Paradigm Monitor SE Atom/Or the Case of the Lying Company (?)

[Deleted member 17820]

Here is an objective and subjective look at the new Paradigm SE Atoms.

Before I made my measurements I contacted Paradigm and they said they "do not have frequency response graphs they can hand out"

RED FLAG #1.

This speaker is advertised as +-3db from 61hs-21khz
But my measurements of this model and Audioholics measurements of the Premier 800F tower BOTH show Paradigm is lying and that there is a major frequency response problem in both these models that are listed with the same tweeter (although there may be some unlisted differences).

Measurements were done in room using a studiosixdigital calibrated USB mic and it's built in output.
Gated to 4ms
Speaker on stand surrounded with melamine foam at 4ft high
in 13 by 16ft room.
EDIT- mic was at 0 degrees at 1 meter centered between woofer and tweeter, grills off.

Once again, I am not an acoustician but the high frequency measurements I took mirror the ones Audioholics took of the premier tower that is listed as using the same tweeter.

Here are each driver and then the FR

Here is a overlay of Audioholics measurement of Premier 800F tower and my Atome SE FR

Here are some Horizontal off axis measurements of the Atom SE at 0, 20, 30, and 50 degrees of axis

Well that's the objective stuff for now. I do have Fibro and CFS so I am doing the best I can. If anyone wants to see the window info or IR let me know.

The speakers sound like they measure, BAD, bad from all Listening positions, evenly bad. Such a large dip in the high end leaves the speaker missing air, liveliness, vibrancy.

Lesson learned, never buy a speaker based on +-3db specs when the manufacturer wont list a FR chart!

 

[HooStat]

That is my policy now too -- I asked Monitor Audio last week if they had frequency response and off-axis horizontal measurements for their Silver speakers. Nope.

I am not sure why the companies are hesitant. I sincerely doubt that they have not done the work, at least in the case of the bigger companies. And doesn't Paradigm have access to an anechoic chamber? Of course, seeing the results does suggest that maybe they don't have the measurements or that they designing using other methods.

 

[Deleted member 17820]

They sure LOVE to flaunt their use of an anechoic chamber BUT they won't give out FR response? that means they know how bad it looks?
My measurements and Audioholics do not match here:
https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

I hate to say it but it seems like reviewers(paid) get cherry picked samples that measure one way while all the regular buyers get speakers that measure CONSISTENTLY different . Wish I was wrong

 

[riker1384]

Paradigm used to make speakers that measured very well, at reasonable prices. I wonder what happened.

https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/paradigm_atom/
https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/paradigm_monitor5/

 

[Snoochers]

Paradigm used to make speakers that measured very well, at reasonable prices. I wonder what happened.

https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/paradigm_atom/
https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/paradigm_monitor5/

I forget the details but I believe it is new management. PSB and Axiom I think are focused on measurement but Paradigm has moved away from that in the last few years.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Is this the same speaker?

 

[Deleted member 17820]

Is this the same speaker?

I believe it is. But the upper frequency FR doesn't match mine or the audioholics posted measurements of 800F.

 

[andreasmaaan]

I believe it is. But the upper frequency FR doesn't match mine or the audioholics posted measurements of 800F.

True, but to me it looks like it has the same shape as yours, but in your case the top end begins rolling off from c. 1 or 2kHz. Possible explanations for that would be either that the XO components have very poor tolerances, leading to wide unit-to-unit variation (most likely a resistor in series with the tweeter having too high a value in this case), or that your measurement mic rolls off at the top end. Do you have another speaker around of maybe higher quality for which there are published, accurate measurements? Measuring that would help work out if it’s the mic.

 

[q3cpma]

> that response

 

[richard12511]

Paradigm used to make speakers that measured very well, at reasonable prices. I wonder what happened.

https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/paradigm_atom/
https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/paradigm_monitor5/

Same thing happened with B&W. My guess is that it's an attempt to differentiate their speakers from others and capture a different segment of the market.

 

[Deleted member 17820]

True, but to me it looks like it has the same shape as yours, but in your case the top end begins rolling off from c. 1 or 2kHz. Possible explanations for that would be either that the XO components have very poor tolerances, leading to wide unit-to-unit variation (most likely a resistor in series with the tweeter having too high a value in this case), or that your measurement mic rolls off at the top end. Do you have another speaker around of maybe higher quality for which there are published, accurate measurements? Measuring that would help work out if it’s the mic.

I have a friend who is an AES member and I have been trying to get over to verify my studiosix mic/cal file but things aren't lining up great.

update:
So I just got back from my friends house troubleshooting my studiosix Utest mic, testing his reference mic, sf101 I believe, and also about 10 other mics.

We found out that my Utest mic is really good (to 10k) without using the calfile in REW, and that REW ISN'T reading the calfile correctly. This means that all the previous data I posted has some errors.

As I said, I have CFS and fibro so I can only do so much in each day.

I will post the FR of my test mic and the reference and I will also re-measure the paradigms.

Blessings.

 

[Deleted member 17820]

So I just ran a real quick sweep and what I got is close to what Soundstage has listed. Without calfile my Utest is only good to 10k so I cut off my measurement past that. I will try and make some proper looking overlays and and correct off axis measurements after I get the calfile/REW issue corrected.

 

[Deleted member 17820]

> that response

The correct FR isn't quite as bad but still not +-3db.

 

[andreasmaaan]

So I just ran a real quick sweep and what I got is close to what Soundstage has listed. Without calfile my Utest is only good to 10k so I cut off my measurement past that. I will try and make some proper looking overlays and and correct off axis measurements after I get the calfile/REW issue corrected.

View attachment 87254

Definitely not +/-3dB, but looking a lot better.

If you sit c. 30° off-axis you'll get a pretty flat response other than the top half octave, which is unlikely to be subjectively very significant anyway (keeping in mind the Soundstage measurements are not accurate below 100Hz).

 

[Deleted member 14468]

Here is an objective and subjective look at the new Paradigm SE Atoms.

Before I made my measurements I contacted Paradigm and they said they "do not have frequency response graphs they can hand out"

RED FLAG #1.

Actually, it's not a flag at all. MOST companies don't even have measurements at all -- and those that do don't usually just hand them out, as the designers at Paradigm say. Most often the measurements of any product are done in the engineer lab and are done for design purposes. They're not ready-made consumer measurements just to pass around like marketing material.

Also, it's very difficult to measure speakers accurately. I can tell that after being to Paradigm, probably more than 50 times, if not more, they have one of the best chambers and measurement systems in the world. So they don't just have access to one -- they have one. And a great one at that.

With that in mind, there's a reason we don't just measure in a room, with speakers on a stand. So many variables. Instead, as has already been linked into this thread, we measure using the chamber at Canada's National Research Council, which ISN'T as good as Paradigm's, since NRC's is smaller. Still, we measured the Monitor SE Atom there and the measurements are respectable in terms of linearity, etc. Certainly fits in their +/-3dB window.

https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!

 

[Deleted member 14468]

I forget the details but I believe it is new management. PSB and Axiom I think are focused on measurement but Paradigm has moved away from that in the last few years.

Hello,

I'm not here to defend Paradigm. Instead, I'm trying to right wrong information. Scott Bagby, one of the original founders, bought the entire thing back from the investment firm he was also involved with. I wrote a story about it:

https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1350-paradigm-shift-the-bagbys-are-back

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!

 

[HooStat]

they have one of the best chambers and measurement systems in the world

This begs the question about why they don't provide measurements and why their speakers don't measure as well as one might hope for. It is certainly their right to do business this way. But it does frustrate the part of their market that deems this information essential. Both KEF and Revel are very open with their measurements. And, of course, many of the pro lines are as well (Neumann, Genelec, etc).

I think it is very fair to believe that a manufacturer providing no measurements is a "red flag". It means the buyer can't know for sure what he/she is getting. I think it is a fair position for someone to take when spending their own money. It also applies to SoundStage -- why else would SoundStage provide measurements if it doesn't believe the information is important to the evaluation of speakers?

 

[Deleted member 14468]

This begs the question about why they don't provide measurements and why their speakers don't measure as well as one might hope for. . . . It also applies to SoundStage -- why else would SoundStage provide measurements if it doesn't believe the information is important to the evaluation of speakers?

I'm somewhat confused as to what the question is, and what's being asked. We measure as many products as we can, whether or not the manufacturer is able to supply measurements (most aren't). Paradigm supplied the speaker fully knowing that we'd measure it. For a $299 pair of speakers, I have really no trouble with what they've provided. And it sounds very good for the price. So if you can elaborate what you mean...?

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!

 

[Snoochers]

Hello,

I'm not here to defend Paradigm. Instead, I'm trying to right wrong information. Scott Bagby, one of the original founders, bought the entire thing back from the investment firm he was also involved with. I wrote a story about it:

https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1350-paradigm-shift-the-bagbys-are-back

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!

Thanks! I had heard about this and I'm glad you brought it up since I forgot. Hopefully this means they will move more towards the direction of objective measurements.

 

[andreasmaaan]

I suspect this speaker is designed on the assumption that the listener won't toe them in, which is pretty typical for speakers in this price bracket. As I mentioned, the 30° off-axis measurement, which is a typical listening axis for forward-firing speakers in a domestic context and is likely the design axis for this speaker, is fairly flat:

The performance further off-axis is also quite smooth:

And distortion performance, while not stellar, is acceptable for a $150 standmount speaker (at equivalent 96dB/1m):

So I'd say they're probably already on the objective measurement path.