Monitor Audio Silver 100 vs 200 vs 300

Mainah904

Standard Member
Hi all! I want to first apologize for the lengthy post. I am a bit of a planner (read: overthinker), and have been testing Monitor Audio Silver (6g) speakers. I currently have the Silver 100, c150, and c350. I have pretty much settled on the c350 as my center channel, and like how the 100s sound. I am within my 60 day demo window for all of the speakers currently.

My dilemma is that I will be moving into my new house this August, and it's a slightly larger space where the speakers will be set up, but it mostly comes down to the change in orientation of the rooms. My current room is a sideways rectangle (18' deep x 25' wide). The right half (18' deep x 13' wide x 9' ceilings) is my living room, and the left half is kitchen/dining. I sit about 10' from the speakers/TV.

In my new living area, it is a long rectangle (28' deep x 18' wide), and the front half (15' deep x 18' wide x 9' ceilings) will be the living room, and behind it is the kitchen. I know that my normal viewing/listening distance will be the same, but because there won't be a rear wall so close for sound to bounce off, will the Silver 100s likely still fill the space?

My viewing/listening habits are about 70/30 Movies/Music (though I have been listening to music more since I have been testing). I will be using a subwoofer pretty much always, even with music (2.1 or 5.1 multi-channel). I know it's impossible for me to predict how they will sound in the new room, which is why I am asking the community who either own, or have owned/tested Monitor Silver 100/200/300 speakers in similar spaces. I have found plenty of reviews for each speaker on their own, but I haven't found one that compares them against each other. I know that the 200 is a small tower in a 2.5-way config, but it uses smaller woofers than the 100, so wouldn't the sound be less "full"? Or by using an 80Hz crossover on my receiver, would the playing field be relatively equal because of the sub? Aside from aesthetics and a slight bump in sensitivity, would I really see any gain going from the Silver 100 to Silver 200?

I know what I tell myself what I want, which is the Silver 300 because it's a 3-way tower, and I wouldn't have to wonder at all if it would fill the room. In all reality though, I am wondering if I really need them, if the 100s are going to be more than capable, especially if I have all 5 channels going at once (rears will be in-wall Monitor CP-WT380 most likely). Then there is the obvious cost difference, the 300s being about $1100 more than I spent on the 100s.

At this point, I would say that my options are: 1) Be happy with the Silver 100s and hope that they fill the space in the new house, knowing that if they don't, I can sell them and take a hit on the upgrade charge. 2) Return the 100s now, and get the 200s if the feedback is positive because they are not much more than the 100s; or 3) Return the 100s, wait until I move in, and then demo speakers, knowing that I would end up with 7g fronts, mismatching the 6g c350. (Anyone with OCD can appreciate that last part).

For those of you who made it through all of that, I applaud you, and thank you for your time!
 

famasfilms

Banned
, knowing that I would end up with 7g fronts, mismatching the 6g c350. (Anyone with OCD can appreciate that last part).

I recently got the Silver 500 7g fronts for half RRP via Ebay. I then had to upgrade my centre, but didn't want to pay £600 for the 7g centre, so I got the 350c for £350.

My understanding is that the 6g is slightly smaller all round, so having "matching" gen wasn't worth an extra £250. I suspect that MA reduced the 6g slightly because the 7g is so big.
 

DavidT

Well-known Member
I recently got the Silver 500 7g fronts for half RRP via Ebay. I then had to upgrade my centre, but didn't want to pay £600 for the 7g centre, so I got the 350c for £350.

My understanding is that the 6g is slightly smaller all round, so having "matching" gen wasn't worth an extra £250. I suspect that MA reduced the 6g slightly because the 7g is so big.
The 6g C350 is bigger than the 7g C250.
 

Kapkirk

Active Member
Return the 100's and buy the 300's, You wont get a better time to get them new as they are heavily discounted at the moment. As good as the 100's are I think you might regret not getting the 300's now. The 200''s are the weakest of all 3, thin sounding and a little unbalanced compared to the 100 and 300'S.
 

