Broke Audiophile....................... [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Broke Audiophile.......................



oddeoowphil38
05-11-2005, 07:41 PM
Hello members I have a story for you. I used to manage a car audio shop and was quite fanatical about it. My passion burned even deeper leading me to home audio. So, at the time I got burned out in car audio and getting in to home audio a friend of mine suggested Paradigm speakers. He sold me exactly what I thought I wanted-a very modest home theater. For some reason I ended up buying a set of MTX floor standers as opposed to going all Paradigm. I know one big mistake after another-LOL!!!! Such is the life of an audiophile. Well, let me be the first to say I want better. So hear me out. Before buying what I did from my friend I did get the chance to do some extensive listening to the B&W 602 S3. I was amazed at the clarity and precision this speaker could produce. Nothing was harsh just very detailed and kinda laid-back. The problem is the B&W 602 S3 are $600 a pair. This is a little out of my budget. I also got to listen to the Paradigm line up including the mini v.3, monitor 3 v.3, studio 20 v.3, and the studio 40 v.3. In Particular, I really liked the studio series especially the 20's. However, they are out of my price range just like the B&W were. So, I looked at the monitor series a lil closer. The first thing I noticed was how much better the mini was with respect to the Titan. The monitor 3's were even better. Oh, I also got to listen to the monitor 7's v.3 and the monitor 11's v.3. I was not any more impressed with the towers as compared to the mini and the monitor 3's. Since my preference is a bit more on music than HT, I decided to go with the cc-170 v.3 as my center. The same day I was able to compare the the Polk rti6 against the mini v.3. It was close but did prefer the mini. However, Polks real wood veeneer was a nice touch. Then I read about the Ascend CBM-170. The reviews on this speaker are amazing and the flatness of the response curve is even more amazing. Many have said the CBM-170 is on par with the Studio 20's. At $328 a pair and offering that kind of performance has more than peaked my curiousity. I know I could just order a pair and try them but right now I just don't have that kind of money to throw around. Then the hassle and expense of sending them back if I am not satisfied is just not an option for me. The Ascend CBM-170 is in my price range. I have noticed that KEX and Woocifer have owned some of these products in the past and I am hoping they can share their experiences with the Paradigm vs Ascend products. Some people have mentioned that the Ascend CMT-340m is on par with the Paradigm Studio 40's. Just hope some members here can elaborate on that as well. I am thinking about buying a set of Studio 20's for my fronts, cc-370 since my preference is more on music than HT, and use my Titans v.3 that I already own for my rears. Do any of you feel this set-up will mesh well. Or, how about the Monitor 3's for fronts v.4, cc-370 v.4 for my center, and Titans in rear? Finally, if I go with Ascend maybe the CBM-170 for fronts, CMT-340c center, and use my Titans for my rears. Any thoughts/sugestions with respect to the Ascends. Thank you for your time. Please help if you can.
Phil

Aric M L
05-11-2005, 09:39 PM
Try listening to a Tannoy Fusion 1 or if you can find one, an Mx-2. Great bang for buck

kexodusc
05-12-2005, 05:45 AM
I've heard only 1 Ascend acoustic system - it was with the small bookshelf speakers (170) and the 340 matching center channel.

I've got to admit, this is a 3rd example I can think of where another "factory direct" company seems to really be standing out from the crowd. I've always been skeptical of claims like "speaker x sounds better than speaker Y that costs 3 times as much". I'm starting to become a believer...and I'm not typically an easy sell. Ascend keeps it pretty simpe - quality drivers and crosssover components...solid cabients, simple, inexpensive finish, and simple designs with no gimmicks. This is a GOOD thing IMO.

First thing I noticed was the tweeter wasn't the same...the 170 uses a 1" Audax tweeter with neodymium magnet...pretty decent inexpensive tweeter, not as good as the other 1" tweeter in the 340's which in fact it was considerably different (costing double, and by all accounts I've heard worth every penny). Could be annoying in some situations, but the system sounded good. Ascend uses some very good quality Audax woofers in their speakers. The CMT-340 is a pretty decent center channel, wish I could have heard it in stereo.

I've heard other speakers that use the Audax Aerogel woofers..they are quite good and easily on par with my Studio 40's. I honestly believe the CMT-340's could very well be as good or better than my Studio 40's. If not, certainly close, and likely a much better value.

Putting the 170's on par with the Studio 20's might be a bit of a stretch, but again I think it would be close - too bad it didn't have the better tweeter. It also doesn't have the low bass response but I know that woofer quite well and it's midrange is quite good.

This being said, I expect it to easily outperform the Mini-Monitors I use to own.

Competition in the $200-$1200 range is really getting heavy thanks to all these "factory direct" speakers. I'd like to hear more Swan and Rockets too.

oddeoowphil38: If you don't have $550 for the CMT-340 you could build "clones" of these for considerably less...even if you bought pre-finished (and nicer looking, better quality cabinets) you'd still be up over $100 using the same drivers. If you or someone you know could build your own cabinets, you could finish these for under $300 in parts, less than the price of a pair of 170's.

Or use the woofer and the better tweeter in instead of the 170's and finish those for under $200.

You might check with Poneal in the Tweaks, Mods, and DIY forum...he has a few designs using the Audax aerogel woofers with some Morel tweeters that are better than the tweeters in the Ascends.

Whatever you do, you'll need a subwoofer as the Audax woofers are generally known for the midrange performance and have weaker bass response than some other mid-woofers that size.

noddin0ff
05-12-2005, 06:06 AM
I am thinking about buying a set of Studio 20's for my fronts, cc-370 since my preference is more on music than HT, and use my Titans v.3 that I already own for my rears. Do any of you feel this set-up will mesh well. Phil

You pretty much described my set up (except CC-470). I'm happy with it. my 20's are v.2 and my CC is v.3. I notice a slight slight difference in the high end. Not enough to notice in HT applications. I generally listen to music in 2-channel so again not an issue. Sometimes I wish there was more oomph in the rears, but not wishing enough to shell out for an upgrade. Minimons would be nice in the rear though... It all meshes very well.

bikeman
05-12-2005, 07:54 AM
If you don't have $550 for the CMT-340 you could build "clones" of these for considerably less...even if you bought pre-finished (and nicer looking, better quality cabinets) you'd still be up over $100 using the same drivers.
.


The Audex drivers in the the Ascend's are proprietary and not available commercially. There are Audex Aerogel drivers available but they are not the same. I recommend you contact Dave or James at Ascend to get some very useful information.

custservice@ascendacoustics.com

and/or stop by the Ascend Forum at:

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/

I auditioned the Studio 40's in my home before I auditioned the 340's. I would have been happy with either but I did prefer the 340's in all aspects except bass extention. With the sub hooked up the bass was similar. My wallet couldn't have been happier with my decision.

David

Feanor
05-12-2005, 08:26 AM
The Audex drivers in the the Ascend's are proprietary and not available commercially. There are Audex Aerogel drivers available but they are not the same. I recommend you contact Dave or James at Ascend to get some very useful information.

custservice@ascendacoustics.com

and/or stop by the Ascend Forum at:

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/

...
Most speaker makers insist that their OEM provider's product is customized especially for them. While this is presumably true, one wonders how extensively in fact, these customizations really are. In some cases -- my cynical nature suspects -- the changes are purely cosmetic.

bikeman
05-12-2005, 09:26 AM
In some cases -- my cynical nature suspects -- the changes are purely cosmetic.

In some cases, you'd no doubt be right. I've gotten to know Dave Fabrikant over the past year and half and I'd be very surprised if his changes were "purely cosmetic." It's just not his nature.

David

IRG
05-12-2005, 10:05 AM
I've heard only 1 Ascend acoustic system - it was with the small bookshelf speakers (170) and the 340 matching center channel.

I've got to admit, this is a 3rd example I can think of where another "factory direct" company seems to really be standing out from the crowd. I've always been skeptical of claims like "speaker x sounds better than speaker Y that costs 3 times as much". I'm starting to become a believer...and I'm not typically an easy sell. Ascend keeps it pretty simpe - quality drivers and crosssover components...solid cabients, simple, inexpensive finish, and simple designs with no gimmicks. This is a GOOD thing IMO.

First thing I noticed was the tweeter wasn't the same...the 170 uses a 1" Audax tweeter with neodymium magnet...pretty decent inexpensive tweeter, not as good as the other 1" tweeter in the 340's which in fact it was considerably different (costing double, and by all accounts I've heard worth every penny). Could be annoying in some situations, but the system sounded good. Ascend uses some very good quality Audax woofers in their speakers. The CMT-340 is a pretty decent center channel, wish I could have heard it in stereo.

I've heard other speakers that use the Audax Aerogel woofers..they are quite good and easily on par with my Studio 40's. I honestly believe the CMT-340's could very well be as good or better than my Studio 40's. If not, certainly close, and likely a much better value.

Putting the 170's on par with the Studio 20's might be a bit of a stretch, but again I think it would be close - too bad it didn't have the better tweeter. It also doesn't have the low bass response but I know that woofer quite well and it's midrange is quite good.

This being said, I expect it to easily outperform the Mini-Monitors I use to own.

Competition in the $200-$1200 range is really getting heavy thanks to all these "factory direct" speakers. I'd like to hear more Swan and Rockets too.

oddeoowphil38: If you don't have $550 for the CMT-340 you could build "clones" of these for considerably less...even if you bought pre-finished (and nicer looking, better quality cabinets) you'd still be up over $100 using the same drivers. If you or someone you know could build your own cabinets, you could finish these for under $300 in parts, less than the price of a pair of 170's.

Or use the woofer and the better tweeter in instead of the 170's and finish those for under $200.

You might check with Poneal in the Tweaks, Mods, and DIY forum...he has a few designs using the Audax aerogel woofers with some Morel tweeters that are better than the tweeters in the Ascends.

Whatever you do, you'll need a subwoofer as the Audax woofers are generally known for the midrange performance and have weaker bass response than some other mid-woofers that size.

Didn't Ascend Acoustics become Aperion? I see they each have their own websites and products now. Maybe I am confusing them and they were never related. Which is supposed to be better the Aperion 632 or the Ascend 340? I like the looks of the 632 - not many reviews compared to their 522 speakers.

Still, I like the Paradigm Monitor 3's I picked up, and the great thing about them when and if I want to sell them in a year or so, I can easily get back most of my money from them. Not too many speakers can do that, in addition to providing great sound while you keep them! I didn't audition both speakers in my home, but at the dealer, there was some material I prefered the Monitor 3 to over the Ref.20v4. The 20s were better on classical and acoustic music, but they seemed too heavy for rock. Maybe if you didn't have a subwoofer this would be preferred. I wish the classed up the Ref series a little more. I really thought the rubber tops didn't look that great. The Aperion 632 in photos is a sharp looking speaker. Maybe next year (after the sub!).

bikeman
05-12-2005, 11:25 AM
Didn't Ascend Acoustics become Aperion?

Never related.

David

Geoffcin
05-12-2005, 03:21 PM
Didn't Ascend Acoustics become Aperion? I see they each have their own websites and products now. Maybe I am confusing them and they were never related. Which is supposed to be better the Aperion 632 or the Ascend 340? I like the looks of the 632 - not many reviews compared to their 522 speakers.


Ascend makes standmount speakers, and sells Hsu subs, while Aperion sells standmounts, towers, and their own subs.

I got a chance to listen to a 5.1 setup of Aperions new Intimus 6-Series speakers, and I came away impressed enough to want to hear more. A set of them will be here by next week.

I coudn't tell you which sounds better, only that the Aperion 632 that I heard was pretty darn good in the 5.1 setup that they had at HE2005. I'l post more after they arrive.

kexodusc
05-12-2005, 04:41 PM
The Audex drivers in the the Ascend's are proprietary and not available commercially. There are Audex Aerogel drivers available but they are not the same. I recommend you contact Dave or James at Ascend to get some very useful information.

custservice@ascendacoustics.com

and/or stop by the Ascend Forum at:

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/

I auditioned the Studio 40's in my home before I auditioned the 340's. I would have been happy with either but I did prefer the 340's in all aspects except bass extention. With the sub hooked up the bass was similar. My wallet couldn't have been happier with my decision.

David
You are correct that the Audax drivers aren't available commercially...Audax is pulling out of that saturated market and selling licenses to their drivers.

DIY-ers have been comparing these so-called "Proprietary Drivers" manufacturs claim for years now. In some cases there are signficant differences...in others there isn't. Often you'll see a face plate, decal, or magnet shield added to a driver. As has been said (and admitted to by designers and driver manufacturers in many examples) the customizations are often cosmetic. In many cases, the "customized" drivers actually perform poorer than the OEM version, the buyer asking for shortcuts.

Ascends drivers do have a few slight mods to them, I don't doubt this. They probably enhance the performance or reduce the cost, a benefit either way. Looking at Ascend's own claims about their speakers and the many other Audax designs that use these drivers (okay the carbon copy commercial drivers), I'm lead to believe there aren't many differences. You can buy Audax kits for cheaper that boast superior performance.

bikeman
05-13-2005, 04:54 AM
You are correct that the Audax drivers aren't available commercially...Audax is pulling out of that saturated market and selling licenses to their drivers.

DIY-ers have been comparing these so-called "Proprietary Drivers" manufacturs claim for years now. In some cases there are signficant differences...in others there isn't. Often you'll see a face plate, decal, or magnet shield added to a driver. As has been said (and admitted to by designers and driver manufacturers in many examples) the customizations are often cosmetic. In many cases, the "customized" drivers actually perform poorer than the OEM version, the buyer asking for shortcuts.

Ascends drivers do have a few slight mods to them, I don't doubt this. They probably enhance the performance or reduce the cost, a benefit either way. Looking at Ascend's own claims about their speakers and the many other Audax designs that use these drivers (okay the carbon copy commercial drivers), I'm lead to believe there aren't many differences. You can buy Audax kits for cheaper that boast superior performance.

You're stating a very biasd opinion and it's not one that I find much credibility with. My response has been specifically about Ascend speakers. You have been painting with a very broad brush but you don't know anything about Ascend or Audex's contract with Ascend. That you know nothing about this is a fact, not opinion.
That you can buy Audax kits cheaper dosen't mean squat. You can't buy the Ascend kits at any price. The crossover, the most important part of all isn't made by Audex so the Audex kit would be useless in making 340 "clones." That's not my opinion either. It's a fact. Have you ever had a conversation with Dave Fabrikant? It would do you a world of good.

David

oddeoowphil38
05-13-2005, 06:14 AM
Thanks for the info. If you dont mind how much did you give for the cc-470? I cant even find an msrp on it. You dont seem to like the Titans in the rear so why do you feel like the mini's would be much better? Have you ever heard the cc-370? If so is the cc-470 really that much better. I am seriously thinking about using the 20's v.4 for my fronts, cc-370 v.4 for my center, and use the Titans v.3 i already own for my rears. How do you feel this would mesh? I am like you my preference in on music so I thought the cc-370 would work fine and to me the rears dont make that much of a difference as long as you use sometthing decent such as the Titans. I may go ahead and get a set of the mini's v.4 and use the Titans for rear surrounds(7.1). That may work for me since my preferences are on music mainly in stereo while using my sub. Anyways, get back to me as soon as you can.
Phil

kexodusc
05-13-2005, 06:40 AM
You're stating a very biasd opinion and it's not one that I find much credibility with.
Geez, someone got pretty defensive here...
Calm down, I have no intention of having a flame-war here.



My response has been specifically about Ascend speakers. You have been painting with a very broad brush but you don't know anything about Ascend or Audex's contract with Ascend. That you know nothing about this is a fact, not opinion.

Dave, I know quite a bit more than "nothing". True I don't know the exact details of Audax's contract with Ascend, by I absolutely don't have to. I've seen more than several examples of "proprietary drivers" and experienced first-hand that sometimes these proprietary drivers share the exact same part number as OEM drivers...Sometimes they are modded heavily sometimes not at all. It doesn't take a genius to put 2 + 2 together, David. Take a look at the specs of the Audax drivers, some of the dozens of highly-praised Audax designs, and then look at Ascend's designs measurements. If these aren't Audax drivers, then it's just a fantastic coincidence or the Audax 6.5" Aerogel and tweeter which look exactly the same in the Ascend design were a heavy inspiration.. A little too close for coincidence if you ask me. Sure there's some variances, but they're pretty darn close. That was my point. I've heard Ascend speakers and other Audax speaker designs. I'm not just shooting my mouth off ignorantly here.

In fact, if you actually read my post you'll see I mentioned that I fully expected Ascend to have made some improvements to the stock Audax drivers. Geez. Do you own stock or something? Exactly which of us is biased?



That you can buy Audax kits cheaper dosen't mean squat. You can't buy the Ascend kits at any price.
True the price doesn't mean a whole lot on its own, the better performance claims do though.


The crossover, the most important part of all isn't made by Audex so the Audex kit would be useless in making 340 "clones." That's not my opinion either. It's a fact.

Forget the fact that you are ignoring the high possibility that the Ascend crossover could be improved or better, I'll forgive you for your ignorance here. "Cloning" is a rather common term in the DIY community - many commercial designs are "cloned" by either buying the same drivers if available, or the aftermarket equivalents and trying as hard as possible to reproduce the original. You find out the cabinet dimensions, (5/8" MDF), the crossover point if given, etc, and go from there This is done quite a bit. Sometimes the results are better, sometimes the same, sometimes worse. If done with care you should end up with a good speaker regardless of how they compare to the original!

I don't use the word "clone" to imply you can copy the exact "soul" of the original Ascend speakers...Think of my suggestion as nothing more than another, cheaper option to the original poster that would provide similar sound at a better price for someone who had more time to spare than money...nothing more than an option...what the hell are you so upset about here? Relax, guy.



Have you ever had a conversation with Dave Fabrikant? It would do you a world of good.
David

As someone who was quick to question my "credibility", let me challenge you on this - why would anyone believe that Ascend's design is superior to that of another design without hearing both? Have you heard other Audax designs? I have.

Two more words you seem to like to use are "opinion" and "fact".

Here's a fact for you...I find it hilarious that you won't accept my opinion, the opinion of an unbiased, neutral, 3rd party hobbyist with no vested interest or money whatsoever into another person's decision to buy a speaker system for their personal use -but you'll willingly accept the opinion of Dave Fabrikant, when the fact is he's a person who has an admittedly biased and vested interest in his company and a desire to make a profit by selling the Ascend speaker design.

If either of us is likely to be biased towards Ascend or not, let me ask you, who do you think it would be?

Tell me now, you called me biased...towards what exactly? I would point out again, that I had nothing but very good things to say about Ascend in this thread. But the minute I presented the possibility that there could be even the possibility of a slightly better option out there (or at least a cheaper, comparable one) you saw fit to question my credibility?

Tell me now, which of us needs "a world of good"?

kexodusc
05-13-2005, 06:44 AM
Thanks for the info. If you dont mind how much did you give for the cc-470? I cant even find an msrp on it. You dont seem to like the Titans in the rear so why do you feel like the mini's would be much better? Have you ever heard the cc-370? If so is the cc-470 really that much better. I am seriously thinking about using the 20's v.4 for my fronts, cc-370 v.4 for my center, and use the Titans v.3 i already own for my rears. How do you feel this would mesh? I am like you my preference in on music so I thought the cc-370 would work fine and to me the rears dont make that much of a difference as long as you use sometthing decent such as the Titans. I may go ahead and get a set of the mini's v.4 and use the Titans for rear surrounds(7.1). That may work for me since my preferences are on music mainly in stereo while using my sub. Anyways, get back to me as soon as you can.
Phil

Phil, whatever you do, I cannot stress strongly enough that the center channel should be as closely matched to the main speakers as possible. I've owned both the CC-370 (although very briefly) and the older Studio CC center channel. The 470 really is a better speaker, but forget that...it's a much better center channel for the Studio 20's than the CC-370!!!
Phil, why not try to find the Studio 20's and CC-470 or Studio Center Channel used to save some money. If the product hasn't been damaged, it should perform as well as it did brand new.
If you aren't up for this, I really think you'd be better off running the Studio 20's in Phantom center mode, while saving the extra money for the matching center channel. Mixed speakers can work, but for best results, at the minimum, the front three speakers should be as close as possible.

bikeman
05-13-2005, 07:52 AM
"Geez, someone got pretty defensive here...
Calm down, I have no intention of having a flame-war here."

You responded specifically to my post. You don't know squat about the company or the designer. That's a fact. The rest of this is speculation cloaked in pseudo authority.

"Dave, I know quite a bit more than "nothing"."

And that's why you're extrapolating in an area you have no first hand knowledge of.


"True I don't know the exact details of Audax's contract with Ascend, by I absolutely don't have to."

Correct. You don't know ANY of the details, let alone exact.

I've seen more than several examples of "proprietary drivers" and experienced first-hand that sometimes these proprietary drivers share the exact same part number as OEM drivers...Sometimes they are modded heavily sometimes not at all. It doesn't take a genius to put 2 + 2 together, David

You're not adding 2 + 2. You're adding apples and oranges and getting apples.

"Take a look at the specs of the Audax drivers, some of the dozens of highly-praised Audax designs, and then look at Ascend's designs measurements. If these aren't Audax drivers, then it's just a fantastic coincidence or the Audax 6.5" Aerogel and tweeter which look exactly the same in the Ascend design were a heavy inspiration."

Your position is so weak that now you're making stuff up. Find where I said these were not Audex.

"A little too close for coincidence if you ask me."

Nobody asked you because it's not a point of contention. Don't make up arguments.

"Sure there's some variances, but they're pretty darn close. That was my point."

That is not your point.

" I've heard Ascend speakers and other Audax speaker designs. I'm not just shooting my mouth off ignorantly here."

You don't THINK you are. That's different.

In fact, if you actually read my post you'll see I mentioned that I fully expected Ascend to have made some improvements to the stock Audax drivers. Geez. Do you own stock or something? Exactly which of us is biased?

Everyone is biased. Netrality only exists in ignorance.

"True the price doesn't mean a whole lot on its own, the better performance claims do though."

What claims? Be specific.

Forget the fact that you are ignoring the high possibility that the Ascend crossover could be improved or better,

Another argument that's completely made up. Again, please show where I have said that the product can't be improved.

" I'll forgive you for your ignorance here."

And I'll forgive you. Now let's get back to reality.

" "Cloning" is a rather common term in the DIY community - many commercial designs are "cloned" by either buying the same drivers if available, or the aftermarket equivalents and trying as hard as possible to reproduce the original."

You're not in a DIY forum. It's better to use the English verision that slang. Then everyone is on the same page.

You find out the cabinet dimensions, (5/8" MDF), the crossover point if given, etc, and go from there This is done quite a bit. Sometimes the results are better, sometimes the same, sometimes worse. If done with care you should end up with a good speaker regardless of how they compare to the original!

Not a point of contention so I'm not sure why you've added yet another layer to the discussion.

I don't use the word "clone" to imply you can copy the exact "soul" of the original Ascend speakers...Think of my suggestion as nothing more than another, cheaper option to the original poster that would provide similar sound at a better price for someone who had more time to spare than money...nothing more than an option...what the hell are you so upset about here? Relax, guy.

"I don't relax when someone takes what I said and makes something completely different out of it. I take that personally. It has nothing to do with the subject. You've made up arguments that I've never expressed. You'd loose a formal debate with that tactic all by itself."

"As someone who was quick to question my "credibility", let me challenge you on this - why would anyone believe that Ascend's design is superior to that of another design without hearing both?"

Where did I make this argument? One or both of us has serious comprehension problems.

"Have you heard other Audax designs? I have."

What does that have to do with anything?

Two more words you seem to like to use are "opinion" and "fact".

"Here's a fact for you...I find it hilarious that you won't accept my opinion, the opinion of an unbiased, neutral, 3rd party hobbyist with no vested interest or money whatsoever into another person's decision to buy a speaker system for their personal use"

You have a deeply vested interest in your opinion. You're anything but neutral about your opinion.

"-but you'll willingly accept the opinion of Dave Fabrikant, when the fact is he's a person who has an admittedly biased and vested interest in his company and a desire to make a profit by selling the Ascend speaker design."

As I've asked earlier. Why don't you give him a call. Compare resumes, experience and methods and get back to us. Or don't get back to us. Just do it for your own education.


"If either of us is likely to be biased towards Ascend or not, let me ask you, who do you think it would be?"

Who cares. We're all biased.

"Tell me now, you called me biased...towards what exactly?"

Everything. Take a psychology course. We all have experience.. That creates bias whether we're conscious of it or not.

" I would point out again, that I had nothing but very good things to say about Ascend in this thread."

So what? If you hadn't used my post to respond to and just posted your opinion, we wouldn't be here. The subject is my post. It's personal.

" But the minute I presented the possibility that there could be even the possibility of a slightly better option out there (or at least a cheaper, comparable one)"

Again, where did I present this argument?

" you saw fit to question my credibility?"

Correct. You have treated me very poorly in this debate. Credible people don't make things up and ascribe it to others.

"Tell me now, which of us needs "a world of good"?"

Not which of us. Both of us.

David

kexodusc
05-13-2005, 11:29 AM
Dave, I politely ask you to re-read this thread again. I've seen your hundreds of posts at the Ascend forum and I appreciate your passion of the speakers, but not once did I ever personally attack you or your precious speakers.

Your following comments worry me:


You responded specifically to my post.
And


So what? If you hadn't used my post to respond to and just posted your opinion, we wouldn't be here. The subject is my post. It's personal.

I don't know how the forum works at Ascend, but the forum rules here are such that once you post, the post becomes public and anyone may respond. Replying to you and using quotations are not by themselves a personal attack. Replying to your post without the intent to insult is not an attack against you personally, and for you to think so is quite honestly, a bit paranoid. I use paranoid to insult, but to describe.



What claims? Be specific.
Since you asked:
If you really want to know, you PM me and I'll send you a few links to Audax kits designed by Joe D'Appolito - the designer credited with the alignment Ascend is ripping-off with the 340's - not to mention eerily similar looking designs using eerily similar drivers (again speculation on my part, but looks are looks - coincidence? maybe) that can be built for under $700. These have been available for over 4 years. Specs: +1.6/-0 dB 100 Hz to 20KHz, with bass extension to 55 Hz...not opinion...fact. That's 1/3 the variance of a more expensive Ascend system and more bass response. A VERY impressive speaker for the money, and in my opinion much better sounding than the Ascends I've heard.



You'd loose a formal debate with that tactic all by itself."

I don't care...Reality check: this isn't a formal debate, this isn't some university debating circuit. It's an internet forum. And what the hell are you debating about? I haven't attacked you or your beloved speakers at all yet.


As I've asked earlier. Why don't you give him a call. Compare resumes, experience and methods and get back to us. Or don't get back to us. Just do it for your own education.
I have e-mailed him and if I receive a reply with any useful information I'll be sure to share it. Thanks. Perhaps you can help with some specific questions I should be asking?


Correct. You have treated me very poorly in this debate. Credible people don't make things up and ascribe it to others.

I consider myself a responsible poster here. I've reviewed this thread, and absolutely nowhere did I attack you personally without prior provocation on your part (ie: questioning my credibility among others) or in direct refutation to your comments. I respectfully ask you to show me one example where I have.
Your doing so will result in my formal apology to you here in the forums.
Your failure to do so will result in my asking you for a similar public apology for what will turn out to be lies on your part.

Thanks,

Geoffcin
05-13-2005, 01:48 PM
I really don't see where this thread went off, but I think we should get back to the question at hand.

oddeoowphil38 is trying to make an informed decision on what he's going to do with his HT setup, specifially regarding his unique problem with matching these speakers. Anyone got some constructive advice?

oddeoowphil38
05-13-2005, 03:15 PM
Thanks Geoffcin I could not have said it better myself. Come on people surely there are others out there with some thoughts. Take a few minutes and speak it. I am surprised woocifer has not voiced his opinion. His advice like many others has been helpful in the past.

thepogue
05-13-2005, 03:50 PM
one particular component or speaker is the "end all"...they become overly defensive and lose perspective.... even after 35 posts..oh..sorry..did I say that? :D


Peace, Pogue

bikeman
05-14-2005, 04:14 PM
one particular component or speaker is the "end all"...they become overly defensive and lose perspective.... even after 35 posts..oh..sorry..did I say that? :D
Peace, Pogue


I apologize for this. I've never made the premise. kexodusc has made so many misrepresntations that it's become difficult to answer all of them. I've asked that he address earlier misrepresentations and all he's done is add more. Again, I apologize.

David

dave123456@mail.com
05-14-2005, 05:03 PM
I owned the CBM-170's for about a year, and i personally think they are overrated. Sure, they are a good speaker for the $328.00 you pay for a new pair, but they are nowhere near quality 1k speakers.

PSB Stratus Mini's ( not that much more used than Ascends new) are the speakers i replaced the Ascends with, and they absolutely STOMP them in everyway, much more musical, more ambience, better decay and overall just more enjoyable.

With the Ascends I always had the feeling that i was listening to the speakers rather than the music. They were too "analytical" for me and just never let me enjoy the music.

Dont get me wrong, they are good speakers for the money but I think reviewers are out place when they compare them with 1k-2k speakers.

If you get a pair at home for audition id suggest getting a couple pairs of other speakers, maybe whatever else your interested in , or even some Audio Note's ( they have a $550.00 model that is suppose to be very good, and if i were to try out any speaker company right now this is what id like to hear).

oddeoowphil38
05-14-2005, 05:18 PM
Dave, no problem. I am still giving Ascend a very good consideration and you have been very helpful in answering my Ascend questions. No apology really needed. Have a good evening.
Phil

oddeoowphil38
05-14-2005, 05:26 PM
Thanks Dave for the info but have you ever heard the Paradigm Studio 20's? How do you feel the 170's compared to the 20's? I am not concerned about the 170's lacking in bass extension but rather more concerned with the SIZE of the sound stage the 170 put out. That is, is it a wide and airy as the Studio 20's? This is what I really need to know. I also understand the 20's have a better tweeter and image a little better but once again I am not overly concerned there as well. If you know of any other speakers the 170's are more comparable to please let me know because I have no experience with PSB---although I have heard nothing but good things. Thanks once again.
Phil

dave123456@mail.com
05-14-2005, 05:51 PM
Hey Phil,

Sorry, no I haven't heard the Studio 20's, but from what Iv'e read they are similiar to the Stratus Mini, although they might be on the brighter side.

Another member of this site, Pat D, who also owns the PSB's has heard the Studio 20's and could help you more than I could.

As far as soundstage is concerned, this is another thing the PSB's were better at. However, the Ascends did put out a good stage and image, it just wasnt as wide. When listening to music this doesnt really make that much of a difference, id be more concerned about how musically enjoyable a speaker is and whether or not its bright , boomy or whatever. For movies it might be different though as you would be able to pinpoint the actors on stage better.

The only other speakers ive heard in this price range were some Athenas at Best Buy, a few different B&W models and i did own some $249.00 PSB image 2b's.

B&W sounded most alike to the Ascends, but with a little more bass and a different ( crisper ) high end.

The Image 2b's werent as accurate, and were somewhat brighter, but for music id take these over the Ascends. They did have some resonance issues though.

Athena's, well i heard them for a very short time and in a bad enviroment so im not going to comment on these.

oddeoowphil38
05-14-2005, 06:04 PM
Dave which B&W's were you referring to? I love the DM602 s3 sounds. Oh man do I ever. They are so laid back and extremely articulate and precise. Different from the studio 20 yes but maybe a bit more detailed than the 20. I still say the studio 20 imaged better than the 602 s3 but not by much. keep in ming my preference is more on music but I would like my fronts to have a soundstage as big as the studio 20's do. And, I just want to get away from towers--they are out of the question as far as I am concerned. I thought the Monitor 3's sound stage was almost as wide as the studio 20's myself. Anyways get back to me as soon as you can. Oh, BTW I do not listen to dvd-a or sacd's just 2-channel stereo. Thanks again.
Phil

dave123456@mail.com
05-14-2005, 06:40 PM
The B&W's i heard were the Dm 303, 601 and i think the 602 ( it was about $550.00).

The dm 303 to me sounded sort of recessed and shut in, it might of been the room though.The larger 602 sounded pretty good to me, nice and crunchy sort of dry. I listened to a few songs off of Metallicas Black Album on this speaker.

If you are seriously considering the Studio 20's, then id definately listen to the Stratus Mini's as well, most people seem to prefer PSB to Paradigm.

Just curious to why you dont want floorstanders? Are you planning on using a sub with the standmounts?

oddeoowphil38
05-15-2005, 08:11 AM
Yes Dave I have a real nice Paradigm PS1000 v.4 10" powered sub. For some reason I am drawn to the bookshelf speakers. I like the way they look on a stand better than a tower. Bookshelfs in most cases image much much better. The Monitor 7, 9, or the 11 IMHO did not add much over the Monitor 3 other than BASS EXTENSION. Sure, the floor standers provide for a larger not necessarily better soundstage and can play at higher volume levels w/ less distortion. But to me these attributes are nill. There is nothing wrong for people to prefer floor standers but they are just not for me. I cant see myself spenging more money on something that may provide better bass extension but as a result gives up some imaging abilities as a result. To each his own. I have never heard the PSB products and really know very little about them. I would love to audition the stratus series but no dealers in my area. So, what I really need to know Dave is how the CBM-170's compared to the B&W 602's? Were they very close in performance? I love the sound of the B&w 602's very much but they are a lilttle out of my price range. A friend or former business associate is a dealer for them and he is willing to give me a small discount. However, once I bought a matching center and rear then I might as well go with the Paradigm studio series. The reason being, I get a bigger discount from a close friend who sells Paradigm products for a living. With that said, the discount is a lttle bit better than what a repeat customer would normally get. For example, I can get the monitor 3's v.4 for $315 a pair. Not bad in my book and much more affordable. He is looking into what he can sell me the studio 20's for and I will know more tomorrow. He had the weekend off for a change and I dont wanna bother him. So Dave please tell me how the 170's compared to the B&W 602's--be a specific as you can. That $328 a pair price sure is attractive providing it is on par at least somewhat to the performance of the studio 20's. Even if the 170's are very close to the B&W 602's then I may have to make some changes in my plans. Keep in mind, I am not concerned about the 170's ability to lots of low frequency extension but rather how it will sound cross overed between 80-90 Hz and up range. And, many have said the 170's tweeter is not a good as the studio 20's tweeter or even the B&W 602's tweeter but what I NEED to know is how much better are they??? Anyways, please get back to me as soon as you can. It is shower time for me. Have a great day.
Phil

RGA
05-15-2005, 09:15 AM
Kex

There is a factor though that the DIY versions are not necessarily going to equal the manufacturer built versions -- I know with the E after hearing a reverse engineered built versin that the DIY version just isn;t an Audio Note. -- it has the same parts and has been copied over and built to the tee but something for whatever reason was heavily lost in the translation from the production version -- my conclusion is that that final stage of hand matching to the computer which no DIY can do considerably alters the end result.

Now i can't say that is the case with Ascend because I know nothing about this company. As for alterations or customization it depends -- I think the manufacturer should try and say a little bit about what they've done -- with AN's turntables the Arm they tell you is from Rega which is rewired with AN silver...if you're not a wire supporter maybe you just buy the plain Rega arm for cheaper. Some makers have a tough time if they have chosen a less popular woofer...not as many paper 8 inch users with foam anymore I suspect so they may have to pay more to get them. Though at least you can ball-park the driver's cost. With B&W you don't know if the tweeter is $50 pounds or $0.25 each and there is no reference to it. On a Headphone forum someone ulled apart the Grado $400.00 head amp and it came to no more in parts than about $20.00 or something to this effect.

kexodusc
05-15-2005, 10:04 AM
Kex

There is a factor though that the DIY versions are not necessarily going to equal the manufacturer built versions -- I know with the E after hearing a reverse engineered built versin that the DIY version just isn;t an Audio Note. -- it has the same parts and has been copied over and built to the tee but something for whatever reason was heavily lost in the translation from the production version -- my conclusion is that that final stage of hand matching to the computer which no DIY can do considerably alters the end result.



RGA: I have never implied that you can 100% copy the exact performance of speaker without the exact same parts going into it...and of course if you were to measure two AN E's built by Peter Q himself, chances are there'd be even a slight variance between them.

I think I've told you before, I have an uncle who's a huge AN fan in Atlanta. His AN E kits have turned out quite well according to him, very similar to the original E's and better than the J's according to him, but he's told me the kit's aren't offered with all the exact same components that are used in the real AN E. At least in his neck of the woods AN E fans are quite happy that they have that option to spend AN K prices to get a much better speaker with a bit of time and care invested. Of course there'd be some difference. I think a lot of companies are wise to protect their product by not allowing people to build the exact same thing. Your experience is a good example of this. You've heard 1 kit now that didn't sound good, and without dissecting this kit to see what the probelm was, you're assuming that no AN E kit ever could sound as good as the real thing. What if someone who didn't even know it was a kit to begin with heard the speaker you heard, and passed similar poor judgement on the AN E itself?
Logically, I wouldn't expect someone who's built a few speakers to be able to deliver the same level of final product as someone who's been doing this for 30 years. If the directions were good and the kit was honestly a close approximation of the original design, the results should be close, and any variances explainable. IMO, a good kit worth buying should be dumbed down enough for beginners or explain what level of sophistication is required to acheive good results - or it's not a good kit worth buying.

As for hand matching to the computer...you're just wrong about that. Reliable measurement equipment doesn't cost 1000's of dollars to obtain what you'd need for measuring speaker components within a higher degree of tolerance than what many commercial speaker offering that do batch testing offer. Spending more money allows you to do faster tests, easier tests, and can sure make the designing stage way easier, but just rebuilding an existing design and using it to measure/verify results isn't rocket science.

In my case I live not too far from a University where the engineers have a speaker /pro-audio DIY club open to the public. It's nice to just be able to bring your creations to a group with multi-thousand dollar spectrum analysers at their disposal and get results. :D
They've even got what they call a "quasi-anechoic" chamber.

Much like anything else in life, you won't believe the results are true until you witness them for yourself.

RGA
05-15-2005, 11:30 AM
I'm not saying the Kit E was bad -- but I would buy the K/Spe over it...wiithout hesitation.

Whatever ferry dust Peter sprinkles in at the end to me makes a good competant speaker a giant killer...and to me that's worth paying for. Can a good DIY get real close maybe -- but from what I've been told the E Kit is close to the equivelant of the E/D a very good speaker but no longer made. It may also be like you say that this particular kit was not as well done -- but the bass was a bit lumpy heavy and coloured - the production E/L was open and integrated better. I suspect it is the matching time alignment process that is the bit that is being missed somehow.

kexodusc
05-15-2005, 12:02 PM
Lumpy bass can come from a number of things...most common problems in DIY-ing are from are poor cabinet construction...butt joints are what most people do...not exactly ideal. I prefer mitre, rabbet, or mortis and tennon - 3 or 4 times stronger and air-tight. Leaks can act sort of like ports, changing the tuning frequency, creating port noise -especially noticeable in the bass realm, but the noise and tuning affect the midrange too. An aweful lot of minor nuances can make big differences.
Midrange problems are usually crossover or damping related - since AN doesn't stuff the hell out of their cabinets (thank god) I doubt it's that.

I wouldn't think the AN kit to be a good project for someone new to woodworking, electronics, or speakerbuilding in general. Better components tend to be more sensitive to flaws.
Just curious, I thought about doing an AN E kit awhile back...birch ply is nice to work with. Are the drivers purchased matched pairs? What about the quality of crossover components - do you buy from AN or are you eft on your own for that?
Does AN actually endorse these kits - I seem to recall my uncle telling me they are sold from a 3rd party or something?

I think you nailed it...A lot of these DIY kits are designed as economical solutions to come close. For some it's an excellent economical alternative - for those without tools, time, or the inclination it's not worth considering. And a huge advantage of brand name speakers is the resale factor. DIY speakers sell too, but the market is much smaller and usually more knowledgeable about product quality and performance.

Good for AN for offering their sound to DIY-ers. For me, a flag goes up when a company gets all top secret about it's design and components. They're not stopping competitors from discovering their secrets because all they have to do is buy the speaker and reverse engineer it. IMO they're usually just hiding something from consumers or taking their level of curiousity and understanding for granted.

thepogue
05-17-2005, 05:49 AM
I apologize for this. I've never made the premise. kexodusc has made so many misrepresntations that it's become difficult to answer all of them. I've asked that he address earlier misrepresentations and all he's done is add more. Again, I apologize.

David
I know things can get a lil crazy here at times...I guess thats part of the attraction. :)


Peace, Pogue

oddeoowphil38
05-17-2005, 04:09 PM
Dave, have not heard back from you. Care to give me an idea how the B&W 602 s3 sounded compared to the Ascend cbm-170? The way you have explained your expereinces with the 170 seems to be a lot like the way you described the B&W. So please explain how they compared.
Phil

dave123456@mail.com
05-17-2005, 08:00 PM
Dave, have not heard back from you. Care to give me an idea how the B&W 602 s3 sounded compared to the Ascend cbm-170? The way you have explained your expereinces with the 170 seems to be a lot like the way you described the B&W. So please explain how they compared.
Phil

Hey oddeoophil38,

Sorry for the the delay- ive been busy. To tell you the truth I have far more experiance with the Ascend than i do with the B&W- Ive only heard the B&W for a short period of time at Ken Cranes. I said they sound alike because they both give you a analytical presentation, rather than a musical one. Analytical speakers are something I do not care much about, and wouldnt want to own the Ascend or B&W to be honest. Maybe for Home Theatre, but definately not for music. The B&W's would give you more bass, which you dont care about, and they also have a metal tweeter which seems to be a problem in much lower priced designs but it didnt bother me when I heard them. But between the two, id probabaly choose the B&W 602 over the CBM-170. In the end though id want to try out other brands, preferebly speakers with soft dome tweeters, that have a fairly large cabinet space ( im starting to really, really dislike small speakers even in small rooms) and are designed for music rather than HT. Im sorry I cant give you a more detailed answer.