Can anything compete with the RAAL tower or Sierra 2?

[ematthews]

I owned the Sierra 2 and made the upgrade to the RAAL tower. I am just throwing this out there to get some knowledge. Is there any bookshelf speaker out there that compete with the RAAL ribbon as far as being so clear and open? I am looking around at 1500 dollars to spend on bookshelves again and I don't think I will find another speaker that can compete. From what I have researched only the KEF LS50 can compete. Maybe Elac's new Uni Fi Thoughts.

[justthinking]

New speakers around $1,500 price point? I don't believe so, KEF LS50 can put up a good fight, but in the end the Sierra-2 will still be superior as it goes down deeper, has larger soundstage and also has better highs due to RAAL

Only other speakers I can think that will offer you same level of performance at similar price point but with different house sound would probably be speakers made by Dennis Murphy or Salk Sound

Or, you can monitor the used speakers market, you may find some bargain out there that sounds good to your ears,

[sludgeogre]

The Elac speakers are not going to be as accurate. They have an accentuated sound in the bass range, and it's more of a sweet sound rather than completely accurate. Good speakers, just not the same kind of design intent as the Sierra 2 or Tower.

From what I've heard of the KEF LS50, it's also a great sounding speaker, but may not be the most accurate. It apparently images very well, so may be slightly better than the Sierra 2, but I don't know. I did read a shootout a guy did between the LS50 and the Sierra 2 and I believe he ended up keeping the LS50, regretting it, and then buying the Sierra 2 again. It's just a matter of taste in the end, both incredible speakers, but one may provide a better experience for each person for a different reason (accuracy, soundstage, imagine, bass impact, instrument separation, etc...). Since you asked specifically about clear and open speakers, I really doubt you'll find anything better for $1500. You're probably talking $5000+ for something more clear and open. I don't know of any other speaker company with less smoothing on their frequency response charts, or of anyone that sells such an incredible tweeter for such a low price.

If I were you I would invest that money in better/more subwoofers, better/bigger amplification, room correction or DSP.

[ematthews]

The Elac speakers are not going to be as accurate. They have an accentuated sound in the bass range, and it's more of a sweet sound rather than completely accurate. Good speakers, just not the same kind of design intent as the Sierra 2 or Tower.

From what I've heard of the KEF LS50, it's also a great sounding speaker, but may not be the most accurate. It apparently images very well, so may be slightly better than the Sierra 2, but I don't know. I did read a shootout a guy did between the LS50 and the Sierra 2 and I believe he ended up keeping the LS50, regretting it, and then buying the Sierra 2 again. It's just a matter of taste in the end, both incredible speakers, but one may provide a better experience for each person for a different reason (accuracy, soundstage, imagine, bass impact, instrument separation, etc...). Since you asked specifically about clear and open speakers, I really doubt you'll find anything better for $1500. You're probably talking $5000+ for something more clear and open. I don't know of any other speaker company with less smoothing on their frequency response charts, or of anyone that sells such an incredible tweeter for such a low price.

If I were you I would invest that money in better/more subwoofers, better/bigger amplification, room correction or DSP.

I had planned on going with AA. Not only for the product but Dave and Dina can't be beat. As for my towers, I purchased some expensive RBH Sound Reference speakers and my Raal towers are way way better.. And half of what I paid. Also no MDF which I can't stand..

[mikesiskav]

The vlam bamboo cabinet is one of the things that really makes Ascend unique. Combined with the Raal and the Curv woofer, I don't think you can beat the Sierra 2 for the money. And it can certainly hold its own at even higher price points. Also, as you mentioned, the customer service from Dave and Dina is spectacular. You won't get that kind of service from a larger company.

[rsmt2000]

New speakers around $1,500 price point? I don't believe so, KEF LS50 can put up a good fight, but in the end the Sierra-2 will still be superior as it goes down deeper, has larger soundstage and also has better highs due to RAAL

Only other speakers I can think that will offer you same level of performance at similar price point but with different house sound would probably be speakers made by Dennis Murphy or Salk Sound

,

I think salks are way more expensive than ascends at all levels. You also pay more to salk for their custom veneers too but it is your comment about the salk's sound signature that would like to hear more about.

