Quote:
Originally Posted by Mag_Neato
hehe, BamBoom.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mag_Neato
hehe, BamBoom.
that's a good one!Quote:
Originally Posted by dallas
Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis
thanx. Your welcome to use my lame puns at parties and call it your own :)
It's outside the "mountain" theme though of ascend. He'll probably call it something like "Fault line' or "Avalanche". Maybe an asian translation for paying homage to the bamboo.
hey guys... to those of you lucky enough to have used both the 340SE and the sierras, i have a question.
i know that many people consider the center channel to be the most important channel in a 5.1 setup, so i have to ask this...
would using a pair of sierra 1's for fronts and a 340SE center sound work better or worse than just using 340SE's across the whole front? the reason i ask is it will be virtually impossible for me to use a sierra center because i am resting an lcd tv on top of the center channel speaker and the tv's footprint is too large for the sierra (but fits nicely with the 340SE).
i just wonder if i would be better off having 3 identical 340SE's across the front.
for what it's worth, i'll be using a pair of HTM-200s for surround duty.
I haven't used both, but likely the answer will be 3 340's will be better for movies and multi channel music, and the 2 S-1's and 1 240 will be better if/when you listen to 2 channel music.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein
I am wrestling with that very issue myself. I have a new 32" LCD set still in the box. My old 20" CRT allowed me to rest the center directly on top of it. If I keep my current center, it may be large enough to support it, but I really don't like the center to be lower than the other speakers, so I am considering building a stand that will put the center directly above the set.
I like BamBoom a lot! I think Avalanche has been done by a driver builder. If he is sticking to SoCal inspirations I like San Andreas in the same vein as Fault Line.
Grand Theft Auto may sue over that one. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinn
Shows how old I am, or that my kids are girls, that I had to google Grand Theft Auto to find out what it is. But if San Andreas isn't a subwoofer in that game I don't see an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by dallas
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinn
ya, that game is probably the best known modern game. 1 because it's good, but even more so because the media uses it as the symbol for video game violence and politicians try to ban/regulate it.
New york's mayor even came out against the new version which takes place in new york. He has issues with a game involving violence, but not the 15 Law and Orders on daily showing 2 murders/rapes/etc per episode or CSI or any other number of shows/movies that show criminals in new york.
sorry, back on topic.
Well the speaker fairy left a couple of natural Sierras on my porch today.
My system (5.1) as of yesterday consisted of Paradigm Atoms all around with the matching Paradigm C-170 center and an SVS 25-31 PC+ (tuned to 20Hz - equalized with a BFD) driven by a Yamaha receiver.
Over the past 9 months or so, I've been poking around looking to see if I could find a replacement for the Atoms mains that would fit in (well enough) with the rest of the system for 5.1 movies and still provide a step up for 2.1 channel music listening without breaking the bank.
I was seriously considering the 340SEs and I even convinced a fellow Napervillian to let me into his house to listen to his. I found them to be too bright (or something) for my tastes. (This coming from a guy with Paradigms being driven by a Yammie!). Regardless, they just didn't work for me.
I also listened very briefly to some Monitor Audio Silver RS-6 (?) and Bronze B-4s, iirc. I found them a bit too harsh for my tastes. I also checked out the new Paradigm Monitor 7 speakers. They were way too harsh. And, I auditioned some PSB T-55s in my home for a long weekend. They sounded nice, but as a floorstander they were a bit too big for my room and they didn't provide enough of a sound upgrade to justify buying them. The bottom line for me at this point was that I found, for the money, the Atoms really worked for me and so I kind of put the upgrade idea on the shelf.
Then, these Sierras came out and I really liked what I read about them. I also really liked how they weren't announced until they were ready to be ordered. It reaffirmed my generally good feelings about Ascend as a company.
So, rather impulsively - for me anyway, I ordered a pair. I figured even if I decide to send them back, it'll only cost me about $2/day in shipping costs to trial them in my home.
The early exit polls are good. But, I haven't had a chance to do any real critical listening yet. Once I do, I'll bore you further with my thoughts.
Mitch
Set them to large and shut off the sub.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis
hey curtis... do the sierras deliver that well in the bass department? the svs subs are no slouches... do you think getting the sierras across the front means i may not have to buy a subwoofer? that'd be great because i kind of think subs are big/ugly... not to mention $500 and up for a good one from Hsu or SVS.
It depends on what ya need, if Home Theater is your bag, then in no way should you be without a sub...... for stereo listening? I THINK he's stating that Ya really don't NEED a sub.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein
I guess the Articulation of the Sierras is so good, that a mediocre sub(even a good sub for that matter), is a bit muddy in comparison for music..........
Maybe I'm wrong, but thats what it seems like to me.
HTH
Muzz hit it. It is going to take a nice sub to match the Sierra's articulation. Then it is pretty specific music that has much content below 40Hz.
Now then the Sierras are not bumped up in bass but balanced top to bottom. If you like your bass to be a tad above everything else you'll want a different speaker or a sub.
Like the bamboo ryhtmic I've been planning ( for months) to build? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Quinn
hehehehe
Last Sunday (05-27-07) I was able to drive up to Curtis’ place to get a listen to the Sierra-1’s. I brought over a pair of 340 classics to do some comparing, and I was pleasantly surprised with all aspects of my listening experience. The 340 classics are great speakers and they’ve served me well over these past few years, but the Sierra’s are obviously the next step in the evolution of Ascend Acoustic speakers.
I’ve always felt that the 340 classics were missing a little bit of “punch” on the lower end of the spectrum, but it’s never really hindered my listening experience since I use a PC-Ultra to complement my setup. While at Curtis’ place I spent a couple hours playing music that I was very familiar with and I was first blown away by how full sounding the Sierra’s sounded without the use of a subwoofer. They were crisp, clean, and accurate sounding through and through.
As my audition continued it became more and more apparent how clear sounding these speakers really were. Not to sound cliché, but I found myself hearing things I had never heard before in my music. These subtle details brought me back to what it was like the first time I heard great sounds from the 170s and 340s. Ascend Acoustics is constantly raising the bar on the products they deliver. I left Curtis’ eager and anxious to get a set of Sierra’s for myself.
Yesterday evening I swapped out my 340s for some B-stock Sierra L/C/R from James. I raced home to set them up and see how they would sound in my room’s layout. The clarity was just as awesome as I recalled from my listening experience on Sunday and I couldn’t be happier. They look great, and they sound great! What else could I ask for?
God Johnal, your killing me!!
I'm listening to Nora right now, daydreaming about my Sierras that won't be here until next Wednesday!!
You just ruined my high, I hope your happy!! :D ;)
all I made Johnal do was clean the bathrooms! :D
He brought over some music that I do not normally listen to....gave the Sierras a good workout.
lol, I think you were the guy who showed up as my wife and I were leaving Curtis's place Sunday. I am the super tall guy with the short blond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnal
As for my experience, The Sierra's are very close to the sound quality of my pro speakers. I was able to hear all the same details, instruments sounded like real instruments, and voices sounded like voices. We auditioned alot of speakers up to $2400/ea, and you'd be suprised at how often most fail at properly reproducing various instruments and voices. The one area the Sierra's surpassed my speakers is in imaging / soundstage, the fact that they are timber matched, and about 1/5th the size. Also, The WAF is exceptional. My pro speakers had a leg up though when it came to the low end, and overall db. They have single 12" woofers, except for my center which has 2.
Overall I am pleased with them, and about ready to pull the trigger. My wife and I want to hear the RBH MC-6C, and JBLpro LSR4300 1st though. Which will be this Sat.
Is there any more b-stock left or are they all sold out?
Yup.....Johnal showed up as you two were getting ready to leave. It just dawned on me that I didn't really introduce the three of you.....how rude....my apologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by brehms
After several hours of listening, I have to say these are wonderful speakers.
I agree with the statements about the great imaging and clarity.
I've already come across two tracks that had sounds I had never heard before. In one case it was some acoustic guitar behind an acapella (sp?) part. I had never heard this guitar before and seriously started wondering if it was coming from some other system in the house or neighborhood.
