3 RAAL Towers or 3 RAAL Horizon for front LCR

When moving to a new condo, I had been thinking about going to a 3 tower, 3 horizon or 2 tower / 1 horizon setup for the front.

I've been a pretty big stickler for identical three speakers in the front for SQ reasons, so the third option dropped pretty quickly (unless someone has a convincing SQ argument for 2 tower / 1 horizon)

I would most likely be wall mounting a 55 or 65 inch OLED, so I'm thinking 3 Horizon, since I can wall mount them right underneath the OLED.

Is there an SQ argument for 3 tower, knowing that I won't be using a perforated screen? I think the TV would be way too high if it would be above the center tower.

And lastly, is 3 Horizon going to be much better than my current 3 S2 setup? I had been planning on moving the S2 to surround duty and getting a fourth to complete a 7.x.x setup.

Thats way too high. The TV needs to be at about half the height.
Getting the Horizon will not cost you any performance, especially if you can have it at a slight angle towards listening position.
As for the performance upgrade over S2, I will leave it for people who have experience with both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxTemp

Thats way too high. The TV needs to be at about half the height.

---

He's going to buy a 55" or 65" TV, not mount at 55" or 65" high

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amatuerholic

He's going to buy a 55" or 65" TV, not mount at 55" or 65" high

---

I understand. I mean the height of of the TV will be too high if it goes over the towers and needs to be half the height of the tower.

For good ergonomics, when seated, your eye height should be somewhere within the bottom half of the TV, and some even say the bottom third.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxTemp

I understand. I mean the height of of the TV will be too high if it goes over the towers and needs to be half the height of the tower.

---

Cool; I misinterpreted what you were referring to with the actual height. Cheers

Pic of current room setup: https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...0721c2bb1e.jpg

My ears are exactly inline with the midpoint of the RAAL in the Front L / R

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

Pic of current room setup: https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...0721c2bb1e.jpg

My ears are exactly inline with the midpoint of the RAAL in the Front L / R

---

If that's the case, then your eyes are barely within the optimum position for the screen.

Your ears should be be level between the tweeter and woofer....that's where measurements are taken. A few inches sitting that far back won't make a difference though.

I thought the midpoint of the tweeter is what I should be setting to ear level?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

I thought the midpoint of the tweeter is what I should be setting to ear level?

---

That's what a lot of people say, but when measurements are taken, it should be the midpoint between the drivers.

But serious, a few inches isn't going to make an audible difference from more than a few feet away. That's why I would be more concerned with eye height in relation to the screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by curtis

But serious, a few inches isn't going to make an audible difference from more than a few feet away.

---

People generally get overly concerned with having the speaker at the ideal height. For our ribbons, I recommend sitting within +/- 10 degrees of the midpoint of the ribbon tweeter. At a listening distance of only 3 feet, this means your ears should be within 1/2 foot above and 1/2 foot below the midpoint of the ribbon. Within this "window" - no human could hear a difference due to height differences - if they do, it is due to room acoustics - not high frequency dispersion.

At a typical listening distance of 8 feet, the vertical listening window becomes 18 inches above and 18 inches below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

When moving to a new condo, I had been thinking about going to a 3 tower, 3 horizon or 2 tower / 1 horizon setup for the front.

I've been a pretty big stickler for identical three speakers in the front for SQ reasons, so the third option dropped pretty quickly (unless someone has a convincing SQ argument for 2 tower / 1 horizon)

I would most likely be wall mounting a 55 or 65 inch OLED, so I'm thinking 3 Horizon, since I can wall mount them right underneath the OLED.

Is there an SQ argument for 3 tower, knowing that I won't be using a perforated screen? I think the TV would be way too high if it would be above the center tower.

And lastly, is 3 Horizon going to be much better than my current 3 S2 setup? I had been planning on moving the S2 to surround duty and getting a fourth to complete a 7.x.x setup.

---

Horizon and Sierra Towers use the same components... It is perfectly matched with the tower. I recommend it over a single Sierra Tower for the center.

3 horizons for the fronts is becoming quite popular lately and it is a considerable step up in performance compared to 3 Sierra-2's, especially with regard to dynamics - which is extremely important for home theater.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

Horizon and Sierra Towers use the same components... It is perfectly matched with the tower. I recommend it over a single Sierra Tower for the center.

3 horizons for the fronts is becoming quite popular lately and it is a considerable step up in performance compared to 3 Sierra-2's, especially with regard to dynamics - which is extremely important for home theater.

---

I'd like to hear more on why you recommend 2 Tower / 1 Horizon rather than 3 Tower, on purely audio reasons only (ignoring form or placement or other logistical reasons). Or is it that it provides the same audio, but you get the all the other non-audio benefits?

