The audio industry still doesn't make sense to me...

[j0nnyfive]

I may be wrong in my thinking (due to my lack of technical and sales experience), but I can't help but think that the audio industry is a bit "wonky".

I'm not blaming the engineers and designers. If anyone is to blame, it's the buyers and maybe marketing departments(?) Or maybe it's me. Maybe it just takes me a long time to understand things.

But to me, this seems so obvious.

In my opinion, there should be an ENTIRE CATEGORY of high-end 2-way bookshelf speakers that emphasize midrange performance and efficiency over bass extension, and are expected to be used with nice subwoofers. It just seems to me that most speaker companies should have this category along side the other more full range speakers.

Of course, I think there should still be "full range" speakers that don't need subs for people who just want simple setups or are heavily space-limited or budget-limited.

It just seems like this is a completely missing category in this industry. The CBM-170 SE is the kind of speaker I'm thinking of, but with more "upscale" drivers (like RAAL) and enclosure materials (like Bamboo).

This is taken from the CMT-340 SE sales page, but this makes sense to me in the context of bookshelf speakers with deep bass. I'm going to substitute the word "bookshelf" for the word "tower":

" In a quality home theater system, subwoofers are required and reproduce low frequency information far superior to 99% of all (bookshelf) speakers. With a full range (bookshelf) speaker, why pay for bass twice and sacrifice the critical midrange and high frequency performance?"

I don't know. Why? Why do other people not want high end 2-way bookshelf speakers that maximize mid-range clarity and efficiency? Is there some technical limitation that I'm not aware of? Is there some upper bass quality that can only be attained by making midbass drivers play as deep as possible? (again, I feel like I'm talking to the buyers/markets here. I know that Dave is limited to designing and building only what there is demand for.)

Can someone help set me straight in my thinking? What am I missing? I do love my Sierra 2EX speakers (I'm not complaining at all about my speakers). But I'm running them without a subwoofer. When I get subwoofer(s) later, I know this subject will surface in my mind again. Are we all just stuck, paying for our bass twice, forever?

Stay safe everybody.

P.S. I know about the Luna, but it's a small speaker (different category).

[j0nnyfive]

So, the post above is meant for YOU people out there who are buying speakers. Do you run bookshelf speakers and subwoofers? Am I alone in thinking the way I do? Would YOU buy a speaker with less bass, more midrange performance, and hopefully more efficiency? Or would this just not work well? Why or why not?

Thanks!

Edit: Again, I want to stress that I am not AGAINST full-range bookshelf speakers. They certainly have their place and a market. I'm just wondering why there doesn't seem to be a market for more bookshelf speakers like the CBMs that are limited in bass extension but focus more on midrange and maintaining high sensitivity (and also using RAAL and more "upscale" midwoofers). Where are you people? Am I alone?

[jimb]

I, too, imagine there should be a good market for a "bookshelf" or "satellite" that is high performance and optimized for 80 Hz crossover. That is, best performance given 4th order crossover at 80.

[j0nnyfive]

Thanks Jimb. Now that there are 2 of us, I can give them the go ahead for making T-Shirts for our new club. :p You think we can start a movement?

I'm gonna go ahead and read about 4th order crossovers since I don't know what that is. lol See? I'm aware that I could be wrong because I don't know these things. I'm just going off of my own intuition that tells me that if a driver is super good at producing low bass... it probably isn't as good at midrange as it could have been otherwise. This might be totally wrong though. I know what I get when I assume. I've done it before.

Now, I'm also aware that the 2EX is better at midrange than the 2 (from what I've read). So sometimes a better driver is a better driver all around, period.

But, you know what I'm getting at. Exactly. High-end sound, optimized for your typical home theater crossover (80hz). With the best midrange it can muster. The best efficiency it can muster.

Jimb, would you think it could be a sealed enclosure? Or would we lose too much? Thanks for helping me think about speakers and not the other things going on. :)

[SunByrne]

You're thinking something like this:

Salk Supercharged Song Surround (http://salksound.com/model.php?model=Supercharged%20SongSurround)

But maybe cheaper, and with even less bass. That'd be this:

The Mini Philharmonitor (http://philharmonicaudio.com/pa_archive/Mini-Monitor.html)

Unfortunately for everyone else, Dennis tells me I bought the very last pair of Mini Phils ever. They sound similar to S2s, just with less low-end reach. Unfortunately, the price really was too good to be true and Dennis's speaker business went under.

[racrawford65]

SunByrne - I like your signature -- obviously :-)

[curtis]

I bet it boils down to development costs and how many can potentially be sold.

[j0nnyfive]

You're thinking something like this:

Salk Supercharged Song Surround (http://salksound.com/model.php?model=Supercharged%20SongSurround)

But maybe cheaper, and with even less bass. That'd be this:

The Mini Philharmonitor (http://philharmonicaudio.com/pa_archive/Mini-Monitor.html)

Unfortunately for everyone else, Dennis tells me I bought the very last pair of Mini Phils ever. They sound similar to S2s, just with less low-end reach. Unfortunately, the price really was too good to be true and Dennis's speaker business went under.


