Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Whats up with the huge delay in updating to SE pics?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curtis
    It is the Ascend Owners thread, but LeeLee never posted pics.
    actually he did, see post #360.

    Geez, what a thread...finally finished wading through it just now. I have to say that LeeLee does use some hyperbolic and inflammatory language, in addition to taking a ridiculously anal examination of a $350 pair of speakers. I also have to say that now I am very curious to hear the Onix XL-S speakers myself though.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada
    Posts
    143

    Default

    I have to say that LeeLee does use some hyperbolic and inflammatory language, in addition to taking a ridiculously anal examination of a $350 pair of speakers.
    I agree completely. OTOH, many of us will recognize the validity of some of his observations, if not his reactions and judgements related to those observations.

    My pet peeve (as Dave well knows ) is the visible seams or "reveal lines" on the speakers, and (I have finally realized) it's not so much their presence that concerns me, but the slight "raggedness" which LeeLee describes. If all the speakers could look as good as the CBM-170 SE in the new pics, I would be completely satisfied with the appearance.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GaryB
    My pet peeve (as Dave well knows ) is the visible seams or "reveal lines" on the speakers, and (I have finally realized) it's not so much their presence that concerns me, but the slight "raggedness" which LeeLee describes. If all the speakers could look as good as the CBM-170 SE in the new pics, I would be completely satisfied with the appearance.
    The pics don't really show anything new to me in terms of the SEs' build quality, they just seem more attractively photographed---larger in size and from interesting angles, with better light conditions.

    My only real aesthetic reservation about the 170s has always been their fundamental shape---oddly boxy and squat/square-looking, made even weirder-looking by the rounded corners. Grows on you like a homely good woman though: "Date the Onix, marry the Ascend!"

    And yes the logo could be more attractive but that really seems like hair-splitting to me when I consider the exceptional performance-to-price ratio of these speakers.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eddie
    I also have to say that now I am very curious to hear the Onix XL-S speakers myself though.
    I have a pair. Accoustically, I wouldn't put them in the same arena with the Ascends but they look good and they go lower than my 340's. I've done some listening with my 200's but the speakers are so different that a comparison isn't possible for me. They both have their strengths and weaknesses but for HT surrounds, I much prefer the 200's. If it was for two channel without a sub, I'd go for the XL-S's but I would expect the 170's to be a better choice if I were going to use them for critical listening. It's a nice speaker at a good price but it's not an Ascend.

    David

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    000000N 0000000E
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bikeman
    I have a pair. Accoustically, I wouldn't put them in the same arena with the Ascends but they look good and they go lower than my 340's. I've done some listening with my 200's but the speakers are so different that a comparison isn't possible for me. They both have their strengths and weaknesses but for HT surrounds, I much prefer the 200's. If it was for two channel without a sub, I'd go for the XL-S's but I would expect the 170's to be a better choice if I were going to use them for critical listening. It's a nice speaker at a good price but it's not an Ascend.

    David
    That's about what I expected.
    Jon O.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,558

    Default

    Hi Guys,

    Greetings from the East Coast...

    I am very pleased to hear that you like the new pics so far... I had absolutely ZERO success with photographers so we are now doing everything in-house.

    Many more pics coming soon
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    000000N 0000000E
    Posts
    771

    Default

    You did those in house??

    Where's that genuflecting emoticon when you need it?
    Jon O.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    17

    Default

    the new pictures are really good -- excellent, in fact. can't wait to see the new ones for the 340s.

    a question on the logos: would they be easy to remove without damaging the grills, or leaving a residue? is it possible to get grills with no logo?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Yes, you can get speakers without logos if you so desire, which is obviously the way to go if you don't think you want them. I believe Ascend will also send you loose logos to apply yourself, if you change your mind. OTOH, you probably won't do that as cleanly and evenly as the factory.

    Personally, I like them.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GaryB
    Yes, you can get speakers without logos if you so desire, which is obviously the way to go if you don't think you want them. I believe Ascend will also send you loose logos to apply yourself, if you change your mind. OTOH, you probably won't do that as cleanly and evenly as the factory.

    Personally, I like them.
    thanks. i just photoshopped one to have no logo, and it definitely looks better with a logo than without one. the logo itself could use some work, but that's another discussion.

    about the "cube" shape that Eddie mentioned, i've always wondered: is that an intentional design decision relating to the sound quality, or did it just kind of end up that way because of manufacturing considerations, etc.? i mean, are there specific reasons why the speaker is not a more traditional taller and narrower shape? i imagine it's designed that way intentionally, but i just wonder about the technical reasons related to how it affects the sound.
    Last edited by starcycle; 04-17-2006 at 08:28 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •