cheaply buy MUCH better performance today. As a new forum member I figured I'd say this as I have thought it on MANY threads over the last couple of years. Just something to think about. My opinion, not that anyone cares is that if we as a customer base do not call out very bad product (junk?), then it will not push the industry to make better products. Just my two cents that I gave for free because no one will ask!

I agree with the sentiment, but I am not entirely sure that this is junk though. It depends on the purchase price. Like many have said, this was not tested as it is to be used.

It’s meant to be used in a small room with an intimate home theatre; perhaps a condo. It’s faults are: no bass and peaky high frequency. The midrange FR is good. The distortion is good in its usage range. It’s dispersion is decent. It was not measured with its sub, which would fill in the bass. Yes, the crossover is too high for LCR mains, but if the sub were to be placed near the centre, for small home theatre use, that would probably be fine. And most AVR’s would automatically EQ the high frequency stuff. Where it might suffer is in stereo usage.

Is it the best value out there? Probably not. Just thinking aloud, Pioneer’s HT set is probably significantly better value/$. But is this terrible for it’s designed use? Not sure that it is. But without the sub, I don’t think you can honestly say. This is a subwoofer/satellite system where the mains are routed through the sub and then the sub’s Xover sends signal to the satellites. The testing done in this case would be akin to only testing the Mid/Upper of a biamped speaker.

The purchaser bought it as a height speaker: in that case (again, depending on price) it may be decent. The lack of bass becomes immaterial, the HF peaking can be tamed with EQ, and the very small footprint becomes one of the chief considerations.

 

[kwoketl]

Small clarification: the $1099 Cinema 100 5.1 system actually consists of 5 of these, identical, plus an 8" subwoofer. I.e., There is no difference between mains, center, surround, though the center speaker is typically shown lying horizontally (a different stand is provided for that use), which would surely impact its performance in-room.

This speaker is also sold in a 2.0 package, and the sub is also available separately.

I'm presently using these in a 5.2 configuration (Monoprice 10" subs), all channels crossed over at 125Hz, with Audyssey XT32 full spectrum reference curve correction. The system doubles as TV/movie and music-only playback (virtually all 5.1 mixed, or upmixed from stereo). I'll try to remember to check the Audyssey graphs later to see if it detected and damped down the designed-in treble boost.

FWIW, I paid nowhere remotely near retail price, for a used set. If anyone needs an 8" Paradigm sub, let me know. ;>

Good to see you using these in a 5.2 config.

I am putting together all the parts for my 10'X10' spare bedroom HT. It is going to be 7.3.4 with 11 of these Cinema 100s. Two 8" and one 10" subs will be managed with the MiniDSP 2X4 HD.

I initially auditioned a few bookshelf systems and I bought this Paradigm Cinema 100 5.1. Put them together with a Denon X3700H and played with it for a couple of days and was satisfied with that. I then packed them up and storing them until my son moves out later this year, then I will be able to set the HT up. In the meantime, I have purchased the 2 additional subs and speakers used. The last 5 speakers (there will be an extra) are being shipped as I type.

 

[AdamG]

Good to see you using these in a 5.2 config.

I am putting together all the parts for my 10'X10' spare bedroom HT. It is going to be 7.3.4 with 11 of these Cinema 100s. Two 8" and one 10" subs will be managed with the MiniDSP 2X4 HD.

I initially auditioned a few bookshelf systems and I bought this Paradigm Cinema 100 5.1. Put them together with a Denon X3700H and play with it for a couple of days and was satisfied with that. I then pack them up and store them until my son moves out later this year, then I will be able to set the HT up. In the meantime, I have purchased the 2 additional subs and speakers used. The last 4 speakers are being shipped as I type.

Welcome Aboard @kwoketl.

 

[Sancus]

I have misgivings about many speakers of many sizes, absent some kind of correction.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...eview-home-theater-speakers.22597/post-752705

Again, the fun here, if you're committed to a certain form factor, is the challenge to make them sound better than they do out of box.

Amir has reviewed plenty of speakers that can be helped with some EQ, so this should not be heresy.

Sure I think correction is a good idea. In fact I strongly believe that you cannot have correct bass without EQ in just about any system(and I'm not alone).

But I do think those EQ posts are somewhat misleading, especially for cheaper speakers. Many show unit to unit variation of as much as +/-2dB especially in tweeter frequencies and so there's no guarantee the EQ is correct unless you measure each of your speakers yourself. Of course this is less true for more expensive speakers(see 305p vs KH120 example), but most of the really good active speakers have correction(either analog or digital) built-in already. That said, I am sure those EQs are generally an improvement over no EQ.

In addition to that, you obviously can't EQ in headroom, reduced IMD or THD, etc. And as we've seen, headroom especially in the 20-500hz range is extremely important to the subjective experience. That's the main reason I don't think super tiny speakers (or subs) can do the trick for HT, personally. My 12" sub is woefully inadequate for HT and I've heard its limitations many times, which makes me very suspicious of the 8" in this package as well lol.

 

[krabapple]

Sure I think correction is a good idea. In fact I strongly believe that you cannot have correct bass without EQ in just about any system(and I'm not alone).

In the case of any 'small' (non floorstanding)-based speaker system, it goes without saying. (It's also true of any 2 channel system , IMO)

But I do think those EQ posts are somewhat misleading, especially for cheaper speakers. Many show unit to unit variation of as much as +/-2dB especially in tweeter frequencies and so there's no guarantee the EQ is correct unless you measure each of your speakers yourself. Of course this is less true for more expensive speakers(see 305p vs KH120 example), but most of the really good active speakers have correction(either analog or digital) built-in already. That said, I am sure those EQs are generally an improvement over no EQ.

My point. You get to decide whether the improvement is good enough *given your constraints*.

In addition to that, you obviously can't EQ in headroom, reduced IMD or THD, etc. And as we've seen, headroom especially in the 20-500hz range is extremely important to the subjective experience. That's the main reason I don't think super tiny speakers (or subs) can do the trick for HT, personally. My 12" sub is woefully inadequate for HT and I've heard its limitations many times, which makes me very suspicious of the 8" in this package as well lol.

Inadequate how and in what circumstances?

I have not experienced the Paradigm Cinema-centered, Audyssey-corrected 5.2 system as being 'woefully inadequate' in my normal listening circumstances (5.1 upmixes stereo mixed + surround mixed material). Then again, I'm typically listening at ~10-15db below reference levels, given my room size and proximity to the speakers.

This isn't to say it's the best sound I could ever possibly get in this room, given no constraints on gear and room treatment!

 

[slipchuck]

1000 dollar paper holders

Too bad you never heard them