Well, not exactly like those speakers, although both of those speakers look very nice and I hear that Mr. Murphy is a great designer. The first speaker produces more bass than I'm thinking is needed. The other speaker is smaller than what I'm thinking of (giving up efficiency maybe).

And this is my point. Either there is a hole in the market(demand), or there is a hole in my brain(technical issues) and I don't understand something. I don't understand why it seems like a category of speaker is missing.

At the other end of the spectrum, you have these websites selling these large horn-loaded speakers touting the importance of having plenty of headroom for wide dynamic swings in movies. I get that. Been there, done that. The problem I have with horns is listeners fatigue, a very "forward" sound, and an overall lack of detail compared to speakers like Sierras. The horn speakers I'm thinking of seem to be designed for home theater use (optimized for 80hz crossovers, etc). I really like that aspect to them.

But I think speakers like Sierras sound MUCH BETTER for home theater, but this side of the audio market seems to be filled with people who hate subwoofers and movies. lol (kidding) So, each speaker, including bookshelf speakers, are made to be run full range without subwoofers (to meet demand, of course).

I patiently await the emergence of a large enough demand for simple 2-way speakers that have upscale drivers (like RAAL) and are optimized for the typical 80hz crossover in home theater. Something like the CBMs, but bamboo, RAAL, awesome midbass, and all that. Of course, there would have to be demand. It just may be too "niche". Something with higher sensitivity (88db? 89db? 90db?), but more than sensitivity, midrange optimization. Should it be sealed? I don't know these things. I'm a simple man with simple thoughts. I play the kazoo.

C'mon people! We should all be the same and want the same things! Unity! How dare you people be different in your preferences and tastes!?

(Again, I want to stress that there is nothing wrong with full range bookshelf speakers. I really love my Sierra 2EXs) (...and please don't misinterpret my silliness as me being upset or anything. If you met me in real life, you'd understand. I've been described as laid-back but kinda goofy. I appreciate this discussion... helps me keep my mind off of more serious things in the world.)

[j0nnyfive]

I bet it boils down to development costs and how many can potentially be sold.

I'm sure that's it, Curtis. I'm trying to increase awareness and demand. I think I'm going to make some T-shirts and get some signs and protest at some speaker conventions. Wanna go? It's for a good cause. It'll be those conventions where the speakers are so exotic they look like alien space ships or something. It will make no sense whatsoever. Neither the speakers, nor the protest. :cool:

[doctors11]

Doesn't the Luna fit this need?

In general I completely agree with you. I've been looking for high quality passive speakers for my desktop with a beautiful midrange and detailed highs in a small package. I'm not worried about the low end as I'm planning on adding a sub. There certainly aren't many of them. But it sounds like the Luna might be the perfect answer for you. Does the 85 db sensitivity worry you?

[j0nnyfive]

Doesn't the Luna fit this need?

In general I completely agree with you. I've been looking for high quality passive speakers for my desktop with a beautiful midrange and detailed highs in a small package. I'm not worried about the low end as I'm planning on adding a sub. There certainly aren't many of them. But it sounds like the Luna might be the perfect answer for you. Does the 85 db sensitivity worry you?


All of everyone's responses have really helped me organize my thoughts better. I appreciate your input everyone!!

Hey Doc! The Lunas look like a great speaker for their application! I can only imagine how crazy challenging it must have been to develop those little speakers (how many woofer trials?) The Lunas are a different category of speaker than what I'm thinking of.

(I'm going to try to explain my thoughts in the post below.)

[j0nnyfive]

Okay, I'm more awake now! Ha!

Let me take a stab at categorizing the Ascend speakers arbitrarily. I'm not doing this to pick on Ascend (my favorite speaker company by FAR). I'm just most familiar with Ascend. And I'm doing this as a commentary on the speaker markets (what speaker buyers are demanding). I think Ascend's lineup of speakers is simply a reflection of what people are paying for. So, if I'm picking on anyone, it's YOU BUYERS out there! lol



1. NO SUB NECESSARY (but won't give you the deepest bass that a sub can)

Sierra Towers
Sierra Bookshelf (the bigger ones)


2. NEED A SUB (if you want sub bass)

Signature Editions
Sierra Lunas


Now, some commentary. In both categories (sub and subless), I have arranged the speakers from loudest to quietest. I want to make some observations.

1. The "no sub necessary" speakers can be a great bang-for-your-buck especially if you plan on not getting a subwoofer. Good subs cost money too. And if you want your speaker to give you satisfying bass, I think you'll get a good bang for your buck with category 1. What do you give up? What is the compromise? For the bookshelf speakers, they don't play as loud as the tower speakers. And the biggest compromise, IMO, is the lack of subwoofer(s). BUT, this category certainly needs to exist no doubt. Many can't accommodate subs in their living situations (apartment, WAF, space, the desire for simplicity, etc)

2. The "need a sub" speakers. You'll notice in this category that as the sound quality goes up, the speaker size goes down (the speakers are getting smaller with more spousal acceptance or lifestyle acceptance factor at play). So, the speakers in this category that have the nicest cabinets and drivers are the smaller speakers. This means that as the speaker quality increases, the loudness decreases.

