Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    6

    Default Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Hello, long time AVSForum user, but just registered today as I'm looking to upgrade my Pioneer Elite speakers. I'm looking at the Luna V2 Mini or the CMT-340SE. The LX and EX are a little bit out of my budget. My system would be a 3.1 (maybe even 2.1?), sub is a Rythmik F12, and AVR is Marantz SE6012. I like speakers on the bright side, and I'm looking for big scale sound (wide soundstage?).

    Are the RAAL speakers overkill just for HT? I watch movies at around 85db.

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,034

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by slip023 View Post
    Hello, long time AVSForum user, but just registered today as I'm looking to upgrade my Pioneer Elite speakers. I'm looking at the Luna V2 Mini or the CMT-340SE. The LX and EX are a little bit out of my budget. My system would be a 3.1 (maybe even 2.1?), sub is a Rythmik F12, and AVR is Marantz SE6012. I like speakers on the bright side, and I'm looking for big scale sound (wide soundstage?).

    Are the RAAL speakers overkill just for HT? I watch movies at around 85db.

    Thanks!
    I don't think so, but what kind of music do you listen to?

    BTW...personally, I think the 340SE is the best value in Ascend's line, one of the best values in speaker, if not the best.

    You listen at 85db, but how far do you sit from the speakers.

    I would not call Ascend speakers "bright". If you like I big soundstage, I would think the 340's have a bigger soundstage than the Lunas, but I have no personal direct experience comparing the two.
    -curtis

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    6

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Thanks for the input. I don't really listen to music in my living room, so choosing a speaker based on music performance might be a waste? Speakers are only 9' away.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,034

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by slip023 View Post
    Thanks for the input. I don't really listen to music in my living room, so choosing a speaker based on music performance might be a waste? Speakers are only 9' away.
    I think the 340's would be great choice.
    -curtis

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    37

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    I don't heard what you have had before but I think larger (or more) midrange drivers up front makes sense

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    6

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by laserllama View Post
    I don't heard what you have had before but I think larger (or more) midrange drivers up front makes sense
    So I haven't had a lot of different speakers, but before these Pioneers, I had a Denon with Boston Acoustics HTIB, then Klipsch Quintet V, after that Chane A2.4 as center (loved it) and KEF Q100 as L/R (meh).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by laserllama View Post
    I don't heard what you have had before but I think larger (or more) midrange drivers up front makes sense
    I am curious as to why you think larger and/or more midrange drivers makes sense?
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    37

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by davef View Post
    I am curious as to why you think larger and/or more midrange drivers makes sense?
    Hey! Yeah was trying to be helpful, I get the feeling I may be wrong by getting that question, sorry!

    I have Lunas for rear surrounds and they do a great job there.

    Also, definitely put me in the "RAAL isn't overkill for home theater" column -though I haven't heard the domes either and I'm sure they are great. Lots of good music and atmospheric content in home theater and can absolutely be appreciated lots. The RAALs are good.

    To explain my question, I *love* your towers, I was assuming they have more "soundstage" or "presense" than the Lunas because of the extra driver or driver size - but I am happy to be wrong. Thoughts on why? Is that just a component thing?

    Anyway, to the OP, if you want really good high-end I would agree the Lunas deliver that. The sub may also alleviate concerns. If anyone is having concerns based on "this is a little bigger than a **** satellite" they should not. Yet I googled the Elites and it looks like they are kind of like small bookshelves, so if I was looking for an upgrade, I would wonder if I wanted some of the larger Ascend stuff (RAAL or not) instead? But maybe I'm wrong about the size thing.

    I would defer to Dave for sure

    But do I like big mains up front even in a kind of small room? Totally

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by laserllama View Post
    Hey! Yeah was trying to be helpful, I get the feeling I may be wrong by getting that question, sorry!

    I have Lunas for rear surrounds and they do a great job there.

    Also, definitely put me in the "RAAL isn't overkill for home theater" column -though I haven't heard the domes either and I'm sure they are great. Lots of good music and atmospheric content in home theater and can absolutely be appreciated lots. The RAALs are good.

    To explain my question, I *love* your towers, I was assuming they have more "soundstage" or "presense" than the Lunas because of the extra driver or driver size - but I am happy to be wrong. Thoughts on why? Is that just a component thing?

    Anyway, to the OP, if you want really good high-end I would agree the Lunas deliver that. The sub may also alleviate concerns. If anyone is having concerns based on "this is a little bigger than a **** satellite" they should not. Yet I googled the Elites and it looks like they are kind of like small bookshelves, so if I was looking for an upgrade, I would wonder if I wanted some of the larger Ascend stuff (RAAL or not) instead? But maybe I'm wrong about the size thing.

    I would defer to Dave for sure

    But do I like big mains up front even in a kind of small room? Totally
    I know it can seem counter intuitive, but the smaller the woofer - the wider the dispersion as frequency increases. Dispersion is a critical factor in producing a wide soundstage.
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: Strictly for HT use, is the RAAL overkill?

    Quote Originally Posted by slip023 View Post
    Hello, long time AVSForum user, but just registered today as I'm looking to upgrade my Pioneer Elite speakers. I'm looking at the Luna V2 Mini or the CMT-340SE. The LX and EX are a little bit out of my budget. My system would be a 3.1 (maybe even 2.1?), sub is a Rythmik F12, and AVR is Marantz SE6012. I like speakers on the bright side, and I'm looking for big scale sound (wide soundstage?).

    Are the RAAL speakers overkill just for HT? I watch movies at around 85db.

    Thanks!
    I would recommend our forthcoming new CMT-340SE2.... Stay tuned, I hope to have the info on our site and open for pre-orders by this Friday.
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •