sierra 2 vs reference 3a de capo

[safebelayer]

Does anyone here have experience comparing these two speakers head to head? It seems that the de capo is the logical competitor though it is twice the price.

Jolida 302b 50 watt tube el34 tubes
Jolida jd100 CD
Basis 2001 turntable

Thanks to all who respond

[bkdc]

Does anyone here have experience comparing these two speakers head to head? It seems that the de capo is the logical competitor though it is twice the price.

Jolida 302b 50 watt tube el34 tubes
Jolida jd100 CD
Basis 2001 turntable

Thanks to all who respond

The fact that Reference 3A touts 'cryogenic treatment' of its wiring and connectors should raise a big red flag on the credibility of the company itself and it's devious marketing schemes to sell snake oil. This is not a criticism of the speakers themselves as I do not have first hand experience with them and they seem to be well reviewed. But the company is engaging in ridiculous deceptive marketing. Yes, super-freezing copper turns copper it into a super-conductor for as long as it remains extremely cold. There is absolutely no benefit when it returns to room temperature. The fact that Reference 3A markets its use of OCC copper over standard OFC or even ETP copper tells me that it is spending money in parts that make absolutely no difference in sound quality. The only measures that matter for the copper cable are resistance, capacitance, and inductance. The resistance at the binding post-banana plug will dwarf any differences between OFC and OCC for the in-speaker run. There is no way that there is any meaningful difference in these measures on a few foot run (or even a 50-foot run) of OCC versus standard ETP copper cable of equivalent gauge. Dave spends money where it counts. He is extremely transparent and posts real world measurements of his speaker components. I'm so happy to support a company that does not sell snake oil in an industry full of it.

BTW, happy climbing. I like your userid.

[davef]

Does anyone here have experience comparing these two speakers head to head? It seems that the de capo is the logical competitor though it is twice the price.

Jolida 302b 50 watt tube el34 tubes
Jolida jd100 CD
Basis 2001 turntable

Thanks to all who respond

NRC measurements of the de capo: http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1150:nrc-measurements-reference-3a-mm-de-capo-be&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

Published specifications of this speaker do not match actual measurements. They claim high frequency extension to 40kHz, measurements reveal this speaker is -10dB at ~15kHz and there is some real odd behavior in the response from 500Hz and up, especially between 1-2kHz, where the response is very erratic and there is high distortion. My guess is that they are crossing the tweeter to low.

Compare with our Sierra-1 measurements, taken in the same facility: http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/ascend_sierra1/

[curtis]

Wow...the measurements of the de capo look funky.

[Blutarsky]

Still, Soundstage gave the Capos a good review, in spite of one of the worst measurements I have ever seen.
I will stick with Ascends peer reviews.

[markie]

I've heard the Reference 3a's several times, as recently as a few months ago in show conditions. They are very 'direct' sounding, fast, clean and to a lesser extent, clear. If I recall they don't have a cross over in the traditional sense. In the room where I heard them they were definitely more lean than lush.

I liked that they were made just about 50 miles from where I live. :) What I didn't care for was the new type of finish they had on them. Very dull and grey. I asked the guy what that was about and he said it helped the sound. That told me they were interested in performance over looks. (I would prefer a slight hit on sound if it made for a good looking speaker.)

So they have gone very utilitarian. Cryogenic treatment? Wiki says

The process has a wide range of applications from industrial tooling to the improvement of musical signal transmission. Some of the benefits of cryogenic treatment include longer part life, less failure due to cracking, improved thermal properties, better electrical properties including less electrical resistance, reduced coefficient of friction, less creep and walk, improved flatness, and easier machining.[1]

All that said, the performance of the speaker in that room at that time did not captivate me, especially for the price. But then, I wasn't that impressed by the Legacy Aeris either when I heard them at the same show. Show conditions can be less than flattering to a speaker!

Mark

[bkdc]

For an 'audiophile' willing to pay for cryogenic treatment of copperwire, it's really insane that they don't just insist on pure silver wire. Silver is not that expensive for a few feet, and it's certainly not difficult to work it into wire. Or if they really insist, they should turn the thermostat down from 70 degrees to 67 degrees F because that'll reduce the resistance of the several feet of wiring more than cryo treatment. Or just turn your listening room into an industrial freezer. And maybe you'll get the resistance decrease equivalent to switching from copper to silver.

Creep? Walk? Cracking? Machining? We're talking insulated copper WIRE here. We're not making a french horn out of copper. This is wire that sits INSIDE the speaker that will sit motionless. It will not be flexed or bent repeatedly.

[mcatucci]

So wait...you're saying if I keep the house as cold as possible I will get a slight improvement in sound? I'm about to test the ultimate in WAF ;)

[bkdc]

So wait...you're saying if I keep the house as cold as possible I will get a slight improvement in sound? I'm about to test the ultimate in WAF ;)

It is amazing what crazy stuff people are willing to do for an absolutely no real gain in sound quality. If a company is willing to market things that provide absolutely no improvement in the final product, I wonder if it is willing to engage in other shenanigans I don't think there is anyone who would take apart a copper wire to prove that it is OCC over OFC or ETP. For a 3-foot run, resistance measurements would be identical or within variation limits on any reasonable measuring device.

[davef]

It is amazing what crazy stuff people are willing to do for an absolutely no real gain in sound quality. If a company is willing to market things that provide absolutely no improvement in the final product, I wonder if it is willing to engage in other shenanigans I don't think there is anyone who would take apart a copper wire to prove that it is OCC over OFC or ETP. For a 3-foot run, resistance measurements would be identical or within variation limits on any reasonable measuring device.

Plus we are talking about differences in electrical resistance of milliohms for speaker cable and connectors. Keep in mind that there will typically be at least 40 times more resistance in the voice coil windings of a driver, and about ten times more resistance in series inductors found in the crossover compared to the cable feeding the signal to the speaker.

Think about it for a moment.. an 8 ohm woofer and an 8 ohm tweeter typically have about 6.2 ohms of resistance in the voice coil windings... and this resistance will vary considerably as the coils get hot (and they can get very hot) I don't think I have ever measured a length of cable with more than 1/2 ohm total resistance... Even for a 50ft run of cheap cable...