Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    This is a really interesting thread since I am currently down to deciding between the Revel Performa3 F206 + C208 and 3x Horizon RAAL.

    I've heard the Concerta2 F36, and loved their neutrality, and believe the Performa3 setup will only be better. However, I'm a little obsessed over the RAAL 70-20xram measurements because of what I am looking for out of my system: realism.

    I wish I could afford to audition both in my room!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    457

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHorizon View Post
    This is a really interesting thread since I am currently down to deciding between the Revel Performa3 F206 + C208 and 3x Horizon RAAL.

    I've heard the Concerta2 F36, and loved their neutrality, and believe the Performa3 setup will only be better. However, I'm a little obsessed over the RAAL 70-20xram measurements because of what I am looking for out of my system: realism.

    I wish I could afford to audition both in my room!
    Well, the Performa3 speaker has similar low end extension, but really diverges from the Sierra speakers with the aluminum dome tweeter they use. The RAAL tweeters are so, so much different than any aluminum dome I've heard. If you loved the neutrality of the Concerta2, you're going to be dumbfounded by the neutrality of the RAAL tweeter.

    Think of it this way, with the RAAL tweeters you have a piece of metal that is extremely light while also having a very large radiating surface area. In addition, it is not connected to a voice coil, it is moved by giant magnets that are not connected to the tweeter element. In my opinion, because of this, there is almost no distortion or ringing and the decay is almost immediate. In an aluminum dome, you have a smaller radiating area which has to be controlled more directly, and is connected to a voice coil that will limit how quickly the sound decays. You just aren't ever going to get the kind of results you get with a true ribbon tweeter.

    From what I have seen, many fans of metal dome tweeters think that the metallic, sharp, ringing sound of them is neutral or realistic when it really isn't, it's just pleasing to them. Because the sound of the high frequencies is more metallic and louder, it makes instruments seem like more than they really are, or much more present than they really are, so people think flutes sound metallic when they really shouldn't in reality. It takes time getting used to the RAAL tweeters because you're almost expecting some level of distortion, because you're so used to it, but it just isn't there.

    You're getting so much more with the Sierra speakers than that as well. You're getting bamboo cabinets that put vinyl wrapped MDF to absolute shame and the kind of quality control that most manufacturers only dream of. The Sierra towers are hand assembled and tested in San Clemente, and you get the response graphs to prove it.

    For me, it's a no brainer, go with the Sierra series and don't look back.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by yesplease View Post
    I think Dave said somewhere that you would need to move up to the Ultima2 for a better comparison.
    Got a link to that? I would consider that a pretty crazy claim. As a disclaimer I've owned the entire Ultima 2 series and every speaker Ascend has made other than the Sierra Tower (which I have on order) and the Horizon.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by Asliang View Post
    Got a link to that? I would consider that a pretty crazy claim. As a disclaimer I've owned the entire Ultima 2 series and every speaker Ascend has made other than the Sierra Tower (which I have on order) and the Horizon.
    @Asliang How would you rate the S2 RAAL tweeter vs the Ultima2 tweeter?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHorizon View Post
    @Asliang How would you rate the S2 RAAL tweeter vs the Ultima2 tweeter?
    It's hard to compare S2 RAAL directly with the Ultima 2 tweeter because the entire Ultima2 line is either 3-way or 4-way with their tweeters only covering a smaller frequency band with a dedicated midrange (or a upper bass AND mid-range driver in the case of the Salon 2), whereas the Sierra 2 has to cross over (I Imagine) around 1.8KHz.

    I have to hear the Sierra Towers to really make an apples to apples judgment where the tweeters are only being compared in a similar band. It's also really hard to compare the Gem2s to any stand-mount monitor because despite having an 8" woofer they start diving at around 75Hz in output. Despite having probably the best midrange I've ever heard I wouldn't suggest it as a monitor due to how thin it sounds lacking any midbass, and it's pretty tricky to integrate it with a subwoofer without the sub getting localized. With all that said, I did have the opportunity to listen to the Gem2s directly against the Sierra 2s and had them in the same room for several months and I would be very surprised anyone claiming they were comparable products performance-wise (and at 7 times the cost they better be, because the Gem2s are butt ugly).

    As far as the tweeters on their objective qualifications, the RAAL probably measures better in CSD plots, I couldn't tell you what sounds better since I've never listened to a driver by itself, but obviously the Revel tweeter will have a much wider radiating pattern due to being a dome, and also having a waveguide. But the Revel tweeter does mesh very well with the Revel midrange driver. It's basically flat across the FR band from a wide variety of angles so both the midrange and the tweeter are equally capable in terms of a wide radiating pattern. (I believe the dropoff after 10KHz is due to the waveguide, but IIRC there's not much musical energy above 6KHz anyway).

    Last edited by Asliang; 06-04-2016 at 12:42 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    S.E. La. - USA
    Posts
    312

    Exclamation Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by yesplease View Post
    I think Dave said somewhere that you would need to move up to the Ultima2 for a better comparison.
    Quote Originally Posted by Asliang View Post
    Got a link to that? I would consider that a pretty crazy claim. As a disclaimer I've owned the entire Ultima 2 series and every speaker Ascend has made other than the Sierra Tower (which I have on order) and the Horizon.
    Yes, Dave stated that HERE. I was curious why the high end frequency response wasn't listed on the Performa3 systems site. Questioned the local dealer, but couldn't get an answer for me. I ended up calling Revel and speaking to a design engineer who pulled a frequency graph and was told the 208 was rolling off at 20K, but their graph didn't take it beyond that!?

    Spec wise, the low end -3db is rated the same as the Towers, but the Towers are a little more efficient. Although I speak from supposition (I've heard neither), I'm sure in Dave's experience, this is a very fair statement for an accurate comparison, say with the Ultima2-Studio2's (@ over 5X $$$)!

    Asliang, though the Towers may not equal the Studio2's, very interested in how they go head to head, if you still own them!

    Ted
    Last edited by theophile; 06-05-2016 at 10:15 AM.
    Sierra RAAL V2 Towers, Axiom EP 500 Sub, Morrow SP7 Grand Reference Speaker Cables, Phillips CD880 XLR Balanced Variable Line Output to Orchard Audio Strakrimson 375w/per ch Stereo Ultra GaNFET Amp..... (Dedicated 2.1 Acoustical Music Listening Room)!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by theophile View Post
    Yes, Dave stated that HERE. I was curious why the high end frequency response wasn't listed on the Performa3 systems site. Questioned the local dealer, but couldn't get an answer for me. I ended up calling Revel and speaking to a design engineer who pulled a frequency graph and was told the 208 was rolling off at 20K, but their graph didn't take it beyond that!?

    Spec wise, the low end -3db is rated the same as the Towers, but the Towers are a little more efficient. Although I speak from supposition (I've heard neither), I'm sure in Dave's experience, this is a very fair statement for an accurate comparison, say with the Ultima2-Studio2's (@ over 5X $$$)!

    Asliang, though the Towers may not equal the Studio2's, very interested in how they go head to head, if you still own them!

    Ted
    Dave seems to have said the Ultima series and not the Ultima2. I dont know if thats a distinction he made intentionally. But if it was it makes perfect sense. Quite a few speaker lines have surpassed the original Ultima series at a fraction of the price these days, mostly a function of outsourcing as since the Ultima series originally debuted the manufacturing of drivers and cabinets have largely moved overseas to reduce costs.

    As far as response above 20K, theres not much point having a speaker go well over 20k. Even DSDs dont typically have any content above 20k (other than high freq DSP induced distortion that mixing engineers "hide" in the higher registers because they know its inaudible) and adult humans dont typically hear well above 16k anyway. Theres also the issue of their cone material, which is aluminum and typically starts breaking up at 23KHz on a 1" dome. Im sure they intentionally rolled off the tweeter at Revel to avoid that spike.
    Last edited by Asliang; 06-05-2016 at 12:11 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Asliang, the crossover in the Sierra 2's is not 1.8kHz. I think that's the crossover in the towers, which use the larger RAAL that can be crossed over that low. The Sierra 2's use the smaller RAAL that can't handle such a low crossover frequency; I think they are crossed at around 3kHz.

    Also, this comment you made is puzzling: "but obviously the Revel tweeter will have a much wider radiating pattern due to being a dome, and also having a waveguide." First, domes don't necessarily have a much wider radiation pattern. In fact, if one were to generalize, the opposite may be true, unless you're referring to vertical radiation only. Domes tend to have very wide output low in the region they cover, with that output narrowing significantly as you go up in frequency. Ribbons don't tend to narrow so much as you go up in frequency. Second, the waveguide doesn't increase the width of radiation of the tweeter; it constrains it so that the tweeter's directivity matches the directivity of the midrange driver that hands off to it. And in doing so, waveguides often constrain the highest octave more than desired.

    One final comment: The CSD of the Revel Ultima2 beryllium dome is excellent. The low-level hash you see in Stereophile's CSD plots of the Salon2 and Studio2 in the tweeter frequency range are actually resonances from the titanium midrange drivers.
    Last edited by Beave; 06-05-2016 at 03:12 PM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    S.E. La. - USA
    Posts
    312

    Exclamation Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by Asliang View Post
    As far as response above 20K, theres not much point having a speaker go well over 20k...and adult humans dont typically hear well above 16k anyway. Theres also the issue of their cone material, which is aluminum and typically starts breaking up at 23KHz on a 1" dome. Im sure they intentionally rolled off the tweeter at Revel to avoid that spike.
    As far as I understand, All domes (Soft, Aluminum, Titanium, Beryllium, Diamond) share one common problem...breakup frequencies. In order to obtain full extend and accurate "Audible" listening comfort that isn't affected by these breakup frequencies (manifested in brightness, edginess, harshness, colorations, fatigue, etc), control of these in-audible frequencies is best achieved by designing their points at or above 30K, or at best an octave above the 3db down-point of the HF transducers flat radiating curve. The best designed systems easily play flat well beyond what you or I can hear (35K to 50K+), insuring that the BF resonates into the system response that is unnoticeable by any human hearing.

    At 62, my hearing still extends out beyond 18K, with 1K-12K sensitives at or below 0 DB. In the early 70's I owned horns and quickly migrated to the smoother, more extended listen-ability of soft domes. However, even Aluminum and Beryllium domes create long term listening fatigue for me, even at moderate levels. On Monday the 6th, I'll be receiving the Sierra 2's with RAAL's that have no BF, thus no affected audible issues in the extreme top end! Comments and observations from owners, like openness, airiness and ease of listen-ability, with extreme focused sound-staging and imaging, are what has attracted me to the Ascend RAAL S2's. All of this plus the excellent products that Dave and AA has historically offered to those willing to take the plunge!

    I'll soon have the Sierra 2's in a 2.1 90sf intimate music room, and you the towers. If the RAALs offer that open, natural, effortless and smooth top end that I've read about, I'm going to have to Re-listen to all the excellent recordings I've collected and recently invested in All Over Again!!!

    Ted
    Sierra RAAL V2 Towers, Axiom EP 500 Sub, Morrow SP7 Grand Reference Speaker Cables, Phillips CD880 XLR Balanced Variable Line Output to Orchard Audio Strakrimson 375w/per ch Stereo Ultra GaNFET Amp..... (Dedicated 2.1 Acoustical Music Listening Room)!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: Ascend Sierra Tower (Raal) vs Revel F208

    Quote Originally Posted by Beave View Post
    Asliang, the crossover in the Sierra 2's is not 1.8kHz. I think that's the crossover in the towers, which use the larger RAAL that can be crossed over that low. The Sierra 2's use the smaller RAAL that can't handle such a low crossover frequency; I think they are crossed at around 3kHz.

    Also, this comment you made is puzzling: "but obviously the Revel tweeter will have a much wider radiating pattern due to being a dome, and also having a waveguide." First, domes don't necessarily have a much wider radiation pattern. In fact, if one were to generalize, the opposite may be true, unless you're referring to vertical radiation only.
    I am generalizing about domes, and I am talking mostly about vertical dispersion when comparing these to drivers. But even on the horizontal plane, the Revel will "seem" to have more room filling because it remains flatter in FR response even at 90 degrees.

    One final comment: The CSD of the Revel Ultima2 beryllium dome is excellent. The low-level hash you see in Stereophile's CSD plots of the Salon2 and Studio2 in the tweeter frequency range are actually resonances from the titanium midrange drivers.
    I said the RAAL "probably" measures better in CSD plots because there are no publicly available measurements of the Revel tweeter by itself. I am well aware that titanium drivers when used in 5" or 6" sizes will typically breakup between 4-6KHz. Comparing the CSD plot of a ribbon tweeter versus the output of a complete speaker is nonsensical, and if I was going to make that comparison I would have specifically mentioned that.
    Last edited by Asliang; 06-06-2016 at 07:27 PM. Reason: spelling

Posting Permissions

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