With a sub, 340's over the 170's for music?

[Ivory05G35]

I'm currious if the 340's are that much better than the 170's for music when used with a sub? Do they image better and have a better sound stage?

I'm planning on either getting 170's for mains and a 340 center or getting 340 mains for now. I'll upgrade the rest of the system later when I can afford it. Either way, I think I'll end up with a 340 setup across the front and 170's in back.

Back to the original question, for music are the 340's that much better for stereo music than the 170's when both will have a sub? This will be for a dedicated HT eventually, but I don't have a room for that yet. I'm in law school and I find myself listening to music a lot while studying so I'm thinking the 340's over the 170/340/170 combo might be better for now...

Thanks for your thoughts.

[ebh]

i just had to reply because i'm a law school student too. :D

as far as your question, I can't answer because I went with the 170s as mains--cost reasons mostly. I think they are great, but am curious to see whether people think the 340s are better imagers, or if they will just fill a room better and with lower distortion. I'm thinking about adding a 340c soon, and possibly 200s for surrounds although my room isn't set up well to handle them.

[curtis]

I think it really depends on the space you are going to be using them in.

[GaryB]

I think it really depends on the space you are going to be using them in.... and the amount of power you're driving them with. If it's no more than 75-100W or so, and you're using a sub, I suspect the gains by moving up to 340s will be quite small.

[Abhi]

What about the difference between spectral decays?

[Ivory05G35]

My current room is kind of weird, it opens op to the kitchen in one corner, has a hallway into it, an an open area leading to doors, oh and it also has a vaulted ceiling...

But someday it will be in a 16x12x9 dedicated, although not very hi-tech, HT room. My current receiver is a yamaha 6.1 with "75" watts. I plan on replacing that with one of several receivers. I also have a Krell 150x2 @ 8 ohms amp laying around. So they'll have plenty of power to them if that matters...

[Eddie]

I would say that the 340 is better than the 170 if there's NO sub. With a sub it's a lot closer...many months ago I had a chance to AB the 2 and to my surprise found that I preferred the 170s, which stayed more neutral/accurate at high volumes to my ears. For moderate/casual listening though the 340s do provide a fuller soundstage as one might expect from the extra driver.

However, with the new SE models, it might be a totally different ballgame.

If budget is an issue and you watch a lot of TV or DVDs, I'd get the 170s with 340 center for now, then add a pair of 340s later when you move into a bigger place. The 340 center does amazing things with voices, which is 60-70% of HT.

[Ivory05G35]

Eventually, whatever I get will be for dedicated HT duty. I have a nice stereo listening setup for later (my girlfriend/future wife :D has an awesome 2.0 setup). For the time being I will be listening to music on these speakers in addition to movie duty. I suppose these speakers will also be used for SACD/DVD-A as well, since the nice stereo setup is and will be 2.0 (phase tech PC 9.1, krell 300r).

I guess what I'm currious about is if I'd enjoy listening to music more on the 340's with my Outlaw LFM-1 or if the 170's with my sub will be nearly or as good...

[Quinn]

The difference between the 170 and 340 for music w/sub is worth it to me.

[Jacob C]

To me I would guess the 170's would be better in a small room with a high quality sub. 340's would probably be better in larger rooms. If the sub is not high quality I would expect the 340's to win in both as they would have deeper extension before relying on a lower quality sub. Then again, the near field imaging of the 170's is supposed to be better. Then you might have to choose between the best imaging or the deepest extension. I guess its really a case for case thing. I am trying to decide between the 170's and the 340's in a small room without a sub. Right now I am leaning toward the 170's.

[rifmon]

I spent an hour listening to my 170 classics along with my HSU V2 mk2 and they were incredible. Casual listening does not reveal their potential, but when you sit to really listen the experience is awsome.

Unfortunately, I cannot compair them to the 340's.

For music, I go to the trouble of disconnecting the speakers from my ONKYO 701 and use a ROTEL integrated and ROTEL cd player. Lots of trouble but I actually enjoy doing it! :rolleyes:

I have my 170's out for the upgrade and am looking forward to getting them back.

[S_rangeBrew]

What about the difference between spectral decays?

If that is important to you, the HTM-200s have a spectral decay plot that makes the 170s and 340s look pretty sloppy. :)

[Eddie]

For music, I go to the trouble of disconnecting the speakers from my ONKYO 701 and use a ROTEL integrated and ROTEL cd player. Lots of trouble but I actually enjoy doing it! :rolleyes:

Doesn't the 703 have pre-outs? I'd just have the Rotel power your mains during HT, I used to do that with NAD separates and a Marantz AVR, great results. The only thing I had to connect and disconnect was the subwoofer cable.

[Mag_Neato]

I spent an hour listening to my 170 classics along with my HSU V2 mk2 and they were incredible. Casual listening does not reveal their potential, but when you sit to really listen the experience is awsome.

Unfortunately, I cannot compair them to the 340's.

For music, I go to the trouble of disconnecting the speakers from my ONKYO 701 and use a ROTEL integrated and ROTEL cd player. Lots of trouble but I actually enjoy doing it! :rolleyes:

I have my 170's out for the upgrade and am looking forward to getting them back.

I'm on the waiting list for the 170 upgrade so I'd love to hear your comments on the differences once you have them back.

Someone needs to A/B the 170SE's with that "other" company's new $199 speakers!

[Quinn]

If that is important to you, the HTM-200s have a spectral decay plot that makes the 170s and 340s look pretty sloppy. :)

Those were for the classic. There aren't any yet for the new drivers and tweeters used in the SEs.

[GaryB]

And frankly, while it could be argued that the HTM-200 had, in some respects, a cleaner decay plot than the CBM-170 "classic", the same could not be said about its performance vs. the CMT-340 "classic", if memory serves.

In any case, such decay plots only tell part of the story, obviously.

[Eddie]

Someone needs to A/B the 170SE's with that "other" company's new $199 speakers!

If you're referring to the SVS speakers, it's already been done on AVS Forums. Not surprisingly the 170s came out well on top.

[Mag_Neato]

Ummm.....no, not those! Think XL-S!! :eek:

[boludaso]

I'm not sure if any of you have the time, resources or contacts, but a head to head competition with these speakers would be nice.

Ascend 170's
Athena AS-B1
av123 xl-s
Axiom M2 or M3
Paradigm Atom
Focal JMlab Chorus 706 S
Fluance SV-6

these are all 2 way speakers that retail for less than $350.

I've also had the same questions regarding the 170 vs 340s as Ivory. I've decided on the 170's due to room size. I am also going to try and install them in the pillars on both sides of my setup to keep things looking clean. i'll then extend the port thru the other side of the pillar and cover the hole with screen or something.

thanks everyone for you comments

[Eddie]

Ascend 170's
Athena AS-B1
av123 xl-s
Axiom M2 or M3
Paradigm Atom
Focal JMlab Chorus 706 S
Fluance SV-6

these are all 2 way speakers that retail for less than $350.

My guess is that it'd come down to the JM Lab and the Ascend, and I'd love to hear that comparison. At Tweeter the JM Lab bookshelves reminded me the most of the Ascends, though the ones I heard were closer to $900/pair.

[Quinn]

Ummm.....no, not those! Think XL-S!! :eek:

The one I want to see is the 170SE and the Ref 1 since the original 170 did 80-85% of what the Ref 1 did IMO.

[boludaso]

I'm with you quinn. My good friend just forked over $$$ for the Ref 1's. I'd love to tell him that the 170s spank them. Although, the vifa tweeter would make it hard to compete with.

of course, he'd come back with the comment, "Yeah, but these things are so heavily based on preference."

[curtis]

Although, the vifa tweeter would make it hard to compete with.
Vifa vs. Seas? Hard to compete with? I think you might have that backwards. :D

[Quinn]

Although, the vifa tweeter would make it hard to compete with.



There is a reason Ascend went to SEAS tweeters. ;)

[Lou-the-dog]

I own the 340 Classics, 170 Classics and have owned the Ref1. The Refs have some qualities I liked but the Ascends are the keepers for me. I'm really looking forward to hearing the new SE drivers.

Randy

[boludaso]

Good point Curtis. I was referring more towards the ring radiator than the actual manufacturer. either way, i think you are right.
does anyone know what seas tweeter that the 170's tweeter was based on?
Either way, i cant wait to pick up my speakers when uncle sam finally gets me my return.

[curtis]

hey boludaso....just noticed you are in SoCal. If you have not heard Ascends yet, you are more than welcome to stop by my place for a listen. Heck, even if you have heard them, you are welcome to come over. I do not have SE's (yet) though.

Another fellow Ascend owner is in town from Arkansas and I had him over for a quick listen before getting some sushi.

[curtis]

I am also going to try and install them in the pillars on both sides of my setup to keep things looking clean. i'll then extend the port thru the other side of the pillar and cover the hole with screen or something.

I just caught this.

Check with Ascend on extending the port, it might changed the tune of the box. I think you would just want to allow the port space to vent.

[Mag_Neato]

I know SEAS developed the 170SE tweeter specifically for Ascend, as well as the new 340SE tweeter. The 170 uses a compact faceplate and neodymium magnet... http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/images/ascenduploads/170-tweeter-side-view.jpg
The 340 uses a larger faceplate and a larger ferrite magnet...
http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/images/ascenduploads/340-tweeter-side-view-1.jpg

They probably began as a standard SEAS offering and were customized, although I could only find 25mm dome tweeters on their website and no 27mm ones like the new tweeters have.

[curtis]

I see 25mm voicecoils, but I am not sure that directly translates to the dome size. Their product numbers do have models beginning with 25 and 27 though.

Somewhere on here I remember someone asking David the variety of the tweeter and he answered.

[boludaso]

Curtis:

Thank you. I was comtemplating asking you for a review. I rarely get up towards LA, unless a client wants to see me. although, i cant think of a better reason than to listen to your system. i'll be in touch in the future to do that.

[Mag_Neato]

Ah....yeah, that's probably what that means. There is a NEW tweeter with a fabric dome, neodymium magnet and dual chamber design with a "27" in the part No. Interestingly, there's also a metal-dome version that uses a lens to compensate for a rolloff near 20khz.

Well, somebody better do a classic vs. SE comparo and post it here soon :D

[S_rangeBrew]

Those were for the classic. There aren't any yet for the new drivers and tweeters used in the SEs.

I'm sure the HTM-200 still has a tighter spectral decay than the SEs in the lower frequencies, it has 4" drivers and it's sealed. Now, as to how much that matters.... most people say the 170s and 340s sound better than the 200, so it can't be that much help. I'd be interested to know what DaveF thinks about this subject.

[S_rangeBrew]

I'm on the waiting list for the 170 upgrade so I'd love to hear your comments on the differences once you have them back.

Someone needs to A/B the 170SE's with that "other" company's new $199 speakers!

That's a good idea, but the 200s are closer in price to the new SVS and AV123 offerings... I think that comparison might be more useful to people. I guess people just see that they *look* like the 170s, (1 woofer, 1 tweeter) and assume that's what they compare to. :confused:

[Mag_Neato]

That's a good idea, but the 200s are closer in price to the new SVS and AV123 offerings... I think that comparison might be more useful to people. I guess people just see that they *look* like the 170s, (1 woofer, 1 tweeter) and assume that's what they compare to. :confused:

I realize the price difference between the 170SE's and AV123's XL-S's is $149, but that's why I am so interested in the comparison. The lack of a grill kills the deal for the XL-S for me, but they are very similar designs (one tweeter/woofer, cabinet size) and I am sure comparisons are inevitable. If someone could live without grills and find that the two speakers sound similar, they could save a few bucks and add a third (center) speaker and come out at roughly the same price as a pair of 170's.

Just putting that out there.....don't shoot :eek:

[Quinn]

Somewhere on here I remember someone asking David the variety of the tweeter and he answered.

I think it was a Sonotex varition with a chamber.

Found it. http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/showpost.php?p=14452&postcount=50

[Quinn]

The lack of a grill kills the deal for the XL-S for me, but they are very similar designs (one tweeter/woofer, cabinet size) and I am sure comparisons are inevitable. If someone could live without grills and find that the two speakers sound similar, they could save a few bucks and add a third (center) speaker and come out at roughly the same price as a pair of 170's.



They aren't shielded either so don't get them near a CRT display.

I still think the Ref 1 would be a good comparison for the 170SE and you could get a whole HT with the price difference. ;)

[rifmon]

Originally Posted by rifmon
For music, I go to the trouble of disconnecting the speakers from my ONKYO 701 and use a ROTEL integrated and ROTEL cd player. Lots of trouble but I actually enjoy doing it!



Doesn't the 703 have pre-outs? I'd just have the Rotel power your mains during HT, I used to do that with NAD separates and a Marantz AVR, great results. The only thing I had to connect and disconnect was the subwoofer cable.


Sorry, I miss stated the model number. I have the older model 602. I think the newer 603 has the pre-outs. I got the 602 on an open box deal for $235.00. Couldn't pass it up. Too bad no pre-outs but that's what I use the Rotel for.

[rifmon]

I'm on the waiting list for the 170 upgrade so I'd love to hear your comments on the differences once you have them back.


Too bad I will not be able to actually a/b the new SE speakers to my older classic speakers. But, I have had my Classics for almost 4 years so I think I will be able to hear a difference. I will give some burn-in time and report back on my impressions.

Still waiting for the returned SE's :rolleyes:

[Mag_Neato]

the first comparison of the 170SE's vs. Onix XL-S. A guy posted on av123 that he's ordered both and will keep one or the other to team up with an X-sub. He's inexperienced at this stuff, so I am not expecting much. There's also a photo posted of a pair of black XL-S.....nice finish.

I am wondering when there will be a professional review of the SE speakers?

[curtis]

It would be nice if he posts here as well...and in a forum such as AVS.

[JohnnyCasaba]

Here is an interesting thread from AVS:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=644816&page=2

The poster LeeLee compares the XLS' and Ref 1's, he also has heard the 170SE's although he does not have them in house at the moment.

[chasw98]

About 10 of us got together with numerous speakers and subs. Among them were my 340SE's, 340 classics, and Ref 1's. You can read the impresions here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=634403 .

Chuck