Which is better for low-level nearfield listening?

[oncable]

I am considering either the 340SE or the Sierra-1. To be used as nearfield desktop audio system. Main requirement is midrange accuracy and detail at low volumes. Which of these models meets the requirements better? Efficiency and price are secondary. High freq performance even less so.
thanks,

[curtis]

I am considering either the 340SE or the Sierra-1. To be used as nearfield desktop audio system. Main requirement is midrange accuracy and detail at low volumes. Which of these models meets the requirements better? Efficiency and price are secondary. High freq performance even less so.
thanks,
How close would you be sitting to the speaker?

Both are excellent, but the Sierra's detail at all levels is better. For nearfield, I would think the 340's size would be an issue.

Give Ascend a call...they will steer you in the right direction. I am thinking that maybe even the new HTM-200SE or CBM-170SE would suffice.

[logicology]

Is this for a home studio setup? If you will be very close to the speaker say... 5 or less feet you probably want to consider an actual near-field monitor. Using normal loudspeakers in a very close setup make the acoustics hit your ear before it interacts with other surfaces. Near field monitors, in my experience, are more forgiving in these situations. I'm a composer and engineer for a game company. I'm currently building a new studio which will house a set of Sierra-1's (among other monitors), but they will be about 15 feet away. For near field monitoring I use another dedicated near-field monitor setup.

Dave, I'm sure, will chime in with better answers... but you have to consider that some lower wavelengths can actually be several feet long from crest to crest. That means with close speaker setups, you're hearing some frequencies before they even complete a full cycle. And in very small rooms, the frequencies will start bouncing around before they complete a full cycle.

[oncable]

How close would you be sitting to the speaker?

Both are excellent, but the Sierra's detail at all levels is better. For nearfield, I would think the 340's size would be an issue.

Give Ascend a call...they will steer you in the right direction. I am thinking that maybe even the new HTM-200SE or CBM-170SE would suffice.

I will be about 4 feet from each speaker. Regarding cabinet size, I thought the 340 is near ideal. The Sierra-1's would have to be raised a bit. Ideally I think the mid-point between the tweeter and woofer should be 22" from cabinet bottom which is ear height when sitting, and it might as well be all cabinet volume to get that height rather than "wasted" space for stands (for better bass perf).

[oncable]

Is this for a home studio setup? If you will be very close to the speaker say... 5 or less feet you probably want to consider an actual near-field monitor. Using normal loudspeakers in a very close setup make the acoustics hit your ear before it interacts with other surfaces. Near field monitors, in my experience, are more forgiving in these situations. I'm a composer and engineer for a game company. I'm currently building a new studio which will house a set of Sierra-1's (among other monitors), but they will be about 15 feet away. For near field monitoring I use another dedicated near-field monitor setup.

Dave, I'm sure, will chime in with better answers... but you have to consider that some lower wavelengths can actually be several feet long from crest to crest. That means with close speaker setups, you're hearing some frequencies before they even complete a full cycle. And in very small rooms, the frequencies will start bouncing around before they complete a full cycle.

The room size is 13x18 feet perfect rectangle with very think carpet floor. System at long end. If it will be a ported system ideally the port should be to the front due to rear wall proximity. I am not planning to use a subwoofer.

[BradJudy]

I use CBM-170SEs at around 4' on my home computer setup and I think they do quite well. I haven't tried my Sierra's in that setup yet, so I don't know how they do relative to the CBM's.

The 340 seems like an odd choice to me for a nearfield setup. Their advantage over the 170 is their ability to hit higher SPL levels.

[oncable]

I use CBM-170SEs at around 4' on my home computer setup and I think they do quite well. I haven't tried my Sierra's in that setup yet, so I don't know how they do relative to the CBM's.

The 340 seems like an odd choice to me for a nearfield setup. Their advantage over the 170 is their ability to hit higher SPL levels.

I would think that with the larger cabinet the 340 would have more extended bass performance? I am a little concerned about midrange "confusion" what with the 2 drivers. Is that a problem?

[BradJudy]

I would think that with the larger cabinet the 340 would have more extended bass performance? I am a little concerned about midrange "confusion" what with the 2 drivers. Is that a problem?

Yes, the 340 would also extend a bit deeper, but really deep extension usually isn't a priority on nearfield monitors.

I don't know the effect of listening to an MTM design at that distance, it might not be ideal.

Either way, I think the CBM-170SE and Sierra-1 are the two speakers of the Ascend line that make the most sense to consider if looking at nearfield options. The updated HTM-200SE might be an option too, but if you have the space for the larger ones I don't see any advantage to the HTM-200SE.