Sierra-2s - Almost 4 Years Later

[dislocatedday]

This probably does not warrant its own thread, but I really did not know where else to put it other than in a new thread.

I bought my pair of Sierra-2 speakers almost 4 years ago (and bought a used custom Sierra-1 with the 70-20xr ribbon tweeter shortly thereafter to use as a center speaker). I don't post much on these forums, or other forums, simply because what free time I do have I would rather spend listening to music rather than discussing equipment, music, etc., on the internet. I have enjoyed these speakers so much over the past 4 years that I don't even consider "upgrading" or replacing them with something else. I think many people "upgrade" their equipment so often just because they want to try something new, and I can totally understand that. These speakers are just perfect to me however, so I don't have any desire to replace them. I should point out that I also use 2 PSA 15 inch subs in my setup (with an anti-mode 8033 device to eq the subs), with the crossover set at 80 Hz, and this combination gives me everything I need from bottom to top.

I am posting here tonight only because I happened to briefly this evening put my old tower speakers back in the setup in place of the Sierra-2s, just to see how I thought they compared to Sierra-2s after not hearing them for a few years, and because I am going to go ahead and sell them as they are just taking up space in my storage area. Those tower speakers are the Rocket RS850s.

It became evident rather quickly that the Rockets are completely outclassed by the Sierra-2s.........so much so that I can't believe I ever thought the Rockets sounded good. That might seem a little over the top, as I guess they are OK sounding, but there is not one single thing they even come close to matching in the Sierra-2s. They look pretty and have an imposing size, and I guess that is the best I can say about them after pulling them out of storage after a few years. I guess they would also technically player deeper, but as I use subs this is irrelevant for me.

I have some older Onix reference .5 speakers that I have been using as my surrounds, and as I listen to quite a bit of discrete 5.1 surround music on SACD, DVD-A, and blu ray, the difference between them and the front Sierra speakers had been bothering me. I was tempted to buy another pair of Sierra-2s or Lunas for surrounds, but it seems like overkill for me. Most of my music listening is still stereo material. So, I decided to order the CBM-170s to be my new surround speakers. The frequency response of this speaker appears to be almost the same as that of the Sierra-2 (with not quite the same top end extension), so I think it will be a good match.

I guess this turned out to be a partial review type posting, but I just wanted to relay how amusing I found it when I briefly put back in my setup my old speakers that the Sierra-2s replaced. All it did was make me appreciate my Sierra-2s even more.

[Mag_Neato]

That is awesome, and is exactly how I feel about no desire to upgrade my Sierra-2's. Since I have total freedom of system placement without worrying about my wife not approving (I have a man-attic!), I do like to experiment with speaker positioning, etc. and am currently listening with them set up in a nearfield configuration. I am only running them with a single 12" sealed servo Rythmik. Hi & Low pass filters on my Halo P5 are set around 45Hz and with the speakers only about 5ft from my ears & about 7ft apart, soundstaging & imaging have become much better. Most of us take for granted the affect the room has on what we hear. By having the speakers close you can take those effects mostly out of the equation. The only thoughts I have for upgrading the 2's are more out of curiosity rather than feeling as if I'm missing anything, i.e. "Are the RAAL towers going to be THAT much better?"

Now I am just tweaking what I have to eek out the last drop of performance.

[dislocatedday]

Hi Mag_Neato. We seem to be very similar in that we both have a dedicated room in which our wives let us do whatever we want, and I concur with the thoughts on the speakers, speaker placement, and the room having the biggest effects on what we hear. The Halo P5 is a great pre-amp, which I almost bought a few years ago. I ended up with the Emotiva XSP-1 in my setup. Both it and the Halo P5 have the HT bypass feature and bass management, which was a requirement for my setup.

My family and I moved into a new home 3 years ago and it has a fairly big, nicely finished basement. I got free reign to make it my "Man Cave", and my wife got the big finished walk-in closet in our bedroom all to herself. This worked out well for both of us!

I have my main front L and R speakers about 4 feet out from the wall behind them, and they are about 9 feet apart from each other. I then sit approximately 8 feet from them, with the speakers toed in so they point about a foot out from each side of my head. This seems to produce the best imaging and soundstage in my room. Getting them further out away from the back wall really brought everything into tighter focus, and produced more depth in the soundstage. I also have acoustic panels on the side walls at the points of first reflection.

