Swan Divas, Wharfedale Diamond 8.2, Athena AS-B1

Not a fair comparison, but I heard the AS-B1's at Best Buy....the set-up was not well done, but from what I heard, they did not sound bad.

-curtis

When you say, "Not a fair comparison", do you mean because of the poor set-up at best buy, or because of the pricing differences between the speakers I've chosen?

How would you describe the AS-B1s in relation to the 170's.. how are they similar, and how are they different, if you can recall?

thanks.

Because of the setup...would only be fair if I brought them home.

Only thing I can recall was that they were not as refined or balanced. Oh...I remember that only one channel was working.

-curtis

I recently joined these forums after deciding to get the 170s and VTF-2 subwoofer.

A little about me, first. In the past, I've owned Large Advent (and heard the double Advent), **** 301, **** 901 (much 'colder' and more neutral than the 301s) and the Wharfedale Diamond Anniversary 7.2. I've been fairly satisfied with the **** 901s, until recently, when (1) they seemed muddy for DVDs, and outside of piano/organ music, or hard rock, they weren't satisfying for music llstening. I thought perhaps as I got older (I am "over the hill"), my hearing was getting worse, so that it wouldn't matter any more. Actually, the reverse was/is true: I need clearer sound now. So I checked online, and started comparing, especially, Axioms and Ascends. My wife insisted on small speakers, allowing for a subwoofer. "No more huge bookshelf speakers" she told me. Ok by me, too, as the **** were getting a bit hefty to put up, and take down, from the tops of our entertainment units. Two things convinced me to try Ascend, first. (1) the flatness of the frequency response curve, and (2) the fact that Ascend reviewers were comparing, and preferring, Ascends to $1500-$2000 systems, while Axioms (2ti and 3ti) were being compared to $500 and under systems. Oh, and a couple of reviews were from other **** 901 owners.

I've had the Wharfedale Diamond Anniversary 7.2, on top of the cases, since my **** equalizer blew (thunder storm when we were out of town). I thought the Ascends might not be any better than the Diamonds, but it was immediately obvious that they were. My wife even came into the room and said "these are a lot better than the others."

The Wharfedales now go back to the basement until I can sell them, along with my **** 901s, and get another pair of 170s (or maybe 340s w/o subwoofer) for the basement.

By the way, the Wharfedales are listed as going to 40Hz, but the 170s have much more bass: deeper and better sounding. I checked them before turning on the subwoofer (VTF-2). The subwoofer is very subtle, and sometimes it's difficult to tell that it is adding anything (except with DVDs!). But playing Bach's Toccata & Fugue in d-minor (Helmut Walcha) demonstrated that the subwoofer was needed: all the deep resonances were lost without it, though the music still sounded good.

Pegleg

Pegleg- Congrats on the Ascends and a belated welcome to the forum.

CQ

Thanks for the detailed response, pegleg!

I wonder how similar the 8.2s are in sound to the previous 7.2s? Not knowing speakers that well, I'm not sure how radically speaker companies change models from one generation to the next.

It gives me an idea though, at least.. so thanks.
(and welcome to the board.. even though you've stolen my newbie thunder!)

Gregisme,
From what reviews I was able to read, the Wharfedale 8.2 seemed to be better than the 7.2. By how much, I cannot say.

Pegleg