PDA

View Full Version : Sierra Mini Tower idea (I know I know)



j0nnyfive
10-27-2019, 05:16 PM
Hello again from Arkansas!

It's been a busy 2 weeks for me... sheesh. I just wanted to throw this idea your way (even though I know you've already thought these out I'm sure). Please indulge me here when you get a little free time, because I know you stay busy.

I just want to tell you what I would love to buy from Ascend. An MMT mini-tower. Shorter than the flagship tower. Lower price than the flagship tower. And it doesn't have to sound quite as good (although I would sure love you to try your heart out to make it sound just as good or even better! I know you do this every time which is why I always recommend your designs to everyone who will talk sound with me).

I would love to see an MMT mini-tower (or 2) with your design skills and name behind them.


What would I hope to accomplish?
1. More output than MT versions while maintaining the MT character sound.
2. Lower price than the flagship 3-way towers. (Although these are great values for what they are)
3. Don't need stands.
4. Towers are cool.
5. Shorter than the flagship towers. (maybe more SAF appeal)

BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE! :D

I would love to be able to recommend some Ascend tower speakers with dual woofers that land somewhere between $1000 and $2000. And, for myself personally, I would love to buy a Sierra-2EX version with a price tag somewhere between $2000 and $3000.

So what's wrong with me? Why do I keep begging for MTM, and now MMT? Cognitive dissonance. In my pea-sized brain, I feel like there needs to be more dual-woofer speakers between the CMT-340 SE and the Sierra towers. (I know about the Duo, but I'm thinking more "regular" sized. IMO, the Duo is in a special, smaller class.)

Whether or not this would be worth doing, I love hearing (reading) your thoughts on these things. I learn something new every time! Thanks for the continued great sound and best value!

And... hee hee hee... I may just be a little crazy... :eek: Happy Halloween!

j0nnyfive
10-27-2019, 08:03 PM
Okay, after some reading, I'm kinda confused. I was under the impression that a 2.5-way design would give you roughly the same output increase as an MTM, but this might not be right. :confused:

If a 2.5-way is just there to give a little more bass, then never mind. lol I was thinking of overall more output but maybe it's only more output in the bass region. Bah. Humbug. Maybe you can straighten me out here?

curtis
10-27-2019, 09:03 PM
I’m curious as to why you need more output.

j0nnyfive
10-28-2019, 09:34 PM
Hey Curtis! Sure!

I want speakers that can fill multiple roles (HT, party, wedding, reception, large room, small room, etc. etc.). I would rather have and not need than need and not have. (Guess how many of those roles I've used the Sierra Towers for?) ;)

Guess how loud I turned up the AVR at the wedding and college reception? I would have turned it up a little louder but I love my AVR. :o "GOOD SOUND TO YOU ALL!!! TAKE THAT!!!"

In my opinion from my own experience: Output is a valuable thing even when you don't think you'd need it. You find uses for things.

For my needs, I would VERY QUICKLY buy a Sierra MT speaker that favors output over bass extension and has the RAAL and bamboo and all that. Only for a good price though. But I understand that "other people" don't want this. So that's out. MTM? Requires a hoss of a tweeter. That's out (for the RAAL anyway).

MMT? May not need a hoss of a tweeter. Has bass. People like towers.

And then I thought... wait a minute... would an MMT fill in the gap between the CMT and Sierra Tower? The output gap? A Sierra-1 MMT mini tower? I dunno. I was going to suggest a Sierra-1 MTM, but then I was anticipating the possibility that people don't buy things like big MTMs at this price... but... people like towers. ;)

In fact, people like short towers too (tweeter on top). ;)

People also like new things (MMT would be new for Ascend). ;)

People also like tower speakers at lower prices ($2,000 may be a barrier for some). ;)

But, MMT may not really provide enough benefit to justify it's existence. If the only thing you get is a little more bass without a raise in sensitivity? Count me out. So this may be a bad idea. I really don't know. This would be an interesting challenge I think. With a 2.5 woofer... what kind of sensitivity could you get? What kind of character can you give the bass? Interesting (to me anyway). In fact, the more I think about this, the more intrigued I get. Now, I kinda want one. Maybe.

Most importantly, if Dave doesn't like the idea and his heart isn't in it, I don't want it.
Just thought I might give him something fun to do. lol

;) I think there is something in my eye ;) ;) ;)

curtis
10-29-2019, 03:36 PM
The big question is if there is enough of a market for something like this. Enough of a market where Ascend could sell enough quantity to make it cost effective and profitable.

davef
10-29-2019, 05:33 PM
Hey Curtis! Sure!

I want speakers that can fill multiple roles (HT, party, wedding, reception, large room, small room, etc. etc.). I would rather have and not need than need and not have. (Guess how many of those roles I've used the Sierra Towers for?) ;)

Guess how loud I turned up the AVR at the wedding and college reception? I would have turned it up a little louder but I love my AVR. :o "GOOD SOUND TO YOU ALL!!! TAKE THAT!!!"

In my opinion from my own experience: Output is a valuable thing even when you don't think you'd need it. You find uses for things.

For my needs, I would VERY QUICKLY buy a Sierra MT speaker that favors output over bass extension and has the RAAL and bamboo and all that. Only for a good price though. But I understand that "other people" don't want this. So that's out. MTM? Requires a hoss of a tweeter. That's out (for the RAAL anyway).

MMT? May not need a hoss of a tweeter. Has bass. People like towers.

And then I thought... wait a minute... would an MMT fill in the gap between the CMT and Sierra Tower? The output gap? A Sierra-1 MMT mini tower? I dunno. I was going to suggest a Sierra-1 MTM, but then I was anticipating the possibility that people don't buy things like big MTMs at this price... but... people like towers. ;)

In fact, people like short towers too (tweeter on top). ;)

People also like new things (MMT would be new for Ascend). ;)

People also like tower speakers at lower prices ($2,000 may be a barrier for some). ;)

But, MMT may not really provide enough benefit to justify it's existence. If the only thing you get is a little more bass without a raise in sensitivity? Count me out. So this may be a bad idea. I really don't know. This would be an interesting challenge I think. With a 2.5 woofer... what kind of sensitivity could you get? What kind of character can you give the bass? Interesting (to me anyway). In fact, the more I think about this, the more intrigued I get. Now, I kinda want one. Maybe.

Most importantly, if Dave doesn't like the idea and his heart isn't in it, I don't want it.
Just thought I might give him something fun to do. lol

;) I think there is something in my eye ;) ;) ;)

I think there is some level of confusion here with regard to output.

Typically, with an MT speaker -- the woofer is the limiting factor with regard to maximum output levels. When you add another woofer (paralleled), regardless of the orientation (be that an MTM or TMM) - assuming you are using the same woofer as the MT and providing the appropriate cabinet volume for 2 woofers , you double the max output SPL capability of the woofer section. Doubling might seem like a lot more output, but it is only +3dB. You then must make sure the tweeter can keep up, or a new tweeter must be used. There is no difference in this regard between a TMM or MTM.

It is important to understand that human hearing does not perceive +3dB more output as a doubling in acoustical power, human hearing perceives a doubling of volume as +10dB.

Taking the same woofer from a TM and adding another one in parallel, while also doubling the cabinet volume does not give you more bass extension, you simply get higher efficiency. You can sacrifice some of that efficiency gain to get slightly deeper bass extension, but then you also decrease max output levels.

So the important question to ask here, Jonnyfive, what exactly are you looking for? Why doesn't the CMT-340 suit your needs?

Blutarsky
10-29-2019, 06:06 PM
Why not use Horizon's stood on end?

j0nnyfive
10-30-2019, 09:23 PM
Hey guys! Sorry for the delayed response. I was too tired after work last night. Couldn't think straight. :(

Curtis: Definitely. Agreed. Audio marketing isn't one of my strong suits. I'll leave that to you guys.


Dave: I love it when you talk technical to me. lol First of all, I want all you guys to understand that I'm not criticizing any of your speakers at all. Every speaker I've heard was very very good to my ears. (And I'm not sucking up either.) I just wanted to make that clear because sometimes it's hard to convey a message or communicate clearly in text alone. So, thank you guys for the good sound.

Next, I want to let ya'll know that when I make a suggestion of a new speaker, it's a suggestion coming from a kindergartner to astronauts on how to fly a space shuttle! So, I can see some level of ridiculousness going on here. lol

So why would I even make a suggestion then? Because... why not? Life is short.

What do I want? Good question. I typed a long paragraph here, but I deleted it for brevity. I'll sum it up: A RAAL/Bamboo/SEAS version of the CBM-170 SE (IOW, less bass, more efficiency). But, I understand that other people don't want this. Meh. Gotta play nice with the others!

Dave, after hearing enough of your speakers, I'm convinced that you can make any configuration (within reason) sound very good. You've done MTs, MTMs, MTWWs, and a couple of funny-shaped speakers (HTM-200 and Horizons). You've demonstrated your talent through all these configurations. I don't think there is a "magical" speaker configuration. I think the magic is in the quality of the parts, and in the talent of the designer. Which is why I'm not going to another company for this. I'm just gonna bug you guys with ideas. There are other talented designers and quality parts out there, but you guys seem to care about the little guy like me. :o You deliver bang-for-buck value where other people deliver nice furniture for the wine tasters. (nothing wrong with that). But, in addition to being bang-for-buck, what I love about Ascend Acoustics is your evidence-based approach. Thank you, thank you, thank you for not wasting my money. Fan for life. :cool:

The MMT speaker idea is just a suggestion. I'm trying to find "bang for buck" ideas. Why do I feel the MMT is bang-for-buck?

In no particular order:
1. Being a tower speaker, you don't need stands.
2. Being a 2-way or 2.5 way means a less expensive crossover board (I think).
3. Having 2 woofers increases power handling and sensitivity (I think).
4. Putting the tweeter on top minimizes the height of the tower (I think). (less wood)
5. Using an MMT config presents a familiar MT sound (I think).
6. Using an MMT config doesn't require the tweeter to cross any lower than an MT
(A really big assumption here).
7. Tweeters usually "outrun" the woofers in efficiency anyway, so the second woofer
may maximize the value of the tweeter (I'm really speculating here).


So, those are value-related reasons. Below are desirability reasons:

In no particular order:
1. With your design skills, this thing would sound like magic chocolate.
2. Towers are cool. Some people just want towers for towers sake.
3. Shorter towers might be desirable to some, maybe for SAF/WAF reasons.
4. Some people just like the MMT speaker (seems kinda popular on some forums).
5. Some people want an Ascend tower speaker, but $2,000 may be their absolute
allowance for speakers. Would an Sierra-1 or Sierra-1 Nrt MMT tower be possible
under $2000 per pair? I dunno. Dual woofer Sierra Mini Towers less than $2,000.
Sounds pretty cool to me (I'm weird she says). I wonder how much a Sierra-2EX
version would cost. Would it still require the big RAAL? I didn't think it would.


Okay! All that being said... (whew!)... I understand that:
A. This may not have enough demand
B. May confuse potential customers
C. May dilute the product line too much
D. May be a bad idea (not bang for buck for a simple or complex reason)
E. May be a bad idea (not much efficiency increase in M->T crossover region).
F. May be something that you're just not really interested in (totally understand that).
G. May be something you just don't have time for (do I ever understand that)!

So, either way... if you made it this far... I'm sorry it was so long and there was no TLDR!!! :o

Thanks, guys.

To Blutarsky:

j0nnyfive
10-31-2019, 06:33 PM
Hey Blutarsky! Just kidding. I was just too tired to write any more last night. How do your vertical horizons sound? Is that what you're doing? I never would have thought of that. :)


To Dave, Curtis, and other Ascend people: Again, I just want to stress that I don't have any problem with any of my Ascend speakers. It isn't that I don't like the CMT-340 SE, it's just that I could tell the Sierras have higher resolution(?). More detail, to my ears. I want as much detail as humanly possible in a speaker (with reasonable sensitivity and dynamic range and natural dispersion and all that good stuff). I love em all. Sometimes I get an idea and have to share it. :o No biggie if it isn't a good idea. I learn a lot from your explanations as to why or why not. So, hit me with it! (When you're not busy). Don't work too hard!

Thanks guys!

j0nnyfive
11-01-2019, 02:56 PM
Just wanted to add, if you guys want to talk technical about the MMT configuration, please do!! That's why I put my posts in the technical forum. I learn something every time! (Whenever you get time though. No rush!)

For instance, from what I'm reading elsewhere, it looks as though the MMT can have some serious lobing challenges. Also, assuming a 2.5-way design, I'm reading that the sensitivity won't be as high. But, I'm not the engineer.

Blutarsky
11-01-2019, 03:27 PM
I have only had one Horizon, it is very dynamic. When they first came out there was a thread about using them as stereo mains. I believe you can order them in this configuration with the tweeter rotated 90 Deg.
Blutarsky
PS, love the image, it is on the tip of my tongue, where it originated?

j0nnyfive
11-01-2019, 04:27 PM
Hey Blutarsky!

Yeah, I've read that the Horizons have a lot of kick to them, I believe it! I don't think I would pay the price for 2 of them to place them vertically, but that's just me. I think I would be bothered just by KNOWING that my T and M drivers are horizontally oriented instead of vertical. Even if it did sound good, I think it would bug me. But, I've been wrong before. Once or twice.

Okay Blutarsky, guess what? I have another one for ya. If you can't figure it out, go to that you tube link for your answer. :D


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocgj9tewHso

Blutarsky
11-01-2019, 05:08 PM
I don't watch scary movies! "Back to the Future" are the most I have seen Crispin Glover.

The Ascend Horizons, stood on end, are no different than the Sierra-2 Center being turned sideways. :)

I thought hard about getting a pair of Horizons. I prefer stand mounted speakers. Subjectively, I get better sound stage. (don't make me defend this please)

Blutarsky

j0nnyfive
11-01-2019, 06:44 PM
No worries! We all like what we like! My "ideal" speaker configuration is MT. One midbass and one tweeter with tweeter on top. This just seems the most natural to me. It does (soundstage-wise) what I feel a speaker should do. I suppose, in a way, a more "ideal" speaker would be coaxial, but I'm not sure any coaxial out there can compete with RAAL right now (unless it's way out of my price range). And, I haven't listened to any coaxials for any length of time, so I dunno. So, Ascend's speakers are the bees knees for me.


My ideal setup is:

tweeter + midbass that extends down just far enough to blend with a subwoofer at ~80hz. So, I'm thinking the MT speaker should extend down to ~60hz or so?

A subwoofer that is setup for smoothest response while sitting in my main chair.

I want as much resolution and natural and smooth dispersion as humanly possible, as well as all the dynamic range (including output) that I can muster out of these speakers.
(This is why I want a RAAL/SEAS/BAMBOO version of the CBM-170 SE)

This is what I THINK I want, after hearing everything I've heard.

I know multiple subwoofers are best for modal smoothing, but I only care about 1 listening seat. :p

jimb
11-02-2019, 12:38 PM
No worries! We all like what we like! My "ideal" speaker configuration is MT. One midbass and one tweeter with tweeter on top. This just seems the most natural to me. It does (soundstage-wise) what I feel a speaker should do. I suppose, in a way, a more "ideal" speaker would be coaxial, but I'm not sure any coaxial out there can compete with RAAL right now (unless it's way out of my price range). And, I haven't listened to any coaxials for any length of time, so I dunno. So, Ascend's speakers are the bees knees for me.


My ideal setup is:

tweeter + midbass that extends down just far enough to blend with a subwoofer at ~80hz. So, I'm thinking the MT speaker should extend down to ~60hz or so?

A subwoofer that is setup for smoothest response while sitting in my main chair.

I want as much resolution and natural and smooth dispersion as humanly possible, as well as all the dynamic range (including output) that I can muster out of these speakers.
(This is why I want a RAAL/SEAS/BAMBOO version of the CBM-170 SE)

This is what I THINK I want, after hearing everything I've heard.

I know multiple subwoofers are best for modal smoothing, but I only care about 1 listening seat. :p

So, I think you just said, what you really want is, the Sierra-2EX. That, or the Sierra-2Di!

j0nnyfive
11-02-2019, 07:40 PM
Hey Jimb! Thank you for offering to get me the Sierra-2Di! At least, that's what I think you just said right? ;););)

Just kidding, of course. I've allowed this thread to get a little too complex I'm afraid.

What I'm going to buy: Sierra-2EX (This will suit my current needs and probably future needs.)

What my ideal (OCD) bang-for-buck speaker is: MT, RAAL/bamboo, bass extension to 60hz to maximize efficiency (expected to be crossed to subwoofer). (This would suit my current and future needs.) Current needs = I don't need bass. Future needs = subwoofer.
Problem = not enough demand. That's kew.
(This is my "perfectionistic" speaker. Just me being OCD about things. No biggie.)

What I'm throwing in the suggestion box for the future that MIGHT appeal to other people: An MMT mini-tower. I would buy a 2EX version (if the price was not too high). But, I thought it might be cool to have a mini tower between $1,000 and $2,000 using the Nrt tweeter. Not necessarily what (I) need, but I thought this seemed like a cool idea.

However, this may not be a good idea for reasons I don't yet understand. It could be that a 2-way MMT would require a tweeter that can play low (bummer). And it could be that a 2.5-way MMT wouldn't boost sensitivity enough to really justify it's addition to the product line. And it could be that an MMT simply isn't enough of a change from the MT's to justify itself anyway. And it could be that Dave just isn't "feeling it" with this idea. lol (And that's totally okay with me. I understand that completely. It's hard for ME to do things that don't interest me. I wouldn't want him working on stuff that his heart isn't in to. Seriously. This man needs a vacation probably. Dave, take a break! lol)

Either way, I would like to learn some of the pros and cons of MMT speaker alignments because I'm having a hard time finding good information elsewhere that I trust. I would like to know Dave's opinions on MMT alignment, and also anyone else that wants to talk about their experience/knowledge with this configuration. And if you have any good book suggestions (containing MMT info), please let me know!

Ya'll be safe. It's getting cold.

j0nnyfive
11-04-2019, 06:21 PM
Update: I just placed an order for Sierra-2EX. WOOHOO!! :cool:
Sorry for the off-topic outburst. I couldn't contain myself!

mikesiskav
11-04-2019, 07:46 PM
Update: I just placed an order for Sierra-2EX. WOOHOO!! :cool:
Sorry for the off-topic outburst. I couldn't contain myself!

Congrats! You're gonna love 'em! :cool:

j0nnyfive
11-04-2019, 08:05 PM
Now, let's not get ahead of ourselves h... I know I will. lol :p

jimb
11-04-2019, 10:58 PM
Update: I just placed an order for Sierra-2EX. WOOHOO!! :cool:
Sorry for the off-topic outburst. I couldn't contain myself!

Great!

racrawford65
11-05-2019, 01:59 AM
Update: I just placed an order for Sierra-2EX. WOOHOO!! :cool:
Sorry for the off-topic outburst. I couldn't contain myself!

Sweet!
Which finish did you get?

j0nnyfive
11-05-2019, 04:47 PM
Black satin bamboo. 'Murica.
And now... the wait. :(... ... ...:)

j0nnyfive
11-05-2019, 06:00 PM
************************************************** ***************
Sierra Mini Tower idea (I know I know) PART 2 - Understanding MMT vs MTM
************************************************** ***************

I'm starting this thread afresh! Why? To re-focus my thoughts. I am trying to learn (from this site and others) the pros and cons of MTM and MMT configurations.

MTM:

Pro: More output, efficiency, and sensitivity.
Pro: Symmetrical lobes/nulls. (may be managed easier in design phase?)
Pro: Woofers always in phase with each other (on tweeter axis)
Pro: "Controlled directivity". (depends on the person)
Con: "Controlled directivity". (depends on the person)
Con: Possible comb filtering (requires a lower crossover to manage this? To have wider vertical dispersion?)


MMT:

Pro: More output, efficiency, and sensitivity.
Pro: A fairly short tower (tweeter on top).
Con: Woofers only in phase with each other on the tweeter axis if you are at a "planned" distance?
Con: More challenging to deal with 2 distinct sets of lobes/nulls due to path length differences between tweeter and woofers?




Alright. I'm just interested in learning the pros and cons here. Whenever ya'll get time. Thanks!! (I'm still reading on other sites too)

I'm leaning toward "MTM" being overall better due to what appears to be more midrange clarity on the tweeter axis. It hasn't escaped my attention that a MTWW design appears to be a combination of both configurations! MTW (mid and woofer always in phase on tweeter axis). Then you have TWW on bottom. So, at what distance from the tweeter is the tweeter and lower woofer in phase? (I'm really getting out of my depth here guys, but I'm having fun.)

Any thoughts on this? (Dave, I love your technical input, but I'm in no hurry. Go on vacation!! Cuz, you da man. :cool:)

racrawford65
11-06-2019, 08:49 AM
Black satin bamboo. 'Murica.
And now... the wait. :(... ... ...:)

The hardest part! Love that finish - same as I have.

j0nnyfive
11-06-2019, 05:11 PM
I know! Yeah, black goes with everything. Piano black makes me finger print paranoid. Matte black isn't my thing. Satin sounds nice! To each his own! I got a buddy at work that's gonna come listen to them. I'm thinking he might just get some Ascends too when he hears them. :cool:

j0nnyfive
11-06-2019, 08:34 PM
Okay, well now I'm a little embarrassed. I've been reading previous posts that Dave has answered and I now realize that he answers these kinds of questions over and over again. It must be exhausting! Kinda feel bad for asking yet another "why not do this?" lol

Dave, you da man. :cool:

I appreciate all that you do for others. Good sound to you, too. I KNOW that the Sierra-2EX will be reality-warping in this small apartment. (Dr. Evil laughs along with mini me)

Please disregard my "mini tower" idea. You keep doing what you do!!