Wolfmother
Member
I just joind audiokarma yesterday and I am wondering what the difference between the HPM 150's and the HPM 1500's. Is it only that the 150 is 125W and the 1500 is 250W? I currently own a pair of HPM 100's. Thanks a lot!
Hpm-150 & Hpm-1500
- Thread starter Wolfmother
- Start date
Dr. Strangelove
Super Member
The biggest difference is that the HPM-1500 speaker is two parts, one on top of the other, for ease of shipping.
Doc
http://audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21382
http://audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21202
Doc
http://audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21382
http://audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21202
Wolfmother
Member
thanks, if you have listened to both, is there a pair you would recommend, if there is even a diffference between the two
Wolfmother
Member
I have enough speakers for now, I'm just wondering so I can keep a lookout over the coming years
Last edited by a moderator:
Wolfmother
Member
how do the 1100's compare?
toymastertn
Bottle Heads Forever
The Hpm 150 Were Designed By Lansing And Thet Are Wonderfull I Ran Them With The Spec 2 Amp For 25 Years Hard Rock And Roll Now My Ears Must Be Damaged Or I Am Becoming Like Flyfisherman (stuck Up) I Now Use Tube At A Lot Lower Volume With More Efficent Speakers (sound A Lot Better To Me In My Old Age But Still Wont Part With The 150s)
Are you talking about the 100w or the 200w HPM 100 ? What was the difference ? What were you powering them with ? :saywhat:
From what I've read and researched on the differences, there isn't any other than marketing. Both versions use the 30-733D woofer, the mids are both 10-721 (there's an a, b, & c), the tweeters are both 45-711 (711a for '75 & 711b for '78) and the super tweeters are the same HP-015b. I think it's the crossovers points that were altered some, too. IIRC.
Susurus
Resolution:6.62×10^-34
A little more detail.
First, the 1500 is ported in the BACK :yes:, 150 in the FRONT. :sigh:
The 150 is a few pounds heavier. Both are heavier but not as deep as the 100. The 1500 is only 12.5" deep, but taller. 150 is 16.5" deep.
Supertweeters:
Both have the top-mounted, clear stacked plates which create horn-loaded openings with nice ultrawide circular distrib pattern and go 8500-40KHz, which cats hear fine (the 100 and 1100's are front-baffle mounted). The 1100 has two and says up to 50KHz. Cats can't hear that high; some dogs can. And bats. :bat:
Handling is listed as 125WPC and 250WPC peak in the SM but in the brochures it says 50-300.
HPM-100 - - 100/200 wpc, 30-25,000 Hz , 26.7 kg, 1200??/4000/12000 xover
HPM-1100 - range(brochure): 50-300 wpc, 25-50,000 Hz, 31,8 Kg, 750/2600/8500 xover
HPM-150 -- 125/250 wpc, 25-40,000 Hz, 37.3 Kg, 750/2600/8500 xover
HPM-1500 - range(brochure): 50-300 wpc, 125/250peak(SM) 25-40,000 Hz, 36.5 kg, 800/2600/8500 xover
HPM-200 - Different animal. 5-way, 2 separately enclosed woofers, 2 HPM drivers: high tweet and supertweet.
200 wpc, 30-25,000 Hz, 124 lb, 150/ 700/ 2000/ 5000 xover
-
Reading the SM shows FR graphs for both the 150 and the 1500. Both show that "love it or hate it" midbass 60Hz hump--like the 80Hz hump that makes HPM-100's a West Coast rock speaker--and a mismatch for most non-SX Pioneer receivers.
The hump is less for the HPM-1500, and it's a bit smoother highter up too; at about 9K and 20K the 150 has more peakies.
Next post: listening.
First, the 1500 is ported in the BACK :yes:, 150 in the FRONT. :sigh:
The 150 is a few pounds heavier. Both are heavier but not as deep as the 100. The 1500 is only 12.5" deep, but taller. 150 is 16.5" deep.
