PMC Twenty23 speakers

Hi, i did change my speakers, found some PMC Twenty23 second hand. It seems they accord well with Naim. I still use my MJ Acoustics Pro MKII subwoofers to create the low bass.

What are your opinions?

Greetings Jort

I am not familiar with your sub but use a Rel with my PMC 20/26 to good effect.


They are excellent with my SN2 - some don’t like the top end however.

1 Like

Neither does my wife, she liked mi ProAc tablette ten a lot, but now doesn’t’ want to stay in the room. I like them a lot, the sound is more complete, and different in a way, i think more like it supposed to be in the recording.

I ran the twenty.23 for a good few years with a SN2 in quite a large room. Mainly I found them very good, with the exception of the upper mid range, which could sound a little rough at times. I think this was probably in the region of the crossover. I’ve subsequently run Tab 10 and Tab 10 Sig in a smaller room, but with much better source and amplification. They both sounded excellent.



:+1::ok_hand::blush:. Yes there is better, but you would have to spend a lot more money. In my opinion Naim and PMC are a good match. I find the Nova and 23’s a very good balanced system. :blush:


Twenty23s with Supernait (1) sounds lovely, and would IMP cost many £££s to improve on.

1 Like

The Twenty.23s, if you like the PMC sound signature, punch well above their price class. I had a pair on the end of a 282/SCdr/250dr and they were in no way a poor match for the amplification. Although I upgraded to the Twenty5.23s, I sort of feel that the older Twenty range did a few things better and in hindsight, would have kept them. I can’t imagine needing a sub with them but then it really depends on the size and height of the room and amp. I have a couple pairs of Twenty5.23s now on vastly different systems and they don’t even sound like the same speaker.

Your assumption is correct. There are a lot of Naim/PMC users around.


MJ acoustics is a side project of Rel but a bit cheaper :blush:

I previously ran Twenty.23’s with a SN2 and found it to be a very satisfying combination. Also ran Twenty.26’s which I really enjoyed. On the whole I found the original twenty series to be very forgiving which was demonstrated quite ruthlessly for me when i initially switched to Fact 12’s as part of an upgrade cycle.

1 Like

Interesting, I have seen FACT 12’s non signature going remarkedly low prices on certain auction sites, I always avoided the FACT 8 as led to believe this was too clinical and upfront for my taste. How do the FACT 12’a compare to the Twenty 26, are they very much system/cable dependant or very much a different speaker altogether?

I had 20.26’s which my 300DR drove with ease. Not so when I demo’d Fact 12’s. The bass was awful. Therefore I’ve never heard Fact 12’s at their best. To me, that suggests the 20.26’s are a very different speaker to the Fact 12. If you’re amp is up to it, I’ve no doubt they will be significantly better than the 20.26.

There are already several threads about PMC speakers and Twenty 23i are very common, as well as the larger Twenty floorstandes and the 5.21i standmount speakers. Does anyone have any experience with the 5.22i standmounts with Naim? These don’t seem to be so common. I heard them once at a show, but with spl electronics (so not Naim) and found them very impressive.

Not sure on the Naim 300 specifications, I have a Parasound JC5 which is their John Curl designed top of range Stereo Power Amp, at 400 Watts RMS, I would hope this could drive those 12’s. I am not keen on analytical loudspeakers and gravitate towards an open, honest sound but with a warmer sounding presentation. Room limitations mean my pmc’s are close to the walls and the transmission line has always been very forgiving with placement, I moved away to B&W CDM7’s before purchasing my previous PMC’s FB1+ and was really disappointed with this ported design. I am currently using a REL sub with my PMC’s and would guess this might be redundant with the 12’s.

I’d have to agree with @Buryfc that the Fact 12 and Twenty.26 are quite different. I don’t find the Fact 12 clinical, its just very unforgiving of the source and amplification isn’t up to it. The sound I have now is more on the ‘lush’ end of the spectrum in comparison to clinical… if those terms could be considered opposites.

In contrast to @Buryfc however I’m really pleased with the bass performance with the Facts and 300DR. I do feel like the 300DR is just about enough for them, but can imagine that they would benefit from more power. I’m not sure anything less than a 300DR would cut it with them.

Back to agreeing with @Buryfc (:joy:) the Twenty.26 are a lovely speaker and very easy to drive. I had these with a SN2 which had no problem with them.

1 Like

To my ears F12 is a distinctly better speaker, however which of the two would sound better to your ears, with your current or future amplification, only you can decide.

1 Like

I changed the placing of the speakers (a bit closer to each other) and now everybody is happy with the sound. So it was just a positioning issue that made my family dislike the sound. Solved and everybody happy!

I have two pairs of 20.23’s. Both are now used in two separate systems with SN3’s, however until recently one pair was used with an old SuperUniti and before that an original Uniti 1. One pair was also used for a long time driven by an Arcam AVR600. I think that they are very good and well balanced, seem tolerant of partnering equipment and different genres of music as well as AV use (I also have the matching centre speaker). I have heard the Kudos Titan 606’s with an SN3 and didnt think they were much (if any) better.

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.