Neutral bookshelf speakers @ $2000?

[Ilkless]

This is very interesting! Thanks for posting!

Ok, spoiler alert:
This goes back to the whole discussion on directivity and dispersion etc. It's probably the case that the KEF has more controlled dispersion. But the Ascend one probably has wider dispersion. In almost all listening tests I know of, wide dispersion is something people tend to like. I would think that goes a long way of explaining why the Ascend speaker won so resolutely. Does it matter that the Ascend has a Raal tweeter, which is assumed to be very good? Or that the Kef tweeter is mounted coaxially in what becomes a waveguide, which may affect the sound in different ways? Difficult to say.

Yes, what is striking about the Ascend's spins in particular is how the narrow ribbon and the very slight rise in the top-octave on-axis combine to yield a remarkably extended and flat early reflection and power response curve (assuming they follow ANSI/CTA-2034A). There is only a slight dip-peak at crossover, which is great considering it is a 6" 2-way with a ribbon tweeter.

 

[napilopez]

This is very interesting! Thanks for posting!

Ok, spoiler alert:
This goes back to the whole discussion on directivity and dispersion etc. It's probably the case that the KEF has more controlled dispersion. But the Ascend one probably has wider dispersion. In almost all listening tests I know of, wide dispersion is something people tend to like. I would think that goes a long way of explaining why the Ascend speaker won so resolutely. Does it matter that the Ascend has a Raal tweeter, which is assumed to be very good? Or that the Kef tweeter is mounted coaxially in what becomes a waveguide, which may affect the sound in different ways? Difficult to say.

SPOILERS (Not sure how long we'll be able to avoid them hah).

While it's important to keep in mind that this is just one blind test, I do think you're probably right. I've not heard, let alone measured the Ascends, so I can only make conjectures based on available measurements and what I've read. But having tested the KEFs and looking at the Sierra's spins, the latter's wide directivity really seems like it could be the ticket. Not that I think of the KEFs as a super-directional design, but they are some of the more directional speakers I've measured.

It's always fun to see how these design elements play out in the measurements. For example here's the R3:

It's a very "smoothly changing" type of dispersion, but gets a fair bit more directional at the top of the speaker's range. By the time we reach 75 degrees off-axis, it's down about 15dB at 10 Khz.

Now here's the Focal Chora, which has a far smaller and shallower waveguide and was designed for wide dispersion according to Focal (it has the sound indicative of it):

The response at 75 degrees off axis is only about 5-7 dB, depending on how you want to measure it. Notably, it stays surprisingly flat in its tilt all the way up to 10Khz. In practice, moving out of the horizontal sweet spot has a minimal effect on timbre, and less of an effect on spatial cues than I'm used to (something I observed before measuring).

For another example somewhere between the above two, here's the JBL L100 Classic:

It's a wide baffle design, so you can see that it's a bit more directional at the bottom of the frequency range than the above two speakers. However, like the Chora, it maintains a very similar slope on-axis as it does off axis, and the tweeter is only down about 10 dB by 10Khz. Like the Chora, it also presents a very expansive soundstage.

Lastly, just for fun, here's the Neumann KH80, with the prettiest on-axis and horizontal off-axis graphs I ever did see.

This one is an interesting case, as it's meant to be listened to dead on-axis in the nearfield for studio use, where you won't hear reflections as much. Nonetheless, its directivity seems just a smidge wider than the KEF, allowing for some flexibility with your horizontal sweet spot.

It's interesting to see how each of these manufacturers chooses to balance their sound. Again, I think directivity is really the realm where individual preferences and suitability for different rooms and applications come into play.

 

[Biblob]

As I recall to correctly level match a speaker, one needs to measure the voltage output, and not do a weighted SPL match. I don't recall exactly how and why, but maybe @Blumlein 88 can chime in on this one.

 

[TimVG]

It's interesting to see how each of these manufacturers chooses to balance their sound. Again, I think directivity is really the realm where individual preferences and suitability for different rooms and applications come into play.

It does seem more often than not that when comparing two well behaved loudspeakers, that the one with wider dispersion is preferred, which in turn correlates to F. Toole’s research.

Your measurements of the Neumann correlate well with my own btw - it is truly a fine loudspeaker.

 

[Ilkless]

SPOILERS (Not sure how long we'll be able to avoid them hah).

While it's important to keep in mind that this is just one blind test, I do think you're probably right. I've not heard, let alone measured the Ascends, so I can only make conjectures based on available measurements and what I've read. But having tested the KEFs and looking at the Sierra's spins, the latter's wide directivity really seems like it could be the ticket. Not that I think of the KEFs as a super-directional design, but they are some of the more directional speakers I've measured.