I have two towers and a horizon center. They match perfectly. So much so, I think they'd be hard to tell apart in a blind listening test. Three towers would be awkward looking imo. My opinion - don't try to get three identical speakers, you'll gain nothing and potentially end up with something weird looking, or your tv in a sub optimal spot.

Whatever way you choose good luck!

Another big advantage of the Horizon as a center in comparison with the Towers is that the Horizon is front ported so it can be placed agains the wall. The closest the front of the center speaker is to the plane of the TV or projector screen the better. If the center is too far from the screen or TV plane then the dialog feels like is not coming from the screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kongar

I have two towers and a horizon center. They match perfectly. So much so, I think they'd be hard to tell apart in a blind listening test. Three towers would be awkward looking imo. My opinion - don't try to get three identical speakers, you'll gain nothing and potentially end up with something weird looking, or your tv in a sub optimal spot.

---

I think the Horizon is the exception rather than the norm in the world of matched centers.

http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeak...valuation.html

The numbers still show the superiority of a vertical center channel vs a horizontal center, if you look at the same speaker but different orientation, or even across speakers. To say there is nothing to gain from three identical speakers is quite the gross overstatement, considering that the advice is usually to get three identical fronts for the most cohesive frond sound field / soundstage.

Agreed, I should have been more specific. I wouldn't get three identical Sierra towers. I'm not so sure you're getting much there since they match so well. If you do go three identical, I'd go three horizons because the center would fit better (and I see horizon=tower, so get what fits the space best imo)

After owning my speakers for about a year and a half now - I'm sure you'd be happy with ascend regardless of what configuration you pick. Best of luck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

I think the Horizon is the exception rather than the norm in the world of matched centers.

http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeak...valuation.html

The numbers still show the superiority of a vertical center channel vs a horizontal center, if you look at the same speaker but different orientation, or even across speakers. To say there is nothing to gain from three identical speakers is quite the gross overstatement, considering that the advice is usually to get three identical fronts for the most cohesive frond sound field / soundstage.

---

You are looking at generalities rather than specifics. There are far too many variables involved to conclude that Audioholics "numbers" apply to every center speaker. Plus, there is much more to center channel performance than simply horizontal dispersion, which really means nothing provided that you can get a wide enough response with no evidence of lobing.

When I mention wide enough -- in most installations, +/- 30 degrees is plenty, otherwise you are sitting nearly directly in front of one of the left/right speakers which will cause more audible problems than even the worst center channel speaker....

For example, if you are at a distance of 10 feet, +/- 30 degrees means you can sit up to approx 6 feet to the left and 6 feet to the right with no evidence of lobing. That is also assuming a human can actually hear lobing in a typical room environment, which I can assure - there are far more audible room anomalies one hears than lobing.

That stated:

If you look at the polar response of the Horizon, there is zero evidence of lobing even at 90 degs off-axis. How is this possible? It is really quite simple with no "magic" - we use an exceptionally beefy midrange that is crossed to the bass woofers at a low enough wavelength such that the woofers don't produce a wavelength that is 1/4 shorter than the distance between the 2 woofers.

The distance between the Horizon woofers = 15 inches. We cross our mid to the woofers at ~ 180Hz. 180Hz = a wavelength of ~ 75 inches. 1/4 of this = 18.75 inches = quite a bit greater than the distance between the woofers.

In addition, while I prefer to use the 1/4 wavelength calculation, many professionals claim lobing is only audible using the 1/2 wavelength calculation, which than translates to a minimum C-C woofer spacing of 37.5 inches for lobing to occur.

The major difference is that most w-t/m-w centers use tiny 3" or 4" mids which must be crossed to the bass woofers at much higher frequencies, typically 800Hz... Which now means woofer to woofer spacing needs to be at 4.25" or less (using 1/4 wavelength calculation)

The Audioholics article is decent, but it only covers one aspect of center channel performance, and this particular aspect is not a concern with our Horizon center.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

I'd like to hear more on why you recommend 2 Tower / 1 Horizon rather than 3 Tower, on purely audio reasons only (ignoring form or placement or other logistical reasons). Or is it that it provides the same audio, but you get the all the other non-audio benefits?

---

Several reasons why.

Horizon has wider vertical dispersion compared to our tower so it will sound more like the audio is coming from the TV rather then below it. (critical for center channel performance)

Horizon sacrifices a bit of deep bass for more midbass - providing a bit more impact than the towers, which is great for special effects, of which the majority comes through the center.

Horizon is far more placement friendly due to the front ports.

Hope this helps!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

You are looking at generalities rather than specifics. There are far too many variables involved to conclude that Audioholics "numbers" apply to every center speaker. Plus, there is much more to center channel performance than simply horizontal dispersion, which really means nothing provided that you can get a wide enough response with no evidence of lobing.

When I mention wide enough -- in most installations, +/- 30 degrees is plenty, otherwise you are sitting nearly directly in front of one of the left/right speakers which will cause more audible problems than even the worst center channel speaker....

For example, if you are at a distance of 10 feet, +/- 30 degrees means you can sit up to approx 6 feet to the left and 6 feet to the right with no evidence of lobing. That is also assuming a human can actually hear lobing in a typical room environment, which I can assure - there are far more audible room anomalies one hears than lobing.

That stated:

If you look at the polar response of the Horizon, there is zero evidence of lobing even at 90 degs off-axis. How is this possible? It is really quite simple with no "magic" - we use an exceptionally beefy midrange that is crossed to the bass woofers at a low enough wavelength such that the woofers don't produce a wavelength that is 1/4 shorter than the distance between the 2 woofers.

The distance between the Horizon woofers = 15 inches. We cross our mid to the woofers at ~ 180Hz. 180Hz = a wavelength of ~ 75 inches. 1/4 of this = 18.75 inches = quite a bit greater than the distance between the woofers.

In addition, while I prefer to use the 1/4 wavelength calculation, many professionals claim lobing is only audible using the 1/2 wavelength calculation, which than translates to a minimum C-C woofer spacing of 37.5 inches for lobing to occur.

The major difference is that most w-t/m-w centers use tiny 3" or 4" mids which must be crossed to the bass woofers at much higher frequencies, typically 800Hz... Which now means woofer to woofer spacing needs to be at 4.25" or less (using 1/4 wavelength calculation)

The Audioholics article is decent, but it only covers one aspect of center channel performance, and this particular aspect is not a concern with our Horizon center.

---

Have you done any lobing tests on a vertically oriented Horizon? Would it show improvements vs. horizontal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

Have you done any lobing tests on a vertically oriented Horizon? Would it show improvements vs. horizontal?

---

Are you sure you have a firm understanding of what you are discussing? There is really no such thing as a "lobing test". Lobing shows itself on the most basic of off-axis frequency response measurements, of which we publicly post for all of our speakers. I know you don't fully understand this, but asking if I evaluate off-axis response measurements of our speakers is like asking a Physics PHD if he understands the Mass-Energy Equivalence Formula or asking a mechanic if he knows how to change the oil in a car :) It is, perhaps, the most basic starting point for speaker design (at least for somewhat competent engineers)

May I ask why you are so concerned with this? As I stated, horizontal off-axis lobing is not an issue with the Horizon.

Please see the polar response here: http://www.ascendacoustics.com/image...rizonpolar.gif


Did you read Audioholics conclusion in that same article? As quoted in the article:

"Acoustical interference caused by multiple drivers playing the same bandwidth is a non-issue if the radiating driver's cutoff frequency is low enough so that the distance between adjacent drivers is small relative to the wavelengths they are producing in equal or near equal proportions. (This is known in filter-speak as the "transition band" or "crossover band"). As the order of the crossover is increased (6 dB to 12 dB to 18 dB to 24 dB or beyond), the amount of phase shift within the crossover band increases, so the likelihood of the two speakers being out of phase at any given angle off-axis increases, while the frequency range over which this is an issue decreases. This is why it can be acceptable to horizontally place multiple woofers and midranges (if the center to center distance between them is closer than the highest wavelength of operation) but, typically NOT tweeters."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

Are you sure you have a firm understanding of what you are discussing? There is really no such thing as a "lobing test". Lobing shows itself on the most basic of off-axis frequency response measurements, of which we publicly post for all of our speakers. I know you don't fully understand this, but asking if I evaluate off-axis response measurements of our speakers is like asking a Physics PHD if he understands the Mass-Energy Equivalence Formula or asking a mechanic if he knows how to change the oil in a car :) It is, perhaps, the most basic starting point for speaker design (at least for somewhat competent engineers)

May I ask why you are so concerned with this? As I stated, horizontal off-axis lobing is not an issue with the Horizon.

Please see the polar response here: http://www.ascendacoustics.com/image...rizonpolar.gif


Did you read Audioholics conclusion in that same article? As quoted in the article:

"Acoustical interference caused by multiple drivers playing the same bandwidth is a non-issue if the radiating driver's cutoff frequency is low enough so that the distance between adjacent drivers is small relative to the wavelengths they are producing in equal or near equal proportions. (This is known in filter-speak as the "transition band" or "crossover band"). As the order of the crossover is increased (6 dB to 12 dB to 18 dB to 24 dB or beyond), the amount of phase shift within the crossover band increases, so the likelihood of the two speakers being out of phase at any given angle off-axis increases, while the frequency range over which this is an issue decreases. This is why it can be acceptable to horizontally place multiple woofers and midranges (if the center to center distance between them is closer than the highest wavelength of operation) but, typically NOT tweeters."

