Sound of
PMS-EXCEL.
This is the part I really
hate because describing sound
is impossible. We are extremely sensitive to any
negative comments on performance. We can take any
high-end speaker and start lining up what this
speaker is not good at, because no speaker does
it all. But we rarely read reviews like this in
magazines. The magazine would very soon run out
of speakers offered for reviews. A review is
meant to sell speakers and we have to carefully
read between the lines to try to find any
reservation from the reviewer - in case there are
any. Mostly it's "bla...bla... this is the
best speaker I have had in my system, etc."
Useless!
Thanks to the internet we are
seeing more critical reviews although a lot of
"amateur" reviewers try to copy the
style and language of their professional
colleagues.
Before I go to the sonics of the PMS and
PMS-EXCEL, a few comments on drivers. The high
sensitivity of the PMS is derived from the use of
drivers with lightweight paper cones. Paper, when
done right, can provide a speedy, transient sound
and usually the break-up of the paper cones is of
an ear-friendly kind. The sound simply gets
muddled when the speakers are driven too loud.
Not necessarily so with the hard-cones. These
EXCEL drivers use magnesium membrane material,
which is extremely hard and work as a piston in
the range where the driver is intended to
perform, but outside this area, they break-up and
produce some very nasty peaks that has to be
carefully removed in the filter. Despite the low
weight of magnesium the cones are heavier than
the paper cones and the EXCEL drivers generally
have 3 dB less sensitivity compared to the paper
cones and the sensitivity of the EXCEL version is
~3 dB lower than the PMS. Very much as expected.
The reduced sensitivity of
the PMS-EXCEL was
immediately recognised when the first speaker was
compared to the PMS. Going from 88 dB to 91
dB/2.8V makes a difference and the 150 wpc amp in
my workshop has to work harder to render the
soundstage of the PMS. Next thing was that the
EXCEL drivers are low-coloured compared to the
paper cones and at the same time I warn you to
put too much into this. Every driver colour the
sound due to the materials used in driver
construction. I'm sure that some will favour the
paper version due to speed and transient attack
and others will favour the ECXEL due to the more
cool and clean sound. It's a matter of taste.
Another thing is that higher sloped crossover
usually provides a "cleaner" sound as
the drivers don't try to do things in the
neighbouring area where it may not be best
performer, and the blend of the sound from two
drivers sharing a certain frequency band will
always be a mixed blessing of different sounds.
The PMS can be driven from
small amps where the PMS-EXCEL gets better and
better the more watts you put behind. The EXCEL
drivers can grow with the task of larger amps,
where the PMS really doesn't need a whole lot of
power to perform the best. This doesn't mean the
EXCEL can't be fully enjoyed from an e.g. 50 wpc
valve amp, which is what I'm running right now
when this is written. The Copland CTA 505 does
very well with the EXCEL set-up - as it does with
the Acapella SEas. All depends on how loud we
play.
All this to say that I wouldn't choose between
the PMS or the PMS-EXCEL purely based on cost.
One version may hold qualities that will suit a
particular set-up better than the other.
|