It's always fun to see how these design elements play out in the measurements. For example here's the R3:

View attachment 37627
It's a very "smoothly changing" type of dispersion, but gets a fair bit more directional at the top of the speaker's range. By the time we reach 75 degrees off-axis, it's down about 15dB at 10 Khz.

Now here's the Focal Chora, which has a far smaller and shallower waveguide and was designed for wide dispersion according to Focal (it has the sound indicative of it):

View attachment 37628

The response at 75 degrees off axis is only about 5-7 dB, depending on how you want to measure it.

For another example somewhere between the above two, here's the JBL L100 Classic:
View attachment 37629

It's a wide baffle design, so you can see that it's a bit more directional at the bottom of the frequency range than the above two speakers. However, like the Chora, it maintains a very similar slope on-axis as it does off axis, and the tweeter is only down about 10 dB by 10Khz. Like the Chora, it also presents a very expansive soundstage.

Lastly, just for fun, here's the Neumann KH80, with the prettiest on-axis and horizontal off-axis graphs I ever did see.
View attachment 37630

This one is an interesting case, as it's meant to be listened to dead on-axis in the nearfield for studio use, where you won't hear reflections as much. Nonetheless, its directivity seems just a smidge wider than the KEF, allowing for some flexibility with your horizontal sweet spot.

It's interesting to see how each of these manufacturers chooses to balance their sound. Again, I think directivity is really the realm where individual preferences and suitability for different rooms and applications come into play.

It's striking that a lot of the stuff below 2kHz for the Focal appears to be resonances that can be EQ'd out since they are almost identical out to 75°. This would yield a even flatter and smoother grey curve. Speakers like these and the Aria actually tick a lot of boxes - both competently-engineered, part of the classic audiophile canon, made in France, etc etc

 

[maty]

But Focal Chora 806 has a problem, like a lot of speakers with vertical frequency response: a great dip at 3 kHz. Usually a lower crossing point is less problematic, about 2 kHz or something less, 1.8 kHz.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-chora-806-on-and-off-axis-measurements.9613/

 

[napilopez]

It's striking that a lot of the stuff below 2kHz for the Focal appears to be resonances that can be EQ'd out since they are almost identical out to 75°. This would yield a even flatter and smoother grey curve. Speakers like these and the Aria actually tick a lot of boxes - both competently-engineered, part of the classic audiophile canon, made in France, etc etc

For sure - it'd be pretty easy to correct with miniDSP etc. These are probably my favorite Focals yet, despite being their new entry-level model. They also have that great sense of dynamics I've always gotten from focal products, which isn't evident in these measurements.

But Focal Chora 806 has a problem, like a lot of speakers with vertical frequency response: a great dip at 3 kHz. Usually a lower crossing point is less problematic, about 2 kHz or something less, 1.8 kHz.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-chora-806-on-and-off-axis-measurements.9613/

Indeed, the Chora is pretty finicky about the vertical axis - also something I've noted with other focal speakers. (Note that the FR overall is a bit different from the horizontal one because I measured the speaker on its side.)

That said, it does still seem to balance out once you look at the early reflections curve. This is an approximation of the harman style - it's averaged from 15 degree intervals and missing the 90 degrees and 180 degrees measurements. But the vertical information is there. A bit of dip around 2k overall, but I think the wide dispersion of it wins out. Also I prefer the high cross-over - as I've mentioned before, I like just a tad more energy around 2Khz because of the crosstalk dip.

 

[Blumlein 88]

As I recall to correctly level match a speaker, one needs to measure the voltage output, and not do a weighted SPL match. I don't recall exactly how and why, but maybe @Blumlein 88 can chime in on this one.

Depends upon what you are matching. If you are using the same speakers, but changing other gear, you match by measuring voltage at the speaker terminals. Usually a 1 khz tone is a good choice.

If you are swapping speakers it is a little more complicated. Toole recommends matching pink noise which has been bandlimited for the 500 hz to 2 khz range. I've taken pink noise and rolled it off at 12 db/octave below 500 hz and above 2 khz for those purposes. Seems to generally be about right.

 

[cookiefactory]

This thread has been very informative as I also find myself in the market for new pair of speakers that will likely end up the L and R channels of a future 5.1 system. I’ve made inquiries to all the manufacturers on my shortlist, and have heard back from all but Ascend. It’s early (a few days) but also questionable at the same time.

 

[sfdoddsy]

I'd love an owner of the Ascends to do some measurements.

 

[jaykay77]

I've got dynaudio focus 160s...they're just a step under the special 40s.
They're pretty badass, put out huge sound and bass, never fatiguing
Check out what Thomas & Stereo (youtube) says about them.
If you can get a pair for less than 1500 you've got something that's tough to beat for under $3k

 

[dkinric]

What measurements do you want to see? As mentioned earlier in this thread, Ascend posts detailed measurements of their items on their website. When I received my Sierra 2s, I received a printout of the frequency plot of my exact pair, showing they were within +/- 1db of each other, signed by the technician.

 

[veeceem]

Yesterday, I auditioned a pair of KEF R3 as suggested by ppl in this thread. Agaist a pair of B&W 802 D3
Both drived by amps: Gryphon Diablo 300 and Accuphase e650
Sources were CD played by a Luxman CD player and Gryphon CD player.

Mid+Treb: KEF R3 wins, I'm sure about this, very real and good details
Bass: can't conclude because it was a 35m2+ room, and its one small bass driver vs a double bass driver speakers But bass produced by KEF R3 is pretty impressive in a medium room.

 

[cookiefactory]

This exact question on my mind, I’ve ordered the Ascend Sierra 2EX and the Buchardt S400 for a head to head comparo. Should have both in-house next week or so.

 

[dkinric]

Cool. I would be interested in your subjective impressions in a shootout review.
In the spirit of ASR, it is recognized that it is only one person's opinion in a particular room with a particular set of equipment, but I am interested in it nonetheless.

 

[cookiefactory]

Cool. I would be interested in your subjective impressions in a shootout review.
In the spirit of ASR, it is recognized that it is only one person's opinion in a particular room with a particular set of equipment, but I am interested in it nontheless.

I will do my best. Actually I’m rather surprised at the lack of write-ups on this specific comparison. Granted both are relatively newish models but they’ve been on the shortlist of highly recommended bookshelves for some time now. Am I wrong in thinking someone would’ve compared the two head to head already? That or my Google-fu is not as strong as I thought.

 

[echopraxia]

I will do my best. Actually I’m rather surprised at the lack of write-ups on this specific comparison. Granted both are relatively newish models but they’ve been on the shortlist of highly recommended bookshelves for some time now. Am I wrong in thinking someone would’ve compared the two head to head already? That or my Google-fu is not as strong as I thought.

If you do a blind test of these, that would be amazing! Along with my comparison of Sierra 2EX vs KEF R3, this may allow us to loosely rank all three.

 

[echopraxia]

Cool. I would be interested in your subjective impressions in a shootout review.
In the spirit of ASR, it is recognized that it is only one person's opinion in a particular room with a particular set of equipment, but I am interested in it nonetheless.

True, but keep in mind also that the science (at least the writings I’m aware of from Dr. Toole) show that while room differences are important to the final sound, they generally do not make a difference in which of two speakers will be preferred — so long as each AB test compares both speakers in the same room each time.

In other words, if Speaker A sounds better than Speaker B when both are in Room 1, then we can conclude with extremely high likelihood that Speaker A will still sound better than Speaker B when both are placed in Room 2 (no matter it’s acoustics, within reason). I can confirm that this was true for the Ascend Sierra 2EX vs KEF R3 test I did, at least.

Also, Dr. Toole’s research shows that the majority of humans have the same preference in speakers! This is also very significant: Without these two findings, comparing speakers would be an intractably complex problem — all evaluations would be specific to both your room and individual ears, which is practically the definition of “subjective”. There would be no way to objectively compare speakers, in such a case.

Fortunately, this is not the case, and the science shows that there is such a thing as an objectively preferred speaker! Moreover, we don’t need to test across all possible rooms or humans to find it.

Of course, the risk of a single blind test like mine is on the unlikely chance that the participant is an outlier, and has a different speaker preference than the average. This was actually a risk for me because I have increased sensitivity to treble imperfections, which is why in my blind test the subject was someone else who, in addition to having no possible bias (on top of the fact that it was a blind test), has very “normal” hearing, and fairly normal music and sound preferences.

But I realize that scientifically this isn’t super rigorous; you have to go on faith that the tester was a representative sample of normal human hearing.

I am hoping/planning to do another blind test soon, possibly with tower speakers (because I think I like them more than bookshelf speakers in general due to form factor). If I do, this time I’ll try to get at least 3 test subjects involved to rule out this final possible concern, to make the results of such a test fairly generalizable across all human ears (at least if we follow current research in this area).

 

[bunkbail]

This exact question on my mind, I’ve ordered the Ascend Sierra 2EX and the Buchardt S400 for a head to head comparo. Should have both in-house next week or so.

Wow nice. Looking forward to the review.

 

[TimVG]

so long as each AB test compares both speakers in the same room each time.

And in the same place!