Sierra Towers (RAAL) vs Sierra 2 EX's as front L/R

[elan120]

The Sierra towers are the first speakers I've had where my wife actually appreciated the upgrade. She's never excited about me getting new gear, but she'd be downright upset if anything were to happen to them. She's been listening to a lot more music lately and sometimes cranks it up pretty loud now.

That is always a good sign that a speaker is capable to provide enjoyments for everyone. I am very much looking forward to test different setups, and have been busy acquiring different gears to find out what works the best.

[Pogre]

That is always a good sign that a speaker is capable to provide enjoyments for everyone. I am very much looking forward to test different setups, and have been busy acquiring different gears to find out what works the best.

In my experience speakers are the most important part of the equation when it comes to gear. Like, BY FAR. After that tackling room acoustics runs a close second in importance. The rest of the electronics, in my opinion, have the least impact on the end result. Once you have sufficient power provided by a well built and engineered av receiver or separates it comes down to features and connections.

I've had a few AV receivers and currently a separate Monolith 7 amp, which I love, but if I'm being honest with myself I couldn't discern any noticeable audible differences between any of them aside from different room correction tech. Of which I'm a big fan of Audyssey MultEQ XT32 and the editor app. That app is a game changer and allows for some very tight, precise control over your room curve using ratbuddyssey (a user made pc program allowing for much tighter adjustments than what you can do with the app alone).

I'd say you have the biggest part of the battle licked with your speaker choices. The rest is finding enough power to drive them to the levels you like and which features you'd like to have. I may be in the minority here, but I really prefer using an av receiver with good bass management. That in my opinion is the biggest weakness with a lot of 2 channel rigs is the lack of proper bass management.

[dislocatedday]

In my experience speakers are the most important part of the equation when it comes to gear. Like, BY FAR. After that tackling room acoustics runs a close second in importance. The rest of the electronics, in my opinion, have the least impact on the end result. Once you have sufficient power provided by a well built and engineered av receiver or separates it comes down to features and connections.

This paragraph is the "Golden Rule" and most important part in audio from my lifetime of listening to music and having a home theater setup for close to 25 years now. Every person into audio should follow this advice IMO.

I'd include capable subs in the speakers equation as well for most setups and definitely if running a HT and watching movies, and the ability to EQ those subs.

I also use a Schiit Loki 4 band EQ on some stereo recordings that I feel need adjustments, but bypass it most of the time.

[Pogre]

I'd include capable subs in the speakers equation as well for most setups and definitely if running a HT and watching movies, and the ability to EQ those subs.

Absolutely agree with you, tho I do consider subs part of the speaker equation since they are just big speakers. But yes, I think good subwoofage is as important as good speakers. A lot of folks underestimate what real good, clean distortion free bass can do for a system. Good bass, properly integrated, has a way of making the entire range sound smoother and cleaner while adding depth, weight and texture.

Having the ability to eq subs is huge because that's where the room really starts asserting itself, are the bass frequencies. Every room is different and very few will have a smooth bass fr without some eq.

For anyone interested Audioholics put up a video yesterday and talked about bass management for advanced users. Lots of good info in it.

[elan120]

I'd say you have the biggest part of the battle licked with your speaker choices. The rest is finding enough power to drive them to the levels you like and which features you'd like to have. I may be in the minority here, but I really prefer using an av receiver with good bass management. That in my opinion is the biggest weakness with a lot of 2 channel rigs is the lack of proper bass management.

Picking the speakers was indeed the challenging part getting this system put together. Originally, I was only planning to use it for HT, but after seeing and talking to others about how capable RAAL Towers are, I am now planning to spend a good amount of time testing to dial in the setup for 2 channel stereo. I have a few combination of setups from source to amp to test, hoping to bring the most out of the Towers.

Btw, thanks for the bass management video link.

[Pogre]

Picking the speakers was indeed the challenging part getting this system put together. Originally, I was only planning to use it for HT, but after seeing and talking to others about how capable RAAL Towers are, I am now planning to spend a good amount of time testing to dial in the setup for 2 channel stereo. I have a few combination of setups from source to amp to test, hoping to bring the most out of the Towers.

Btw, thanks for the bass management video link.

You bet.

Right now I have a 5.1 setup in my living room pulling double duty, and stereo music playback is wonderful. There's certainly a lot of debate about it, but I really don't think a dedicated 2 channel only rig offers much more than a carefully set up 5.1 for stereo sound quality. A good av receiver with a full set of preouts is the route I usually suggest. Then you can go for additional amplification if you choose, and have a ton of flexibility for both ht and stereo listening. Not the least of which being proper bass management.

I've seen guys who will have 2 different sets of electronics for ht and stereo use, in the same room using the same speakers and that just never made any sense to me. It adds complexity and just seems superfluous to me. If you think about it all that amp money could go toward something like room treatments or multi subs, and that's where you'll notice audible improvements. I've yet to read a study or DBT where any participants were able to pick between "audiophile" and just plain "good".

Here's one with some interesting results.

http://matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm

[racrawford65]

You bet.

Right now I have a 5.1 setup in my living room pulling double duty, and stereo music playback is wonderful. There's certainly a lot of debate about it, but I really don't think a dedicated 2 channel only rig offers much more than a carefully set up 5.1 for stereo sound quality. A good av receiver with a full set of preouts is the route I usually suggest. Then you can go for additional amplification if you choose, and have a ton of flexibility for both ht and stereo listening. Not the least of which being proper bass management.

I've seen guys who will have 2 different sets of electronics for ht and stereo use, in the same room using the same speakers and that just never made any sense to me. It adds complexity and just seems superfluous to me. If you think about it all that amp money could go toward something like room treatments or multi subs, and that's where you'll notice audible improvements. I've yet to read a study or DBT where any participants were able to pick between "audiophile" and just plain "good".

Here's one with some interesting results.

http://matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm

I don’t think adding a stand-alone music preamp (with HT bypass if plan on sharing front speakers and amp) adds that much more complexity. A few more interconnects. Depending on equipment, a dedicated 2ch preamp can really improve music over an AVR. My MRX720 was pretty good for music, but the Rogue RP5 I added was a definite step up, especially for imaging/soundstage with vinyl playback

[elan120]

I don’t think adding a stand-alone music preamp (with HT bypass if plan on sharing front speakers and amp) adds that much more complexity. A few more interconnects. Depending on equipment, a dedicated 2ch preamp can really improve music over an AVR. My MRX720 was pretty good for music, but the Rogue RP5 I added was a definite step up, especially for imaging/soundstage with vinyl playback

What do you think is the main factor for the improved image/soundstage? Is it because the AVR not processing the signal well enough or something Rogue RP5 added?

Are you mostly vinyl or both vinyl and digital as source material?

TIA

[racrawford65]

Hi elan120
Not intimate with the circuitry of both so I’m hypothesing that the Rogue as a dedicated 2channel preamp is better than the mrx for music based on design. Tubes vs solid state may also contribute

Mostly vinyl. Although recently added a streamer

[Pogre]

What do you think is the main factor for the improved image/soundstage? Is it because the AVR not processing the signal well enough or something Rogue RP5 added?

Are you mostly vinyl or both vinyl and digital as source material?

TIA

I don't think there is a factor for improved soundstage and imaging when it comes down to modern electronics. Any time I've seen claims like that tested (not sighted comparisons, they're notoriously inaccurate) those differences disappear with a properly set up dbt.

I'm mostly digital, tho I do have a tt.