MA Bronze 2 vs PSB Image B25

NAD and PSB are strategic partners...because they gel very well.

well appears you have been caught in the vicious cycle of upgrades even before you have started !

Now that the "Keeda" is in your mind better to go and audition and compare it and then buy the one that you like :)) they are definitely no leagues apart..if they are your ears are the ones that will tell you so.


PSBs are perhaps a tad tougher to drive than the MA..but the NAD will work fine with both.

Both the speakers are in the same league and suit the same taste of music...

I've heard the 320 with the B25s and I was really impressed...like Abhi said...PSBs and NADs are meant to gel with each other...so they may be the choice for you...

If possible listen to both of them with the same amp and then decide...

abhi.pani schrieb:

NAD and PSB are strategic partners...because they gel very well. ;)

Abhi,
Initially I didn't get what you meant by 'strategic partners', later my friend found it out for me

Arj schrieb:

well appears you have been caught in the vicious cycle of upgrades even before you have started ! Now that the "Keeda" is in your mind better to go and audition and compare it and then buy the one that you like :)) they are definitely no leagues apart..if they are your ears are the ones that will tell you so. PSBs are perhaps a tad tougher to drive than the MA..but the NAD will work fine with both.

Hey Arj,
Its not about any upgrade 'Keeda' in my mind (reminded me of the worms from The Wall ). I have a budget of 20-30K for the speakers. So my question was more in terms of..like the extra buck you pay for PSB Image B25 over MA Bronze 2, Is it worth it or if its negligible?

Monitor Audio Bronze BR2 Specification
Frequency Response +/- 3dB: 42 Hz - 30 KHz
Sensitivity (1W@1M): 90dB
Nominal Impedance (Ohms): 6
Power Handling R.M.S (W): 100
Recommended Amplifier Requirements R.M.S (W): 30-100 W

PSB Image B25 Monitor Specification
Frequency Range
On Axis @ 0° ±1.5dB 59-20,000 Hz
On Axis @ 0° ±3dB 45-23,000 Hz
Off Axis @ 30° ±1.5dB 59-10,000 Hz
Lf Cutoff -10dB 40 Hz

Sensitivity
(1w (2.83V) @ 1m, IEC-filtered Pink Noise, C-weighted)
Anechoic Chamber 89 dB
Typical Listening Room 91 dB

Impedance
Nominal 6 Ohms
Minimum 4 Ohms

Input Power
(RMS,Clipping < 10% of the Time)
Recommended 10-100 Watts
Program 70 Watts

Looking at the specs can you say if B25s are tougher to drive? Need your technical inputs on this.

soulforged schrieb:

Both the speakers are in the same league and suit the same taste of music... I've heard the 320 with the B25s and I was really impressed...like Abhi said...PSBs and NADs are meant to gel with each other...so they may be the choice for you... If possible listen to both of them with the same amp and then decide...

Soulforged,

I guess you have heard both B25s and B2s with 320. If so, can you elaborate on what differences you could make out?

Cheers!

Voodoo_CHild schrieb:

Looking at the specs can you say if B25s are tougher to drive? Need your technical inputs on this. Cheers!

from this spec we can assume it, based on lower sensitivity and impedance..although this can only be confirmed by the impedance and phase curves as these specs only show one facet.


but again i know it is tougher (Form past experience of another forum member), although this has no impact to you as the BEE is capable of driving both ! (This may have been more important if for example you were using a lower power amp)

I have not heard the B2s with 320 but with. But I have heard the B4s and I liked their response to rock (not so much to jazz). When I heard B2's (with an amp I cannot remember), I found its sound to be much tighter and clearer than the B4s.

B25s are (apparently) one of the speakers recommended by NAD for pairing with 320...tight bass and clear highs that complements 320's slightly warmer disposition.

I would seriously suggest the B25s to anybody who wants to pair them with 320.

but I guess there is a 6K+ difference in their prices and if that is a concern...B2 would do just as well...

BTW...has anybody heard the BR2s?

vodoo, monitor audio bronze b2 was on my list too. heard it, it had a lot of detail but my ears hurt bad after an hour. viren's harmonys give me great detail with no fatigue. it belts out maiden, ac dc, purple brilliantly. guess that's more to do with the valve amp though

stevieboy schrieb:

vodoo, monitor audio bronze b2 was on my list too. heard it, it had a lot of detail but my ears hurt bad after an hour. viren's harmonys give me great detail with no fatigue. it belts out maiden, ac dc, purple brilliantly. guess that's more to do with the valve amp though :)

Monitor audios metal tweeters have been thought of brigt..but I think they sound ok after break in (Of course which has broken in the ear or the speaker is another question altogether )

I feel both are pretty good speakers at this price point. Go by your ears.
MA will be typical british sound.
PSB belongs to the flat measurement camp (nrc - canada)
I feel your ears will be a better judge.

soulforged schrieb:

I have not heard the B2s with 320 but with. But I have heard the B4s and I liked their response to rock (not so much to jazz). When I heard B2's (with an amp I cannot remember), I found its sound to be much tighter and clearer than the B4s. B25s are (apparently) one of the speakers recommended by NAD for pairing with 320...tight bass and clear highs that complements 320's slightly warmer disposition. I would seriously suggest the B25s to anybody who wants to pair them with 320. but I guess there is a 6K+ difference in their prices and if that is a concern...B2 would do just as well... BTW...has anybody heard the BR2s?

The MA Bronze bookshelves I auditioned with my NAD 325 were indeed BR2 and not B2. I agree with you on BR2s (maybe B2s as well though I haven't auditioned them) being quite detailed and tighter than B4s. I felt the same

stevieboy schrieb:

viren's harmonys give me great detail with no fatigue. it belts out maiden, ac dc, purple brilliantly. guess that's more to do with the valve amp though

I used to sell PSB speakers once.The B25 is excellent if you know how to optimise it.However the BR2 is exceptional too.As square wave says hear them both.The only difference I remember is that the PSB had more bass.This could be a double edged sword.If not optimised, you will have boom in the room, conversely if you have a room closer to 2500-2800 cu ft, then the PSB will have a tight LF once dialled in correctly.
Deaf.

deaf schrieb:

I used to sell PSB speakers once.The B25 is excellent if you know how to optimise it.However the BR2 is exceptional too.As square wave says hear them both.The only difference I remember is that the PSB had more bass.This could be a double edged sword.If not optimised, you will have boom in the room, conversely if you have a room closer to 2500-2800 cu ft, then the PSB will have a tight LF once dialled in correctly. Deaf.

Deaf,

Thanks for your inputs. Size of my room is 13' X 12'(how to convert in cu ft. ) though the listening space is a bit lesser. Anyway, its time to go check those B25s...should be auditioning them this weekend. Will update on the experience

Cheers!

Thanks for your inputs. Size of my room is 13' X 12'(how to convert in cu ft. )

Multiply the height of your room....simple

abhi.pani schrieb:

Thanks for your inputs. Size of my room is 13' X 12'(how to convert in cu ft. ) Multiply the height of your room....simple :D

Well..Abhi, lemme give some more details wrt my Room then In fact, in an older post of mine, I had mentioned this..
"Ceiling of the room is not flat. It comes down tapered in 2 different directions from the top before sitting on the 4 walls. This has resulted in adjacent walls of equal height. 2 adjacent walls are of 9' and the other 2 adjacent walls are close to 14' in height." I am just curious now...Should I consider the topmost point as the 'height' to calculate the cu ft? Since the room design doesn't resemble a 'cube', should we look for some other metric based on room shape?