Ascend vs Ascend vs Dynaudio

[GirgleMirt]

Could anyone comment on Ascend 170SE/340SE vs Dynaudio? Maybe vs Audience 42, 52SE or Contour 1.4? Or any other model actually...

It would probably be for a ~10x20 room or maybe larger... I say 170/340 because I'm actually not quite sure which one I'd be better off with.. I know its vague, but so are my audio plans.. :p

I have a sub (12 inch sealed DIY design) and an amp which are both unused, so I might build a 2nd system or maybe replace my current set of speakers (Totem Sttafs) who knows...

I was eying a pair of 340's, but now I'm wondering whether I'd just be as good with a pair of 170SE's. I'd use the sub anyhow, and 170s would almost cut the price in half. Music would be the priority.

I said vs Dynaudio, because these consistently seem to impress me. If they were a third of the price, I'd definitely get a pair :p I'm not exactly sure what they do so well, but they seem to have a signature sound that I absolutely love. I think its in the 'tightness', seamlessnesss and neutralness... I don't know I can't really describe it since I can't even put my fingers on what it is exactly... I think it somewhat comes close to the top end JMLabs...

We're definitely not in the same price range here, but being that the Ascends are difficult to audition, I'm trying to get a better idea of what I should expect. It can get dizzying sometimes trying to draw conclusions. Ex: Ref1 = amazing for 1500$!!! 340SE's just as good as if not better at 600$!! 170SE sounds (very close?) to 340SE!! Wait ok... so then... 170SE will sound very close to say Dynaudio 52SE? :confused: ([edit] Not that I think they would, because in some way they shouldn't... As they're drastically differently priced...)

Anyone has any insight on the subject?

[GirgleMirt]

The new 170SE is very close to the Onix Ref1.

Never actually heard the Ref1 :p But thats nice to hear! :cool:

[BradJudy]

I haven't listen to Dynaudio in a long time, but the Audience 52 (I think, could have been 42) was one of the speakers I liked when auditioning before buying Ascends. I heard them next to the B&W 600 series and definitely prefered the Dynaudio.

For reference, when auditioning before buying Ascends I also compared Paradigm Monitor series alongside KEF Q series and definitely prefered the KEFs. I nearly bought a KEF Q series package.

So, if you perfer Dynaudio Audience to B&W 600 and perfer KEF Q to Paradigm Monitor, then you might enjoy Ascends like I do. Since that was a long time ago and I've never directly compared them to Ascends, then take it all with a grain of salt.

[curtis]

Last year I had a friend come over to listen to my classic 340's before he bought Dynaudio 52's. The issue for him was the 52's played deeper than the 340's, and he was doing 2-channel with no sub.

After he got the 52's he invited me over to his place and asked me to bring my 340's to compare. We found out that his room really amplified the bass response of the speakers and he said "wow, the bass would have been enough in this room". A since we were able to actually A/B the speakers side by side this time, he was able to hear the differences more easily. It seemed the Dyns had a bit smoother/polite sound while the Ascends had a bit more detail/lively sound.

[GirgleMirt]

Hmmm!

BradJudy: Thinking back a few years, B&W 600 were not bad, but I think they lacked some of the detail of higher end speakers (ex: B&W CM series, Totem, etc), the Paradigm Monitors were impressive for their prices, but again, they didn't really hold up that well to speakers with 3 times the price which is where I ended up spending my money. The Studios, for some reason, didn't sound bad, but for music I didn't like them as much as say Monitor Audio or Totem. For some reason, vs MA, it kinda gave me the idea of "built for power" vs "built for music", I think MA was a smoother (especially the tweeter, which I wasn't crazy on the Paradigm), more refined speaker, vs Studios which just seemed a bit like a truck.. Like very solid, can go really loud, but when not played too loud, sounded a bit rough around the edges... (Not sure if that makes any sens but... thats what I wrote. :p)

The Kefs, Q3 I think it was I auditionned, really didn't impressed me, supposedly, they have a port plug they can use, but the shop probably didn't use it and the bass was overpowering and a also a bit muddy.. Bad combination that really didn't impress me at the time... XQ was a different matter though!

I was looking at the older posts yesterday, 170 vs 340. Some says the 340s are a bit more forward than the 170, but the choice should go with room size, I think for 20x10 the 170s would be plenty, and for the low end they'll have the sub.. Is there a difference in 'detail' for 170 vs 340? "340 have better mids", are we talking about subtle differences (I think we are) or things you can hear right off the bat? Bah anyhow, 20x10 is relatively small, I think the 170 would be better off.. If I move them to the main room which is like about 30x13, I read some say that they remain more neutral when pushed vs 340s. With sub, should be ok anyhow...

curtis: I like detail, the more the better :) Being that the 340s are livelier than the 170s, that might actually mean the 170 would be closer to Dynaudio? Interesting... And side by side, it didn't seem like the Ascend were overmatched, which is pretty encouraging, given that I think most speakers mentionned above (Paradigm Studio/Monitor, Kef Q, B&W 600 series) would have been vs Dynaudio, correct?

I guess what I'm primarily looking for: Detail, smoothness, clarity and seamlessness... (Seamlessness = It has to sound coherent from highs to lows, sometimes it doesn't...) Also no FR aberrations or speaker coloration... It has to be like punchy, but not punchy in an uncontrolled way, like the sound has to be 'tight'... Like some speakers seem to have a 'wild' sound or sound a bit like they're straining, where others seem 100% in control, sounds like they're playing effortlessly... And I think that pretty much describes the Dynaudio sound, as well as again the high end JMLabs, which are pretty much my current favorites. Does that sound like its describing the Ascends too? Does that make any sens to anyone? :confused:

In fact the monetary differences of the 170 vs 340 is pretty much unimportant... If the 340s give me more of the above, I'd rather get those instead, but I'm not totally sure of the exact effect of the 2nd woofer and how that would impact the above characteristics...


[edit]Wow that was long... sorry! :p btw, now that I think about it, I think a speaker "sounding in control" or "play effortlessly" is the main difference between high end and entry level stuff, again, does that make any sens? At all?? [edit2] Actually... Playing effortlessly vs straining, I'm pretty sure that's distortion. As distortion occurs, sounds less smooth, less real, just like the speaker was, well, straining. And very little distortion gives a very smooth sound, which would seem like the speaker is playing effortlessly. See I'm getting as I'm typing this :D So I want the less possible distortion!

[edit3] And looking at the Soundstage measurements (http://www.soundstageav.com/speakermeasurements.html), the Ascends seem to have less THD than then JM Labs mini utopia?! HUH!!! The 170s seem to have a little spike at 10k, anything more audible? Dynaudio C4 looks like I'd have expected, very low THD, Audience 40 looks pretty high...

How does the distortion of the 170SE look vs the 340SE? Anyone has some insight about distortion, its effect or how to interpret THD?

[edit: #... I lost track..] Just noticed the 340 and 170 use different tweeters, which raises the question, 340 has bigger ferrite magnet, larger chamber, its cooled... Bah.


And silly question, does the phase plugs move with the drivers or are they static? I saw on some MA that their phase plugs, instead of being attached to the magnet/frame of the speakers, were actually glued on the woofer itself! So it went back and forth as the driver was pumping. That seemed very strange, I always thought all phase plugs didn't move! Seemed more logic as it reduces the weight of the moving part of driver, but was assured by their rep that it didn't make any difference... (and yep it sounded fine none the less :) it just looked a bit funny IMHO :D)

[BradJudy]

The Kefs, Q3 I think it was I auditionned, really didn't impressed me, supposedly, they have a port plug they can use, but the shop probably didn't use it and the bass was overpowering and a also a bit muddy.. Bad combination that really didn't impress me at the time... XQ was a different matter though!


Interesting. One of the main reasons I prefered the Q to the Paradigm was that the Paradigm monitor series had boomy, muddy bass compared to the KEF Q (I listened to the Q1/3/5/7 and was leaning toward Q5s for mains). I suspect the difference between our experience was largely the rooms. The Paradigm and KEFs were righ next to each other in my demo, but both were too close to the back wall.

[curtis]

[edit3] And looking at the Soundstage measurements (http://www.soundstageav.com/speakermeasurements.html), the Ascends seem to have less THD than then JM Labs mini utopia?! HUH!!! The 170s seem to have a little spike at 10k, anything more audible? Dynaudio C4 looks like I'd have expected, very low THD, Audience 40 looks pretty high...

And silly question, does the phase plugs move with the drivers or are they static? I saw on some MA that their phase plugs, instead of being attached to the magnet/frame of the speakers, were actually glued on the woofer itself! So it went back and forth as the driver was pumping. That seemed very strange, I always thought all phase plugs didn't move! Seemed more logic as it reduces the weight of the moving part of driver, but was assured by their rep that it didn't make any difference... (and yep it sounded fine none the less :) it just looked a bit funny IMHO :D)

real quick here....got to get my son to a summer little league game.

Remember, the measurements at Soundstage are of the "classic" 170. I suspect distortion is much lower now.

The phase plugs do not move with the cones. If they do...they are just dust caps and not phase plugs.

[MikeS]

Yup, they are fake phase plugs. MA and B&W use them on some of their speakers.

[SteveCallas]

I spent some time comparing classic 340s to Dynaudio Audience 42s and 52. The 42s were outclassed. With the 52s, the level of detail and clarity between the two was about the same, with the 340s having a little better imaging and the 52s having a wider soundstage. I felt the bass on the 52s was a little bit unnatural or forced though. The speakers I felt most closely resembled the sonic signature of the classic 340s were the Linn Ninkas.

[GirgleMirt]

Brad: True, probably also electronics, the Kefs and Digms were at different locations, and I think the digms had a beefier amp.

Mike/Curtis: lol Thats what I thought! But... I think one of the goals of the phase plug also has to do with the way it reflects the soundwaves, and that impacts the sound, so even a dustcap with a phase plug shape would probably have that effect. But anyhow it just looked pretty silly going back and forth though :D

thx for dyn comparisons :) Alright so now the question... 170 or 340? :confused: The impression I have is that the 340SE seems to be "more" of a speaker vs 170, as in, overall... better... (better soundtage, better imaging, better mids) I'm not concerned about a bit more livelier sound.. so... which should it be...

[SteveCallas]

I think you answered your own question :D Get the 340s.

[curtis]

Mike/Curtis: lol Thats what I thought! But... I think one of the goals of the phase plug also has to do with the way it reflects the soundwaves, and that impacts the sound, so even a dustcap with a phase plug shape would probably have that effect. But anyhow it just looked pretty silly going back and forth though :D
If the "phase plug" is moving with the cone...it is producing sound, which a real phase plug does not do.

[Lou-the-dog]

The non-moving phase plug assembly on the Ascends also serves a function of cooling the voice coil. IMHO a phase plug attached to the cone is probably cosmetic.

Randy

[GirgleMirt]

I wouldn't go as far as saying that. http://www.preference-audio.com/phaseplug.htm It would still serve its main function, which is to reflect the mid frequencies and improve the phase. I guess it would produce sound since its pumping with the driver, but so would a normal dust cap anyhow. So it would still act as a phase plug, but since it pumps, it might not be a plug... So... Its... a.... phase dust cap?! :eek:


Alright! Soooo... I think I'll go for the 340SE... Now, do you think these would relegate the Totem Sttafs to a secondary system?


Currently: Nad 541 cdp and laptop are the main sources which outputs digital to a Behringer DEQ2496 digital Equilizer (used as a DAC and pre-amp), then to a QSC RMX1450 280 watts amp which is powering the Totem Sttafs (http://totemacoustic.com/english/products/floorStanding_staff.htm).

Unused is Rega Brio 35 watts amp and the DIY 250 watts 12 inch sealed sub. The sub parts were purchased when I had Totem Arros, but then unforseenly upgraded to Sttafs which played a lot lower (to the 40hz) so it became a bit useless to add the sub... plus the amp has PLENTY of power anyhow..

So I think the plan is to use the 340SE with the sub & 35 watts integrated... But if the Ascends sound better than the Totems... Then it'll mess up all my plans... The 35 watts struggled a bit with the Sttafs, so I'm hoping the Ascends would fare better. They're higher sensitivity plus would be coupled with the sub.

But say I'm using the speaker jacks to connect the sub & Ascends, would the sub somewhat lower the load of the amp? I'm now thinking adding the sub to the chain would have no effect on the speaker and integrated amp since the speakers get their juice from the integrated amp and the integrated would still generate the lower frequencies it would provide to the speakers/sub... And actually, using that setup, if the integrated generates 'sloppy' bass... So would the sub.. as I'd guess it would just amplify what the integrated feeds it...

