Sierra-2 vs. SVS Ultrasound Bookshelf vs. Vapor Audio Stiff Breeze

[Korkster]

Since these three have been where my focus has been over recent weeks as I try to decide how best tp proceed towards upgrading my speakers, I thought I would throw this out there to see if anyone has any thoughts or opinions as to how these three compare. The ultras are a few hundred less than the sierras and the stiff breeze are a few hundred more. I realize there may be some bias as this is an Ascend Acoustics forum, but I trust you all :-). I am, btw, leaning heavily towards the Sierra-2's at this point. Just wondering if anyone has had any exposure to the others.

[smurraybhm]

SVS makes some great subs and I looked at their new speakers when they first came out and was debating upgrading my 1s or starting with something new. The components going into the Sierra in my opinion are of a better quality, RAAL tweeter a huge plus for the 2s, but at least with SVS and Ascend you get the in home trial. Vapor looks like a nice speaker too, but from what I see no home trial period plus their warranty in my opinion stinks - especially compared to most other IDs. Part of that may be due to how many different ways you can "customize" each speaker. I will stop from voicing an opinion on the impact of some of those upgrades that they offer on their various speakers.

Since you are leaning towards the 2s - order a pair and take advantage of the trial listening period. I have no doubt that once you hear them you won't regret your decision. By the way I own a SVS sub, Sierra 2s and some other speakers. After upgrading to the 2s at the end of the year, I can honestly say they are the best bookshelf speakers I have owned - over 37 years and more than a few bookshelf speakers - a number significantly more expensive. Dave could charge a lot more than he does for the 2s.

[Hlam]

I own the Sierra 2 and have heard the Ultra bookshelf.
In my opinion the Sierra 2 are much better than the Ultra. They are not even close in sound quality. I think that the Ultra may be more comparable to the Sierra 1. I also own SVS subs. So I am not an Ascend fanboy for sure. As a mater of fact I would say that SVS's customer service is the best you will find based on my experience.
I have never heard the Vapor Audio Breeze so I can not comment on them.
Good luck.

[picasso]

I had the same question a few weeks ago with the Vapors, Sierra 2's and another ribbon/woofer bookshelf design that the name right now escapes me. Emailed Vapor for their recommendation as per their website. Still awaiting their response. Ordered the S2's and have had them in my home for 2 weeks now. I, too have an SVS sub. I can honestly say that I have found the musical nirvana I have wanted all my life but could not afford. And to think, with patience, and Ascend Acoustics, it ended up kinda easy on the wallet. Well, compared to $10K anyway. True hi-fidelity has never been so affordable in my lifetime. All good speakers require good amplification. Spend some of your money there and order the S2's with a good library of CD's, Concert Blu-Rays, cheap vodka, good cigars and a Radio Shack sound meter.

Rotel RSX 1550 (Amp section supplies my rear surrounds)
Lexicon NT 512 Amplifier (For LCR)
S2's L&R
340 Center
170 Rears
SVS Sub
NAD CD Player
Bogen Line conditioner
TIVO Roamio Pro
PS3 Xbox 360
SONY LED

[FirstReflect]

I think one of the biggest problems with the Sierra-2 is the selling price being too low. Folks have been trained to equate sticker price with quality. So it's quite natural that people are comparing the Sierra-2 to other speakers that sell for around $1500/pair.

But those aren't really appropriate competition in terms of parts quality, sound quality, or how much it cost to make the speakers. That's the price that people ought to be more concerned about; if two pairs of speakers both cost $1000 to actually manufacture, but one has a selling price of $1500/pair while the other has a selling price of $5000/pair, why would we then assume that the $5000/pair speakers magically became better? They didn't, obviously; the selling price is arbitrary. I could take a pair of speakers that cost $1000 to manufacture and charge $10,000, and a whole bunch of people would now swear up and down that they're better than the $5000/pair speakers - just because of the psychology of pricing.

So Ascend's greatest flaw is charging such a small profit margin that it has people comparing the Sierra-2 to speakers that cost much less than the Sierra-2 to actually manufacture. If you're looking at other ID brands, a lot of the honestly more comparable speakers will be up in the $2500/pair range. Not all of them - there exist other ID brands that are also charging very small profit margins. But just in a more general "how do these compare?" sense, that's more the sort of price that other ID brands would charge for speakers that cost as much to make as the Sierra-2. If you're looking at retail store brands, it's more like $5000/pair or more. Again, not always. But just in terms of mindset and what sort of real cost of manufacturing and expected results in return.

So when you look at it that way, you quickly realize what a remarkable bargain the Sierra-2 really are! That's why so many of us have clambered to buy them as quickly as we could! But for the majority of people, the price is actually a bit of a problem. They cannot reconcile that two pairs of speakers both selling for around the same price could be largely different in performance. But we ought to stop thinking in terms of price classes set by the selling price, and instead, focus on price classes set by how much it cost to make the speakers. Of course, no brands really publicly share that information, so it's not the public's fault! All we have easy access to are the retail and "street" prices. So of course that's what we use for comparison. So that's why I mention the $2500/pair and $5000/pair figures. If we're forced to use selling prices, then those are the more appropriate "price brackets" for the Sierra-2 in the ID and retail store markets, respectively. Think of them that way, and you'll better understand why I would personally say that the Sierra-2 are a cut above the other speakers in this comparison thread here :)

[RicardoJoa]

Hi firstreflect,
im not sure what you are trying to say. It is svs and vapor stiff breeze.
The breeze should be a better comparison to the S2. And i doubt the speaker is over price. It uses the raal 70-10 and has a custom front baffle. Consider extra over the standard dayton boxes. As far as Svs, i dont know, they might compare to the S1 though but may not be that bad without guving a try.

[FirstReflect]

Hi, RicardoJoa

I was just trying to say that Ascend's pricing can lead to a lot of people overlooking them. Folks who are looking at $5000/pair speakers in a store, or $2500/pair speakers online will often assume that Ascend's speakers are not in the same performance bracket. I'm saying that Ascend is under-priced, not that anyone else is overpriced. I'd venture that most of the online brands are still very, very reasonably priced. Many online brands still undercut the retail-only brands by 50% or more. I was just saying that even among online brands, Ascend's profit margins are unusually slim.

So I was just talking more about mindset. Don't think of them as $1500/pair speakers because they cost as much to make as a lot of other speakers that are selling for $2500/pair or $5000/pair.

So when it comes to the SVS Ultra bookshelf speakers and the Vapor Stiff Breeze in particular, there's just a little bit of putting some pieces together:

The SVS Ultra speakers do not cost nearly as much to manufacture - just in terms of parts cost, cabinet costs, all those sorts of things - as the Sierra-2. If Ascend had the same profit margin as SVS, the SVS Ultra speakers and the Sierra-2 would no longer be in similar price brackets just in terms of selling price.

For the Vapor Stiff Breeze - their selling price is already higher. So that can lead to the assumption that the Sierra-2 might be somehow "less than" the Stiff Breeze.

But look at some of the design differences - MDF cabinets with a veneer finish rather than laminated bamboo. They tout using crossovers with "only 4 components". Look at the Sierra-2 crossover! Fewer components doesn't mean better, it just means cheaper -- haha.

To hit that price point with those drivers, Vapor must have a pretty small profit margin, too. But the cabinet and crossover will be quite a bit less expensive than what's going into the Sierra-2.

So all I'm saying is that the Sierra-2 - in terms of what it costs to MAKE them - does not fall in between the SVS Ultra and the Vapor Stiff Breeze. In terms of selling price, it appears to fall in between those other two options. But in terms of manufacturing price, it's the most expensive of the bunch.

So I'm just trying to point out that the selling prices can give a false impression of what to expect performance wise. Someone might look at the three prices and assume that the SVS Ultra is good, the Sierra-2 is better, and the Vapor is the best - just going by the very common assumption that more expensive equals better that is engrained in a lot of people's minds. I'm saying, turn that thinking into how much it cost to MAKE the speakers, not how much they are selling for. If you go by that metric, the Sierra-2 end up being the most expensive.

I hope that helps to clear up what I was trying to say :)

[RicardoJoa]

Well the svs are 2/3 the price of the sierra2.
The vapor breeze is about 1500, but the raal alone is quiet expensive. I would say more then the one on the s2. Also, it has a custom front baffle, which means additional labor from just sticking with the original dayton baffle. It sure wont be as inert and beautiful as the S2, but i doubt Pete and Ryan are just putting parts together.
The S2 is a great performer so do some ID manufactures. I just felt that you were putting others down somewhat just to make the sierra proud . Sorry if i have misinterpreted.

[FirstReflect]

No, not putting others down. Sorry if it came across that way.

Just saying, well, what I wrote -- haha.

When I wrote, "there's a bit of putting some pieces together", I wasn't talking about the speakers! lol. I was meaning that we, the consumers, need to look at what information is available to us and draw some conclusions. Sorry for the confusion of that wording :p

So, for example, touting a 1st order slope crossover that uses only 4 parts. That doesn't seem like the best design choice to me. That seems like a cost-control measure. But, hey, if it works out great, wonderful! To me, it's just a clue that there was a little bit of a corner cut there.

