Small floor standing speaker shootout... (1 Viewer)

[Craig Chase]

Curtis, I tried to get Paradigms from a couple of stores... There not interested. I did do some eaxtensive listening to them, though. For music they are not in the same league as Rocket/Ascend/Axiom speakers...

 

[CurtisSC]

Bummer...

But you can do the purchase and sell(if you wanted to) like you did with some of the subs you had. :b Easier to say with someone elses money.

Just seems like a better way to show the internet direct value....

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis, I had considered doing that. I made a decision before the first review to always get the OK from the company whose product I was reviewing. It just seems the right way to do things. B&M companies have a pretty good lock on most of the magazines, and for a variety of reasons do not want an internet review.

 

[Mark LS]

Good Morning from Boulder...

I guess I really don't have too much to say about any of this --- how could I...

I do however wish to point out that RS550 MKII (NOT a bookshelf... ) based systems start at around $1500 dollars. You can add a UFW-10 sub for not a whole bunch more (under $500 dollars)...

I think any comments about build quality, cosmetics or otherwise (inside or out) are best kept to myself as my opinion does not necesarrily coincide with others offered here... I'll allow our product(s) to speak for themselves...

Wishing you all the very best...

mls

 

[Jimmy Harmon]

Excellent show of restraint Mark. I was quite surprised at David comments. Didn't Ascend agree to the setup? Don't agree to the ground rules and then complain when you don't win.

This was not a bass shootout but if either setup had an apparent advantage in that department it would be the one using the seperate 8" powered woofer. In fact, I'm pretty sure Craig said that Mark was the only manufacturer that agreed to compare his tower speakers against a speaker that was using a seperate (sub)woofer to augment its bass.

I think too many people are focusing on the bass response though, and it is presumptious of David to exptrapolate that the Ascends would have scored a 97 with a VTF-2/3. If you're going to do that you might as well throw in a UFW-10, but then we're comparing subwoofers not speakers. Not to mention that bookshelf speakers have their own advantages over towers such as typically better imaging.

As far as pricing, its comparable but not identical. I know Ascend offers custom finishes and charges extra for them. Well, with the Rockets that is part of what you're paying for. To some people it's well worth the cost while to others it isn't.

I just expected Ascend to be more gracious. It seems like every time David talks about Rockets he has a certain condescending attitude towards them like everyone who buys them are just wowed with their pretty cabinets and don't know what good speakers sound like. It's getting tiring.

Craig has repeatedly said these are both great speakers. He has also said they are different enough sounding that he can easily distinguish between them. This leads me to believe that some people would prefer the Ascend sound and some the Rocket sound. That's cool. In fact, that's great. Speakers are very subjective and its hard to go wrong with either company's products. I'm still interested in getting a pair of silver 170's for my bedroom but Ascend's sore loser attitude is kind of a turn off.

Sorry I couldn't show the restraint Mark did . . .

 

[CurtisSC]

Jim, you and I have communicated friendly for a long time. You are also one of the folks that really want me to hear the 550's.

You are right this was not a bass shootout, but the initial implication that the 550's had better bass over the STF-1 was a shocker to many, and thus drew a lot of attention. Granted, it is not that big of a deal to me, but a few bass lovers have messaged me in dis-belief, and one even has gone so far to say it is impossible, even now with it being more or less equal. So there are some out there that think it is a big deal.

I will have to disagree on the condescending attitude comment. Do you think Nhan's comment on build and finish was condescending at all? Or anybody's comments on the Rockets fit and finish being superior to others? The condescending feeling often depends on who is on the receiving end.

For extrapulating scores, I agree, without knowing the weighting of different aspects, you can not really extrapulate. Also, without knowing the weighting, we do not know how the scores were derived. What the scoring does is give a feeling of objectivity to something that is objective.

Craig's comparison here is/was very public, and draws a lot of attention. His comparison on HTS, where he preferred the CBM-170 over the ELT-CSe was less public because HTS has much less traffic than HTF. Nobody chimed in to gloat or question over there. You have to wonder if that comparison took place in a more public manner, what kind of posts might have resulted.

I also have questions about the testing and setup...I should have asked them before the test began. Asking them now would give the perception of a sore loser.

For me, all of this has really piqued my interest in the RS550MK2 and I am seriously thinking about trying a pair out. That way, I can criticize myself.

 

[Craig Chase]

Jimmy, Curtis... Thanks to you both for replying. Without getting into hours of science... the drivers in the 550's have a lot of air moving capacity, more so than Gen I.

Four 6.5 inch drivers have the cone area of one 12.5 inch driver... and the internal volume of the 550's is a lot larger than the STF-1 ... Apply a bit of physics. And you should SEE those drivers move during deep bass spectaculars... serious excursion here !

NOW... The area the 550's really were just astounding was in detail and soundstaging presentation... The 340's were much better than one can expect in this price range or anywhere near it. The 550's really do out gun any speaker below $2500 I have ever heard.

As for my grading the 340 package a 95 and the 550's 100... no amount of subwoofers, bass enhancers... etc... would change that score.

Keeping it in perspective though, thinking the 95 score is not great is like telling your child you are not proud of HIS/HER 95 overall grade in school because you found out another student scored a 100...

Both companies should be celebrating the knowledge that at least one lunatic reviewer loves BOTH products.

By the way, for the record, I had the 340's in the identical position that the 170's were in for my review of them.

And the review of the 170's that Curtis mentioned was on Home Theater SPot, and, using the same scale as here, The Ascends would have scored a 100 and the Rocket ELT/CSE's a 99 by me, and the Ascends a 95 and the Rockets a 100 by my wife. When the results were posted that the 170's had scored a one point victory over the Rockets, Mark Schifter's response was "You posted what you heard before knowing which speaker was which, and gave a fair account of both speakers. I am honoured to have been in the test. Thanks for your time and effort".

He also encouraged that I post the results (of the 170's and ELT/CSE's) on HIS site.

My wife was not here for this test, other than Monday night, which was casual... she is now working hard on the re-do of our basement theater room... with no time for listening tests for a while. I do love doing tests with her...

Anyway... It was mentioned to me that I "picked" an obscure site for the 170 test, and Home Theater Forum for this test... I picked HTF this time because I have been promising Parker Clacke a test here for 7 months, not because I wanted to give this test more "views". If you remember, at first, the review here got very little notice. Besides, As the results were posted before I even KNEW which speaker was which, I am not sure how the logic of me "picking" on Ascend for this review can apply.

If anyone wants, feel free to link to that test here...

 

[Eddie Horton]

I still say that for the price, you couldn't go wrong with either one. It'll simply come down to which one sounds best to you. All this talk about which one "wins" gets a little crazy after a while. It's like asking which is better between a BMW M5 and a Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG. They're both great. To each his own.

 

[CurtisSC]

What is a Gen I?

 

[Craig Chase]

550 Gen I ... I have the Mark II's ... Upgraded drivers and crossover. It is pretty normal for companies to upgrade drivers without a lot of fanfare... Hsu does it, SVS also does... Rocket did here.

Picture a subwoofer with 4 x 6.5 inch drivers working in tandem in a 100 liter enclosure and an 800 watt amp weighing 80 pounds driving them ... with a total port area of just over 5 inches...

Well... now look at the 550 Mark II's being driven by my McIntosh...

 

[Craig Chase]

Eddie Horton... Very well spoken. Part of the reason I word the tests the way I do is hopefully to help someone makea decision as to which might be close to what he/she wants in speaker.

Also to help someone decide that the return freight is worth the small risk...

For example, if someone asked whether or not to try the 340's for a system that had a Yamaha 1400 Receiver... The black finish matches this person's decor, and he was looking at an Energy C-9 based system for $2500 with subwoofer... I really think this person would LOVE the $1868 340/340/170/VTF-3 system ... and with the only risk being a $100 return shipping charge, YES... Try the Ascend Package.. it is FAR superior to the Energy package...

And if another is looking at B&W 604 based system for $3500 with a subwoofer... versus the 550 Mark II system for $2500 with DUAL UFW-10's ... again, for $1000 less, the Rocket system is QUITE superior to the B&W set up.

 

[CurtisSC]

I thought it was just a crossover change....and that Mark was thinking about offering the crossover to Gen 1 owners.

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis, the official change is the crossover change... as for the driver, look at Hsu. If you dig deep enough, you will find the driver in a 1220 now is improved over one from 5 years ago.

Same thing with SVS ... The db-12 driver (used in all "plus") models was changed this January... no news bulletins ... nothing.

In fact, I discover this tidbit during blind listening tests because the PB2+ we had here (made in January,2004) sounded better the the 25-31 pc+ (made in October, 2002) ...

Tom Vodhanel was surprised I heard the difference, as it was not announced.

Back to the 550's ... Mark alluded to "better driver control"... My read on that is they, like most companies, are getting better performance from the drivers today than a year ago....

You are right, Mark has publicly stated that the crossover has changed... and they sell kits to guys for their Mark I's ... to make their crossovers Mark II's...

 

[David_D]

Ok, let's picture that in a different way. What we have wi the 550s are two speakers that are -3dB at 40Hz, according to the manufacturer specs. Let's charitably guess that they are -10dB at 25Hz, although it could easily be more. How does putting in a lot of power make them any less rollled off at low frequencies?

Craig, I've enjoyed all of your tests, and I believe you did your best to test the speakers fairly. I know both the 550s and Ascends are excellent speakers, from companies led by quality individuals. However, I think the bass reinforcement artifacts of an unusual room are being interpreted as a characteristic of the speakers.

 

[CurtisSC]

Craig,
then I may have interpreted it wrong. I thought owners of the original 550's could get the performance of the 550MK2's if they installed the new crossover.

 

[Craig Chase]

The worst frequency response I attained from the 550's was down 3 dB at 32 Hz in room. This was in a mid room position. The factory spec is quite conservative.

I have seen other areas where factory specs were quite generous... The Energy C-9 comes to mind. EDIT ... and the Legacy Focus, while rated to 16 Hz, fell quite short of that spec...

See you guys tomorrow... ... time to take the missus to dinner...

 

[Craig Chase]

Curtis.. I have yet to see that definitive a statement... But tell me, you are looking to m=get the new amp from the VTF-3 Mark II for your older VTF-3... Will that make it a Mark II ? Or will it still have the older 12 inch driver ?

David... I also moved the STF-1 to the position that the 550's were in, and the bass did improve their. I also posted that earlier.

Here are some -4dB points for both the STF-1 and the 550.2 ... in different room positions...

STF-1 - mid room ... 33 Hz, along a wall, 32 Hz, in corner, 28 Hz, and about one foot out from corner, 22/23 Hz...

550.2 ... mid room ... 31 Hz, and about one foot from corner, 22 Hz

It is ironic... a couple of months ago, I tried explaining to a lot of people just how important room placement was. And that the next wave of improvement in subwoofers would be fixing the room resonances... Noone chimed in with agreement until now. Thanks for the validation, guys.

Oh... and Da missus is having a fashion emergency... dinner will be a bit later...

 

[CurtisSC]

It makes it a Mark 1 with the Mark II amp. Dr. Hsu said I it would be mainly noticeable on peaks, but just about no difference in normal listening. I am actually thinking about getting the maple finished VTF-3 now, giving my Parents my VTF-3, and using the STF-2 I gave them for somethingelse. The downfiring driver will make me feel safer with the kids.

I think actual sweeps of your room from the listening position, like you did with the subs, will help us understand your room and what you heard and demonstrate placement importance. It would be interesting to see the peaks/valleys.

 

[KylePete]

I've got a question, Craig. Did you do any listening with the grills on? I wonder if that would change any of your impressions of the speakers.

Some people have pets and kids in the house, so leaving the grills off is not always possible.




Kyle

 

[CurtisSC]

My kids do not even know the speaker grills come off.