• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Differences between DCM Time Window 3 and TF V6.0?

Shug451

Sansui Low-Powered Amp Guy
Attention DCM fans: Both of these speakers have become available near me for the same money and I'm having a hard time figuring out the differences/similarities between each model. I understand the TF v6.0 is certainly newer, but the TW3 is a classic. But can anyone point out some advantages of either? Thanks very much.
 
Register to hide this ad
I've read a lot about DCM speakers online and owned quite a few pairs now, and there is not as much talk about TF-V series compared to the older ones.

This thread about the TF-V10.0 indicates it was still in the "true" DCM era when Steve Eberbach was still at the company (he left in 1999) https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/dcm-timeframe-v-10-0.568778/

This would also make the 6.0 a proper DCM speaker from the Eberbach age.

According to the above thread, on the TF-Vs the front-facing drivers are all on a single forward face, instead of on two faces angled away from each other like the Time Windows. However, the TF V-10.0 does have rear-firing tweeters on the angled faces on the back. I'd guess the 6.0 is the same basic design but with 6" woofers and maybe only one pair of rear tweeters.

I haven't heard the TW3s, but I have heard the TW1as (great) as well as the Timeframe TF-600s. The TF-600s are probably more similar in design to these - a flat front face, 6" woofers, and rear-firing as well as front-firing tweeters. Those sound amazing. I would have high hopes for the TF-V6.0.

For me, the Time Window 1as are the best I've tried yet in my space with my setup. The stereo image is really impressive even when sitting off-axis. But due to the odd shape of the Time Windows, I'd guess that any pair of TWs will either be fantastic or a bit of a dud, depending on your space. Also, the 1as really came alive with a ton of power feeding them; my cousin who had them before found them a bit lacking in lows and highs in his lower powered setup.

Obviously you have to check out both and report back.
 
Oh, also - I read that the TF-Vs use some kind of plastic coated MDF for the caps instead of finished oak. To me, that is a drawback. Not a big fan of that look and they won't age as well or be as easy to refinish as the oak caps of the classic TWs/TFs.
 
I had a pair of Time Window 3 for almost 20 years. This is spot on:
The stereo image is really impressive even when sitting off-axis

And the ambient/direct face makes the TW speakers really easy to integrate in a room. The TW 3 also has attenuation on the back of each speaker to adjust the relative volume of the two speaker faces and that helps in challenging rooms.

Never heard the later TF-V speakers, so can't comment on them.

In general I'd classify the DCM sound as being full, and more of a "wash" of sound instead of pinpoint imaging that other speakers provide. That's not a criticism, just an observation! I had a chance last year to listen to my old TW speakers for a month and had a lot of fun with them.
 
Oh, also - I read that the TF-Vs use some kind of plastic coated MDF for the caps instead of finished oak. To me, that is a drawback. Not a big fan of that look and they won't age as well or be as easy to refinish as the oak caps of the classic TWs/TFs.

Thanks for the feedback, Porcupine. Yes, it does look like the TF-Vs use MDF for the caps. Definitely not as nice as the oak on the TW. I'm a little concerned about using these speakers in my space, as one of them needs to be somewhat in a corner. (Probably 18 inches from the back wall and 8 inches from the side wall.)
 
I had a pair of Time Window 3 for almost 20 years. This is spot on:


And the ambient/direct face makes the TW speakers really easy to integrate in a room. The TW 3 also has attenuation on the back of each speaker to adjust the relative volume of the two speaker faces and that helps in challenging rooms.

Never heard the later TF-V speakers, so can't comment on them.

In general I'd classify the DCM sound as being full, and more of a "wash" of sound instead of pinpoint imaging that other speakers provide. That's not a criticism, just an observation! I had a chance last year to listen to my old TW speakers for a month and had a lot of fun with them.


Thanks, DCMFan. So you haven't found placement to be an issue with the TW? How far off the wall do you place them? I didn't realize the TW3 has attenuation controls on the back. Yes, that should help in my challenging room.
 
Thanks, DCMFan. So you haven't found placement to be an issue with the TW? How far off the wall do you place them? I didn't realize the TW3 has attenuation controls on the back. Yes, that should help in my challenging room.

The TW 3 manual is in post # 4 here:
https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/dcm-timewindow-3-manual.613123/

Distance from the wall behind the speakers affects bass response. I liked mine anywhere from 18 to 30 inches into the room, but every room is different.

For imaging, the best setup was to get the distance from the sidewalls to speaker as symmetrical as possible.

Good luck! Hope this helps!
 
The TW 3 manual is in post # 4 here:
https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/dcm-timewindow-3-manual.613123/

Distance from the wall behind the speakers affects bass response. I liked mine anywhere from 18 to 30 inches into the room, but every room is different.

For imaging, the best setup was to get the distance from the sidewalls to speaker as symmetrical as possible.

Good luck! Hope this helps!

Excellent! Thanks. I'm leaning toward picking up the TW3.
 
Back
Top Bottom