Pioneer HPM-100 -- All Opinions Welcome!

[Socal Sam]

The Pioneer HPM-100 speaker was a best seller and it is easy to see the showroom appeal. They are visually very appealing. Big heavy cabinets with beautiful wood veneer. Substantial drivers including a cast basket woofer. And the promise of technology with the ribbon super tweeter. Play them in the sound room and you get big bass and sharp treble, just the thing to hook impressionable teens! No question, the HPM-100 is loads of fun but are they audiophile?

Once home, the picture was not so good. Mid range is drowned out and forces me to use the tone controls to tame the bass and treble. Plugging the port with a hand towel goes some way towards achieving neutrality. However, no matter what I do, the sound never settles down and never becomes easy to listen to. In fact, I can't listen them for more than 30 minutes before ear fatigue sets in.

[dingus]

my experience with this speaker is limited, but your scenario sounds familiar. i've heard HPM 100's at their worst and what i think has to be their very best.

the former was a miserable experience chronicled here (http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59256), no matter what was tried, there was no good sound to be had from this speaker. the latter was with this system (http://www.sound-thinking.org/index.php?showtopic=869) and the HPM 100's sounded simply stellar, no low end bloat, no high end shriek and no mid suck out. the sound was balanced, dynamic and was surprisingly refined.

the difference between the two is attention to detail and proper execution. in the first go-round we didnt do any eq'ing other than making use of the speaker and receiver tone controls. in the second case, the system is eq'ed to the room via spectrum analysis and the Pioneer SG-50 graphic equalizer. Mark W. goes into some more detail in this post. (http://www.sound-thinking.org/index.php?showtopic=2436&view=findpost&p=27452)

basically the HPM 100 is a speaker that needs to be properly eq'ed in order to sound right (to my ear), but when done right it sounds very good.

[hakka26]

I have a set because they were cheap. Presently hooked up to a Pioneer SX-1250. I can listen to them for extended periods. I did some selling and horse trading with a person that was a manager of stereo store in the '70s. We discussed the JBL L100. He had spoken with someone at JBL and his take was that, using the pots, you turn off the highs then slowly turn the knob until you the tweeter just begins to produce. Apparently, he felt that is all the highs you need. Since the same designer did the HPM-100 I tried this with both and it seems to work for me.

[stuwee]

I never cared for the Pioneers but, maybe I never heard them set up properly in the room and EQ'd. Then again I never cared for a speaker that really needed an EQ to sound decent. I hope I didn't step on any toes. I mean isn't using the room properly just like using an EQ anyway?? If so then my 'Logans are a crappy design. So I'll shup up.

Hey Hakka, I'd forgotten you liked Ann Margret. check out some heirloom pics I have in my "Shrine room"

Craig

[wrayman]

We discussed the JBL L100. He had spoken with someone at JBL and his take was that, using the pots, you turn off the highs then slowly turn the knob until you the tweeter just begins to produce. Apparently, he felt that is all the highs you need. Since the same designer did the HPM-100 I tried this with both and it seems to work for me.

That's exactly what I did with mine to be able to enjoy them. After that, I enjoyed them immensely. Found them to be an excellent jazz speaker, as well as rock.

There are a lot of divided opinions on this speaker out there. Comments on brightness etc abound. Judicious use of the pots might be the answer for some. If they are there, why not use 'em if needed ? :)

[Fast Forward]

I own a pair had them for about a year I love them I set the speaker control at about 1/2 way to bring out a little mid range ,,I set the tone controls on my Pre-amp, Sansui AU-999 at flat,, I like them ,,but next to Bose there probably the most talked ,, loved and hated speaker out there

[BroonsBane]

I had my pair for about 1 1/2 years. No matter the amplification (and there was a great deal of variety there) I couldn't listen to them. Like Sam I suffered fatigue and even messing with the adjustments didn't get me anywhere. I was glad to move them along.

[dingus]

... I never cared for a speaker that really needed an EQ to sound decent ...

Mark W's that i referenced in my second example sounded quite a bit better than decent, about a 180 from the sound in my first example.

[stuwee]

Mark W's that i referenced in my second example sounded quite a bit better than decent, about a 180 from the sound in my first example.

Ok, fair enough then, I knew my comment could be taken many ways, to be general, alot of folks think Bose 901 when they think about a speaker that needs an EQ, especially in the bass department, they forget Infinity's brilliant R.A.B.O.S. system on the MTS's from the late '90's. I've used parametrics sparingly to adjust but, only by ear, not perfect I know, presets are a Godsend when you share a house with another set of ears that don't agree with your own.

