results of shootout are now posted

[audibleconnoisseur]

Hello all, AudibleConnoisseur here with a report on the Sunday speaker shootout in Dacula, GA! Along with three gentlemen and myself, we spent four hours at my place listening to a variety of speakers, eating some hotdogs and discussing music and bass! Here is the line up of speakers by pair:

Ascend Acoustics 340SE - $568
Axiom Audio M22v2 - $460
Boston Acoustics VRB - $500+?
Focal JM Labs 806V bookshelf - $800
HSU VTF-2 MK 3 sub - $469+sh
Sapphire 1500 surrounds - $1000 bought for $349
Focal JM Labs 826V floor standing - $2100

Many of these only got a few minutes b/c we were more interested in the first four and the sub. The Equipment used to test the speakers was a Samsung SACD/DVD/CD player, Technics 5-disc changer and a Denon AVR-1905 80W/ch receiver. The LP was approx 13’ back from the speakers and the speakers were approximately 6’ apart. The test was done in 2.1 stereo sound with treble and bass at +/-0. The speaker wire was 14 gauge, in-wall certified shielded speaker wire. Most tests were done at the –20 to –5Db levels as were shown on the 1905. The sub was set to just under 9 o’clock on the volume dial and 80Hz crossover setting within the 1905. The LP was from corner to corner. For these tests, the guys wanted the grills off, so we did everything with the grills off (Had I thought about it, I would have put the grills back on as I won't take them off while they are in our system for several reasons). Note that with the grills on the sound could be smoother for each speaker or even seem slightly less forward.

The first test was the VRB’s v/s 806V’s. While I was not as privy to this test, I did hear much of the testing from afar. I let the VRB owner test first. He mentioned that he did like the sound of the 806’s but didn’t like them enough to warrant the cost difference. I agree, as did the Ascend owner.

Last test was the VRB’s v/s the Ascends. This proved to be the closest case of two similar sounding speakers. The presentation was similar and according to the others the 340’s were the winner by a smaller margin than the VRB’s v/s 340’s, I was the only one to tell a larger difference in the two (I have hearing above and below the regular hearing spectrum as has been tested when I was younger and as recent as three years ago). I noticed a few things different. First the SEAS tweeter was smoother at the top end and seemed a little less fatiguing than the VRB’s although by a slight margin during the short playing time. The VRB’s sounded more boxy and confined by about 15% as the 340’s opened up during the entire session and never sounded boxy. It was clear that the 340’s were made solid and presented well no matter where they were. Oh, there was only about 8”-10” of clearance to the back wall for each speaker. The VRB’s are a well built speaker that will win no award for looks, neither will 340’s. Both are capable of producing very loud music very clearly but the 340’s sing better and when pushed, so no signs of fatigue where the VRB’s seem that had they been given about 10 more Db’s (this would have been VERY loud), they might begin to show sibilance and or become shrill. They also have a nice sized woofer that is capable of producing decent bass if there is no sub to be had - one would be suggested for all of these though. The 340’s dropped lower on paper and held their own quite well but we didn’t push it to find out how well they did.

Ok, to the main event and why we were here… 340SE v/s M22v2. For the most testing these two were pitted against each other and it was FUN! We took them to +/- 0 at the highest point and didn’t care to push past this just in case as this level with the Denon is suppose to be reference level. I am not an A/V pro but I assume this to be true. The 340’s are capable of 220W rms and 400W max! That is some serious power they can hold with pristine sound and doubtful you are going to blow them unless you are doing something stupid or you have a very low powered / very, very high powered receiver. These 340’s can hold their own at any level you are capable of handling acoustically. The M22v2’s are rated at 200W max amp and I am not sure what rms or power they can handle but I don’t believe it is as high as the 340’s. Strange thing though is the 340’s are rated 92dB and the M22v2’s were 93dB so one would think the M’s would play slightly louder with the same gain and the 340’s would play slightly lower. Not the case. We found that the M’s took a touch more volume to play at the same perceived sound level as the 340’s!? After some thought and a bit of adjustment, the 340’s were dropped to –4 treble (of –12) and the sound of the two were much closer as we think the forward presentation of the 340’s and the SEAS tweeter were just smoother and easier to hear. Also we could adjust the M’s to +4 and get similar presentation but this would produce a more harsh tinny sound from the M’s. B/C of this we found that the M’s were more reserved at all volume levels. Not so much a good reserved, but slightly laid back or maybe even a bit muddy with certain music, such as rock music. Most music, the M’s are quality and present well with smooth midrange and good sound. The M’s are also not bad with the high end presentation but I can see how they would be perceived as harsh or fatiguing over a long time, especially at +4 to match the smoothness and treble capability of the 340’s. It was b/c of this that I used -4 on the 340's over +4 on the M's. However, we usually used the +/-0 settings to compare apples to apples!

The 340’s present well with all types of music, including rock. They really stood out in this category and for me this was good. I enjoy all types of music but currently I listen to a lot of alternative rock and other types that you would find on a regular radio dial. They also image well and present a quality soundstage even when we had them 3’ too close for our distance back (should be spkr dist apart = .73 x LP distance). The 340’s were the standout to me as far as presentation, clarity, high end, smoothness, spot on midrange and ability to offer quick and refined bass with ANY music track or movie track we threw at it. The M’s stood out with better bass for rap they also had REALLY nice midrange. With both male and female voices, both performed well. We listened to some classical, jazz, rock, acoustic, Cassandra Wilson (great fun cd with a lot of soft acoustical performances and fun sound effects), Sarah McLachlan, Eagles, all the way to disturbed and Godsmack! Both reproduced quality music and we enjoyed our session with the variety of genre. When we were testing the female voices, I was noticing some things I hadn’t heard before or heard better with these speakers, such as the separation of Sarah’s lips when she sings (which personally takes me to the seat next to her and is a bit of a turn on if you are in to her. I have her at the top of my musicians for female vocals at this time b/c of her passion and the way she is able to pass that passion to the listener and make you feel the song in your soul), her quite breaths b/t lyrics, etc. There was another singer that eludes me at the moment (female) that had a really nice voice and during her session that was live and on DVD, I heard a few things that I didn’t from the M’s (or had to re-listen and really focus to hear them) while she was on. Many background sounds such as instruments moving, people talking, coughs and other artifacts that make live sessions so neat to hear and bring you to the stage with them - I really appreciated and enjoyed this. I was the only one that heard them the first time and consecutive times before I turned up the volume to a higher level and pointed them out to the others. The 340’s produced original content with no deviation in my opinion. The M’s did well but the sound seemed a bit more masked and these little artifacts that make that quality track were hidden at the same volume levels or muffled and that was a red flag for me. It was b/c of this that I was really sold on the Ascends. The 340’s REALLY DO project the original and accurate recordings so I can see how a bad recording will stand out. I didn’t hear any bad ones that day but that particular song (if nothing else) really sold me. This coupled with the Ascends presence and forwardness during rock playback as well as spot on midrange and no-nonsense reproduction is what sealed the purchase decision for me.

I can’t say that I personally found anything I didn’t like about the Ascends when they were in my home… except that they weren’t mine! Even the M’s owner said that he preferred the Ascends over his own M’s in the rock area and I think he also appreciated the quality of all other music as well... I hope there are no lingering afterthoughts of his decision with the M22 & m60’s he owns… they are damn nice speakers! He is still pleased with his M’s but I feel that had he been given another chance, he would have strongly considered the Ascends in his testing. Now to be fair, he has the M60’s as well and I have heard them last year when I went to his home to audition the Axiom line… they are very nice and range and image well when I last heard them. They will stomp the 340’s on bass extension and when he played the Pink Flyod cd for me… wow! I digress… I was near sold on them at the time but had to wait to purchase anything. From what I am being told, the M22v2 play everything the same as the M60’s w/o the bass extension and there is a ‘little’ lower and fuller midrange that you might give up b/c of the size of the two. However, when paired with a sub and the sub taking 80Hz and lower, the sound of them is near identical (this from an Axiom Audio Advisor). That being taken into account, I had to choose the 340’s w/sub. Now I can get the full range + the movie and depth LFE’s that I have been yearning for all these years!