First post..need some advice.

[roque1128]

Hello everyone! I am looking at upgrading my speakers and need some advice. Currently I have Polk audio RTIa3 for my fronts, and CSIa4 for my center, and FXIa3 for my surrounds. My sub is an SVS PC12-NSD(which I am keeping) The speaker packages I am looking at are:

Ascend Acoustics-

CMT-340SE Mains
CMT-340SE Center
CBM-170SE(surround duties)

Swan-

Diva 4.2(fronts)
Diva 4.2c(center)
Diva 4.2r(surrounds)

What experience does everyone have with these. I have heard great things about both but want real world experience if possiblre. I know everyone is different and will like different sound, but some advice is greatly appreciated. Or is there another company that I may want to look at? I looked at Aperion Audio but the speakers I would want are not shipping until march and I want to do this sooner than that. Oh and I am running a Marantz sr7002 for my receiver.

Thanks and I love the forum btw!
Roque

By the way my room is 14'W x 16'L and my budget is roughly $1500 give or take a little

 

[Critterjr]

First, a lot of people will probably tell you the same thing...try and listen to each and decide for yourself. I've been away from this forum for a while but I can tell you that I got the Swan 6.1s a couple years ago and am still VERY happy with them (but they are in a 2.0 system). I found the company great to work with and I really enjoy the sound that comes out. Since you're using a decent sub you might also consider some alternatives like Sierra-1 for instance.

What's the space from the wall you'll be placing the speakers in...etc. I'm not the sound engineer many others here are...but I don't think you'll suffer from either choice. Both are solid and the differences are probably going to rely on your own ear more than on a few measures of Hz.

Is the room carpeted? Are you going to use the speakers for movies alone or do you also do a lot of music with them?

That being said...what other type of speakers have you listened to to help you narrow things down? If you have other preferences, it might help understand what else you might like...B&W, PSB, Polk (what did you like or dislike about the ones you have), Totem, NHT, etc etc etc...

I don't have an ideal answer for you...I can tell you that I like (old) PSB and Swans for the cost. If I had it to do over I'd still go for the 6 series because I use them almost exclusively for music (in that room) but if I were rebuilding a home theater for movie watching I'd go with Sierra-1s unless I was looking at towers then I'd probably still go for the smaller (though very tall) 4.2s or I'd go look at the newer lines of PSB speakers (unless I could afford some Totems which I lust after).

Now someone can (should) come along and tell you about cross over levels and the tweeter quality and how they find such and such too bright or too muddy or that they drop off too soon...and they'll probably be correct.

But I did want to reply and tell you welcome aboard this is a great and knowledgeable group of audiofiles so you'll get some great advice. Just don't rush it and listen to as many different speakers as you can...never buy from these reviews alone. Your ears like what your ears like.

 

[roque1128]

Thanks for the quick reply! The room is carpeted and they will be used about 60/40 movies/music. I have an extensive music collection so I will listen to a good amount of music. They will probably sit about 6-9inches from the wall. I know thats not ideal but I guess its better than sitting them right on the wall.

I definately agree that I should listen to them first, but being they ID companies it makes it difficult. And I like the idea of towers because I do have little ones running around, and right now I am constantly worried that one of them is going to knock my polks off of their stands.

I really appreciate the info that you gave me. Its going to be a difficult choice for me for sure. If anyone else has any advice or insight it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks again,
Roque

 

[SopRage]

Hey, man.

I've got the exact Ascend set-up you're looking at, and I think they're the deal. The Sierras mentioned are (from what everyone says) a step up, but I can tell you the only thing I DON'T like about my Ascends is that they are brutally unforgiving of poor recording.

I don't do a WHOLE lot of "critical music listening" with my gear, but they - in my limited experience - sound at least as good as anything I've heard elsewhere on music. Granted, with my budget I haven't tortured myself with going to the few high-end audio shops in St. Louis and hearing the very best of what's offered (for exponentially more money), but the other setups I've heard in other homes, electronics retailers, and home theater retailers certainly never led me to consider selling my CMT-340SEs.

For the money, I'm not convinced you can do much (if any) better. ... especially for movies (or, in my case, games).

They catch some crap for being "ugly" too, but I don't mind how they look. Take a peek, if you like: http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71835.

Can't speak for the Swans, but I couldn't find a negative review online regarding the Ascends when I was looking a few years ago. That's what sold me.

Good luck!

 

[SopRage]

Just took a look at the Ascend page,

You could do Sierra-1s across the front L/C/R and use HTM-200SEs as surrounds (which I did formerly, and, frankly, sound almost identical to the CBM-170SEs I replaced them with) for $1600.

I'd probably still save the money and go with the 340s instead of the Sierras (since they can go louder with a lot less power for movies), but that Marantz could probably handle the Sierras just fine.

That $500 difference in price could go towards a second PC-12!

 

[jinjuku]

I believe that Ascend has a money back policy for in home trials.

I would find a Swan vendor that offers the same.

You could simply try their center channel offerings and work it out from there. Minimum of shipping being a reason to try a center channel.

 

[sholling]

I've never heard the Swans but I own a pair of CMT-340SE and obviously like them and a friend owns the the CBM-170SEs and seems pleased (they sound good to me). I spoke to Dave F. about placement before buying the 340s and he told me that as long as you crossover to the sub well above port tuning (80hz is a good spot) that the ports will be doing so little work that they only need a few inches. He designed them so I'll take his word for it. That's a cool thing about Ascend if you have a question you can ask the man that designed them. For the price they're a darn good speaker.

 

[roque1128]

Thank you everyone for your replies! I am leaning more towards the Ascends for a couple reasons, the price and the name they have made for themselves. I thought about the Sierras, but I think I will be just as happy with the 340's. And like SopRage said, I could use the extra money for a second PC-12 As far as looks' that doesnt concern me too much either, and I will be getting the stands they offer for them and filling them with sand so they are stable. I still haven't decided 100% and I'm about a week out from making a decision, but Ascend is looking like a winner so far

Roque

 

[roque1128]

By the way SopRage, I love your room!

 

[GranteedEV]

I have never heard either but I'd say I'd have no trouble ordering a pair of the ascends, although I wouldn't want a horizontal MTM center channel.

Have you considered auditioning any Revels? IMO their approach to center channels is a more correct one.

 

[SopRage]

I have never heard either but I'd say I'd have no trouble ordering a pair of the ascends, although I wouldn't want a horizontal MTM center channel.

Have you considered auditioning any Revels? IMO their approach to center channels is a more correct one.

So, your advice is for the poster to stay away from Ascend, Axiom, EMP, Energy, Klipsch, Polk, RBH, and Salk, just to name a few? From a quick glance through their offerings, they don't have any other options for centers. ... certainly not anywhere near this pricepoint. Even the cheapest Revel center I saw online was almost $200 more than the Ascend center (which is approaching double the price).

Those are pretty highly regarded manufacturers (in many cases well reviewed here as well) selling "inferior" center channels.

 

[cschang]

The MTM horizontal center issue is blown out of proportion.

With a well designed MTM center, there usually isn't a hint of a problem until your are 20 degrees off-axis, and even then it may not be an issue. That isn't to say that there aren't better designs for different situations, but the MTM is well suited for most.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/center-channel-speaker/position-of-the-center-channel

 

[jostenmeat]

The MTM horizontal center issue is blown out of proportion.

There has only been one mention of it previous to your post, and it was only stated as a personal preference as well. I don't know if I'd call it blown out of proportion. Well, TBQH, I personally wished I knew of the compromise with a horiz MTM before I bought my Images. At the very least I would be cognizant of the compromise I was making. I've been told that my C60, based on xover and driver spacing, would be 180 degrees out of phase at about 20 degrees off axis.

With a well designed MTM center, there usually isn't a hint of a problem until your are 20 degrees off-axis, and even then it may not be an issue. That isn't to say that there aren't better designs for different situations, but the MTM is well suited for most.

Which ones are well designed outside of the AH example? I understand that reducing the driver spacing and lowering the xover point would be desirable, if perhaps creating other compromises, such as putting the xover point in the speech discrimination band.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/center-channel-speaker/position-of-the-center-channel

For those who are reading about this for the first time, the above article was added to this original one:

http://www.audioholics.com/education/loudspeaker-basics/vertical-vs-horizontal-speaker-designs/conclusion-rankings-and-evaluation.html

 

[cschang]

There has only been one mention of it previous to your post, and it was only stated as a personal preference as well. I don't know if I'd call it blown out of proportion. Well, TBQH, I personally wished I knew of the compromise with a horiz MTM before I bought my Images. At the very least I would be cognizant of the compromise I was making. I've been told that my C60, based on xover and driver spacing, would be 180 degrees out of phase at about 20 degrees off axis.

Sorry, I meant in general, not specific to this thread.

180 degrees out of phase? Wouldn't that mean between those two drivers, you would not hear anything(no sound) when sitting 20 degrees off axis? Probably meant 180 degrees out of phase at a certain frequency.

Do you hear a problem when you sit 20 degrees off axis?

Which ones are well designed outside of the AH example? I understand that reducing the driver spacing and lowering the xover point would be desirable, if perhaps creating other compromises, such as putting the xover point in the speech discrimination band.

I would say that, like with every speaker, you would need to listen for yourself. As for the xover point, I think most two-ways utilize something between 1khz-2khz give or take....this is where driver choice comes into play as well as crossover execution.

 

[jostenmeat]

Sorry, I meant in general, not specific to this thread.

180 degrees out of phase? Wouldn't that mean between those two drivers, you would not hear anything(no sound) when sitting 20 degrees off axis? Probably meant 180 degrees out of phase at a certain frequency.

Ah I think he meant at the xover point. For instance, while I have the C60, he did say that the C40 would have a deep null at 2.2khz, as in well below the -6db summed SPL of the two woofers from the system SPL, or something like that.

Do you hear a problem when you sit 20 degrees off axis?

I believe I did, however, I'm typically not one to freak out over something, and point all fingers at any culprit. The reason being is that I often change more than one thing at a time, and just as importantly and unfortunately, I deal with multiple compromises at the same time. I think the C60 is a solid center speaker for the money, but I do feel subjectively convinced that being onaxis as possible is a very worth goal with this speaker. I have been offaxis (I don't know how many degrees), and a stereo/phantom experiment had much better dialogue intelligibility than with the center speaker working.

I would say that, like with every speaker, you would need to listen for yourself. As for the xover point, I think most two-ways utilize something between 1khz-2khz give or take....this is where driver choice comes into play as well as crossover execution.

What you say confirms a recommendation I was told, as 1.5 k to 1.8 kHz for the xover point in a horiz MTM. Of course, this is a bit too low for other idealists here. One in particular might demand the xover point be as high as 4khz (but I guess then the mid drivers would get a bit beamy?).

 

[GranteedEV]

The MTM horizontal center issue is blown out of proportion.

Not at all.

"Blown out of proportion" depends on what you desire. If "good enough" is "good enough" then fine. But if you want "great" then you simply can not have a horizontal MTM. And I'm not saying this from a holier than thou perspective. I'm speaking as someone who took the same sacrifice himself due to aesethetic/financial/time reasons.

Horizontal MTMs just aren't any good.

And it's NOT just about "for people off axis". Even a person sitting dead on just won't feel comfortably listening to a horizontal MTM because of its polar response characteristics. For movies it can be "good enough" because we're not listening critically or focusing on tonal accuracy. But it's truly just a very flawed design.

What you say confirms a recommendation I was told, as 1.5 k to 1.8 kHz for the xover point in a horiz MTM. Of course, this is a bit too low for other idealists here. One in particular might demand the xover point be as high as 4khz (but I guess then the mid drivers would get a bit beamy?).

That's what I like about the Salk Soundscape. They went with a 3" midrange driver in a 3-way.

 

[cschang]

Certainly...it is always about what we "desire". It becomes subjective. Lumping all horizontal MTM's as "aren't any good" I think is a dis-service to some.

Did you have a chance to read the article I linked? Thoughts?

 

[SopRage]

Not at all.

"Blown out of proportion" depends on what you desire. If "good enough" is "good enough" then fine. But if you want "great" then you simply can not have a horizontal MTM. And I'm not saying this from a holier than thou perspective. I'm speaking as someone who took the same sacrifice himself due to aesethetic/financial/time reasons.

Horizontal MTMs just aren't any good.

This is getting ridiculous. If we want "great" (meaning uncompromised) we're no longer looking at systems in this price-point. Everything is only "good enough" until you have the top product conceived of and produced by man.

The poster is looking at 5.0 systems around $1500, not outfitting his private screening room with a high-end flagship system.

This is turning into a theoretical exercise rather than offering real-world solutions. If there is a better system for the price (that does not feature the godless sonic abomination that is a MTM-designed center), let's simply offer it for the OP's consideration.

 

[GranteedEV]

This is getting ridiculous. If we want "great" (meaning uncompromised) we're no longer looking at systems in this price-point. Everything is only "good enough" until you have the top product conceived of and produced by man.

The poster is looking at 5.0 systems around $1500, not outfitting his private screening room with a high-end flagship system.

This is turning into a theoretical exercise rather than offering real-world solutions. If there is a better system for the price (that does not feature the godless sonic abomination that is a MTM-designed center), let's simply offer it for the OP's consideration.

like i said, a pair of cmt 340s with a revel C12 centre. should tonally match well and give great performance.

 

[cschang]

like i said, a pair of cmt 340s with a revel C12 centre. should tonally match well and give great performance.

I will say that a pair of CMT-340SE's with a CMT-340SEc (horizontal center) will tonally match, and will give great performance in a 40 degree wide listening area.