[Scorpion8]

Like stuwee, I never cared for Pioneer speakers. Panasonic Thrusters, maybe (:D), but I didn't go for speakers made by a "non-speaker" company. All my speakers have been thru companies that did speakers as their primary business: Infinity, Boston Acoustics, AR, Paradigm, .... I thought the buddies who had them set up properly had a good set of rock n' roll noise makers, but not the clarity of a properly established "real" speaker. IMHO.

[hakka26]

All my speakers have been thru companies that did speakers as their primary business: Infinity, Boston Acoustics, AR, Paradigm, .. IMHO.

Yes, but let us not forget that Pioneer gave free rein to the JBL engineer who designed the L100 (talk about a speaker that gets flamed) and with my limited knowledge, I don't think Pioneer has done much of anything beyond the long gone HPM line. FYI the HPM 100's are nowhere near my favorites.

Ooh Stuwee I'm jealous. She sure had the All-American looks for a Swede.*hearts*

[elroy]

when we did our review of a set of hpm 100's on ak, which btw was our ultimate demise on that site.

dingus, charivari, kfa888 listened to a 3 different speakers, and I personally didnt care for them, at all, the were bad, real bad, but after the fact, we didnt have them even close toe being positioned correctly, so my review was probably flawed.

I do think they definetely have the "cool factor" goin for them.

elroy

[Socal Sam]

when we did our review of a set of hpm 100's on ak, which btw was our ultimate demise on that site. elroy
Hmmm, that makes me very curious.

dingus, charivari, kfa888 listened to a 3 different speakers, and I personally didnt care for them, at all, the were bad, real bad, but after the fact, we didnt have them even close toe being positioned correctly, so my review was probably flawed.

I do think they definetely have the "cool factor" goin for them.

elroy
True, placement and room is key. I've found the HPM-100's work better in a big room with plenty of breathing space for placement away from walls and reflective surfaces. Room should be realtively dead as well. Stands make a huge difference.

[Socal Sam]

That's exactly what I did with mine to be able to enjoy them. After that, I enjoyed them immensely. Found them to be an excellent jazz speaker, as well as rock.

There are a lot of divided opinions on this speaker out there. Comments on brightness etc abound. Judicious use of the pots might be the answer for some. If they are there, why not use 'em if needed ? :)

Jazz and Rock! The HPM-100 needed too much "judicious use of the pots" and that was the problem. However, I could better tolerate the results.

[BroonsBane]

when we did our review of a set of hpm 100's on ak, which btw was our ultimate demise on that site.


You've got to be freaking kidding...no, I guess you're not.

[itlldue]

I have HPM 100s
I have Klipsch KG4s
I have Klipsch Cornwalls
I like 'em all
So there!

[MacGyver]

when we did our review of a set of hpm 100's on ak, which btw was our ultimate demise on that site.


no way!! you serious?!?! MAN, AK *IS* a communist principality!!!!:mad: anyway, people shouldn't be so hard on PIONEER. they *MAY* not have made the absolute finest loudspeakers in history, but they did in fact produce many fine, undisputibly high-quality examples...

[Socal Sam]

no way!! you serious?!?! MAN, AK *IS* a communist principality!!!!:mad: anyway, people shouldn't be so hard on PIONEER. they *MAY* not have made the absolute finest loudspeakers in history, but they did in fact produce many fine, undisputibly high-quality examples...

Pioneer was the volume leader back in the day but they were less concerned with sound than with maintaining their sales lead.

[MacGyver]

Pioneer was the volume leader back in the day but they were less concerned with sound than with maintaining their sales lead.


actually, ever since the mid-'70s, PIONEER has seemed to be the second-place leader in market share. right behind SONY. both companies had their quality, and their crap. still, PIONEER did produce some real winners thoroughout 1975/1992 that gave the "big-S" and everyone under them a real run for their money, and are still beyond reproach, at least as far as physical construction and styling are concerned. quality designs unparelleled by anything the company has produced since...

[dingus]

Pioneer did make some quality speakers, the S-1010 for example is a very good and refined sounding speaker, without having to tune and tweak like is necessary with the HPM-100.

[BroonsBane]

Pioneer did make some quality speakers, the S-1010 for example is a very good and refined sounding speaker, without having to tune and tweak like is necessary with the HPM-100.