Mainah904

Standard Member
Unfortunately, I can't swing the $1100 difference in price between the Silver 100 and Silver 300 right now, as tempting as it is. Regardless of what I get, they will either be paired with a 12" SVS sealed sub, or a RSL Speedwoofer sub (or ultimately two of the same). Since time is on my side, I'm tempted to return the 100s and wait to grab a pair of 7g speakers when I find an open box deal. At least I'll have the c350, despite it being cabinet unfriendly.
 

Kapkirk

Active Member
Arh that's a shame, they can be had for £749 in the uk about $1000, I have seen them even cheaper in clearance sales. The 7G are considerably more expensive. The c350 is a great center speaker.
 

Mainah904

Standard Member
The cheapest I have been able to find here stateside is $1800 plus shipping, and they were a demo pair. I wish they had waited until later in 2022 to refresh! 🤣
 

GrazzaB

Distinguished Member
I’ve had both the 200s and the 300s. Actually I think the 200s are superb as slim floorstanders, but like others here I got a great deal on a pair of 6G 300s (just over £700) and they’re just fantastic with the C350 as a front three. Then I run Silver FX for surround and Silver 50s for back surround. I don’t think you’d be unhappy with any of your choices, but as recommended by others the 300s are probably the top choice IMO. Also you can happily run the 300s without a sub for two channel music if your AVR has that mode (or you could use a stereo amp with HT bypass).
 

Marshall Mike

Well-known Member
@Mainah904 FWIW, my advice would be to base your decision on the aesthetics between the stand mount 100 and the floorstanding 300.

In real world listening, you will hear very little difference between them, if any, once the sub and room correction is factored in. The reason for choosing floorstanders is bass extension due to the larger cabinet size, and remember both speakers from the same range share the same drivers and tweeters for the mids and treble.

As you pointed out, the 300’s are considerably more expensive, money you would be spending on deeper bass which your going to crossover to your sub and then eq away.

That money would be better spent on amplification, subs etc.

I had a pair of silver 8 floorstanders and changed them out for Gold 100 stand mounts and I did not lose anything from the front soundstage in terms of volume at my listening position, but I gained in SQ with smoother treble.
 

Mainah904

Standard Member
@Mainah904 FWIW, my advice would be to base your decision on the aesthetics between the stand mount 100 and the floorstanding 300.

In real world listening, you will hear very little difference between them, if any, once the sub and room correction is factored in. The reason for choosing floorstanders is bass extension due to the larger cabinet size, and remember both speakers from the same range share the same drivers and tweeters for the mids and treble.

As you pointed out, the 300’s are considerably more expensive, money you would be spending on deeper bass which your going to crossover to your sub and then eq away.

That money would be better spent on amplification, subs etc.

I had a pair of silver 8 floorstanders and changed them out for Gold 100 stand mounts and I did not lose anything from the front soundstage in terms of volume at my listening position, but I gained in SQ with smoother treble.
In your opinion, would there be any benefit to moving up to the Silver 200 due to the 2 1/2 way design? I know the drivers are much smaller, but that should make them a bit more responsive, right?
 

Marshall Mike

Well-known Member
In your opinion, would there be any benefit to moving up to the Silver 200 due to the 2 1/2 way design? I know the drivers are much smaller, but that should make them a bit more responsive, right?
Do you think your ears would be able to tell the difference?

I'm trying to manage your expectations of changing from stand mounts to floor standers from the same product range within an AV set up.

If you were running a 2.0 stereo set up and found you required more bass or volume, then by all means swap the 100's for floor standing 200/300's.

When a subwoofer comes into play though for 2.1 or 5.1 listening, any gains brought about by the larger floor standers cabinet are quickly lost as the AVR sends all bass, typically 80hz and below, to the sub. After room correction has been applied you will be hard pressed to realistically tell the difference between the two as the mids and highs are coming from the same product range and technology. Remember, the introduction of the sub effectively turns your system into a 3 way design.

If you have your heart set on floor standers, by all means go for it. They are gorgeous to look at and its your money after all. I just don't think its fair to make you think there will be an improvement in SQ.

If you really wanted to improve SQ, invest the money instead in better amplification and/or subs.
 

ShanePJ

Distinguished Member
AVForums Sponsor
If you can accommodate the 300's then these are the sweet spot in the range as the small mid-range really give them then edge over all the other speakers in the silver range in my own opinion.