I really believe that people who want to get the most out of an audio setup (regardless of whether it is for HT or music) should focus their money and attention on the speakers (including subs) and the setup of them in their room first and foremost. A person should find speakers they like, and then work to optimize their setup and placement in their room. After that, then a person should worry about the electronics with the first consideration being ensuring that they have sufficient power to reach the levels they need in their room. I realize it is more fun to discuss and play around with different AVRs or processors, DACs, automated room correction, etc., but I just think these should be the last things to worry about after speakers, subs, and room placement.

[Mag_Neato]

Agreed, fix the room/placement before thinking of new electronics.

I had full reign of the basement at my last house, though never really messed around with placement as much as I should have. The only negative there was that my wife could hear everything I was listening to!

When we built the new house, we got a concrete slab foundation in lieu of a basement. My man-attic is the finished room above the garage. I had the builder add insulation to the wall between the finished attic room and the open loft. There's a solid core door between them. I also added acoustic door weather stripping to the door stops which dramatically reduced the transmission of sound through it. There are times I am listening at very high volumes and worry that my wife will say something. When I come downstairs she asks "where have you been?". That's when I know the soundproofing works!

The Halo P5 was an unexpected purchase over the last few months. Since it has been replaced with the P6 I found a dealer demo for roughly 40% off MSRP. And it is in the silver finish to boot, which I prefer to the black. It replaced my tried and true Marantz SR6003 AVR that was serving pre duty with an Adcom GFA-5500 amp. It has made a very nice increase in performance. Since it does not have any digital processing other than its onboard DAC, I placed the sub the same distance from my ears as the main speakers. This has made the quickness, tightness & impact spot on. I'm still trying to find the optimal placement for everything, but this is a great start. I did pull the speakers out a ways from the wall, maybe about 3ft, but am limited in how far apart I can go as the room is only 10' - 10' 6" wide or somewhere about that. I have them around 7' apart for now. The 5' listening distance was recommended by a sound engineer and has been pretty nice so far.

[Remonster]

It's funny you mention upgrading for the sake of trying something new. I posted my Sierra 2s for sale (on another forum) this week and was offered $1,100 for them and then it hit me, I wouldn't let them go even for that much. There are other speakers I'm curious to try but I know I'll regret letting these go. I think they'll be with me for a very long time.

[Mag_Neato]

I thought I'd post my latest feelings of the Sierra-2's.
Lately, I've been doing mental hopscotch (Missing Persons reference!) regarding my amp, an ADCOM GFA-5500, which I bought used about 4 years ago. It has been a solid performer and have never had an issue. I tried running the Sierra-2's full range for kicks to try taxing the massive power reserves of the amp, but could never really induce any strain. The speakers seemed as if they'd give up first.

After replacing a Marantz SR6003 AVR I was using as a pre with a Parasound Halo P5 pre, the sound improved quite a bit. I then began wondering if a new, modern state-of-the-art amp would make a difference too. After researching a few options it was obvious I would have to spend way too much for something to replace the ADCOM. I then found a guy who modifies ADCOM amps with upgraded parts & circuit mods. After reading user comments and digesting the modification strategies outlined on his site, I finally took the plunge and had him perform his mid-level mod on my amp.

I got the amp back yesterday. I hooked it up, turned off my Rythmik 12" sub and set the Sierra-2's to run full range. He recommends running the amp to burn it in and even suggested leaving it powered on for several days. Now, I have run the Sierra's full range before but felt the Rythmik was a necessity, so I was prepared to keep the volume under control during heavy bass as to avoid unwanted noises from the woofers. What I was not prepared for was the massive improvement the amp has in bass extension and grip. I had to put my hand on the Rythmik's woofer to confirm it was off. Jaw-on-floor moment. With the mods to the amp and its new command of the bass, the Sierra-2's have incredible extension, slam & dynamics. Track after track of material with good bass.....drums, bass guitar, etc.........had me slack-jawed. I felt no urge to engage the sub. The entire bandwidth seemed improved. The mids had more weight, the highs were extended and smooth, soundstage seemed more natural and expanded. Hard to explain. I have lots of listening to do!

To sum it up, this has given me an even greater appreciation for the amazing Sierra-2's.

Now, Dave, all we need now is the option to upgrade to the new woofer used in the Sierra-2 Diamond version!!

[rifmon]

Thanks for sharing. I am a soon-to-be-owner of a set of Sierra 2's. I currently own a set of Piano Black Sierra 1's and have been enjoying them for approx 6 years now. The bass in my room is very good with the 1's. I'm expecting the bass quality to be different when I receive the 2's in ways described here on this forum many times.

