Ascend Sierra 2 Speaker Review

[Chromatischism]

The larger (wider) RAAL used in the Sierra towers doesn't require the higher crossover that the 64-10 RAAL (used in Phil BMRs, Ascend Sierra-2EX) does. It also has lower distortion. And finally, its dispersion isn't quite so "really wide" as the dispersion of the 64-10.

Do you know the crossover frequency for any of these speakers? For the Sierra 2 it looks like it's around 3 kHz, which is high and not ideal territory for the 6.5" driver to be operating in.

We aren't talking towers here in this thread, especially with comparisons to Revel bookshelf speakers.

But regardless of the variant used, they are still higher in distortion and crossover point, and wider in dispersion than a waveguided dome. That's why I don't think the ribbon would bring benefits to my system.

 

[tw 2022]

I don’t think that can be stated as absolute fact. There are people, like me, that prefer the widest dispersion possible, which the Revels do not match.

Bingo...

Any "baffle" is a waveguide.

you're arguing semantics here ..you should be arguing with Dennis or Dave not me.. and i do agree that a baffle is in effect a waveguide , but it is not a built in addition , it's part of the actual box,, correct? i do get there are geometric equations at work as well...

 

[jhaider]

...you're arguing semantics here ..you should be arguing with Dennis or Dave not me..

No, I’m arguing reality. I agree there are degrees of complexity - with the flat waveguide terminating at a 90 degree corner being the most basic*, and a contoured structure starting from the driver diaphragm of the driver that transitions into continuous surfaces being the most complex*.

but it is not a built in addition , it's part of the actual box,, correct?

That is semantics. Consider some cabinet designs by teams of degreed or veteran experts in the field with access to complex modeling software and cabinet tooling/casting techniques (and the budget to be able to exploit all that, to be sure).

Point is, if you draw the line of “waveguide” at the section molded into the mounting flange you’re missing what’s going on!

 

[Shazb0t]

Do you know the crossover frequency for any of these speakers?

The crossover from the RAAL tweeter to the midrange driver in the Sierra Towers is ~2kHz.

 

[Beave]

And for the bookshelf speakers with the 64-10 RAAL, it's around 3kHz.

The polar plots and CEA-2034 plots show a pretty good directivity match.

The bookshelf woofer is about 6" from frame edge to frame edge.

 

[tw 2022]

Point is, if you draw the line of “waveguide” at the section molded into the mounting flange you’re missing what’s going on

i wasn't and didn't....i was talking about the use of propietary wave guides and the need to use them or not.. you assumed the rest outta thin air.. sorry for the confusion...

 

[Jon AA]

For a very small room, I definitely agree that you want narrow, well-controlled dispersion.

What's your reasoning on this? That's typically the opposite of the way pro audio looks at things. For example, if you look at the Genelec's lineup, as they go from near-field to mid-field to far-field monitors, they generally get more narrow in dispersion as you go up the line in order to keep the ratio of direct to reflected sound at an acceptable level in larger rooms with longer listening distances.

 

[Ricardojoa]

What's your reasoning on this? That's typically the opposite of the way pro audio looks at things. For example, if you look at the Genelec's lineup, as they go from near-field to mid-field to far-field monitors, they generally get more narrow in dispersion as you go up the line in order to keep the ratio of direct to reflected sound at an acceptable level in larger rooms with longer listening distances.

Not exactly in the same context. He is probably referring to wide dispersion vs narrow dispersion, not narrow dispersion vs narrower dispersion. The fact most studios speakers use some sort of wave gui

What's your reasoning on this? That's typically the opposite of the way pro audio looks at things. For example, if you look at the Genelec's lineup, as they go from near-field to mid-field to far-field monitors, they generally get more narrow in dispersion as you go up the line in order to keep the ratio of direct to reflected sound at an acceptable level in larger rooms with longer listening distances.

i bet is to minimize reflection. Pros have their room treated , average joe has bare walls with pictures hanging or maybe not even. Not exactly apples to apples.

 

[jhaider]

i wasn't and didn't....i was talking about the use of propietary wave guides and the need to use them or not.. you assumed the rest outta thin air.. sorry for the confusion...

Define "proprietary wave guides."

My point is the whole baffle (and to an extent the whole cabinet) is the "waveguide."

Furthermore, most speaker cabinets are unique to a particular speaker, especially today when the previously available prefab/prefinished cabinets are off the market. (Parts Express sold a nicely line of veneered and gloss black cabinets for stand-mount speakers with exchangeable machined and painted baffles for a time - the first BMR monitors used them IIRC.) So they are by and large "proprietary" as well.

So the bottom line is, unless one is advocating for loudspeakers composed of essentially flange-less drive units suspended from threads, any blanket statement about "waveguides" is nonsensical. Every other type of speaker design employs them.

 

[Chromatischism]

What's your reasoning on this? That's typically the opposite of the way pro audio looks at things. For example, if you look at the Genelec's lineup, as they go from near-field to mid-field to far-field monitors, they generally get more narrow in dispersion as you go up the line in order to keep the ratio of direct to reflected sound at an acceptable level in larger rooms with longer listening distances.

As the walls get closer, a really wide dispersion speaker causes the early reflected sound to become a larger proportion of the mix.

 

[Chromatischism]

Define "proprietary wave guides."

My point is the whole baffle (and to an extent the whole cabinet) is the "waveguide."

Furthermore, most speaker cabinets are unique to a particular speaker, especially today when the previously available prefab/prefinished cabinets are off the market. (Parts Express sold a nicely line of veneered and gloss black cabinets for stand-mount speakers with exchangeable machined and painted baffles for a time - the first BMR monitors used them IIRC.) So they are by and large "proprietary" as well.

So the bottom line is, unless one is advocating for loudspeakers composed of essentially flange-less drive units suspended from threads, any blanket statement about "waveguides" is nonsensical. Every other type of speaker design employs them.

It doesn't matter. No one uses the term that way. Everyone in the industry understands what a waveguide is and does. No one is using flat baffles and claiming "look at our flat waveguide".

 

[Ricardojoa]

It doesn't matter. No one uses the term that way. Everyone in the industry understands what a waveguide is and does. No one is using flat baffles and claiming "look at our flat waveguide".

Yea, In a wavegude, the frequencies are intended to disperse in a control manner. On a flat baffle, the frenquencies are reflected off the baffle depending on how wide the baffle is and the dispersion pattern of the tweeter.

 

[tw 2022]

Define "proprietary wave guides."

My point is the whole baffle (and to an extent the whole cabinet) is the "waveguide."

Furthermore, most speaker cabinets are unique to a particular speaker, especially today when the previously available prefab/prefinished cabinets are off the market. (Parts Express sold a nicely line of veneered and gloss black cabinets for stand-mount speakers with exchangeable machined and painted baffles for a time - the first BMR monitors used them IIRC.) So they are by and large "proprietary" as well.

So the bottom line is, unless one is advocating for loudspeakers composed of essentially flange-less drive units suspended from threads, any blanket statement about "waveguides" is nonsensical. Every other type of speaker design employs them.

Define "proprietary wave guides."

My point is the whole baffle (and to an extent the whole cabinet) is the "waveguide."

Furthermore, most speaker cabinets are unique to a particular speaker, especially today when the previously available prefab/prefinished cabinets are off the market. (Parts Express sold a nicely line of veneered and gloss black cabinets for stand-mount speakers with exchangeable machined and painted baffles for a time - the first BMR monitors used them IIRC.) So they are by and large "proprietary" as well.

So the bottom line is, unless one is advocating for loudspeakers composed of essentially flange-less drive units suspended from threads, any blanket statement about "waveguides" is nonsensical. Every other type of speaker design employs them.

Once again, you are arguing with the wrong person...@DennisMurphy is the guy you need to address....i understand the concept you are addressing, and once again, i agree with your assessment other than picking apart verbiage in an effort to discredit the thought...have a wonderful discussion , you've worn me out..

 

[Jon AA]

As the walls get closer, a really wide dispersion speaker causes the early reflected sound to become a larger proportion of the mix.

Yes, as well as late reflected sound. With wider dispersion, the percentage of direct sound goes down regardless of room size. If you're sitting 1-2m away from the speakers, it's not an issue as you've got plenty. But as listening distance increases, the percentage of direct sound goes down pretty fast unless dispersion is narrowed.

i bet is to minimize reflection. Pros have their room treated , average joe has bare walls with pictures hanging or maybe not even. Not exactly apples to apples.

Yeah, so the average joe would need a waveguide even more. I'm not making a judgement on preference--I'm just saying for a given preference of "spaciousness" vs "precision," the farther away you sit from the speakers the narrower the dispersion you'll need to hit that preference (whatever it may be).

 

[Chromatischism]

Yes, as well as late reflected sound.

In a small room, there are no late reflections.

 

[Jon AA]

In a small room, there are no late reflections.

Even in a small, well treated room, the sound doesn't stop after the first bounce. Of course a really large room is capable of much later reflections, but that's missing the point.

Even in a quite small 2300 ft^3 room with an RT60 of .22, Genelec says at 2m or more with the 8320A, more than 1/2 the sound reaching your ears is "Reverberant Sound."

The point is no matter what speakers you have or what room you're in, as you get farther away (as people tend to do in larger rooms when set up correctly) the Direct to Reflected ratio goes down.

While I certainly don't expect the threshold of 50% Genelec sets will be everybody's preference, the only point I was trying to make is whatever your preference is, as you get farther from the speakers you'll need more narrow dispersion to meet it.

 

[Chromatischism]

The point is no matter what speakers you have or what room you're in, as you get farther away (as people tend to do in larger rooms when set up correctly) the Direct to Reflected ratio goes down.

While I certainly don't expect the threshold of 50% Genelec sets will be everybody's preference, the only point I was trying to make is whatever your preference is, as you get farther from the speakers you'll need more narrow dispersion to meet it.

We agree on this.

Even in a quite small 2300 ft^3 room with an RT60 of .22, Genelec says at 2m or more with the 8320A, more than 1/2 the sound reaching your ears is "Reverberant Sound."

That's interesting. Food for thought:

“What is often overlooked in the attempted measurement of RT60 in small rooms is that the definition of RT60 has two parts, the first of which is unfortunately commonly overlooked.

1. RT60 is the measurement of the decay time of a well mixed reverberant sound field well beyond Dc, a real critical distance.
2. RT60 is the time in seconds for the reverberant sound field to decay 60 dB after the sound source is silenced.

Since in small rooms, there is no Dc, no well mixed sound field, hence, no reverberation but merely a series of early reflected energy, the measurement of RT60 becomes meaningless in such environments."

Discussion: https://www.avnirvana.com/threads/fixing-room-acoustics-for-a-small-listening-room.9109/post-70888

 

[chang]

The design goals are also different, I think. Dave is going for the widest horizontal dispersion and most bass extension possible from a small box. Revel seems more moderate in those areas, allowing more reasonable sensitivity.

I own the LX and EX v1. In my main listening area, the LP is 15 ft+ from the speakers. I don’t think the LX really excelled here. The low sensitivity was a bit of a problem, and I found the bass sounding unnatural at times…there was also audible port noise on some tracks. I moved them to my home theater and put BMRs in my main listening area, which IMHO are slightly better overall. I do plan on upgrading my EX v1 to the v2, as I’m curious to compare.

Which BMR version do you have? How would you compare them to the EX v1's?

 

[JLGF1]

[Sierra-2] Started rolling off at 6 kHz and was -15 dB down at about 12 kHz

"-15dB down @ 12kHZ"? I don't think so.

 

[jhaider]

"-15dB down @ 12kHZ"? I don't think so.

Remember that Mitchco doesn't do conventional, translatable measurements that everyone else in the world uses. He does some cockamamie single point at a listening position in a random room thing and imagines it has great value. See this thread for some context.