And if you can fit the 100's and have the budget for the 300's then that answers that question especially when you look at the 100 and 200 and see how far back that design flows in the silver range.

So, if your after both music and movies, then its the 300's, if its film, I'd say the 200 as these do loose a little definition in the musical feel and kind of always did even against the 8's whereas the 100 used to sound like a small 8 until it was replaced by the 300. I have to honestly say that I think if Monitor Audio could squeeze the smaller driver into the 100's cabinet along with the same tweeter and bass driver, I feel it would be quite an accomplished speaker which would upset quite a few products in the market. However where it is, the 100's would be my last option as I'd go for the 50's with a woofer or two at the bottom end as I feel they have more ability musically in place of just adding boominess to the equation due to the larger driver, but if it just for cinema, then either will be fine
 
Last edited:

Khazul

Well-known Member
To my mind the reason to get the 300 (or 500 for that matter) is when using them for music.

For AV I find it better to run all channels with 80Hz crossover and rely on a decent well integrated sub. If you do that, then anything that extends much below 40Hz or so you are not really going to care about leaving you with how the upper bass, mid and upper range sound which IMHO is still noticeably better then the 200, but not sure if you really notice in a movie however (unlike say having a better center channel).

I think the 300 really come into their own when given full range audio from a decent amp - ie stereo music HiFi use and this is why I bought them for use in an approx 21ft x 18ft room which I find they suit very well.

While I would not choose the 200 for full range music use, I would consider them for pure AV sound use and would probably prefer them over 100 on a stand. OTOH, if I were to live with reduced bass extension for music, then I might prefer the 100 on a stand for music over the 200.

As the 50 got a mention in the previous post, I do have a pair of these and actually very much like them for small space use (office etc), but not in a medium or larger room, however I actually use them as surround speakers (room layout mean FX on wall would have been impractical). For their size they actually seem to have surprisingly good bass extension.
 
Hi, I currently have Silver 50, with same drivers as the 200's and I had Silver 100 - believe me when I tell ya that size does matter from dynamics and sound authority POV. 5,25 inch drivers are ok for smallish rooms as they don't overpower the room but dynamics and bass wise they don't get the job done no matter the implementation (small floorstanders or bookshelves). And adding a sub only partially solves the bass issue, since mid-bass will still be lacking. That 8 inch woofer works wonders in a medium sized room. I auditioned 100 7G and they are a major update over the previous Gen. Mids are less in your face, soundstage is better, they are much faster on bass. Also, 6g always seemed to lack some freq. where the woofer/tweeter met, as proved by the measurements done at AudioScienceReview, so they probably solved the problems arousing from making a large woofer work with a tweeter.
I hope my reply helps.
 

Kapkirk

Active Member
I went from the floorstanding silver 200's to a pair of standmount Elac's and the amount of deep bass I get now with the 6.5 inch bass driver puts the silver 200's to shame. Was going to by an BK XLS 200 sub but I don't feel I need one now.
 

Mainah904

Standard Member
I appreciate all of the feedback. For now, I have decided to hang onto the Silver 100 6g speakers I got at 40% off on closeout. At least this way if I try them out in the new space and they don't fill it the way I want, I won't take as much of a hit on resale. If they do fill the space, then I will be happy that I got speakers that I like, for a price I am very happy with. As it is, in my current living situation, I have been very happy with the bass that the 100s are putting out, and have shut off my sub for normal listening for now (I'm in a townhouse).

For the center, as much as I liked the c350, it would not fit in my entertainment enclosure (it's a wall unit with piers and shelf that frames the TV and limits space), and would require me to build a new one/buy a new one. I plan to build a new one in a few years, but I want something I can enjoy in the interim. Because of that, I settled on the c250 (7g). Paired with the Silver 100s, I feel like they blend well. Sure, it may not have the same depth on its own as the c350, but it picks up some of that depth when played with the 100s in multi-channel music, and they pick up some of the midrange from the c250, and overall they sound good together for me.

Plus, should I later decide to upgrade the 100s to 300s, I'd likely be getting the 7g versions due to availability anyway, so they would already blend with my center channel.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Samsung S95B QD OLED Review - A Quantum Leap for OLED!
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom