Head to Head Review: Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE vs Wharfedale Diamond 10.1

[2ndammendment]

Figured I would share some more thoughts as I've done a lot more listening since my original review.

Im thinking of asking Ascend if they would be willing to extend my auditioning period to give me the opportunity to try out some other speakers.

Currently my chief complaints are that the bass in the CBM-170's is quite anemic and they sound a bit thin in the lower midrange. When listening to classical music drums have a lack of impact and bass in EDM is notably lacking. I don't think im asking too much out of stand-mount speaker. The CBM-170s have a fair bit of high frequency energy, maybe a little more than I would like personally. The tweeters definitely seem a bit brighter than the tweeters on my SVS Ultras. The fact that the Ultras have so much more low frequency potential and a lusher lower midrange could be shifting the tonal balance to make them sound smoother and more balanced.

Something I find odd is that after running MCACC on the Ultras there isn't a significant increase in SQ over the unaltered pure direct mode, it sounds different but not always better. For example sometimes pure direct sounds better on classical music but having MCACC on makes EDM and movies sound better. However, MCACC totally changes the CBM-170s. Its a very drastic difference. Sound quality is hugely improved after running the auto cal. The Ultras and the 170's are in two very different rooms and its very likely that the room is the culprit so I'm going to go ahead and relocate the CBM-170s to the same room as the Ultras to see whats what.

The ARX AB1's have caught my eye. Reading first hand experiences it looks like they pack quite a bit more bass than the 170's. I saw this video that someone else made, these towers use the same driver that the AB1's use. That excursion is hugely impressive. Excursion 1 on Vimeo I turned up the volume quite loud and couldnt even get 1/6 of that excursion. The AB1's use a folded ribbon tweeter though and that makes me a bit nervous since ive never owned a speaker with one. Its suppose to be fairly laid back though(i've heard a few ribbon tweeters before and they were always bright). If anyone has heard these please let me know what you thought of them.

 

[ImcLoud]

are the ultras in a larger room, I like the midrange and low end of the 170s, I would swap them around and see what it sounds like, I didn't like the ultras as much as I thought I would...

 

[2ndammendment]

are the ultras in a larger room, I like the midrange and low end of the 170s, I would swap them around and see what it sounds like, I didn't like the ultras as much as I thought I would...

Well, theres definitely personal preference when it comes to speakers. Thats why there are so many damn choices lol. Im not going to break my back moving the Ultras but I'm about to relocated the 170's as we speak.

 

[theJman]

The ARX AB1's have caught my eye. Reading first hand experiences it looks like they pack quite a bit more bass than the 170's. I saw this video that someone else made, these towers use the same driver that the AB1's use. That excursion is hugely impressive. Excursion 1 on Vimeo I turned up the volume quite loud and couldnt even get 1/6 of that excursion. The AB1's use a folded ribbon tweeter though and that makes me a bit nervous since ive never owned a speaker with one. Its suppose to be fairly laid back though(i've heard a few ribbon tweeters before and they were always bright). If anyone has heard these please let me know what you thought of them.

The Arx are indeed very impressive speakers, so they're another good one to consider, but there are two things you should be aware of:

1. The tweeter is a planar-magnetic, not a ribbon. Similar, but not the same.
2. The midrange uses an XBL2 motor, which allows for that type of excursion in a controlled manner. You can't compare that to a "regular" motor; if you tired to drive most other midranges that hard the distortion would skyrocket.

 

[2ndammendment]

The Arx are indeed very impressive speakers, so they're another good one to consider, but there are two things you should be aware of:

1. The tweeter is a planar-magnetic, not a ribbon. Similar, but not the same.
2. The midrange uses an XBL2 motor, which allows for that type of excursion in a controlled manner. You can't compare that to a "regular" motor; if you tired to drive most other midranges that hard the distortion would skyrocket.

I'm not familiar with the electrostatic type transducers. Thanks for the correction.

Im aware that the midrange use the split gap XBL2 motor. Whatever it is it looks really impressive. I'm sure as with everything there is some sort of disadvantage to that design(probably cost I'm assuming?)

 

[shadyJ]

I'm not familiar with the electrostatic type transducers. Thanks for the correction.

Im aware that the midrange use the split gap XBL2 motor. Whatever it is it looks really impressive. I'm sure as with everything there is some sort of disadvantage to that design(probably cost I'm assuming?)

The disadvantage is XBL^2 tends not to be as sensitive as normal motors. The advantage is you gain a cleaner and more linear sound for many of the same loudness levels.

 

[2ndammendment]

Update:

I have good news and bad news..

I moved the CBM-170s into my main listening room. I placed them on stands out in front of the Ultras(which are feeling quite claustrophobic due to my room constraints). I didnt bother running MCACC. The difference from changing rooms was pretty substantial as expected. They sounded like different speakers. Even though they were placed much further from the walls in my main listening room, they had much more bass because my seating position is right up against the back wall(not ideal). This tends to enforce low frequencies quite a bit. They imaged way way better without that pesky computer monitor sitting in between them and gained a lot of depth on the sound stage. The overall tonal balanced shifted towards being much more neutral. The lower midrange which I was missing came to life. I spent over an hour enjoying them in my main listening room. I even did some comparisons against the SVS Ultras which call that room home.

The sonic improvement was so significant I went ahead and tore my computer room apart and rearranged everything around the best speaker positioning I could find. I tried placing them on stands to the left and right of the desk, i tried placing them out behind the desk, I moved the desk towards the wall and away from it. I tried just about every combination I possibly could. In the end though I wasnt able to improve the sonic performance significantly. Its nice to know that these speakers can sound really great....but I'm trying to find something for near-field use. At the end of the day I'm just not able to achieve as good sound as I would like while staying within my placement constraints. Considering the placement isnt ideal I'm wondering if its worth trying something else out. They certainly don't sound bad, I'm being fairly picky. Theres a possibility the ARX AB1 might do better for near-field use...or they could be worse. I'm scratching my head right now trying to figure out what to do.

 

[ousooner2]

The EMP e41 should be on your short list

It's literally the exact same thing as a $1,000 RBH bookshelf with a different cabinet and for.....about $700 less. If I had that money to spend on a PC setup, those would be here in a heartbeat to try

 

[alphaiii]

The EMP e41 should be on your short list

It's literally the exact same thing as a $1,000 RBH bookshelf with a different cabinet and for.....about $700 less. If I had that money to spend on a PC setup, those would be here in a heartbeat to try

And to think, when EMP first ran out of the E41-B during a black friday sale, they were selling the E41 for $179/pair. Still kicking myself for not buying them then.

On a side note - the RBH 41-SE are only $600/pr (at least in standard finish).
RBH Signature Series 41-SE Speaker Review | Audioholics

 

[fuzz092888]

The EMP e41 should be on your short list

It's literally the exact same thing as a $1,000 RBH bookshelf with a different cabinet and for.....about $700 less. If I had that money to spend on a PC setup, those would be here in a heartbeat to try

That's not exactly accurate. They're more or less the RBH Signature Series 41-SE, which is to say darn near identical. The MSRP on the 41-SE is $599, but since RBH speakers are mainly sold through dealers, I wouldn't expect you'd really pay that much. That's not to say $299 + shipping for a pair of the Emp Tek E-41's isn't a great deal on a great speaker.

 

[ousooner2]

I just read that from an Audioholics article lol. Didn't do much research on the RBH price. If you can get them for their $180/pr price that's still a very nice savings. Seems like a nice bookshelf

 

[fuzz092888]

I just read that from an Audioholics article lol. Didn't do much research on the RBH price. If you can get them for their $180/pr price that's still a very nice savings. Seems like a nice bookshelf

Well the E-41B (aka the 41-SE/B) was the one that was equivalent to the $1,000ish (at least at MSRP) RBH model. That used a phase plug and a Be woofer, while the 41 uses an aluminum cone woofer. I have a pair of E-41B's that I got when they were having that blowout sale and they are great speakers.

 

[ousooner2]

Rub it in why don't ya! lol

 

[fuzz092888]

Rub it in why don't ya! lol

Well right now they've been relegated to front height speakers in the HT setup. I'm not sure if that rubs it on more or less

 

[2ndammendment]

The EMP e41 should be on your short list

It's literally the exact same thing as a $1,000 RBH bookshelf with a different cabinet and for.....about $700 less. If I had that money to spend on a PC setup, those would be here in a heartbeat to try

I'm sure their great speakers and I may audition them some day for a different application, but right now in this room I need something that has more bass than the CBM-170. My current room and seating position really attenuate bass severely and make crossing over to a sub very difficult. If anyone has heard the Arx AB1s out knows a speaker which will have comparable bass I would like to hear about it.

 

[2ndammendment]

I went ahead and pulled the trigger on the Arx AB1s. The main reason is that I've never tried out a speaker with a planar tweeter and am always looking to try out new stuff. It sounds like they could be similar to the CBM-170 which I already like, but with more bass. There are at least 10 other speakers I would like to audition but time and money is the name of the game.

 

[ousooner2]

Why not the ARX a2? dual woofers could help with your situation

 

[2ndammendment]

Why not the ARX a2? dual woofers could help with your situation

They absolutely would help, but they are over a hundred bucks past my budget. Maybe if I like the A1B I'll save up and get the A2C. I'm trying to be careful though.... Shipping speakers back isn't cheap. The Wharfedales cost me 40 bucks to send back. I'll have spent damn near 100 bucks total in shipping if I return the CBM-170s(if the ARX's are better). I just got laid off recently so that doesn't help.

 

[ousooner2]

Ah good point. Forgot about possibly shipping them back. Smart. If you end up really liking them then those can go to surrounds

 

[2ndammendment]

Ah good point. Forgot about possibly shipping them back. Smart. If you end up really liking them then those can go to surrounds

You know, I use to be a multi-channel guy. My first two serious systems were 7.1, but I've grown to like the simplicity of 2ch stereo for music/movies/tv. I cant say I miss surround sound that much. Maybe I will try putting one together sometime in the future when I move to a different place.