Short answer: the Pioneer SP-BS22-LR in Philharmonic AAM form, though neither ranks well in its class. The Q Acoustics 5020’s 5-inch Continuous Curved Cone woofer sits in an attractively finished, carefully engineered cabinet, but Erin found its balance distinctly too crisp and treble-heavy: the top end runs roughly 3-5dB elevated over a recessed 1-3kHz region. The AAM mod by Dennis Murphy answers only for some directivity error near the crossover. Both are rated below 3.0/5 among the 90 bookshelf speakers; for better sound, the Philharmonic Ceramic Mini ranks #2 at $900.
Buy the Q Acoustics 5020 if you want one new; the Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) is discontinued, so only look for it used.
Still deciding? The full Passive Home rankings cover every ranked option.
Specifications Side By Side
| Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) | Q Acoustics 5020 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $168 per pair Discontinued | $1,199.00 per pair |
| Ranked | #63 of 90 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers | #76 of 90 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 78Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) | 103Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 60Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) | 48Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Drivers | 1x 4” curvilinear-cone woofer (stock Pioneer), 1x Peerless BC25TG15 1” silk dome tweeter (replacement) | 5” (125mm) C3 mid/bass driver, 1” (25mm) tweeter |
| Weight | 9 lbs (4.1 kg) | 15.4 lbs (7.0 kg) each |
| Sensitivity | 83dB (2.83V/1m, measured by Audio Science Review) | 87.1dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Erin’s Audio Corner; 87.9dB manufacturer specified) |
| Impedance | 8 ohms nominal (approx. 5 ohms minimum, measured by Audio Science Review) | 6 ohms nominal, 3.3 ohms minimum (manufacturer specified) |
| Crossover Frequency | 3000Hz | 2.5kHz (manufacturer specified) |
| Dimensions | 12.6”H x 7.1”W x 8.5”D (320.0 x 180.0 x 215.0 mm) | 11.2”H x 7.1”W x 11.5”D |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear | rear-ported |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 5.07 | 3.63 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.82 | 6.55 |
| DIY Kit | Yes | No |
| Frequency Response | - | 53Hz - 30kHz (-6dB, manufacturer specified) |
| Recommended Power | - | 25W - 100W (manufacturer specified) |
Related Speaker Comparisons
How Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) compares with other leading options:
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Ascend Sierra 1 v2
- KEF LS50 Meta vs Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod)
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Arendal 1961 Monitor
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Revel M105
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Klipsch RP-500M II
Prices on this page were last checked October 2, 2026 at 10:18 PM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Two Speakers In Full
Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod): $168 per pair Discontinued eBay
Pros: This is Dennis Murphy’s “Affordable Accuracy Monitor” (AAM) mod of the discontinued, budget Pioneer SP-BS22-LR: the stock tweeter is swapped for a Peerless BC25TG15 dome and a redesigned 3rd-order crossover is built to match it to the stock 4” woofer. CEA2034 spinorama shows only small variations from a flat on-axis response with some directivity error near the crossover, a marked improvement over the unmodified Pioneer, which the reviewer notes shows much more variation from flat. Distortion at 86dB SPL/1m is reasonably controlled above 200Hz, and tweeter distortion barely rises even at 96dB SPL/1m. Measured bass extension of 78Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 83dB.
Cons: Some directivity error appears near the crossover frequency. Distortion climbs in the woofer’s range (below 200Hz) at both 86dB and 96dB SPL/1m. Minimum impedance dips to about 5 ohms with a couple of resonance peaks. This is a DIY project, not a finished retail product: Murphy sold ~$168 pre-built pairs for a while but no longer does, so it now requires sourcing a used/discontinued Pioneer SP-BS22-LR pair plus building the crossover and swapping the tweeter yourself. The mod itself is public domain, but there is no current turnkey way to buy this speaker.
Full Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 60Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 78Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Crossover Frequency | 3000Hz |
| DIY Kit | Yes |
| Dimensions | 12.6”H x 7.1”W x 8.5”D (320.0 x 180.0 x 215.0 mm) |
| Drivers | 1x 4” curvilinear-cone woofer (stock Pioneer), 1x Peerless BC25TG15 1” silk dome tweeter (replacement) |
| Impedance | 8 ohms nominal (approx. 5 ohms minimum, measured by Audio Science Review) |
| Sensitivity | 83dB (2.83V/1m, measured by Audio Science Review) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 5.07 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.82 |
| Weight | 9 lbs (4.1 kg) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Dynaudio X14
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs MartinLogan Motion 4i
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs ELAC BS U5
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs JBL L52 Classic
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Dynaudio Emit M10
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs Parts Express Copperhead Desktop Kit
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs JBL Stage A120
- Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (Philharmonic AAM Mod) vs ELAC Uni-Fi 2.0 UB52
- See all 36 comparisons
Q Acoustics 5020: $1,199.00 per pair Amazon eBay
Pros: Attractively finished compact standmount with a 5-inch Continuous Curved Cone woofer and carefully engineered cabinet details. Erin found distortion well controlled at normal levels: below 1% down to about 50Hz at 86dB/1m. Its 87dB measured sensitivity is unremarkable rather than hard to drive, and it maintains acceptable output for typical 80-85dB listening. The rear port can be plugged for placement flexibility. Measured bass extension of 103Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 87.1dB.
Cons: Erin found the tonal balance distinctly too crisp, forward and treble-heavy: the top end is roughly 3-5dB elevated while the 1-3kHz region is recessed, so vocals change level unnaturally as they move through their range. The shallow woofer crossover and steeper tweeter slope contribute to the off-axis discontinuity, while the port has a strong 1kHz resonance. Bass is limited: Erin measured F3 103Hz and F10 48Hz; at 96dB distortion reaches about 3% by 100Hz, and he bottomed the woofer when pushed hard. He preferred the less-expensive 3020i’s linearity and did not recommend the 5020 for neutral listening without EQ.
Full Q Acoustics 5020 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 48Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 103Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Crossover Frequency | 2.5kHz (manufacturer specified) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 11.2”H x 7.1”W x 11.5”D |
| Drivers | 5” (125mm) C3 mid/bass driver, 1” (25mm) tweeter |
| Frequency Response | 53Hz - 30kHz (-6dB, manufacturer specified) |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3.3 ohms minimum (manufacturer specified) |
| Recommended Power | 25W - 100W (manufacturer specified) |
| Sensitivity | 87.1dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Erin’s Audio Corner; 87.9dB manufacturer specified) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.63 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.55 |
| Weight | 15.4 lbs (7.0 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | rear-ported |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Micca RB42
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Verdant Audio Bambusa AL-1
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs JBL Stage A130
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Fluance Signature HFS
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Q Acoustics 3020i
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs JBL Control 1 Pro
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs KEF Q100
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Polk T15
- See all 42 comparisons