$600 for 2 speakers

[avaserfi]

In effort to allow this thread to go in the direction user dem beats would prefer [and it seems he is uninterested in modification] I have answered jostenmeat's questions in a newly created thread here:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=437213

 

[ParadigmDawg]

Dont worry guys, you get a few drinks down Andrew and he becomes more like me and less like Chris

Leave you guys alone for a couple days..... sheesh.

Thank you all so much for the suggestions. Those swans are a HECK of a deal.

 

[avaserfi]

Dont worry guys, you get a few drinks down Andrew and he becomes more like me and less like Chris

Pshh, what are you talking about...I don't drink .

In all seriousness, I can't recommend the Ascends/Behringers more at this price points. The Behringers would be a superior options at low/mid spls, but if high SPL (95+dB) are wanted than the Ascend is a better choice.

 

[Spkr_Bldr]

I did miss the Axiom M22ti measurements being on Soundstage. After comparing these measurements to the Ascend and Behringer measurements I can fully say that the Axiom is the lowest quality offering. Just looking at the on/off-axis response it is clear that the Ascends are far more linear as they do not contain a midrange bump (well within audibility*) as well as rising treble (again well within audibility*). Also, note the Ascends far more linear 'listening window' measurements as well as superior off-axis response. Both speakers seem to have THD well below audibility at measured levels.

I gotta say, I disagree with your take on what the measurements mean. Since those measurments are taken from the same source, assuming that they're under the same conditions is fair. The only concern in the Axiom measurement is the rise around 4khz. The bump at 1khz is just a diffraction effect, it goes away off axis. And the distortion levels of the Axiom are the only ones I'd say are below audibility. The Ascend is over 1% from 1khz all the way down, even at just 90db spl ... and pushing 2-3% for a large part of the range at 95db. That's definately audible, the vast majority of musical information is in that region. Now likely much of the distortion is 2nd harmonic, but with a profile like that shows I'd expect rising 3rd likely coming close to the same level as 2nd around it's peak near 800hz. I've seen drivers with distortion profiles like that before, and they always go in the trash pile or off to Ebay.

And if you just want to talk about FR plots, I'd take a bump centered at 4200hz over one centered at 800hz. Especially when that bump is directly linked to a cone breakup as can be seen in the impedance/phase charts.

Rather than focusing on the subjective reviews I only look at the measurements as it seems, often times, reviewers who correlate these measurements with credible research underestimate thresholds of certain aspects [resonance] while overestimating audibility of others [distortion]. Thusly, rather than relying on others to make these judgments I have spent [and still spend] a large amount of time studying this research to attain full understanding of said studies.

I'm assuming you only say this because you're pushing the Ascends, while trying to diminish the Axioms? I've never heard either one, but just looking at those charts I'd guess that the Axioms would sound better and be a much more accurate speaker.

 

[WmAx]

The Ascend is over 1% from 1khz all the way down, even at just 90db spl ... and pushing 2-3% for a large part of the range at 95db. That's definately audible, the vast majority of musical information is in that region.

I have no intention of entering this thread for long, but I will point out that the distortion measurements on the site are for the old CBM-170. The SE version has near identical FR measurements, but has far lower distortion. Also, their is no cone resonance on the CBM-170 SE at 800Hz.

In addition, the SPL measured at the NRC is far higher than what DIYers traditionally post on distortion measurement DIY sites. A 90dB 2 Meter single speaker anechoic measurement is equivalent to two speakers playing in a normal room at well over 90dB, which is very loud. Normal listening levels are in the 80-85dB for most serious music listeners(as opposed to high school kids rocking out) from what I can gather from reading random polls on this kind of thing, and 80-85dB is the maximum that is really safe for extended listening periods, anyways.

-Chris

 

[Spkr_Bldr]

I have no intention of entering this thread for long, but I will point out that the distortion measurements on the site are for the old CBM-170. The SE version has near identical FR measurements, but has far lower distortion. Also, their is no cone resonance on the CBM-170 SE at 800Hz.

In addition, the SPL measured at the NRC is far higher than what DIYers traditionally post on distortion measurement DIY sites. A 90dB 2 Meter single speaker anechoic measurement is equivalent to two speakers playing in a normal room at well over 90dB, which is very loud. Normal listening levels are in the 80-85dB for most serious music listeners(as opposed to high school kids rocking out) from what I can gather from reading random polls on this kind of thing, and 80-85dB is the maximum that is really safe for extended listening periods, anyways.