But, once again, my only real point is that selling price is not the best way to predict performance. That's all I was driving at. Similar price points don't necessarily mean similar costs of manufacturing. The selling price is arbitrary.

[RicardoJoa]

No, not putting others down. Sorry if it came across that way.

Just saying, well, what I wrote -- haha.

When I wrote, "there's a bit of putting some pieces together", I wasn't talking about the speakers! lol. I was meaning that we, the consumers, need to look at what information is available to us and draw some conclusions. Sorry for the confusion of that wording :p

So, for example, touting a 1st order slope crossover that uses only 4 parts. That doesn't seem like the best design choice to me. That seems like a cost-control measure. But, hey, if it works out great, wonderful! To me, it's just a clue that there was a little bit of a corner cut there.

But, once again, my only real point is that selling price is not the best way to predict performance. That's all I was driving at. Similar price points don't necessarily mean similar costs of manufacturing. The selling price is arbitrary.

I always thought that doing a shallow slope is much harder to get both drivers time aligned. There must be effort and time given. If they wanted to cut cost, they would have simply use the stock dayton baffle.

[smurraybhm]

I think all of us who have Ascend products will go to great lengths to attest to their quality and performance. You need to be careful when you start saying that SVS is working off a larger profit margin, doesn't cost as much to make, etc. Dido on the Vapor's. Unless you have information that we don't or the expertise to go beyond something that "seems" to something "that is." All three are IDs, located in the states and offer some interesting products. In the case of Ascend and SVS we know that both companies are well regarded. Vapor seems to be aimed more at the high end audiophile market with deep pockets reviewing their products and pricing. Their speakers remind me of pricing a car - options add up.

One can always order the SVSs and the Sierra 2s and judge for yourself. Ascend or SVS wouldn't offer a free home trial if it wasn't an effective way to gain new customers - I bet return rates are very low for both. Personally I would start with the Ascends and make it an easier process with no return necessary.

[petmotel]

One thing I would like to point out is the types of drivers. The Ascend Sierra Towers are the first speaker I owned with ribbon tweeters. It was a revelation! The RAAL ribbon in the S-2s is reported in the specification section as having a mass of less than 1/100th of a gram (for the actual ribbon). There is no way a conventional dome type of transducer can hope to compete with a quality ribbon. It is simply not physically possible. I truly need not audition a speaker with a dome type high frequency transducer to know it will not perform as well.

And of course the S-2 woofer/mid which is a new, proprietary driver from Seas, designed from the ground up with some new, and advanced technology. In my experience it performs with levels of dynamics, and accuracy, in an extended bandwidth which is absolutely amazing, as well as exemplary.

At the very least, ultimate performance, much less performance with this level of value, is a very difficult feat to accomplish with a bookshelf speaker.

Jay

[markie]

I've heard the SVS speakers; to me they are good workhorses, quite good in all areas, but magical in none. I haven't heard them personally, but one can tell the Sierra 2 touches upon the magical, wow type of experience. I don't think the near equally priced Vapor Breeze would quite match it, but the Vapor Stiff Breeze (2 woofers instead of 1) at $2000 has a good chance. But then it is a much larger speaker and thus doesn't have the WAF of the Sierra 2. Interestingly I find that Vapor has a design philosophy similar to Ascend's, putting value on keeping things as simple as possible - although that simplicity comes out in different ways.

(On the other side of the spectrum, I've heard that Andrew Jones of TAD fame is not averse to putting a lot of complexity into the crossover in order to get what he wants.)

Mark

[Korkster]

Well, thanks everyone for your input. Sometimes a person just needs a little reinforcement into doing what they already pretty much know they should do. I don't spend this kind of money everyday, so I needed a little push, I guess. :-) I expect I'll be placing my order very soon.

[AllanMarcus]

I think one of the biggest problems with the Sierra-2 is the selling price being too low. Folks have been trained to equate sticker price with quality. So it's quite natural that people are comparing the Sierra-2 to other speakers that sell for around $1500/pair.

But those aren't really appropriate competition in terms of parts quality, sound quality, or how much it cost to make the speakers. That's the price that people ought to be more concerned about; if two pairs of speakers both cost $1000 to actually manufacture, but one has a selling price of $1500/pair while the other has a selling price of $5000/pair, why would we then assume that the $5000/pair speakers magically became better? They didn't, obviously; the selling price is arbitrary. I could take a pair of speakers that cost $1000 to manufacture and charge $10,000, and a whole bunch of people would now swear up and down that they're better than the $5000/pair speakers - just because of the psychology of pricing.