Supertweeters:
Both have the top-mounted, clear stacked plates which create horn-loaded openings with nice ultrawide circular distrib pattern and go 8500-40KHz, which cats hear fine (the 100 and 1100's are front-baffle mounted). The 1100 has two and says up to 50KHz. Cats can't hear that high; some dogs can. And bats. :bat:
Handling is listed as 125WPC and 250WPC peak in the SM but in the brochures it says 50-300.
HPM-100 - - 100/200 wpc, 30-25,000 Hz , 26.7 kg, 1200??/4000/12000 xover
HPM-1100 - range(brochure): 50-300 wpc, 25-50,000 Hz, 31,8 Kg, 750/2600/8500 xover
HPM-150 -- 125/250 wpc, 25-40,000 Hz, 37.3 Kg, 750/2600/8500 xover
HPM-1500 - range(brochure): 50-300 wpc, 125/250peak(SM) 25-40,000 Hz, 36.5 kg, 800/2600/8500 xover
HPM-200 - Different animal. 5-way, 2 separately enclosed woofers, 2 HPM drivers: high tweet and supertweet.
200 wpc, 30-25,000 Hz, 124 lb, 150/ 700/ 2000/ 5000 xover
-
Reading the SM shows FR graphs for both the 150 and the 1500. Both show that "love it or hate it" midbass 60Hz hump--like the 80Hz hump that makes HPM-100's a West Coast rock speaker--and a mismatch for most non-SX Pioneer receivers.
The hump is less for the HPM-1500, and it's a bit smoother highter up too; at about 9K and 20K the 150 has more peakies.
Next post: listening.
Last edited:
Susurus
Resolution:6.62×10^-34
Okay, that was a lot more detail. 
Metal badges!
Glass tops! :sadwave: No, it's not a Jubal.
MSRP for these models could have changed, but the 100 was under 400 and the others were 500 - 550. Each?
HPM-100 vs. 1500
The 1500 highs are more airy in this short/wide room; very enjoyable, no cutting. Lighter but also seem more robust. Kieth Moon's cymbals? Yep, all there. Fast as E-stats? No. But head in vice? No! :thmbsp:
Turn the woofs, mids, and dome tweeters off, and the 1500 supertweets are clearly and easily heard, with undertones low enough to get much of your sound. 6dB crossover. The 100's supertweets can be heard through a tube to your ear that way, but it's not obvious like the 1500.
Listening caveat #1: separated by 2 months, not A/B. Same room and Concept 16.5 & SX-1250 used. B and C drivers on the 100's. C's on 1500.
Listening caveat #2:
I am unashamedly biased; I like E-stats, Maggies, and Dahlquists. Incredibly high quality drivers, like SpeakerLabs and NS-1000Ms overcome that and get to stay. Infinite baffle, like Bozaks too. I just don't usually like boxes or ports; front ports especially (not a fan of small JBLs). Infinite baffle, like Bozaks, preserve tonal balance. They stay too.
Bass: no way to compare til I get foams. Had the bass sections disconnected and lying on their backs to keep VCs from rubbing. But clearly the bass has that quick, dynamic ability. Not true like NS-1000M but the 'hump' makes it seem lower.
All grill covers off.
These 1500's are a significant improvement over the 100's. The stacked plates are a more complete realization of the HPM driver concept, circular distribution instead of the small barrel. Of course they cost more and are harder to find...
Cabinets are a disappointment. HPM-100's construction is superior in every way. Section connections will be modified from the silly bookshelf push/twist plugs to T-nuts. There's a little angle bracing in the cabs but could be more. And a veneer makover, including the icky bare back. Some places on the web say the sides are vinyl but mine are walnut veneered.
Xovers could get some new non-inductive resistors and caps too but that's down the road.
And whip up a set of risers/stands. The diagram in the SM shows those clearly, should be easy. I'm happy to have all the grills intact and tempered glass tops...!
Thanks Dr. Strangelove for your scans: http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=76378
Metal badges!
Glass tops! :sadwave: No, it's not a Jubal.
MSRP for these models could have changed, but the 100 was under 400 and the others were 500 - 550. Each?
HPM-100 vs. 1500
The 1500 highs are more airy in this short/wide room; very enjoyable, no cutting. Lighter but also seem more robust. Kieth Moon's cymbals? Yep, all there. Fast as E-stats? No. But head in vice? No! :thmbsp:
Turn the woofs, mids, and dome tweeters off, and the 1500 supertweets are clearly and easily heard, with undertones low enough to get much of your sound. 6dB crossover. The 100's supertweets can be heard through a tube to your ear that way, but it's not obvious like the 1500.
Listening caveat #1: separated by 2 months, not A/B. Same room and Concept 16.5 & SX-1250 used. B and C drivers on the 100's. C's on 1500.
Listening caveat #2:
I am unashamedly biased; I like E-stats, Maggies, and Dahlquists. Incredibly high quality drivers, like SpeakerLabs and NS-1000Ms overcome that and get to stay. Infinite baffle, like Bozaks too. I just don't usually like boxes or ports; front ports especially (not a fan of small JBLs). Infinite baffle, like Bozaks, preserve tonal balance. They stay too.
Bass: no way to compare til I get foams. Had the bass sections disconnected and lying on their backs to keep VCs from rubbing. But clearly the bass has that quick, dynamic ability. Not true like NS-1000M but the 'hump' makes it seem lower.
All grill covers off.
These 1500's are a significant improvement over the 100's. The stacked plates are a more complete realization of the HPM driver concept, circular distribution instead of the small barrel. Of course they cost more and are harder to find...
Cabinets are a disappointment. HPM-100's construction is superior in every way. Section connections will be modified from the silly bookshelf push/twist plugs to T-nuts. There's a little angle bracing in the cabs but could be more. And a veneer makover, including the icky bare back. Some places on the web say the sides are vinyl but mine are walnut veneered.
Xovers could get some new non-inductive resistors and caps too but that's down the road.
And whip up a set of risers/stands. The diagram in the SM shows those clearly, should be easy. I'm happy to have all the grills intact and tempered glass tops...!
Thanks Dr. Strangelove for your scans: http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=76378
Last edited:
Susurus
Resolution:6.62×10^-34
Do these stacked-plate HPM drivers belong with the exotics like Heils? I believe they can knock at that door.
Not as mid to upper range drivers, nor as full-range like OHM-Walsh. But there's high output, low distortion HF integrated with the other drivers that AMT Heils never quite got. (Unless the TL tower cabs did; not heard those yet.) 2-way AMT Heils never had a cast woofer as good as the HPM woofers though.
Guess I should try these on top of my tweeter-less ESS nines?
The earlier ESS with TL/KEFs? Someday I'll get to hear those.
Last edited:
Susurus
Resolution:6.62×10^-34
I don't know. Never seen them IRL.
This thread comparing 5 vintage star speakers included it, not the 1500. Why? Could be the 1500 was too new?
Ed in Tx
Super Member
Definitely a connection there, but actually designed by Bart Locanthi, ex-Engineer for JBL who quit them, then went to work for Pioneer in mid-70s.
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
Susurus: Great posts and insight on the big Pioneer HPM's. Your observation about HPM's being a mismatch for anything except Pioneer SX receivers is spot on. I have always suspected the SX receivers were tuned for the HPM's and not the other way around. I suppose Pioneer gave Mr. Locanthi a free hand in designing the HPM's which resulted in a speaker much like the L-100 with paper paper mids and tweeters. While bright sounding paper drivers were necessary for early SS that tended to have sluggish amp sections, as SS designs became faster and more accurate, paper cones resulted in very bright sound. Pioneer had to dumb down the SX line and also the SPEC 2 amp in order to make the family sound good. I will concede that SX receivers and HPM speakers do sound good together and the market definitely agreed. However, for the same reason I am philosophically opposed to tone controls, I do not think tuning an amp for a speaker with non-linear frequency response is the right way to go. When Pioneer receivers or HPM speakers are paired with other brands, the sound is often less than satisfying.