---

I do not, hence why I am asking.

Just trying to see if the same pattern of vertical orientation being better than horizontal orientation as shown in the audioholics article holds for the horizon as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

I do not, hence why I am asking.

Just trying to see if the same pattern of vertical orientation being better than horizontal orientation as shown in the audioholics article holds for the horizon as well.

---

If you look at the measurements posted on our website here: http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages...n/hormeas.html

specifically, the horizontal and vertical off-axis graphs, you will see that the horizontal placement is technically "better" than vertical placement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

If you look at the measurements posted on our website here: http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages...n/hormeas.html

specifically, the horizontal and vertical off-axis graphs, you will see that the horizontal placement is technically "better" than vertical placement.

---

Without belaboring this point too much longer, would the off-axis response change at all if the tweeter is rotated 90 degrees?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

Without belaboring this point too much longer, would the off-axis response change at all if the tweeter is rotated 90 degrees?

---

Ribbon tweeters must be used in a vertical (upright) orientation. If you were to use the Horizon vertically, the ribbon must be rotated 90 degrees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

Ribbon tweeters must be used in a vertical (upright) orientation. If you were to use the Horizon vertically, the ribbon must be rotated 90 degrees.

---

Thanks for that response, but i was inquiring whether, after the tweeter is rotated 90 degrees, and the speaker retested, would the vertical and horizontal on-axis / off-axis graphs look measurably different than what has been posted or would I expect that they look the same, except that vertical dispersion is now horizontal dispersion and vice versa?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

Thanks for that response, but i was inquiring whether, after the tweeter is rotated 90 degrees, and the speaker retested, would the vertical and horizontal on-axis / off-axis graphs look measurably different than what has been posted or would I expect that they look the same, except that vertical dispersion is now horizontal dispersion and vice versa?

---

From approx. 1800Hz and up the response is mostly influenced by the tweeter. If the tweeter is not in the proper orientation, you are going to see a dramatic high frequency roll-off, the greater the off-axis angle - the greater the rolloff.

The mid-range response will also not be the same compared to vertical vs. horizontal positioning, regardless of the tweeter orientation.

Due to the length of bass wavelengths, the bass response would be the same regardless of vertical vs horizontal positioning.

So to answer your question, if we rotate the tweeter 90 degrees and retake our off-axis measurements, the response would look nothing like what we have posted. What is posted on our website is with the speaker oriented in a horizontal position with the tweeter in the correct orientation. The vertical response posted on our website is with the speaker positioned horizontally. This is the common usage of the speaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

From approx. 1800Hz and up the response is mostly influenced by the tweeter. If the tweeter is not in the proper orientation, you are going to see a dramatic high frequency roll-off, the greater the off-axis angle - the greater the rolloff.

The mid-range response will also not be the same compared to vertical vs. horizontal positioning, regardless of the tweeter orientation.

Due to the length of bass wavelengths, the bass response would be the same regardless of vertical vs horizontal positioning.

So to answer your question, if we rotate the tweeter 90 degrees and retake our off-axis measurements, the response would look nothing like what we have posted. What is posted on our website is with the speaker oriented in a horizontal position with the tweeter in the correct orientation. The vertical response posted on our website is with the speaker positioned horizontally. This is the common usage of the speaker.

---

I apologize, I meant to say if the tweeter was rotated 90 degrees and the speaker was set vertically instead of horizontally, will the responses look similar? Interested in the alternate usage of the Horizon, which would be in vertical orientation with a properly oriented tweeter for vertical use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roen

I apologize, I meant to say if the tweeter was rotated 90 degrees and the speaker was set vertically instead of horizontally, will the responses look similar? Interested in the alternate usage of the Horizon, which would be in vertical orientation with a properly oriented tweeter for vertical use.

---

Ahh - now I understand, thanks for the clarification. Yes, in this regard, with the Horizon positioned vertically and the tweeter properly oriented - measurements (both vertical and horizontal) would be very similar. On-Axis would be identical -- off-axis, starting at about +/- 30 degrees would start to show some minor differences in the range of 1kHz - 4kHz, but again, only minor and I strongly doubt you would ever be that far off-axis while listening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davef

Ahh - now I understand, thanks for the clarification. Yes, in this regard, with the Horizon positioned vertically and the tweeter properly oriented - measurements (both vertical and horizontal) would be very similar. On-Axis would be identical -- off-axis, starting at about +/- 30 degrees would start to show some minor differences in the range of 1kHz - 4kHz, but again, only minor and I strongly doubt you would ever be that far off-axis while listening.

---

Thanks!