I have Sierra towers with RAAL towers and a horizon and have attended a few audio shows where I heard way too expensive salks but nothing in the prices range of the sierra towers.

Thanks
Ron

[Jaybeez]

My 2's compare very favorably to Revel Ultima Gems (1) on similar / same media.

At about 1/4 the price new vs. new (recognizing Gem 1's can only be bought used) the price vs. performance ratio is ridiculous.

IF you can find a set of Revels used, you'll still pay $1000+ more and won't be any happier with what your ears pick up.

[N Boros]

I think that the way question is worded needs some tweeking. Does any other speaker at the $1500 have as high as a cost in materials used in the speaker? I think the answer to that is, only a small number of speakers might be in the class as the Sierra 2.

Saying one speaker can compete with another is kind of a loaded question. How are you measuring performance of one versus the other? There are lots of different things you can compare. You can get a super efficient Klipsch speaker that can beat the sierra 2s in terms of efficiency and maybe even having lower distortion (at least in the high end) at say 100dB or 105 dB at the $1500 level. Does that mean the Klipsch speaker is better? You can get a Magnepan speaker that might produce a more realistic and larger soundstage at or near that price point. Is the Magnepan better? The Sierra 2 has much more uniform off axis response than the previously mentioned speakers. Does that make the Sierra 2 better? I think that the real problem is that our preferences for speakers are quite subjective. Harmon has statistical research that says most people prefer speakers that are linear, with good off axis response, low distortion, good transient response, etc. But, there were some that didn't agree.

While I love my Sierra 2s and think that these will be speakers that are my reference speakers for quite some time, I can't say that everyone would agree that they are the perfect speaker for them. It could be because of hearing deficiencies or just plain personal preference.

[curtis]

You can get a Magnepan speaker that might produce a more realistic and larger soundstage at or near that price point. Is the Magnepan better?
I agree with your point. I just have a pet peeve with the above statement. How do you know if a soundstage is more realistic or accurate?

[N Boros]

I agree with your point. I just have a pet peeve with the above statement. How do you know if a soundstage is more realistic or accurate?

Sorry. I haven't heard a planar magnetic speaker, but have heard and read many people describing them in this way or saying that they have a huge soundstage and kind of holographic imaging. They could have a "more realistic" sound to them, if a person has seen a certain live performance and can compare that with a good recording of that performance on the Magnepan speakers. I'm not sure if most reviewers have done this though.

I am interested in listening to planar magnetic speakers at some point though, since most reviewers do seem to agree on they have quite a different sound that just about any other traditional speaker. They seem to describe them in different ways though and have a hard time coming up with the words to completely convey how they are different though.

[curtis]

Sorry. I haven't heard a planar magnetic speaker, but have heard and read many people describing them in this way or saying that they have a huge soundstage and kind of holographic imaging. They could have a "more realistic" sound to them, if a person has seen a certain live performance and can compare that with a good recording of that performance on the Magnepan speakers. I'm not sure if most reviewers have done this though.

I am interested in listening to planar magnetic speakers at some point though, since most reviewers do seem to agree on they have quite a different sound that just about any other traditional speaker. They seem to describe them in different ways though and have a hard time coming up with the words to completely convey how they are different though.
Not just with a planer magnetic speaker...any speaker. How do you know the soundstage is accurate?

Imaging is a whole 'nother story. I haven't heard any other brand of speaker as a whole, image as well as Ascends.

Soundstage is the size the picture...imaging is how well that picture is in focus.

[N Boros]

Not just with a planer magnetic speaker...any speaker. How do you know the soundstage is accurate?

Imaging is a whole 'nother story. I haven't heard any other brand of speaker as a whole, image as well as Ascends.

Soundstage is the size the picture...imaging is how well that picture is in focus.


That is a good point. I have no idea what measurements we could look at for a particular speaker to determine if one has a more accurate sized soundstage than the other.

Rob H., co-Host of AVRant, often talks about planar speakers and how they do seem to in fact do a better job at imaging than the Sierra's with the Raal ribbon tweeter. They also produce this big soundstage as well. Whether or not this is accurate, I have no idea. Not everyone is after accurate. This does not mean that I plan to sell my Sierra 2s to just get some planar speakers, at all. The reason I wanted the Sierra2s, is that I can use them in a surround sound speaker layout and share the experience with other people: watching a movie together or listening to some music together. Rob H. and Tom have mentioned several times on AVRant that while planar speakers are exceptional in the two areas I mentioned, they are also very difficult to setup to get that sound. Also, they have very very narrow dispersion, so that if you move your head a slight bit some of those attributes go away. So it is not possible to that same experience on an album or a movie with someone else with many of these planar speakers. Does that mean that they are worse or better than the Sierra 2s? No, they are different. And every speaker (unless one has an unlimited budget) is going to have some pros and cons. But, Rob H. has mentioned that the Sierra 2s come quite close in performance to planar speakers in imaging, while not having the downside of such narrow dispersion.

Years down the road I will probably try out a pair of planar speakers, so that I can see what all these folks are raving about. If they do what some say they can, I could see myself enjoying them for solo 2 channel listening sessions, but still keep the Ascends for everything else.

[curtis]

That is a good point. I have no idea what measurements we could look at for a particular speaker to determine if one has a more accurate sized soundstage than the other.

Rob H., co-Host of AVRant, often talks about planar speakers and how they do seem to in fact do a better job at imaging than the Sierra's with the Raal ribbon tweeter. They also produce this big soundstage as well. Whether or not this is accurate, I have no idea. Not everyone is after accurate. This does not mean that I plan to sell my Sierra 2s to just get some planar speakers, at all. The reason I wanted the Sierra2s, is that I can use them in a surround sound speaker layout and share the experience with other people: watching a movie together or listening to some music together. Rob H. and Tom have mentioned several times on AVRant that while planar speakers are exceptional in the two areas I mentioned, they are also very difficult to setup to get that sound. Also, they have very very narrow dispersion, so that if you move your head a slight bit some of those attributes go away. So it is not possible to that same experience on an album or a movie with someone else with many of these planar speakers. Does that mean that they are worse or better than the Sierra 2s? No, they are different. And every speaker (unless one has an unlimited budget) is going to have some pros and cons. But, Rob H. has mentioned that the Sierra 2s come quite close in performance to planar speakers in imaging, while not having the downside of such narrow dispersion.

Years down the road I will probably try out a pair of planar speakers, so that I can see what all these folks are raving about. If they do what some say they can, I could see myself enjoying them for solo 2 channel listening sessions, but still keep the Ascends for everything else.
I have only critically listened to planer speakers twice...both times were Magnepans.

Big wall of sound each time, but neither demo had good imaging. Just my experience, and yes, it could have been the setup.

[theophile]

I have only critically listened to planer speakers twice...both times were Magnepans.

Big wall of sound each time, but neither demo had good imaging. Just my experience, and yes, it could have been the setup.

Agree Curtis. I critically listened to the big Maggie's a while back and recently, some big Martin Logans. They do throw up a big wall of sound, but certainly had a very diffused and bloated image with an ill-defined soundstage. In other words, they didn't accurately present a realistic "live image" venue space, no matter the music genre! The Sierras are just the reverse in all areas of realistic presentation...much more musical, natural, accurate and Live Sounding, with everything in it's place as it is hearing it Live (to my ears, YMMV)!!!

Ted

[sludgeogre]

Agree Curtis. I critically listened to the big Maggie's a while back and recently, some big Martin Logans. They do throw up a big wall of sound, but certainly had a very diffused and bloated image with an ill-defined soundstage. In other words, they didn't accurately present a realistic "live image" venue space, no matter the music genre! The Sierras are just the reverse in all areas of realistic presentation...much more musical, natural, accurate and Live Sounding, with everything in it's place as it is hearing it Live (to my ears, YMMY)!!!

Ted

I heard a pair of 1.7i at a dealer and though I loved the sound, it is indeed very diffuse and room filling. I think some people prefer that to precise imaging for one reason or another, it's that wall of sound kind of quality, with really tight bass. I much prefer my towers, as it sounds realistic instead of euphonic, if that makes sense.

[theophile]

I much prefer my towers, as it sounds realistic instead of euphonic, if that makes sense.

Perfect sense! :cool:

[ematthews]

Well. I wasn't really talking about 1500 price point. Or even 2900 for the towers.. I had a chance to listen to others mentioned and I just can't find a better sounding speaker. My only wish... I had gotten the black bamboo tower...