Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SunByrne
Based on what people have said it sounds like the EX V2 narrows the gap between the LX and the EX, but the EX still won't have the LXs wider vertical, so I expect not. In my main HT I have Duos for LCR (upgraded to V2s, which was a substantial upgrade) and they're great until I stand up—being vertically off-axis is not ideal for the RAALs and I don't think the EX V2 upgrade can really address that.
Of course, that's a bit speculative—I'll know more once I get around to the 2EX V2 upgrade myself. Probably over the holiday break.
The game also changes again if the Horizon becomes available with the Titan tweeter, as Dave has either hinted at very strongly or maybe even said outright (can't remember which). Then for HT I'd definitely get LXs with a Titan Horizon.
Thanks!
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
New poster at this site. Just got the LX yesterday. Any experience with break in? So far I'm finding the mids and lows out do the highs and I'm hoping that the highs might open up in time. Also, I'm wondering if it might be a factor of the amp used.
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jwreich13
New poster at this site. Just got the LX yesterday. Any experience with break in? So far I'm finding the mids and lows out do the highs and I'm hoping that the highs might open up in time. Also, I'm wondering if it might be a factor of the amp used.
It is more likely the room and positioning. Can you tell us more in that regard?
What are you using now to power them?
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
curtis
It is more likely the room and positioning. Can you tell us more in that regard?
What are you using now to power them?
Using a Cambridge Audio CXA81. I don't have room for stands so they are sitting on (with isolators) the top of an entertainment cabinet which has a TT. I have KEF LS50 Metas there and I wanted to compare.
The LS50 Metas have a wonderful and clear upper range with the integrated amp which would probably be considered warmer. I have a Rel sub as well. I'm able to get them at least 12" from the back wall.
The room is a medium small open room about 12' x 16' with no closed side walls.
I liked what I was hearing from the LX except for the missing upper range. I definitely preferred the KEFs with the sub. I've moved the LXs to a small HT with a Denon receiver and the LX acting as the main speakers so that it can get more time on it. (I still work and also other family members won't abide me playing music all of the time in the house).
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jwreich13
Using a Cambridge Audio CXA81. I don't have room for stands so they are sitting on (with isolators) the top of an entertainment cabinet which has a TT. I have KEF LS50 Metas there and I wanted to compare.
The LS50 Metas have a wonderful and clear upper range with the integrated amp which would probably be considered warmer. I have a Rel sub as well. I'm able to get them at least 12" from the back wall.
The room is a medium small open room about 12' x 16' with no closed side walls.
I liked what I was hearing from the LX except for the missing upper range. I definitely preferred the KEFs with the sub. I've moved the LXs to a small HT with a Denon receiver and the LX acting as the main speakers so that it can get more time on it. (I still work and also other family members won't abide me playing music all of the time in the house).
How are you handling bass management with the sub? If what I am reading is correct, the Cambridge just sends everything below 2.3khz to the sub, and then you just adjust the level on sub. Correct?
The LX has MUCH more bass and mid-bass than the LS50 Meta. In your setup with the LS50 Meta with the sub, you are able to turn down the bass from the sub, so you can give more emphasis to upper range. Since you can do that with the LX (unless you use the tone controls on the Cambridge), you are bass is going to be more emphasized to your ear unless you EQ.
You might want to look into the Q-Plugs that Ascend offers for the LX.
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
curtis
How are you handling bass management with the sub? If what I am reading is correct, the Cambridge just sends everything below 2.3khz to the sub, and then you just adjust the level on sub. Correct?
The LX has MUCH more bass and mid-bass than the LS50 Meta. In your setup with the LS50 Meta with the sub, you are able to turn down the bass from the sub, so you can give more emphasis to upper range. Since you can do that with the LX (unless you use the tone controls on the Cambridge), you are bass is going to be more emphasized to your ear unless you EQ.
You might want to look into the Q-Plugs that Ascend offers for the LX.
Bass is not the issue. I can deal with that. The issue is the roll off of the top end. You can't tune the Cambridge. I can hear the high end clearly and it just isn't the clarity of the KEF's high end. It is a different presentation. I want it all.
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jwreich13
Bass is not the issue. I can deal with that. The issue is the roll off of the top end. You can't tune the Cambridge. I can hear the high end clearly and it just isn't the clarity of the KEF's high end. It is a different presentation. I want it all.
Oh...I know the presentation of the KEFs are different. If I recall correctly, they are also a bit elevated at 5khz (where perceived "presence" is dominant)from measurements I saw, that might pair better with your Cambridge.
The LX's are pretty neutral, so that may be the issue.
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
curtis
Oh...I know the presentation of the KEFs are different. If I recall correctly, they are also a bit elevated at 5khz (where perceived "presence" is dominant)from measurements I saw, that might pair better with your Cambridge.
The LX's are pretty neutral, so that may be the issue.
It may also be positioning. The long review by one of the posters here indicated that the LX sounds differently if you are listening above or below ear level. On the KEF system, I was below ear level whereas in the HT, I'm a bit above and it sounds better (may also be the Denon which I believe is a bit neutral or brighter than neutral). But I'm also hoping that the speakers open up a bit.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jwreich13
Bass is not the issue. I can deal with that. The issue is the roll off of the top end. You can't tune the Cambridge. I can hear the high end clearly and it just isn't the clarity of the KEF's high end. It is a different presentation. I want it all.
Hi jwreich,
There is no high frequency roll off with the LX. You can actually easily see the differences between the 2 speakers. Below is the estimated in-room response comparison between our LX and your LS50 meta. The difference in bass and midbass between the 2 speakers is huge, with the LX having as much as 4 and even 6 times as much low frequency energy.
Attachment 2428
It is extremely important to understand that the wider the bandwidth of a speaker (meaning from the lows to the highs) - the less one frequency range stands out. For example, if you have a perfectly neutral speaker (let's call this speaker A) that is rated from 200Hz to 20kHz, and you have a perfectly neutral speaker (speaker B) rated from 80Hz to 20kHz, speaker A is going to sound more detailed in the highs, even though they have the same amount of energy in this range. This is simply how we hear.
You can see in this comparison the huge difference in bass, and the mids of the LX are a bit smoother and more neutral, while the highs are practically identical between the 2.
Are you able to post a pic of the front of your room showing the speaker positioning?
Also, you might try using Q-Plug "S" with the LX, that will make the bass response of the LX very similar to the bass response of the LS50, which will then make the midrange and highs sound more prominent.
Re: Sierra 2-EX vs Sierra LX
As a follow-up, a good way to think about what I mentioned above is like this. If you have one gram of salt, it is going to taste very salty. Then add a gram of pepper, and a gram of beef. Still salty, but not quite as much. Then add a gram each of a few more ingredients, some, pork, paprika, garlic, onions... You have the same amount of salt, but now you no longer taste just salt, in fact - the salt just blends into the overall deliciousness.
Ok - now I'm hungry ;)