Mag_Neato, you mentioned you paid for upgrades for your ADCOM and you're very happy with the results. I am running my Sierra 1's with a Harmon Kardon 3490 stereo receiver. There's a guy on-line who works on HK receivers in a similar manner. His site and services grabbed my attention but I never sent my HK in to him because I was skeptical the results would've been noticeable. But your positive experience has me reconsidering!

[Beave]

Warning: This is going to be a bit rude. I don't know how else to say it, so I apologize in advance for sounding confrontational.

Do you really think your auditory memory lasts that long and is that good?

You're comparing what you hear now with what you remember from weeks ago. Auditory memory is very fleeting - on the order of seconds, not minutes, not hours, not days, not weeks.

[Beave]

The 3490 is still relatively new, and, if I remember right, fairly powerful. There's no need to send it in for mods.

Old amps can have the power supply caps dry out, which can affect performance (*if* they have dried out). An amp that's just a few years old is very unlikely to have that problem.

Some of these 'modification' people rely on faulty long-term audio memory and expectation bias in their customers.

If it ain't broke, there's nothing to fix.

(I sold an amp a few years ago to a guy who immediately sent it off for mods. It was a great amp working fine - and from what I saw of the mods, they were a joke.)

[Mag_Neato]

Hello Beave, thanks for your interest.
Yes, auditory memory is very fleeting and should be taken into consideration. Let me ask you this: If your wife/child/mother/father were to experience an issue that affected the tonality of their speech, would be able to detect it even after weeks of not speaking to them? Most likely. Why? Because you know how they sound from extensive familiarity with them. Do you have measurements of their sound to compare and point to? No? DidnÂ’t think so.
In similar fashion, I am extremely familiar with how my SierraÂ’s sound. I bought them as one of the first pairs of original Sierra-1Â’s when Dave released them in 2007. I upgraded to NeTs, and when the RAAL kits were made available I converted them again. I regularly listen to a variety of tracks that I play over and over, so IÂ’m pretty good at knowing how things will sound. When I say that the modded amp is doing things differently, it is not expectation bias, it’s my trained ear picking this out. I understand the need for some to want to see data measurements on a screen so they can justify what is heard, or reported to be heard, but I tend to go by what my ears are telling me. If I just paid for something that is only sounding good psychologically, then it was still worth it!

[Beave]

Voice recognition - and recognizing changes to a person's voice - isn't the same as hifi sound reproduction and recognition of changes there. Evolution has tuned our hearing mechanism to be more observant of familiar voices. Hifi is exceptionally recent on the evolutionary scale.

No matter how well you think your ear-brain mechanism is 'trained,' it's still susceptible to all sorts of biases, both conscious and unconscious. Some of the most confident, experienced listeners are the most fallible.

There's always the possibility that your Adcom was seriously out of spec before, and that there really is now an improvement because it's functioning as it should have all along. That was the case for an old receiver I had - and it stuck out like a sore thumb in my level-matched comparisons.

[rifmon]

The 3490 is still relatively new, and, if I remember right, fairly powerful. There's no need to send it in for mods.

Old amps can have the power supply caps dry out, which can affect performance (*if* they have dried out). An amp that's just a few years old is very unlikely to have that problem.

Some of these 'modification' people rely on faulty long-term audio memory and expectation bias in their customers.

If it ain't broke, there's nothing to fix.

(I sold an amp a few years ago to a guy who immediately sent it off for mods. It was a great amp working fine - and from what I saw of the mods, they were a joke.)

Advice taken. Yeah I actually called the guy months ago and he not only told me about the mod’s, he went on to try to sell me some speakers. Well the guy needs to make a living but I ended the call. I will take your advise and leave my 3490 well enough alone.

I bought the HK used and it still looks and functions as a new. I remember Dave sold these in the early days. When I saw it I bought it. I trust it’ll Kahr well with my up coming 2’s

[Mag_Neato]

I’m not going to send this thread off course with a “he said/she said” debate, just reaffirming that the Sierra-2’s are still incredible and are in no danger of being replaced, regardless of the amp.

[natetg57]

I understand the need for some to want to see data measurements on a screen so they can justify what is heard, or reported to be heard, but I tend to go by what my ears are telling me. If I just paid for something that is only sounding good psychologically, then it was still worth it!

It IS all just entertainment. So I'm glad you're enjoying your purchase. I agree with Beave that if a different amplifier sounds distinctly different than something about that should be measurable. But it's not worth arguing about for sure. I know I've been surprised by my own attempts at blind listening tests. I was SURE that a digital version of a radiohead album sounded better until I realized that it was 16/44 like the CD.

[Mag_Neato]

It IS all just entertainment. So I'm glad you're enjoying your purchase. I agree with Beave that if a different amplifier sounds distinctly different than something about that should be measurable. But it's not worth arguing about for sure. I know I've been surprised by my own attempts at blind listening tests. I was SURE that a digital version of a radiohead album sounded better until I realized that it was 16/44 like the CD.

It is about enjoying the performance!

Were the digital & CD versions from the same recording session? Variations of the setup in recording, such as mic model, mic positioning, mix balance, etc. will produce different results. A CD quality mix can sound better than a Higher res version if recorded properly.

[natetg57]

It is about enjoying the performance!

Were the digital & CD versions from the same recording session? Variations of the setup in recording, such as mic model, mic positioning, mix balance, etc. will produce different results. A CD quality mix can sound better than a Higher res version if recorded properly.

No, I'm pretty sure it was the exact same recording and recording quality. My point was that when I wanted to hear a difference, it seemed like there was a clear one. It makes me a lot less trusting of my impressions.
My wife helped me to do blind testing of sound treatments placed behind my front speakers. To my surprise, when I couldn't see what was going on, I consistently liked the sound better without the panels behind the speakers. Without the blind testing, I was sure I like it better with the panels there. I ended up using them at the back of the room.

[Mag_Neato]

No, I'm pretty sure it was the exact same recording and recording quality. My point was that when I wanted to hear a difference, it seemed like there was a clear one. It makes me a lot less trusting of my impressions.
My wife helped me to do blind testing of sound treatments placed behind my front speakers. To my surprise, when I couldn't see what was going on, I consistently liked the sound better without the panels behind the speakers. Without the blind testing, I was sure I like it better with the panels there. I ended up using them at the back of the room.

Fair enough. I would never try to convince you that your brain was being "tricked" by what you hear. I was not there and have no basis to refute your findings. You heard what you heard. When I listen I often close my eyes so the sound creates the "Soundscape" without my eyes seeing the equipment & room. I can better visualize the performance. The better the sound reproduction, the better the experience.

[curtis]

Fair enough. I would never try to convince you that your brain was being "tricked" by what you hear. I was not there and have no basis to refute your findings. You heard what you heard. When I listen I often close my eyes so the sound creates the "Soundscape" without my eyes seeing the equipment & room. I can better visualize the performance. The better the sound reproduction, the better the experience.
Mag, I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

Are you implying that "closing your eyes" takes away influence of knowing what equipment is being used?

[Mag_Neato]

Mag, I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

Are you implying that "closing your eyes" takes away influence of knowing what equipment is being used?

I think it does, for me anyhow. It's easier to "see" the performers/instruments on a blank canvas vs overlaying the images on what you are looking at. Make sense?

With home theater the video gives you the visual supported by the soundtrack.

[curtis]

I think it does, for me anyhow. It's easier to "see" the performers/instruments on a blank canvas vs overlaying the images on what you are looking at. Make sense?

With home theater the video gives you the visual supported by the soundtrack.
You still know what equipment is being used, regardless if your eyes are open or not, and that is still an influence on your perception. It is not equivalent of a blind test.

[Mag_Neato]

You still know what equipment is being used, regardless if your eyes are open or not, and that is still an influence on your perception. It is not equivalent of a blind test.

Curtis, maybe I phrased it wrong? It is not about doing any sort of test, blind or sighted. It's about my enjoyment of the performance......which seems to be a lost concept for many, specifically those obsessed with measurements and what equipment is in the rack. I am simply at a point where I want to focus on the enjoyment of my system and the sound it makes. I have upgraded and tweaked. The sound has improved to varying degrees along the way. I'm at a point where it's time to enjoy the fruits of my labor and try not to think about the next upgrade. So, for ME, when I close my eyes it is not so I "forget" what equipment I have, but rather it allows my mind to paint the picture of the performance so I can enjoy those special song tracks that make me want to close my eyes!

Having a system with the Sierra-2's just makes those moments a bit more special.

[curtis]

My statement was only in regards to blind testing, bias, and influence. It was not to disparage your enjoyment...it is clear that you enjoy your system, like all of us should.

[Mag_Neato]

No worries Curtis, I realize I replied incorrectly to your question. This time change must be affecting my brain more than I thought!

[mikesiskav]

Hmmm, some interesting announcement coming?? :D

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/showthread.php?6914-temp

[Mag_Neato]

Hmmm, some interesting announcement coming?? :D

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/showthread.php?6914-temp

Radio silence!

[davef]

Radio silence!

Stay tuned... ;)