-Chris

That's good to know about the SE version, clearly the woofer distortion through the critical midrange region was a problem ...

And yes, anechoic does require significantly higher drive level to reach the same spl. Without anything other than a guess, I'd say you'd probably get 2-3db more in room at the same power.

 

[dem beats]

Ava, you the man.

I don't think my co worker will end up in that direction, but you may have my next bedroom set picked out. I hope to do a DIY set up for dedicated 2 channell.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Infinity Primus 362s sound awesome (especially the imaging), are easy to drive, and are $600/pr MSRP. If you search, though, they can sometimes be found for less (occasionally even a lot less.)

 

[Alex2507]

Infinity Primus 362s sound awesome (especially the imaging), are easy to drive, and are $600/pr MSRP. If you search, though, they can sometimes be found for less (occasionally even a lot less.)

I agree. See sig.

I just wanted to offer this from a Stereophile review:

Floorstanding LoudspeakersInfinity Primus 360 loudspeaker:
Measurements
Sidebar 3: Measurements
The Infinity Primus 360 was significantly more sensitive than average, at an estimated 91.5dB(B)/2.83V/m. Though this is slightly lower than the specified 93dB, the 360 will still play very loudly with only a few watts of input power. However, with an impedance magnitude that drops below 4 ohms in the lower midrange and high treble and an electrical phase angle that is extreme in the upper bass (fig.1), the speaker needs to be partnered with an amplifier or receiver that can drive low impedances with aplomb. (The combination of 5.2 ohms and –45º phase angle at 93Hz will tax amplifiers rated at 8 ohms.)

I've been playing around with placement and equalization with my 360's and love 'em. My favorite is 2.1 equalized stereo. Pure chocolate.

 

[fredk]

Interesting comments Ryan. I am relatively new to all things speakerish, so it is hard for me to evaluate measurements and peoples comments about them.

When I look at the measurements for the Ascends and the Axioms, I can see that the ascends are flatter on axis, but off axis, to me, I do not see much of a difference and it was interesting to see that there is actually more distortion with the Ascends. I have no idea how these audibly manifest themselves.

I do know that there are differences of opinion between various researchers on what we can and cannot hear and that as you move outside of our hearing 'sweet spot' our ability to discern differences falls off.

I am looking forward to your participation here Ryan as it seems you have a pretty good grasp of this stuff.

Whether or not one speaker is better than the other, I still think the Axioms are good performers and worth a listen.

 

[R-Carpenter]

You can have my Pro Ac 2.5 clone for $700 if you want to drive to NY. It'll beat the hell out of any commercial speaker for the same price out there.

 

[WmAx]

Interesting comments Ryan. I am relatively new to all things speakerish, so it is hard for me to evaluate measurements and peoples comments about them.

When I look at the measurements for the Ascends and the Axioms, I can see that the ascends are flatter on axis, but off axis, to me, I do not see much of a difference and it was interesting to see that there is actually more distortion with the Ascends. I have no idea how these audibly manifest themselves.

I do know that there are differences of opinion between various researchers on what we can and cannot hear and that as you move outside of our hearing 'sweet spot' our ability to discern differences falls off.

I am looking forward to your participation here Ryan as it seems you have a pretty good grasp of this stuff.

Whether or not one speaker is better than the other, I still think the Axioms are good performers and worth a listen.

Please remember the Ascend measurements are of the old version. The new version has far lower distortion(they specifically re-designed the drivers to address this complaint). The new version does have near identical FR response - on and off axis - as compared to the old one. I have measured/analyzed the new units.

-Chris

 

[fredk]

Understood Chris. I don't doubt for a minute that the Ascends are an aceptional value and that, based on your measurements, the new drivers perform better.

I also expect than the newer version of the M22 measures better than the ti referred to. Unfortunately, without measurements I have no idea where that improvement would show up or how much better the v2 might be.

They are both better than average speakers as are the PSBs and several others mentioned in this thread.

 

[R-Carpenter]

Out of curiosity, what exactly are you using to take the measurements of this loudspeakers and do you take distortion measurements of individual drivers?
Did you measure speaker's impedance? I would think an impedance compensation would be valuable for intended amplifier or a receiver.