[Lou-the-dog]

. So it would still act as a phase plug, but since it pumps, it might not be a plug... So... Its... a.... phase dust cap?! :eek:




HeHe! OK, I'll buy that! ;)

Randy

[curtis]

What does your reflection in a mirror look like when the mirror is shaking?

Distorted.

[GirgleMirt]

Not quite sure the analogy is correct... From my link above:


In any conventional loudspeaker, the highest frequencies of audio emanate from the area around the center of the cone and the lower frequencies are produced by the area of the cone that is farther from the center. In fact, the distance from the center at which a sound wave will come off a loudspeaker cone is directly related to its frequency. This helps explain why larger cone loudspeakers are usually capable of producing more bass.

Due to the shape of the conventional loudspeaker cone, the higher frequency sound waves tend to collide at a focal point. This causes phase distortion and a loss in clarity. As a result, accuracy and transparency suffer. This also has detrimental effects on the realism of the sound environments created by today's high fidelity digital audio and surround sound systems.

The phase plug pole piece extension improves driver performance and clarity by deflecting delicate midrange audio out into the sound space and minimizing distortion producing collisions.

It seems like this would still hold true for a phase dust cap. Its definitely possible that it would generate its own sound, but due to the shape, my guess is that it would emanate the sound very differently than if the dust cap was flat...

I'd be surprised if a company like Monitor Audio would simply put a fake phase plug for the sole reason to fool its potential customers into thinking they use a phase plug... Especially if the fake plug had a detrimental effect on the sound. I would see that as an absolutely horrible move... I hope their marketing department does not hold that kind of power in their enterprise.... I'm pretty sure they put it there because it improved the sound compared to your regular dust cap...

Now wait.. Why are we talking about MA's phase dust cap! Lots of my questions are still unanswered :p

[curtis]

The phase plug pole piece extension improves driver performance and clarity by deflecting delicate midrange audio out into the sound space and minimizing distortion producing collisions.
Yeah...but now we are back to the definition of a phase plug. Does it move or not? :)

OK...what are the other questions? :)

[GirgleMirt]

Hmmm.. Let me go back to the babbling and try to find them.. hehe :p To resume..

1) amp connected to sub thru speaker plugs. Does not reduce the 'load' on the amp correct? So this does not sound like a very good way to hook up a sub...

2) Given above config, 35 watts + sub + 340SE = ok? The Totems are less sensitive so I think I'm better off leaving the 280 watts amp with them... (plus the power amp needs a pre-amp which is the EQ, and EQing helps quite a bit for the Totem IMHO...). Wish I had two 150 watts instead of a 35 watts and a 280 watts, but oh well...

3) Will the 340SE take place in the primary system and relegate the Totem Sttafs to a secondary? Totem is almost twice their price! The bets are opened!

[curtis]

1. I think you are right.

2. I think you are right.

3. I heard the Totem Rainmaker a month or so ago. Very nice speaker, a tad laidback for my tastes. I wonder if the shop has Sttafs that I can listen to. I am sure you will test the speakers in each system.

[curtis]

The phase plug issue came up on AVS, and someone found some information on Audioholics:


**Bonus #1** Be cautious with some loudspeaker manufacturers that use a quasi phase plug which looks like a phase plug for marketing purposes, but does not physically separate from the cone of the driver. These "so called" phase plugs can sometimes do more harm than good as they can provide an inconsistent surface area and can also increase mass of the cone yielding poorer frequency response and linearity.

A real phase plug essentially eliminates the need for a dust cap, which in turn, reduces cone mass, permitting extended frequency response. It allows more airflow through the motor structure, which improves cooling and thus increases power handling. A Phase plug also helps to reduce on-axis beaming by dispersing higher frequencies that the cone is producing.
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/buyingguides/loudspeakergimmicks.php

[Mike^S]

So these fake phase plugs can actually cause more harm than good. Very interesting.

[GirgleMirt]

I'm still not convinced its all bad. I just noticed Paradigm new Atom: http://www.shows.soundstagelive.com/shows/avtour2006/sep14b/paradigm_monatom_pop.jpg

It also looks like it has similarly fake phase plug dustcaps. It doesn't look like they've tried to fake a phase plug, so it must be there for acoustic reasons...

http://www.shows.soundstagelive.com/shows/avtour2006/ced_showstoppers_1.html

Anyone know whats up with the Paradigm condom color drivers?! :D It actually looks like they put condoms over drivers with phase plugs... :eek: Ridiculous! :p