Got a pic of those dingus?

[dingus]

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k304/SoundThinking/Rarities/S1010.jpg

[BroonsBane]

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k304/SoundThinking/Rarities/S1010.jpg

Cool, thanks.
Were the kids free or did buyers have to pay extra? :-?

[dingus]

those are Kelly's (aka Superfly@ST, kfa888@AK) before he repaired the drivers. i got to listen to them when they were fully operational and was quite impressed. they sounded great on ss and simply wonderful with a super t-amp.

[BroonsBane]

Those look really nice. I haven't had much luck with the two pair of Pio speakers I've owned but maybe those are a step in a different direction.

[dingus]

definitely! very balanced, smooth and refined. i'm not saying they are equivalent, but i would call them Pioneers answer to the Yamaha NS-1000.

[Socal Sam]

actually, ever since the mid-'70s, PIONEER has seemed to be the second-place leader in market share. right behind SONY. both companies had their quality, and their crap. still, PIONEER did produce some real winners thoroughout 1975/1992 that gave the "big-S" and everyone under them a real run for their money, and are still beyond reproach, at least as far as physical construction and styling are concerned. quality designs unparelleled by anything the company has produced since...

I should have narrowed my comments to stereo gear and speakers in the late seventies silver era. The SX line outsold the STR line by a bunch, at least in the U.S. Include 1980-1992, and you include some truly dreadful Sony audio offerings (aside from some early ES models and the SS-Mx series speakers).

[Socal Sam]

definitely! very balanced, smooth and refined. i'm not saying they are equivalent, but i would call them Pioneers answer to the Yamaha NS-1000.

S-1010? Hmmmm, very interesting.

[MacGyver]

I should have narrowed my comments to stereo gear and speakers in the late seventies silver era. The SX line outsold the STR line by a bunch, at least in the U.S. Include 1980-1992, and you include some truly dreadful Sony audio offerings (aside from some early ES models and the SS-Mx series speakers).

then i guess it was the mid/late 80s when SONY's U.S. market share was unparelelled. correct me if i am in error, but i am of the impression that at least from 1988/1992, it seemed that PIONEER offered a range of receivers running the $300/1300 price range, each with respectable build quality and power output for their price point, that only SONY's higher-priced mid to high-range ES models could match...

[Socal Sam]

There are only a handful of Pioneer and Sony pieces that interest me that were made in the Eighties. The Pioneer M-25 power amp (don't know the matching preamp or tuner model numbers) is one. Sony made a bunch of very nice ES single disk players, my favorite being either the CDP-X707ES or maybe the CDP-X77ES. I also like the TA-E77ESD preamp, TA-N77ES power amp, and the TA-N80ES. Also, the matching tuner is nice. The only Sony or Pioneer receiver I like is the STR-GX10ES. So, it is not exactly a wasteland but there really isn't much I like.

[MacGyver]

There are only a handful of Pioneer and Sony pieces that interest me that were made in the Eighties. The Pioneer M-25 power amp (don't know the matching preamp or tuner model numbers) is one. Sony made a bunch of very nice ES single disk players, my favorite being either the CDP-X707ES or maybe the CDP-X77ES. I also like the TA-E77ESD preamp, TA-N77ES power amp, and the TA-N80ES. Also, the matching tuner is nice. The only Sony or Pioneer receiver I like is the STR-GX10ES. So, it is not exactly a wasteland but there really isn't much I like.


the PIO VSX-D1S ain't half bad if you give her a chance...

[imasoundhound]

sorry for ressurecting an old thread, but i have a pair of hpm 100's. one of them is a 100 watter, the other a 200 watter (i can't hear any difference). i gave 20 bucks for the pair, and had to buy one woofer.

they are definitely not my favorite pair of speakers. my klipsch kg-4.2's take that position, followed closely by the original advents, then the jbl 4311b's.

on the other hand, the hpm's beat the infinity sm-120's by a good bit, as well as my yamaha ns-5's, realistic optimus 1b's, and some i don't have any more (cerwin vega e-312's, dlk 1.5's, polk monitor 7c's, and several others).

i listen almost exclusively to classic rock and blues.

i have to concur with the general consensus. the bass is kinda boomy and the highs are a little harsh. that being said, with proper placement and a little tweaking on the level control pots, they can sound darned good, particulary with rock and roll.

all in all, you can listen to a lot worse sounding speaker.

just my two cent's worth.