Now, in all fairness, I am upgrading from Atoms which are about a third of the price, so I better be hearing an improvement. But, as I stated in my previous post, when listening to other speakers priced closer to the Sierras, I didn't notice such an improvement.
So far continues to be so good. :)
Mitch
Out of curiosity, what did you guys listen to during the session? Personally, I've found that source material that has a lot of clipping sounds particularly bad on my 170SEs. I'm pretty sure it's the clipping because I have both the original and remastered (into clipping! :mad: ) versions of some pieces of music, as well as the clipped CD and non-clipped DVD versions of other pieces of music (checked afterwards by ripping/decoding and visually examining the waveforms), and the clipped versions invariably sound really harsh to me. On my other speakers, such material sounds annoying and lacking in dynamics, but the 170SEs are not nearly as forgiving.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
Obviously, tonal balance can also make speakers and receivers sound warm or bright (or both--the Paradigms I've auditioned generally had a laid-back midrange, sort of a built-in "loudness" function), but all Ascend speakers are designed to be as neutral and balanced as they come in this regard (and actually measure as such). I'm not arguing against what you heard, of course--just wondering out loud about the nature of auditory perception (as well as recording and mastering practices).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
If possible, could you listen to the same source material with which you auditioned the 340SEs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
It was a while ago that I listened to the 340SEs, but material probably consisted of The Shins, Alison Krauss, Jenny Lewis, Secret Machines (possibly?), The Ditty Bops, maybe some Pixies and/or Nirvana. In other words, rock and acoustic stuff. Now, I don't know what you mean by "clipping" in this context. So, I don't know if any of these recordings fit that category.
Auditory perception is the crux of the problem of describing speakers, isn't it? :) What you hear and what I hear are affected by everything from age to aural abuse (I'm still feeling the effects of sitting front row at that Cars concert in high school) to simply what sort of sounds you like. (I'm more a fan of mezzo as opposed to soprano - viola vs violin, for example). It's funny you describe Paradigms as laid back. Everyone describes them as bright and Yamaha receivers as bright, yet from what I understand of "bright" I always thought my Atoms sounded pretty even keeled - laid back, I suppose. And, when I heard the 340s I found them relatively brighter.
I have been listening to the same basic set of material on the Sierras and I would say that I definitely like the Sierras' sound better than what I remember of the 340s. They are fuller sounding. There's a brightness there, but the lower frequencies balance it out quite well. And, there are a bunch of other variables at play here as well. For one I listened to the 340s in someone else's house while the Sierras are right here in my family room. I used CDs when listening to the 340s while here in my house I'm streaming FLAC through a Squeezebox with a toslink to my receiver.
Anyway, I'm listening to Alison Krauss and Union Station right now and they sound lovely. :)
Hope this helps,
Mitch
I'd have to do some research, but I'd imagine that the acoustic material would probably have reasonable mastering, while the rock might have some amount (possibly a great deal) of digital clipping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
Digital formats all have an absolute numerical (integral) limit to their headroom, and for well over a decade now, engineers have been mastering CDs at such a loud (and always increasing) level that the waveforms have been clipped in the digital domain, often rather brutally. This mostly affects rock and other "popular" music, and as a result of this so-called "loudness war," many modern CDs actually do sound markedly inferior to their increasingly rare vinyl counterparts. :mad: I'm sure that analog pundits would love to know that they're right after all, but obviously it's for the wrong reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
You're right, although from what I've seen, this goes beyond what we can physically hear and what we prefer. We all have a reference to what things really sound like (i.e. using our ears in the real, live, unrecorded world), but there are still differences in what each of us perceive as realistic with regard to the reproduction of sound.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
Semantics might be an issue here. In my opinion, Paradigms are generally "laid-back" in the midrange, and a bit hot in the treble and upper bass regions--without looking at any graphs, I'd say they seem to exhibit a relatively mild "smile" or "loudness" curve that many people subjectively find rather pleasing. Overall, most of the high-end models do sound somewhat brighter than neutral to me on any sound with sufficient harmonic content (they certainly would on a Yamaha receiver, based on the Yamahas I've heard), while my Ascends sound as absolutely neutral (to me) on well recorded material as any speaker I've ever heard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
The Atoms I've heard (long ago--I don't know about later versions) definitely sounded warmer than the high-end models, and while they still seemed to have the "loudness" curve at lower volumes, they seemed to get comparatively shy in the treble when pushed. I'm not sure as to whether this was a function of volume, the amount of treble content in the source, or something else altogether. I actually haven't heard the 340SE, but the 170SE, which is said to sound very similar, is more neutral than the Atom at all volume levels, in my opinion, and if anything, is definitely not shy when pushed in the treble region.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
A much more extreme example to consider is the cheap, cheesy set of computer speakers that I got for free with a computer system. While it makes human voices sound much brighter than they do on the 170SE, it doesn't sound nearly as "bright" or "sparkly" when playing material that actually contains a lot of detailed treble. Certainly for this comparison, I would consider the 170SE to be more accurate.
So there's volume to be considered, possibly, as well as certain characteristics of the source material that I'm finding difficult to cohesively reconcile with what I and others hear (especially since we're not doing a controlled scientific study, obviously). For example, with many TV soundtracks, which are not known to be great recordings, the 170SE can sound rather "crunchy" at times (some would describe this as "bright")--voices can take on a harsh, tinny quality that we just don't hear in real life. This is something that I do NOT hear on the 170SE at all with good recordings. Being a hobbyist, whenever I notice this specific characteristic, I try to detect the same thing on my headphones, and in every case so far, I have been able to hear this "crunchiness" in the headphones, only not as pronounced. Because known good recordings do not have this characteristic on either the 170SE or the headphones (to my ears and perception), I'm inclined to attribute it to the source. Similarly, digital clipping, which I mentioned earlier, is most definitely a characteristic of the source, and sounds awful to me on the 170SE.
Generally, the tonal balance of a speaker can really only be evaluated within its frequency range, and undoubtedly the Sierra-1 is more capable at the lower end, where some would say that the other Ascend speakers are a bit shy when pushed (the cost of using extremely lightweight woofers, I suppose). What I'm starting to wonder, though, is whether the 170SE and 340SE seem overly bright to some not so much as a result of tonal balance but because of some kind of oversensitivity to flaws in the source material. Obviously, the next question is whether the Sierra-1 also exhibits this characteristic, and to what degree. Can it be more detailed yet more forgiving at the same time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
And that's what's important in the end. :) Thanks for your input, by the way. I might have to find out whether there's a valid, feasible way to make some sense out of all of this (probably not, but I can try!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
DPR:
Nice post.
As far as clipping is concerned, then yes I would agree that some of the rock I listen to is clipped.
I should probably do some A-B with the Atoms just for snicks and see if I notice any smiles besides the one on my face. :) <- Or that one.
Mitch
just from my experience with some of that music, i find the shins and pixies to be generally well-recorded. however, i was disappointed when i put the secret machines on my 170s. was expecting "first wave intact" to just sound punishingly intense, but it seemed muddled. same with the new arcade fire CD. I saw them last night and the sea of instrumentation was amazing and powerful, but the intensity doesn't come through very well on the CD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
The Shins and Pixies (at least surfer rosa) I think are good rock records to demo speakers with imo (i.e. I don't think there is much clipping tho i could be totally wrong--this is just from what I hear out of my speakers). I highly suspect the Secret Machines have a lot of clipping/dynamic compression. or maybe just a poor engineer.
Your assessment of the Shins, Pixies and Secret Machines is consistent with what I found. Although the Shins' "Oh Inverted World" is a bit muddy.
Mitch
maybe so--i'll have to go back and listen. i was thinking of their most recent album, which i thought sounded pretty decent. good dynamics and imaging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch G
The new album is a totally different animal from both their first and second albums. Though they're still on SubPop, they've used different studios and have had different people do the mastering. The first two albums were recorded in Mercer's basement (and portions in a Seattle studio), the new album was recorded entirely in a Portland studio with a new producer.