Ed in Tx
Super Member
Huh??? In my 4 years ('77-81) as an employee and technician for Pioneer, I never observed anything other than a flat response across the audio bandwidth and beyond to the limits, in any amplifier or receiver, using the Sound Technology audio analyzer and BPI load box on my bench. Reviewers would have been all over Pioneer for deviating from a flat response. BTW my 2 Spec-4s drive 4 HPM-150s quite well!
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
All due respect to your experience, I've owned many SX receivers and almost the complete line of SPEC amps at one time or another. I've also owned multiple pairs of HPM-100's, HPM-60's, and HPM-40's. After trying many combos with other brands I have concluded that staying within the family gives the best results, especially with the speakers. I've played the amps on non-Pioneer speakers and the notable lack of dynamics becomes aparent. This was especially noticeable with the SX-1980, SX-1250, and the SPEC 2. The SPEC 4 was more dynamic and IMO the best Pioneer until the M-25 came along.
Test results always interest me. Given a test tone, most amps do very well and given enough time to stabilize, the distortion is neglible. However, introduce a dynamic waveform like a square wave and that shows an amp's DF and slew rate which has a strong correlation to accuracy. Notice I did not use the term quality, which IMO is a subjective term. While I have not seen a Pioneer on the scope, I have seen top performers and compared the sound. Pioneers are duller and less dynamic in the highs and lows. They sound slow and ponderous, which IMO is compensated for by the port, lose woofers, and bright paper tweeters of the HPM's.
I have my HPM-150's hooked up to a Kenwood KR-7600 at the moment and I can not complain about them one bit. I prefer the HPM-150's over many other speakers that I have either tried or heard.
I kept the HPM-150 over the Infinity Kappa 7, JBL L166, Klipsch KG4.
The HPM-150 is a totally different animal then the HPM-100. Obvioulsy the box has a lot to do with it, but after checking out my crossover, I am thinking about trying to copy it to put n a pair of HPM-100's I have to see if it will smooth them out some for me.
Any listening test depends on the person listening, but for me, the HPM-150 is really hard to beat in it's price range.
That being said, I also have a pair of magnepan MG-IIc's that will be my main speakers, so I do not think I am one who enjoys booming bass, but accurate bass.
I give the Pioneer HPM-150 a BIG thumbs up myself.
I kept the HPM-150 over the Infinity Kappa 7, JBL L166, Klipsch KG4.
The HPM-150 is a totally different animal then the HPM-100. Obvioulsy the box has a lot to do with it, but after checking out my crossover, I am thinking about trying to copy it to put n a pair of HPM-100's I have to see if it will smooth them out some for me.
Any listening test depends on the person listening, but for me, the HPM-150 is really hard to beat in it's price range.
That being said, I also have a pair of magnepan MG-IIc's that will be my main speakers, so I do not think I am one who enjoys booming bass, but accurate bass.
I give the Pioneer HPM-150 a BIG thumbs up myself.
redd6054
Active Member
I have my HPM 150's hooked up to a Yamaha MX-1000U amplifier with a yamaha C-2 preamp being fed by a pioneer elite CD player. Trust me when I say the 150's are not slow and muddy, The Yamaha amp is a fast responce, newer piece (250 watts RMS) that gives the HPM's a deeeeeeeep bass that are not slow, to my ears anyway. I also have an SX 838 driving celestions and they sound really good. The 838 has been recapped though. Maybe my expereince is still got a way to go , I can't agree with SX receivers only sounding good with HPM's or vice-versa.
Last edited:
