Need an Opinion....or two. 3.1

[YogiBizz]

Also, this is great. I appreciate everyones feed back.

 

[lovinthehd]

Is the RAAL Tweeter only available on the Sierra's?

Yep the whole Sierra family is where it starts with the Raal, and there's even a kit to convert a Sierra-1 to a 2....maybe some day The Sierras have very nice bamboo based cabinets, btw.

 

[lovinthehd]

So would I be able to run the 340's for now. and then later down the road, if i choose to get... lets say, the sierra 2's , could I move the 340s to the rear? or would the difference be so noticeable, it'd be irritating?

They're all voiced somewhat similarly altho I probably wouldn't mix the raal and dome tweeters across the front three; surrounds I don't think it would make a difference and the 340s sure would make for potent surrounds ! You could pop over to the Ascend forums, pretty good place to get details on speakers and opinions on that mix, too. David Fabrikant, the owner/designer of Ascend, is active there. Somewhat active on the official ascend threads on avsforum.com too.

 

[KEW]

Dennis doesn't have the in home trial programs like SVS or Ascend offers as far as I'm aware, though....

I know that last summer, Ascend had a special promotion where they would pay return shipping like SVS does. From what I read, it looks like you would be out for shipping both ways with Ascend while SVS pays shipping both ways.
Dennis offers 7 days for return, but you would pay shipping both ways. As strange as it may seem, he (expertly) does this as his hobby and does not have the profit margins to absorb shipping costs. That is how the Philharmonitor is $300 less than the Seirra RAAL.

I found a 5.5" ScanSpeak Revelator mid/woof for $210 each:
http://www.bestdealbuys.us/p/Scan-speak-Revelator-15w-30k-00-5-5-Paper-Cone-Woofer-8-Ohm-Qts-0-27-46204229.html
This looks like the cabinet at $144 each:
http://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-twc-050ch-050-cu-ft-2-way-curved-speaker-cabinet-cherry--302-723
I could not find the RAAL tweeter. The least expensive RAAL I could find was the 70-10D which goes for $322 each:
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/ribbon-tweeters/raal-70-10d-raal-ribbon-tweeter-with-optional-amorphous-core/
I believe the RAAL Dennis uses (like the one Ascend uses) does not have a replaceable ribbon and that saves money, so lets assume $200 ea. for the tweeters.
That puts us at $1108.
I'm pretty sure Dennis outsources the woodworking (he did not have a wood shop when I visited), so add the cost of cutting the baffles and the port hole in the back, acoustic dampening material, terminals. Then XO board and components. Since you have built a crossover or two, you have a good idea what that costs although I don't know how complex the New Philharmonitor XO is. Lets say $171 ea. for everything in this paragraph.
That puts us at $1450. I'd guess Dennis gets a 25% discount on materials like the speakers and cabinets. He does not have the production quantities to get deep discounts like a large manufacturer would.
That puts the cost at $1085. Obviously, he is not paying himself much for building the XO, assembling, measuring FR, packing, and shipping speakers. He is not trying to earn a living or grow into a big business, he is retired with a reasonable pension. He is just enjoying sharing his talent and passion with other people who enjoy music & audio. Between that and playing violin in the Orchestra, I think he is well into "self-actualization" from Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.


I went through these numbers as much for my own curiosity as anything, I don't pretend any precision on my guesstimates, but if you've been around the block a time or two, you know I'm not off by too much. Oh, and I forgot about the $50 he donates to the Orchestra for every (pair of?) speaker he sells (excluding the $210/pr AA's)! But to my point, he does not have profit margins to absorb shipping costs!

I know a few of DIY'ers who, once they became familiar with Murphy's speakers, realized they were not going to save a dime doing it themselves.

To YogiBizz, I say Dennis is a hobbyist, but do not misunderstand that to mean he isn't a top notch speaker designer. I believe at this point I can say he designed every speaker that Salk sells (including the flagship $16,000/pair Soundscape S12's). I know he designed the XO for all of them. He has been a mentor for the DIY community for a long time.
http://www.salksound.com

 

[KEW]

So would I be able to run the 340's for now. and then later down the road, if i choose to get... lets say, the sierra 2's , could I move the 340s to the rear? or would the difference be so noticeable, it'd be irritating?

Absolutely no Sound Quality reason not to use the 340's as surrounds.
The reasons I wouldn't suggest it are:
1) The 170's would make fine surrounds in a larger room. The 340 represents $300 more tied up in your surrounds. I'd rather see that money put into the front speakers.
2) Visually, most of us want compact surrounds, and the 340's are a pretty good size. Also heavier which can be more difficult to mount or result in a more top heavy stand.

If neither of those is important to you, I can't think of any reason not to use the 340's as surrounds.

 

[lovinthehd]

I know that last summer, Ascend had a special promotion where they would pay return shipping like SVS does. From what I read, it looks like you would be out for shipping both ways with Ascend while SVS pays shipping both ways.
Dennis offers 7 days for return, but you would pay shipping both ways. As strange as it may seem, he (expertly) does this as his hobby and does not have the profit margins to absorb shipping costs. That is how the Philharmonitor is $300 less than the Seirra RAAL.

I found a 5.5" ScanSpeak Revelator mid/woof for $210 each:
http://www.bestdealbuys.us/p/Scan-speak-Revelator-15w-30k-00-5-5-Paper-Cone-Woofer-8-Ohm-Qts-0-27-46204229.html
This looks like the cabinet at $144 each:
http://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-twc-050ch-050-cu-ft-2-way-curved-speaker-cabinet-cherry--302-723
I could not find the RAAL tweeter. The least expensive RAAL I could find was the 70-10D which goes for $322 each:
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/ribbon-tweeters/raal-70-10d-raal-ribbon-tweeter-with-optional-amorphous-core/
I believe the RAAL Dennis uses (like the one Ascend uses) does not have a replaceable ribbon and that saves money, so lets assume $200 ea. for the tweeters.
That puts us at $1108.
I'm pretty sure Dennis outsources the woodworking (he did not have a wood shop when I visited), so add the cost of cutting the baffles and the port hole in the back, acoustic dampening material, terminals. Then XO board and components. Since you have built a crossover or two, you have a good idea what that costs although I don't know how complex the New Philharmonitor XO is. Lets say $171 ea. for everything in this paragraph.
That puts us at $1450. I'd guess Dennis gets a 25% discount on materials like the speakers and cabinets. He does not have the production quantities to get deep discounts like a large manufacturer would.
That puts the cost at $1085. Obviously, he is not paying himself much for building the XO, assembling, measuring FR, packing, and shipping speakers. He is not trying to earn a living or grow into a big business, he is retired with a reasonable pension. He is just enjoying sharing his talent and passion with other people who enjoy music & audio. Between that and playing violin in the Orchestra, I think he is well into "self-actualization" from Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.


I went through these numbers as much for my own curiosity as anything, I don't pretend any precision on my guesstimates, but if you've been around the block a time or two, you know I'm not off by too much. Oh, and I forgot about the $50 he donates to the Orchestra for every (pair of?) speaker he sells (excluding the $210/pr AA's)! But to my point, he does not have profit margins to absorb shipping costs!

I know a few of DIY'ers who, once they became familiar with Murphy's speakers, realized they were not going to save a dime doing it themselves.

To YogiBizz, I say Dennis is a hobbyist, but do not misunderstand that to mean he isn't a top notch speaker designer. I believe at this point I can say he designed every speaker that Salk sells (including the flagship $16,000/pair Soundscape S12's). I know he designed the XO for all of them. He has been a mentor for the DIY community for a long time.
http://www.salksound.com

I didn't realize the Ascend experiment with round trip shipping had expired, thanks. Good to know Dennis has one too and bonus on the contribution to an orchestra. Just nice when it's completely up front on the trial thing, you just have to add/calculate shipping in....for me shipping would be cheaper than going where there may be a selection of things to listen to in any case (let alone returning them).

 

[j_garcia]

So would I be able to run the 340's for now. and then later down the road, if i choose to get... lets say, the sierra 2's , could I move the 340s to the rear? or would the difference be so noticeable, it'd be irritating?

Yes, that would work.

 

[YogiBizz]

SO... would you consider the $800 B-stock Ultras L/R more valuable than the 170's L/R 340/C @ $650? Because the Ultra's @ $1000 push the top of my budget with no room to pick up the low end with a Sub.

 

[j_garcia]

You might be better served with the Ultras and then adding a sub later because you might be less inclined to upgrade sooner, but 170s with the sub gets you a more well rounded system for both movies/music. If you step to 170s and get a sub I think you'll get more bang for your buck because a sub adds a lot compared to going without one. Tough call, because speakers are the single most important aspect when it comes to your overall sound. That said, I don't think you'd be disappointed with the Ascends even if the Ultras are better.

*Edit

I am *ALMOST* inclined to say go with the Philharmonic AAs vs the 170s, but then you have decisions to make about a center since there sort of isn't a matching one. Dennis offers another modded center (pioneer C-22) that he says blends well with them since he uses the same tweeter and voices it similarly. I would say the AAs are better than the 170s. Plus, they'd be less expensive than the Ascends.

 

[Pogre]

SO... would you consider the $800 B-stock Ultras L/R more valuable than the 170's L/R 340/C @ $650? Because the Ultra's @ $1000 push the top of my budget with no room to pick up the low end with a Sub.

I picked up a pair of Ultras from their outlet for 800 that were undamaged. They came with a 45 day risk free home trial and the full 5 year warranty. I have no desire to upgrade at this point, I'm so happy with them.

 

[MrBoat]

I have a hard time with the constraints of a budget (within reason) with recreational items or what amounts to a one time expenditure. Every time I start out with a budget, by the time I get through researching/shopping, the budget has grown some more, usually substantially if I am focused on the particular goal. So basically, what I am saying is, take your time and get what you really want.

The other thing is, at least with the music aspect, if that happens to be important, is that a lot of these speakers have a rather profound phantom center channel effect on their own, especially in small spaces and even the subwoofer manages to fall in there as well. I have a room similar in size to your own. Adding a center channel would be redundant in my case. IOW, I'd almost always make the center channel my last enhancement if needed and focus on higher quality main speakers.

Finally, I may be all wrong about this since I only have experience with my space, the same place I have been for over 20 years and know next to nothing about surround sound or video. If so, I am sure the other, more experienced posters will correct me and I will learn something too.

 

[j_garcia]

I'd take a 2.1 setup with a better sub vs. a 3.1 setup with a lesser sub or no sub. IMO the center IS important for movies, but if I had to give one up, I'd keep the sub.

 

[Pogre]

When I was at the same stage you are right now, I bookmarked this link and kept an eye on it for virtually undamaged Ultras while I researched and asked questions about other options. There are some in there at times that are pretty scuffed up, but there are also undamaged, or so lightly scratched that it's imperceptible unless you know it's there.

I jumped on a pair of nice ones when I saw them and ordered them. If I didn't like them, no problem. I have 45 days to ship them back for a full refund and they foot the bill for shipping.

 

[MrBoat]

I'd take a 2.1 setup with a better sub vs. a 3.1 setup with a lesser sub or no sub. IMO the center IS important for movies, but if I had to give one up, I'd keep the sub.

That's it for me too. Especially after finding out just how important the subwoofer actually is, and recently at that. From here on out, I will not consider a system without one.

Of course, I'm posting under the newbie effect, with recently having my antiquated audio assumptions overturned a bit. But comparing the old to the new, the phantom center effect is a very noticeable one.

 

[YogiBizz]

I have a hard time with the constraints of a budget (within reason) with recreational items or what amounts to a one time expenditure. Every time I start out with a budget, by the time I get through researching/shopping, the budget has grown some more, usually substantially if I am focused on the particular goal. So basically, what I am saying is, take your time and get what you really want.

The other thing is, at least with the music aspect, if that happens to be important, is that a lot of these speakers have a rather profound phantom center channel effect on their own, especially in small spaces and even the subwoofer manages to fall in there as well. I have a room similar in size to your own. Adding a center channel would be redundant in my case. IOW, I'd almost always make the center channel my last enhancement if needed and focus on higher quality main speakers.

Finally, I may be all wrong about this since I only have experience with my space, the same place I have been for over 20 years and know next to nothing about surround sound or video. If so, I am sure the other, more experienced posters will correct me and I will learn something too.

No doubt. The more I look, the more I'm telling myself, "well, maybe just a little more." Over and over. And then I look and my budget's been blown to poop. The good thing is, you guys have given me a lot of feed back, and it's greatly appreciated. A lot of choices have been mentioned. Im leaning toward giving the AA's and the Ascends a shot; given my budget and the capabilities to "stair-step" up to higher end series within both manufactures.

^^^ Hahah, Poop?

 

[YogiBizz]

When I was at the same stage you are right now, I bookmarked this link and kept an eye on it for virtually undamaged Ultras while I researched and asked questions about other options. There are some in there at times that are pretty scuffed up, but there are also undamaged, or so lightly scratched that it's imperceptible unless you know it's there.

I jumped on a pair of nice ones when I saw them and ordered them. If I didn't like them, no problem. I have 45 days to ship them back for a full refund and they foot the bill for shipping.

Thank you. Ill keep an eye out. I never gave any emphasis on my listening preference. It's about 90% movies, 10% music. Even with the discounted Ultra's, that still leaves me a little over budget with a decent Sub.

 

[j_garcia]

Here's my quick take on the AAs:

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/first-pic-of-the-new-room.28576/page-14#post-1168097

 

[Pogre]

Thank you. Ill keep an eye out. I never gave any emphasis on my listening preference. It's about 90% movies, 10% music. Even with the discounted Ultra's, that still leaves me a little over budget with a decent Sub.

I totally understand budget constraints. It took me a little time to save up for the Ultras. The other more budget friendly options you're considering are winners too. I think when it's all said and done you're gonna end up with something you really like. I think you're right in wanting to have enough money left for a good sub. You're going about this the right way.

 

[YogiBizz]

Yeah, a 2.1 makes an unbelievable difference compared to one without a sub. I was always impressed with my dad's 7.2 setup as a kid. The low end was unbelievable. I'm trying to talk him into getting a new setup for his HT. He's running some pretty ancient Technics with a way out of date AVR.

 

[KEW]

Well, since I am about 93% music/7% HT I was going to say the Ultras will do fine without a sub. They have good bass on there own for music. The same is true for the AA's which also have good bass. However they don't have solid bass for HT LFE.
While I enjoy watching a good action movie like the Avengers with the subs engaged, I'd still be happy with just two good speakers (like the Ultras), but that is probably because the first 50 years of my life were spent using the speakers built into the TV, and having good bookshelf speakers is soooo much better, I enjoy it without the subs.

I can tell you I compared the 340's against the AA's and I liked the AA's better (they were just a slight touch more neutral IMHO). However, the difference was not great, and I would understand why someone might prefer the 340's, so I never wrote up that experience. Any such review is subjective, but usually I have a sense that anyone looking for accurate sound would agree with me. In the AA vs 340 comparison, I did not feel very strongly that the AA outperformed the 340.
I did not push them hard enough to find their limits, but expect the 340 with the dual drivers to go louder than the AA's and expect the AA's to go louder than the 170's. However it is noteworthy that the AA's are less expensive than the 170's. I just can't find a speaker that can compete with Dennis Murphy's stuff at the same price. It is unfortunate that he has not found a worthwhile option to split the gap between the $210 AA's and the $1150 New Monitors.

You do not say where you are, give us a general idea. If you are near me, you are welcome to come and hear the AA's as well as some others I have.

Either the AA's or the 170's will offer good sound and depending on your past exposure to HiFi, I'm not sure you would identify any significant shortcomings until you listen critically to a better speaker.