OK, back to the thread...what are people using for stands for their Sierras? I've been contemplating building bamboo-veneered or bamboo plywood stands, but if there's a good option out there that would save me the time and runaround I'm interested.
Thanks,
J.
Good luck on the bamboo Veneer way..
Bamboo ISN'T wood, it is grass, and is cut, dried, and pressed (with glue)on a machine.
I've used it, and ya probably better off just going to a Floor dealer, and seeing if they have any long enough cutoffs for stands, and using a finetooth table saw(or better yet, have someone with a CNC cut it for you) to cutoff the tongue/groove.
And then using Bosticks Best(the BEST floor Glue- about $150 for 5 gallons, IF you can even find it) flooring glue to glue it together(with clamps).
You can probably use other glue and clamp, but Bosticks is the ballz.....
Isn't as EZ as it sounds when dealing with Bamboo, that much I know for certain.
BTW- For folks that are looking to match the color of the Sierras(IF they are the same color as MY Vertical carbonized Bamboo floor), I have what I feel is a good match...
Plain Red Oak, with 2 coats of Matte/Satin Poly.....
Thats it.
I have pics of my vertical carbonized bamboo floor,and I used The afforementioned threshold(OBVIOUSLY the grain isn't the exact same, but the color is very close IMO).
LMK if ya need to see them.
Actually,Curtis could you host the pics of my threshold?
Yup...they should show up here sometime soon...I hope.
http://changpics.smugmug.com/gallery/2938302#P-2-15
Thx bro
I realise my color match puddy is awful.......
One of these days I'll fix that!!
This thread's been kind of quiet lately, so I thought I would post my week 1 impressions. I received my speakers a week ago and have pumped at least 20 hours of music through them as well as a couple of movies and regular TV viewing. I'm happy to report that they mesh well enough with my Paradigm center and surrounds for TV and 5.1. But, my real goal for these was for 2.1 music and for this they are fabulous. I've really been enjoying the imaging and sound quality that these speakers produce. Even less than stellar recordings like Pink Floyd's Atom Heart Mother sound better than ever before. So, if you were hoping for a pair of b-stock returned naturals, you'll have to look elsewhere. :)
Oh, and in case anyone cares, I have them on Omnimount Cosmic 24" stands. These stands have a "brushed" silver post and black base which matches well with my Sony LCD RPTV silver and matte black detail. They are a bit top heavy with the Sierras on them - even with the post filled with fish gravel. But, in my layout there's really no danger of someone bumping into them causing them to topple over.
Mitch
I don't feel I can say enough about them. IMO, an outstanding speaker compared to what I have heard.
They simply need to be heard and compared.
Well, while I'm waiting here for the sierras to arrive(may be a while since it probably won't be till next week) I figured I'd register and post. :rolleyes:
I wanted to buy my dad a set of bookshelves as a gift. He likes music but he's not insane about it like me. So my original budget was to keep the speakers between 3 and 4 hundred dollars. But with amp and everything I wanted to keep it under 800. ;)
I was reading around on avs about 2 months ago and started thinking about getting some bookshelves from a certain company there that has a pretty big presence. After reading a while I came to the realization that Dave F. handled himself in one manner and lets just say other people from other companies handled themselves in another manner. :mad:
This made me want to look into ascend more fully. I originally was looking into getting the cbm 170 se but I'm really glad I waited now because after reading all of the wonderful things being said about the sierras I just had to order a pair. :D
I ordered monday and there were cable issues so my order got revised on tuesday. No word yet on when they will be sent out but I live in an area that takes 5 days for them to get here. So needless to say I'm very anxious esspecially since I have this week off and the next, and was hoping to give them a thorough listen before giving them to my dad. :eek:
Heres hoping they arrive soon! :)
Hehe, I bet you'll be picking up a couple of speakers from Best Buy to give your dad after you listen to the Sierras. :)
Mitch
When you ordered them, did they say weither or not they received their order of tweeters?
hmm...I wonder if there is going to be a fathers day special? lol.
Your mentioning of the tweeters is the first I've heard about it. You mean there is a back-log on parts? :(
DANG. :( :( :(