This is inverted from category 1.

Category 1: As sound quality goes up, loudness goes UP. (bigger speakers = more output)
Category 2: As sound quality goes up, loudness goes DOWN. (you people and your lifestyle speakers) lol

Now, I said all that above to try to illustrate what I feel is the missing category. Let me make new categories here:

1. NO SUB NECESSARY
2. OPTIMIZED FOR SUBS <----- not small speakers!!!
3. LIFESTYLE (small speakers)

It just seems that the speaker-buying crowds are ignoring subwoofer optimized unless they're buying either horn speakers, budget speakers, or small speakers. In my opinion, this is a shame. Speakers like the Sierras sound much better for home theater, but we're still in the era of paying for your bass twice. There just doesn't seem to be as much demand for speakers that play loud, have super clarity, and are designed to expect subwoofers. I can't wait for this market to emerge (if ever). Because if it does, to me, this will truly be the best bang for your buck high quality category of speakers in the universe.

Is this all just a hangover from the "subwoofers are evil" era?? If so, I wish it would go away.

And again, there may be something I'm misunderstanding about all of this on a technical level or pricing level or demand level or level level. ....too many variables... :p

And again, I'm not poo pooing the small speakers and speakers that have a lot of bass. I definitely see how we (the audio community) NEED those categories. My Sierra-2EX speakers sound so sweet to my ears in this small apartment. And their bass is astonishing. If I could get away with a sub.... evil grin.

All that was said, keep in mind, is coming from a non-technical person. It could ALL be completely and utterly WWRROOOOONNNGGGGGGG... just my opinions/observations. Take it for what you will.

[mjlav]

I get what you're saying and I don't think you're crazy. The question for Dave would be whether he feels that in the S2EX, where bass AND midrange were improved, does he imagine a driver where midrange on the S2EX would be even better at the expense of bass extension - where the sub take over. I am not sure that sacrificing ~35Hz-80Hz extension would ever buy you better midrange. But I am not a speaker designer. But I certainly get the point. FYI, I currently own the S2EXs, RAAL Towers, and RAAL Horizon.

[jimb]

Furthermore, the optimum product would be sealed (IMO).

[j0nnyfive]

I get what you're saying and I don't think you're crazy. The question for Dave would be whether he feels that in the S2EX, where bass AND midrange were improved, does he imagine a driver where midrange on the S2EX would be even better at the expense of bass extension - where the sub take over. I am not sure that sacrificing ~35Hz-80Hz extension would ever buy you better midrange. But I am not a speaker designer. But I certainly get the point. FYI, I currently own the S2EXs, RAAL Towers, and RAAL Horizon.

Sorry for the really long-winded posts. I tried to make them shorter but I wanted to make sure that people really understand where I'm coming from.

You have a great point! I don't know, either. I'm going off of a set of intuitive assumptions here.

1. Speaker drivers are designed to meet specific targets like everything else that's engineered. (The 2EX woofers don't reach down that low by accident)

2. There are compromises that must be made to reach those targets.

And I know you know that. My understanding is that to maximize bass extension, you have to give up
sensitivity, and that a driver that is optimal for low bass tends to be different from a driver that is
optimized for mid range. (Isn't a mid range driver typically lighter?) That's as far as my intuition goes. On top of this, I don't know if sealing the cabinet can play a part in this, or if this would just cost the speaker too much efficiency. I'm over my head on that one.

Does the Sierra 2EX driver represent a technological advancement that somehow does away with the need for specializing drivers to optimize specific ranges? I doubt it. No doubt it is better than the Sierra-2 woofer in the midrange, but I can only imagine what can now be accomplished if SEAS focused on a full size driver that only has to extend down to 60hz or so. What kind of midrange and output performance could we get then? I have no idea! But judging by the fact that they got the 2EX woofer to do THAT? It would probably be INSANE. And, if we can start to get back some efficiency in the speaker (from giving up bass), that would be a good thing seeing as how blockbuster movies keep getting more and more dynamic (or are they just louder? loudness wars affected movies yet?)

Music's in the midrange. Life is in the dynamics. Bass is in the subwoofer. LOL Ho boy. Ignore that sentence. I'm crazy.

[j0nnyfive]

Furthermore, the optimum product would be sealed (IMO).

Hey! If you know more about this, would you mind explaining it to me? I understand that sealing a speaker can help increase cone control. But I don't know how this would effect the low end. Would we be giving up too much output at 60 or 65hz if we sealed it? This is over my understanding right now. And could you use a port, but then plug the port later and get a similar effect? What say you Jimb?

[curtis]

I believe Dave has made custom bookshelf speakers using the midrange driver from the tower.

[j0nnyfive]

I believe Dave has made custom bookshelf speakers using the midrange driver from the tower.

I can believe it! Although I'm not sure if those midranges can blend low enough (80hz). I bet those would be interesting, no doubt.

I found a speaker. Paradigm Persona B. 89db sensitivity anechoic. +/-2db @ 60hz. 7 inch mid-woofer.
Impedance: "Compatible with 8 ohm". Whatever that means. lol "Sure.... it'll work.... (runs the other way)"

Only $3500 each!! What a steal!! Can Dave beat this Goliath? Oh man I'm so cheesy.
I wouldn't be too surprised if the RAALs already beat it! But, I like those base specs. Looks like the CBMs! (I know that a speaker is much more than specs of course)

[j0nnyfive]

I have another theory about why this "category" of speaker is so rare.

I've been looking at this whole problem through idealistic eyes. But, we're living in the real world and have to deal with real people.

Most people buying speakers aren't OCD perfectionistic audio nerds like me!

Most people just want what they can intuitively understand. More bass. More clarity. And trust in the company/designer.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

So how do you sell a lot of a single line of speakers? Make sure they appeal to the widest audience possible. This ensures low prices. No way around it. Gotta have enough bass. Gotta be loud enough. And if I have deep pockets, gotta be the best you got. But if my wife yells at me, gotta be the smallest you got.

Does the average speaker buyer even know about the existence of the mid range? I didn't when I first bought the Sierra Towers (Nrt). I just bought them because I could afford them and because I trust the designer (still do, obviously). And I don't regret that purchase one bit! Still enjoying them after many years.

I think for the speaker "category" I'm thinking of to exist:

1. It actually needs to be a GOOD IDEA. (may not be)
2. It needs to be technically possible (no technical or price barriers).
3. Education for the average consumer needs to happen somewhere.
4. After being educated, people still have to want it and be sure of it.
5. ...and they still have to have no technical barriers or limitations (subwoofer).

This might be too tall an order to happen. We can't even get many audio companies to stop being deceptive with their specs.

So, ASSUMING that we can get enough people to want this kind of speaker, I need to establish numbers 1 and 2.

1. Is it ACTUALLY a good idea from an acoustic or technical standpoint? Will the speaker sound bad?
2. Are there pricing or technical limitations to this kind of speaker?

[j0nnyfive]

I want to say THANK YOU so much, guys, for hanging with me in this discussion. My posts are long walls of text and I spend a while trying to edit them to make them shorter. Being concise is something I'm working on, but I'm not the best at. Thanks again.

[curtis]

The most important question is if there is enough market for a company to make this kind of speaker. Specifically, is there enough market for Ascend to develop such a speaker. They have in the HTM-200SE and the CBM-170SE. These speakers have been around for almost 20 years, with only one change to the SE models (new woofer and tweeter). If Ascend saw the need to upgrade them again, I think they would have. Before the Sierra line of speakers, these and the CMT-340 were the only speakers Ascend offered.

Ascend is not a big company, they can not waste time and energy on something that isn't going to be profitable. Dave works a lot to get things "just right", not only with his own design/engineering, but with his OEMs to bring us excellent products.

I am 99% sure there isn't a technical issue. It is more about if it makes sense for Ascend.

I think you are looking for something like this:
https://jblpro.com/en/products/c222hp

[j0nnyfive]

The most important question is if there is enough market for a company to make this kind of speaker. Specifically, is there enough market for Ascend to develop such a speaker. They have in the HTM-200SE and the CBM-170SE. These speakers have been around for almost 20 years, with only one change to the SE models (new woofer and tweeter). If Ascend saw the need to upgrade them again, I think they would have. Before the Sierra line of speakers, these and the CMT-340 were the only speakers Ascend offered.

Ascend is not a big company, they can not waste time and energy on something that isn't going to be profitable. Dave works a lot to get things "just right", not only with his own design/engineering, but with his OEMs to bring us excellent products.

I am 99% sure there isn't a technical issue. It is more about if it makes sense for Ascend.

I think you are looking for something like this:
https://jblpro.com/en/products/c222hp


I agree with everything you said, Curtis. Dave has already confirmed for me that there isn't a big enough demand for this kind of speaker I'm talking about. This discussion is for YOU guys who buy speakers.

This discussion isn't so much to answer the "WHAT" questions (that Dave has graciously answered already) as it is the "WHY" questions. And the input from you guys has already begun to help me clarify my thinking.

And very funny, Curtis!!! Here are YOUR speakers now!!!

LOL!!!
You guys better behave over there. Be safe.

[Bruce Watson]

...there should be an ENTIRE CATEGORY of high-end 2-way bookshelf speakers that emphasize midrange performance and efficiency over bass extension, and are expected to be used with nice subwoofers.

Well, for my money that's exactly what I have. I've got a pair of Rythmiks, and a pair of Sierra-2s for L/R. When I'm listening to music, that's generally what I'm listening to, and it's for the reasons you state. Xover is 80 Hz. It sounds like a big floor standing full range speaker system, except that the subs are where they need to be to control room modes. What's not to like?

[j0nnyfive]

Well, for my money that's exactly what I have. I've got a pair of Rythmiks, and a pair of Sierra-2s for L/R. When I'm listening to music, that's generally what I'm listening to, and it's for the reasons you state. Xover is 80 Hz. It sounds like a big floor standing full range speaker system, except that the subs are where they need to be to control room modes. What's not to like?

That sounds great, Bruce!! I'm jealous of your setup!!

If you don't mind, what is your impression of my initial post? What is your thinking? I'm trying to get as many people's thoughts on this as I can because everyone's input on this is really helping me fill in the gaps of my understanding. Thanks!! Do you have any questions for me? Are you wondering why I seem to be making such a big deal? Or are you seeing some flawed reasoning that maybe you can help me with? Any input is much appreciated!! Thanks again!!

Be safe.

[curtis]

Well, for my money that's exactly what I have. I've got a pair of Rythmiks, and a pair of Sierra-2s for L/R. When I'm listening to music, that's generally what I'm listening to, and it's for the reasons you state. Xover is 80 Hz. It sounds like a big floor standing full range speaker system, except that the subs are where they need to be to control room modes. What's not to like?
This past weekend, I did some re-arranging of my setup, specifically the subwoofer location.

My room has a big suckout at 50hz. I moved the sub all along length of wall that was open, about 10'. Everywhere had the suckout, but I put sub where there was the least amount.

Then I re-ran Genesis/ARC, and to my surprise, it set the crossover at 90hz for my mains.

I also made some other system changes.

Sounds wonderful!

It's what you do when you're not supposed to do much outside.

[curtis]

Or are you seeing some flawed reasoning that maybe you can help me with? Any input is much appreciated!! Thanks again!!

Jonny...
I don't think your reasoning is flawed, but like Bruce, I have what I need. (but I want 2EXs)
What I think your missing is the actual market for what you want. It's very small.

[curtis]

I agree with everything you said, Curtis. Dave has already confirmed for me that there isn't a big enough demand for this kind of speaker I'm talking about. This discussion is for YOU guys who buy speakers.

This discussion isn't so much to answer the "WHAT" questions (that Dave has graciously answered already) as it is the "WHY" questions. And the input from you guys has already begun to help me clarify my thinking.

And very funny, Curtis!!! Here are YOUR speakers now!!!

LOL!!!
You guys better behave over there. Be safe.
Got it. BTW...I wasn't joking about those JBL's.

BTW...Dave has worked on exactly what you want in his previous life at Miller & Kreisel, the S150.
https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/137/index.html

[j0nnyfive]

Got it. BTW...I wasn't joking about those JBL's.

BTW...Dave has worked on exactly what you want in his previous life at Miller & Kreisel, the S150.
https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/137/index.html


Oops! My apologies!! I thought it had to be a joke! How can you be serious? (nervous laugh)

Yep! "Good sound to you.....always!" :o

[curtis]

Oops! My apologies!! I thought it had to be a joke! How can you be serious? (nervous laugh)

Yep! "Good sound to you.....always!" :o
High output two-way meant to be used with a subwoofer.

[j0nnyfive]

High output two-way meant to be used with a subwoofer.

I'm sorry Curtis, I know my posts were walls of text so I won't make you go back and read them. lol

I know at some point I'll need to reiterate my main points, but I'll spare ya'll the pain for now. :p

Or was I unclear somewhere? Very possible! Please, let me know!

[j0nnyfive]

WHY I STARTED THIS THREAD (A RECAP):
I'm gonna share some observations I've made over the past several years and then segue that into me winning the Nobel prize for my genius idea:


1. Wilson Audios and Revel Salons have horizontal centers. Who cares?

- NO speakers are "too nice" for home theater. Home Theater be gettin' crunk.
- The whole "Oh, it's just for home theater" attitude is dying out.


2. The 85-90 bookshelf/tower dance. Who cares?

I dunno... room kinda big. Dynamics. Yadda yadda. Might regret it! Yay tower$!!!


3. Tower speakers need subwoofers. Who cares?

- Those room modes ain't gonna fix themselves. Better buy that bass twice, boy!
- The whole "subwoofers are evil" attitude is dying out.


4. Dynamics too low in modern music. Too high in modern movies. Who cares?

- Uh oh... some people went ahead and bought those Klipsch at Best Buy!


5. People give up horn speakers after figuring it out. Who cares?

- Now they're looking for a balance. They know what they're wanting now...

Drumroll please...... (A man sitting in the seat behind you whispers: better get ready to buy that bass twice boy).........

***Oh wait!! I have an idea! You know those small satellite speakers that have no bass but they can get pretty loud for their size? Yeah? Just make bigger, high-end versions of those!! No, I'm not talking about those NHTs. I mean bigger. NO, I'm not talking about those massive JBL sound re-enforcement speakers.. NO I'm not talking about the Lunas. I mean bigger! Normal size! Normal size! Yes.. that... Anyway, they're gonna get subs to fix those room modes, and I'm sure the woofers would probably be better at mid-range anyway because they aren't putting out a lot of bass!! (You're a genius Jonny, you're a genius!!)

YAY!!!! YOU WON THE NOBEL PRIZE JONNY!!!! (Someone yells "get 'em a body bag!")

(I'm sorry... It seems that there has been a mistake. We need to take back the prize. It appears that nobody wants that except Jimb. We don't like Jimb. ...I'm sorry, son.)

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

So the reason I started this thread is to figure out why nobody wants what Jimb wants.
Why Jimb? Why? Why do they have to treat you this way?

[curtis]

Yeah, I must be at a loss. I don’t know what you want.

[j0nnyfive]

Yeah, I must be at a loss. I donÂ’t know what you want.

Okay... what I'm doing in this thread is learning how other people think about speakers. It's interesting. My "idea" or "observation" is that there is a missing speaker "design target" in the home audio world in general. Why? Not enough demand. I'm trying to get a feel for why and whether it is plausible that demand may increase in the future.

Imagine a bookshelf speaker the size of the Sierra 2EX. Now give it the bass extension of the Luna. What did that do? Made it louder. And made the mid-range cleaner. In theory.

So what? What does this accomplish? It pushes the speaker closer to the home theater ideal.

1. Midrange even better than 2EX (in theory). (maximized mids)
2. Sensitivity getting much closer to 90db (maybe). (maximized sens)
3. MT = good bang for buck, versatile placement, and closer to point source ideal.

What did we give up? Bass. So use your subs you're getting anyway to fix room modes.

So isn't sacrificing bass too big of a sacrifice? Isn't "perfect" the enemy of "good"? I would make the argument that people buy 3-way tower speakers. Why? They want perfect. So there may be a market for "perfect" in bookie land, too.

Have you ever heard of min/maxing in video games? Where you maximize certain things and minimize certain things to hit whatever targets you set? That's basically what I'm doing here. Trying to outline a "min/maxed" bookshelf speaker that hits a very definite home theater target. Bang-for-buck high end sound. Can't get any more bang-for-buck at this quality level than this. In theory. I might be totally wrong, though! Why not already existing speakers? They weren't built with these targets in mind. (I'm not focusing on speakers, I'm focusing on design targets)

I hope this helps, Curtis. Sincerely. I know it seems like I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill, but... does Dave ever get really really into trying to perfect something? I sorta come from a family of perfectionists. But... I like it. :p

As you know, speakers are designed with certain targets in mind. Most high-end bookshelf speakers target a reasonable amount of bass so that they sound good without subwoofers. The targets I listed above simply assume subwoofers, but give you high-end quality sound (such as RAALs).

I'm not after a speaker. I'm learning more about speaker people and what their ideals are. It seems like the speaker world has been changing over the past decade, to me. The distinction between home theater and music speakers has been blurring, and subwoofers seem to be becoming more and more common. Especially using multiple subwoofers. I'm wondering if these changes will begin to shift people's expectations and in turn shift design targets. Or not.

(Also, it isn't lost on me that even if there were demand, there still may be problems with my understanding, or technical issues or pricing issues or what not. In other words, it could be that a type of mid-woofer I am thinking of may be SUPER expensive. Or it may be that the 2EX is at the limit of what can be done in the mid-range frequencies at it's price point. Or anything! Who knows?)

I don't want anything Curtis. But, I do enjoy your conversation and you have good music taste!

[curtis]

I know it seems like I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill, but... does Dave ever get really really into trying to perfect something?
Why would you ask this question? You don't think he does?

[j0nnyfive]

Why would you ask this question? You don't think he does?

Ah, I'm sorry Curtis. That was a rhetorical question. It's obvious to me that he does. I'm using his desire to perfect something as an example to explain why I'm striving so hard to understand something. I'm trying to perfect my understanding by having a discussion about these things. I wasn't literally asking if Dave tries to perfect something. That would be rather silly.

[davef]

I don't have much time these days but I am pretty sure what jonnyfive is looking for is something like the Sierra-2EX but with an even lower moving mass woofer, thus sacrificing bass for higher efficiency. Notice I mentioned sacrificing bass for efficiency - because a woofer like our EX is already very low mass and fully optimized for midrange performance. Further lowering moving mass, would require a shorter voice coil and taking some mass off the cone (likely making it thinner and less damped) this will increase efficiency at the expense of deeper bass. It would also sacrifice some power handling but I don't expect any actual measurable improvements in the midrange response. Typically, lowering mass by a significant amount can result in improved midrange detail - but with something like our EX woofer, the reduction in mass would be minimal as the MMS is already extremely low.

The question is, why would someone prefer having, for example, 3dB higher efficiency in a speaker that will now handle less power and would not provide the flexibility of using lower crossover points if the room or subwoofer demanded it? You would really get the benefit of both worlds by simply using the Sierra-2EX crossed at 80Hz.

J - it is important to understand that designing a woofer that is very low mass and fully optimized for the range of, for example, 80Hz to 4kHz, will still attempt to reproduce those below 80Hz frequencies. Those frequencies below that optimization point, can cause significant issues for that woofer if it can not handle them.

Even with an 80Hz crossover, there is still plenty of information below 80Hz that the woofer will still see and must be able to reproduce without distortion or distress.

The Sierra-2EX woofer is optimized to be able to reproduce frequencies one full octave below 80Hz.

You mentioned Paradigm Persona B. This is, in fact, very similar to our Sierra-2EX with regards to specs. Its efficiency is not 89dB - that is just what Paradigm would like you to believe. Its sensitivity is slightly higher than our Sierra-2EX and that is because it uses a woofer with more surface area. In addition, its measurements are not impressive:

https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1788:nrc-measurements-paradigm-persona-b-loudspeakers&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

What you are looking for is doable, but it would require a larger very low mass woofer and I am not really a fan of trying to mate a woofer larger than 6.5" with a tweeter. The speaker would need to be a 3-way for it to be optimized.

I designed / worked on a slew of these THX specific speakers for M&K (-3dB at 80Hz with 90dB efficiency), we were able to accomplish this goal by using multiple woofers (S-100, S-150, LCR750, S1, S5000, S-125). What I learned was that people went crazy for them for home theater, but did not like them for music. They lacked midbass, warmth, and dispersion characteristics were not ideal for music.

While I understand exactly what you are looking for, there is a reason you don't see this type of speaker these days. A competent engineer can get just as good midrange performance, while also getting excellent midbass and bass all with simply sacrificing sensitivity. Wattage is quite inexpensive.

[Bruce Watson]

You would really get the benefit of both worlds by simply using the Sierra-2EX crossed at 80Hz.

Yes. Exactly this. Dave's Sierra 2 designs + servo subs are very bloody difficult to beat.

[j0nnyfive]

Yes. Exactly this. Dave's Sierra 2 designs + servo subs are very bloody difficult to beat.

Oh, c'mon Bruce!! Don't pretend you KNEW all that all along now!! Because you didn't tell me, Dave had to take time out of his day to do all of your explaining!!

:p

LOL I'm just kidding of course. (I love you Bruce)


Dave, I feel bad, on one hand, that you took time out of your day to educate me. I really do. But, YOU SIR... Thank you so much!! ..for clearing up my technical curiosities on this matter. Everything you said helps me to better understand perhaps WHY the kind of speaker I'm thinking of isn't around. (The trade-offs don't balance in a sensible way.) I wasn't sure just how much more mid range performance could be gained, and how that would balance with losing bass performance below 60hz, and how that would all balance out. The sensitivity boost/loss isn't too big a deal. I considered that a possible bonus in addition to improved mid-range detail. But, I didn't know for sure. Now I do!

Why would someone want to lose power handling? Because they're a ****y! LOL

And now, I am through with this topic unless anyone wants to keep discussing it.

I want to re-iterate one more time that I love my Sierra 2EX and I use them just about every day. I'm not dissatisfied in ANY way. In fact, and this is kinda funny, unless a person is considering spending at the 2EX level for speakers, I DON'T WANT THEM TO HEAR THESE SPEAKERS because I don't want them to start crying or be disappointed in the speakers that they got, because there are other good speakers out there at lower price points but GOOD LORD!! Listening to these speakers (2EX) after that would be cruel punishment. (...and now, you have to go back to YOUR speakers, son...)

Again, thank you ALL for your taking the time to discuss this topic with me. It means a lot to me!! (I won't bring up another technical topic like this for a long long time, don't worry)

You guys stay safe!!

[j0nnyfive]

Actually, wait a sec. I've been caffeinated.

Dave, I really don't want to take any more time away from your work, but I have to mention this just to be sure. This may not change anything about what you said, but I need to make sure that it won't. Some of the things you said in your post give me the impression that You and I were not on the same wavelength. Let me just describe the exact speaker I'm thinking of in the best, most specific way that I can. All the talk of large cones, multiple woofers, and 80hz -3db points was making me a little nervous. :p I think sometimes its easy to think someone is chasing loudness at all costs (because I'm sure you've had this conversation a billion times).

Here is the speaker I am envisioning (Jimb told me to do this):

Arrangement: MT (no more, no less)
Woofer size: 6.5" (I wasn't sure of your exact limit on size but I never wanted to sacrifice off-axis realism)
-3db point: I assumed the Luna's point was okay. (?)
Enclosure: Possibly sealed unless this would be bad. (minimize group delay? tighten clarity?)
Primary attribute: Maximized midrange quality from a woofer specifically designed to hit these specific targets.
Accidental attribute: Increased sensitivity. This is not priority one. But every little bit helps.
Known sacrifices: Ability to cross lower than 80hz. Warmth.

This speaker wouldn't be "warm" for music. It would simply be as neutral as possible.

I am hesitant to post this... but I don't want to be misunderstood or taken as a knuckle dragger who just wants a louder speaker at all costs. This is why I reacted in humor to Curtis when he said I wanted a big sound re-enforcement speaker... I thought... SURELY he thinks more of me than that?
Edit: Not that people who NEED louder at all costs are knuckle draggers!! Sometimes there are legitimate needs!! lol Gotta learn to be more P.C. about knuckle dragging.

My biggest curiosity at this point is:

How a sealed enclosure would affect things. (Jimb made me ask this)

So, only if you ever have time, Dave. (it doesn't have to be today or tomorrow or even next week!! My email will let me know whenever it is.) I truly appreciate your willingness to educate us!!!

P.S. When is your book coming out?

[curtis]

I don't get it...

Dave told you there isn't a reason to build what you are envisioning, and you asked again.

The Sierra 2EX crossed at 80hz is your answer.

The port really doesn't come into play above 80hz.

[j0nnyfive]

I don't get it...

Dave told you there isn't a reason to build what you are envisioning, and you asked again.

The Sierra 2EX crossed at 80hz is your answer.

The port really doesn't come into play above 80hz.

Dear Curtis,

From reading what Dave wrote (I read it several times just to be sure), I was wanting to make sure that he understood that I wasn't talking about a speaker with a -3db point at 80hz. And that I wasn't talking about a speaker with multiple woofers or tweeters. And I wanted to make sure to clarify that a smooth off-axis performance is very important to me as well (so I wasn't envisioning a woofer too large).

I wanted to just be sure that he understood exactly what I was curious about and not something a little different, because I wanted to be sure it didn't make any difference. After all, the CBMs, the CMTs, and the Luna's -3db points are what informed my ideas. When he mentioned -3db at 80hz, it kinda threw me off.

Sometimes, in the medical field, we have to get an order clarified. Do Doctors get upset at this? Who knows? It isn't viewed as "questioning the Doctor's judgement". If something seems a little "off" about a response you get, you ask for clarification just to be sure. Sometimes the exact same response comes back, and sometimes the Doctor says "Oops! We got our wires crossed a little back there. Here's my new answer..."
Science.

I value Dave's input very much! I wanted to make sure we were on the same page.
Also, Dave didn't mention anything about a sealed cabinet. I was curious about that because I know the mid-range on the tower is sealed, some other bookshelf speakers are sealed, and Jimb mentioned sealed as well. Just curious.

I know that Dave is a very busy man, so it's okay if he doesn't answer. I totally understand. Just making sure he's not accidentally answering a question that wasn't asked. Seeking clarification.

Thanks Curtis!! You da man!! Sit back and relax my friend.

[curtis]

To me, what seems like you are doing is trying to justify your idea (and how come JimB isn't chiming in?), not clarifying an idea.

I think it is very clear that the 2EX is the answer, it ticks all your boxes, unless you decide to add some more. Its performance is outstanding in the frequency range your desire, and then some.

BTW...the midrange in the Tower is sealed so it doesn't interact with the woofers. I think Dave has that in one of his posts in the Tower thread.

OK...enough said, I will bow out. Carry on.

[j0nnyfive]

To me, what seems like you are doing is trying to justify your idea (and how come JimB isn't chiming in?), not clarifying an idea.

I think it is very clear that the 2EX is the answer, it ticks all your boxes, unless you decide to add some more. Its performance is outstanding in the frequency range your desire, and then some.

BTW...the midrange in the Tower is sealed so it doesn't interact with the woofers. I think Dave has that in one of his posts in the Tower thread.

OK...enough said, I will bow out. Carry on.


Well, I'm sorry about Curtis leaving. I hope I didn't upset him. That was never my intention. And, if Jimb is paying attention, I'm just saying things like "Jimb told me to" as a joke. I'll try to be very straight-forward and serious in the future.

To rightfully defend myself from Curtis's accusational posture (trying to justify). This is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. I did learn a lot from Dave's response, but there are some points that seem a little unclear to me (information below 80hz assuming which -3db point? did he think I meant 80hz -3db point? I don't know.) And, again, I wasn't sure how sealing the bookshelf speaker would affect everything. <-- This isn't clarification, it's just something that I wish he talked about in that post. Just my curiosity and I wanted to see what Dave would say about sealing a woofer as high performing as an EX. Would this do anything at all? Or maybe hurt it? Just my curiosity. Now I'm considering port plugs for my EXs. But that's kinda off-topic. I sought clarification ultimately for clarification.

This section of the forum is labeled: Technical Discussions, and it is described as "The place for high-level technical discussions such as loudspeaker DESIGN, room acoustics, subwoofer design, FUTURE audio/video technologies etc..." (emphasis mine). I'm saying this to defend my starting this topic on a whim...

However, thinking about Curtis's responses and the role he plays, I feel it may have been inappropriate for me to have raised this kind of discussion on a speaker company's website. And if so, I apologize. I will keep this in mind in the future, and pay closer attention to which forums I ask which questions.

No hard feelings (I mean that).
Ascend is still my favorite speaker company. I wish you guys continuing health and success in the future. Take care.

[natetg57]

I don't think it's wrong to ask the questions you asked but I would suggest rereading your posts and making them much shorter. But don't overthink it. We all appreciate learning and the technology side of our speaker systems. Take care and happy listening!

[curtis]

No hard feelings.

You have obviously done your reading. I just feel the answer was already given to you.

Now you are asking about sealed vs ported, which in itself is another topic. That said, like I mentioned before, if you are crossing the Sierra-2EX at 80hz, the port doesn't come into play.

The Sierra-2EX does what you want it to do, why are you going beyond that? Because you think there is something better for your needs?

[racrawford65]

I don't think it's wrong to ask the questions you asked but I would suggest rereading your posts and making them much shorter. But don't overthink it. We all appreciate learning and the technology side of our speaker systems. Take care and happy listening!

I agree. The questions are good, but shorter / more direct (organized?) posts would help.

I also agree with Curtis that the S2EX hits the mark you are looking for technically as well as commercially.

No offense meant to Johnny.