So Ascend's greatest flaw is charging such a small profit margin that it has people comparing the Sierra-2 to speakers that cost much less than the Sierra-2 to actually manufacture. If you're looking at other ID brands, a lot of the honestly more comparable speakers will be up in the $2500/pair range. Not all of them - there exist other ID brands that are also charging very small profit margins. But just in a more general "how do these compare?" sense, that's more the sort of price that other ID brands would charge for speakers that cost as much to make as the Sierra-2. If you're looking at retail store brands, it's more like $5000/pair or more. Again, not always. But just in terms of mindset and what sort of real cost of manufacturing and expected results in return.

So when you look at it that way, you quickly realize what a remarkable bargain the Sierra-2 really are! That's why so many of us have clambered to buy them as quickly as we could! But for the majority of people, the price is actually a bit of a problem. They cannot reconcile that two pairs of speakers both selling for around the same price could be largely different in performance. But we ought to stop thinking in terms of price classes set by the selling price, and instead, focus on price classes set by how much it cost to make the speakers. Of course, no brands really publicly share that information, so it's not the public's fault! All we have easy access to are the retail and "street" prices. So of course that's what we use for comparison. So that's why I mention the $2500/pair and $5000/pair figures. If we're forced to use selling prices, then those are the more appropriate "price brackets" for the Sierra-2 in the ID and retail store markets, respectively. Think of them that way, and you'll better understand why I would personally say that the Sierra-2 are a cut above the other speakers in this comparison thread here :)

Sorry for opening an old thread, but the above pricing argument missed a huge cost not represented in manufacturing cost: R&D cost. R&D cost is extremely relevant to the quality of the speaker. There is virtually no way to determine that cost. A $1000 to manufacture speaker and selling for $5000 may have cost $2,000,000 to develop. Who knows.

That all said, I'm sure the Ascend speakers are great and are very well priced. Other ID firms are as well (heck, look at Chane!).

[curtis]

When it comes to R&D and drivers, Chane is one of the least comparable ID brands to Ascend.

[AllanMarcus]

When it comes to R&D and drivers, Chane is one of the least comparable ID brands to Ascend.

I think Chane, Ascend, Phil, and many others, are ID speaker dealers that are great for their price. That was my point.

[curtis]

I think Chane, Ascend, Phil, and many others, are ID speaker dealers that are great for their price. That was my point.
But that point was made in FirstReflection's post...other than the "many others"...as I don't think there are.

[davef]

Sorry for opening an old thread, but the above pricing argument missed a huge cost not represented in manufacturing cost: R&D cost. R&D cost is extremely relevant to the quality of the speaker. There is virtually no way to determine that cost. A $1000 to manufacture speaker and selling for $5000 may have cost $2,000,000 to develop. Who knows.

Hey Allan,

I have been involved with many loudspeaker companies over the course of my 30 yr career. I have yet to come across a company that actually factors in a development cost when calculating the retail price for a pair speakers. Most just simply add up the cost of the components + labor (generate a BOM -- bill of materials etc.) and then add their margin. I am sure there are some companies that add in a development cost, but there aren't many. Typically, in this industry, R&D costs are covered by profits generated by previous products.

Rob (FirstReflect) is extremely knowledgeable regarding the inner workings of this industry and pricing -- shockingly so actually. When he was shopping companies for his custom build, I found it a bit disturbing that, based on the pricing we quoted him, he pretty much knew what our profit margin was.

That said, with a product like the Sierra-2, that uses a tweeter that was developed specifically for this speaker, as well as a woofer that was nearly entirely built for us, actual development costs were rather huge. Beyond anything we could absorb on our own, especially when considering the product (Sierra-2) would not be available until these components were completed, and these components are not mass produced in Asia (where development costs like tooling are fractions of the cost)

With the Sierra-2 tweeter, our deal was that RAAL would be able to sell an OEM version of what we co-developed which would help cover the development costs. This is not the same tweeter, although it does look the same, but there are some important differences.

With the woofer, since we have been a high volume purchaser from SEAS for over a decade now, they saw the potential in this so they absorbed about 1/2 of the development costs (which they figured would be worth it based on estimated yearly volume) and the other 1/2 we absorbed.

Now -- these types of "deals" don't come easy and in many ways give us an advantage over smaller or lesser known establishments, but many who know us, know our history etc, and know the kind of reputation we carry within this rather tight industry. I take great pride in the relationships we have with our many vendors, and this started well before Ascend -- for me it began back in my M&K days, which began 26 years ago when I started specing custom components from various manufacturers all over the globe (OMG -- hard to believe it has been that long :confused:).