Needing Two Towers for Music use...What Would You do With a $2000 budget? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 49 Old 11-30-2012, 09:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chashint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Wait, I thought commsys was the end all authority on everything ??

Regards,
Charlie

chashint is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 49 Old 11-30-2012, 09:53 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Nuance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 11,583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

Wait, I thought commsys was the end all authority on everything ??


My journey to find the "perfect" speaker
Dr. Olive's Blog

 

 

No matter what measurements tell us, a loudspeaker isn’t good until it
sounds good. - Dr. Floyd Toole
Nuance is offline  
post #33 of 49 Old 11-30-2012, 10:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

Wait, I thought commsys was the end all authority on everything ??

For some reasons he thinks everyone in the universe has the exact same preferences as he does. eek.gif

Will he ever figure it out?

Tune in next time............
AcuDefTechGuy is offline  
post #34 of 49 Old 11-30-2012, 10:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
cschang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manhattan Beach, CA
Posts: 14,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

For some reasons he thinks everyone in the universe has the exact same preferences as he does. eek.gif
Will he ever figure it out?
Tune in next time............
Not only that, he claims to have heard speakers...only to be proven he hasn't. rolleyes.gif

It really is a disservice to the forum community.

-curtis

Owner of Wave Crest Audio
Volunteer Mod at the Ascend Acoustics Forum
Like all things on the Internet, do your research, as forums have a good amount of misinformation.
Help beat breast cancer!

cschang is offline  
post #35 of 49 Old 11-30-2012, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by cschang View Post

Not only that, he claims to have heard speakers...only to be proven he hasn't. rolleyes.gif
It really is a disservice to the forum community.

Sounds like that ridikas guy on AH forum claiming he auditioned Focal Grande Utopia, JBL Everrest, Revel Salon, KEF Blade, TAD R1, B&W 800D2, and many more speakers all on the same day. Can't even lie right. biggrin.gif He must think we were all born yesterday. What a joke. biggrin.gif

Maybe he's really just a 13 yr old kid posting. eek.gif

I guess he doesn't seem to get the message we're all sending him. biggrin.gif
AcuDefTechGuy is offline  
post #36 of 49 Old 12-02-2012, 05:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
4DHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: sierra ecuadoriana
Posts: 5,828
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

You might want to read the title of the thread again.
Except that they are not full range. That's a non-full range speaker sitting on top of a subwoofer.
Well. You went 62% over his budget.
I also disagree with your conclusion. I personally doubt you are even familiar with the speaker you are nay-saying; but to each their own.
The PT800 acutally bottoms out quite a bit earlier at 80Hz (SongtTower is 42), is -6db at that point (SongTower is -3).
Normally I would say this wasn't important, but 80Hz is shockingly high. It means you'll likely need to move the crossover point up to 100Hz. (I actually had to go pull down the manual because I found 80hz hard to believe)
You *will* need a subwoofer with these (yes, I am aware that you were recommending one), and integration will be fun.
It's an on-wall system; so not mounting it on the wall will result in baffle-diffraction problems, which BTW will bring you to -12db @80Hz (OTOH: a SongTower is not wall mountable, so that's an ergonomics preference)
The cabinet facade is... well, let's just say not up to the same standards.
But for only 62% more money we can buy a refurbished one.
How about this: Don't knock my recommendation to laud your own and, in return, I won't tear your recommendation apart.
I will admit that I forgot what his budget was...but
I did not advise just buying the PT800s but the PT800/PS1400 stacks. The stacks are full range. So your point they are not full range is completely invalid.
The PT800 are -6db @ 80. But when XO to a sub you still end up with a flat FR @ the XO point.
When stacked and the internal XO in the PS1400 is used, the XO is set to 130. Which is what Greg Timbers decided was the optimal XO point between the 8" mid-bass and sub drivers.

And I DO own 5 of the PT800s. So I do know what they can do. I have had them wall-mounted, mounted to subs, and sitting on bases. Greg Timbers knew what he was doing when he designed them.
These speakers are akin to the Revel Gem2, which I have also auditioned.

So you want to compare FR of the Songtowers to the PS stacks; ST to 42 htz, PS to 28 htz.

As for Nuance, I know people who have heard both the ST & PS and all have said the PS were better, in their opinions.
And these would be people who's opinions I value. And that said, I'm sure the ST are quite good.
4DHD is offline  
post #37 of 49 Old 12-02-2012, 08:39 AM
Advanced Member
 
RicardoJoa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Come on, are you ****ing serious??
We all know any speaker pair wilh rythmik will get F3 of 14HZ, get some clue before you compare a sytem with sub and no subs. Thos Pt stuff look so ugly, i wouldnt want them in my living room. My dads 80's altec look way better...biggrin.gif
RicardoJoa is online now  
post #38 of 49 Old 12-02-2012, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 76
I know that quoted me, but I really lost interest back on page one. Some new conversation might bring me back, but not a continuation of that one. I think everything worth saying on both sides was said long ago.
JerryLove is offline  
post #39 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 04:07 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
realbigplaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Breathing Life back into this thread. Thanks again for all your suggestions. The final verdict is Sierra Towers with a SVS SB12-SB12. They sound great and now I prob. need to upgrade my Denon 1912.
realbigplaya is offline  
post #40 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 07:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
Newbie01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Wales, PA
Posts: 834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
For muisic... Salk SongTowers or Phil 1's...

Don't think you can honestly get better than this. Sierra Towers are nice...but I think ST or Phil 1's are different lvl entirely. If you have heard the Sierra though...go with what your ear tells you is good! Absolutely nothing wrong with your 1912 either.

Unless you get your speakers in and you require a better room correction...but for music...you should be fine!
Newbie01 is offline  
post #41 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 08:13 PM
Senior Member
 
avsnoob10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Garden State
Posts: 216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

For muisic... Salk SongTowers or Phil 1's...

Don't think you can honestly get better than this. Sierra Towers are nice...but I think ST or Phil 1's are different lvl entirely. If you have heard the Sierra though...go with what your ear tells you is good! Absolutely nothing wrong with your 1912 either.

Unless you get your speakers in and you require a better room correction...but for music...you should be fine!

Newbie: I own Sierra Towers so in their defense what are some qualities (or lack of) in Sierra Towers puts Salk SongTowers and Phil 1s in "different lvl entirely" ?? I hope this is based on your auditioning of all 3 pairs in question...
avsnoob10 is online now  
post #42 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 08:22 PM
Senior Member
 
jrnewquist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
The Aperion Verus Grand Towers are right at this price point. I love how mine sound, and how they look. Many of these other suggestions are also excellent, as well. Lots of choice in this price range.

jrnewquist is offline  
post #43 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 08:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
Newbie01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Wales, PA
Posts: 834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsnoob10 View Post

Newbie: I own Sierra Towers so in their defense what are some qualities (or lack of) in Sierra Towers puts Salk SongTowers and Phil 1s in "different lvl entirely" ?? I hope this is based on your auditioning of all 3 pairs in question...

As in everything ...sound is subjective not objective.

I based my opinion on graphs of the two. Componets and I have heard ST / SST and the Forte ...which is a model down but of the same line as the Grand. Of course...there is also "type of music" to consider with and without a sub.

But for clarity and transparency...it was night and day. However, like I said..that may not be his or your cup of tea...and it is a small stretch but a stretch comparing the Forte to the Grand but they are cousins if not brother and sister.

That isn't to say that I am sure the Grands...are well Grand...Aperion makes a quality product.
Newbie01 is offline  
post #44 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 09:01 PM
Senior Member
 
avsnoob10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Garden State
Posts: 216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

For muisic... Salk SongTowers or Phil 1's...

Don't think you can honestly get better than this. Sierra Towers are nice...but I think ST or Phil 1's are different lvl entirely. If you have heard the Sierra though...go with what your ear tells you is good! Absolutely nothing wrong with your 1912 either.

Unless you get your speakers in and you require a better room correction...but for music...you should be fine!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

As in everything ...sound is subjective not objective.

I based my opinion on graphs of the two. Componets and I have heard ST / SST and the Forte ...which is a model down but of the same line as the Grand. Of course...there is also "type of music" to consider with and without a sub.

But for clarity and transparency...it was night and day. However, like I said..that may not be his or your cup of tea...and it is a small stretch but a stretch comparing the Forte to the Grand but they are cousins if not brother and sister.

That isn't to say that I am sure the Grands...are well Grand...Aperion makes a quality product.


Wow... I thought you were discussing Ascend Sierra Towers, Salk SongTowers and Philharmonic 1, more specifically the (lack of) qualities of Ascend Sierra Towers which puts Salk SongTowers and Philharmonic 1s into "different lvl entirely" based on your research and auditioning of all 3 speakers in question, no?? so "subjectively", based on your research and audition, what is it that you did not like about Ascend Sierra Towers or what are some qualities that you liked more on Salk SongTowers and Phil 1s compared to Ascend Sierra Towers? By the way, you talk about "subjectivity" but then talk about "graph" and "components", I hope you know the difference or definition of "subjective" and "objective".
avsnoob10 is online now  
post #45 of 49 Old 02-15-2013, 10:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

As in everything ...sound is subjective not objective.

I don't agree. Sound is objective; particularly reproduction. What is subjective are the qualitative decisions of sub-optimal traits. For example: whether it is better to have an accurate on-axis response at the expense of a different off-axis response; or whether a lesser, but more consistent across the horizontal plane non-flat is "less offensive"; or whether the (incorrect for the original source) radiation is better as a omnipole or a point-source monopole. Neither is correct, and I can quantify that pretty well; but one will be subjectively *preferred* by a given listener at a given moment.
Quote:
I based my opinion on graphs of the two. Componets and I have heard ST / SST and the Forte ...which is a model down but of the same line as the Grand. Of course...there is also "type of music" to consider with and without a sub.
And that might be a problem for the SongTower (though the Ascend Sierra Towers look pretty similar on paper, so it may be a universal problem). I love my SCST's for anything other than the lowest-pushing songs (thing "Clubbed to Death", "Right Round", "Shake that", "The Tocatta Fuge", etc), and even then I still like them despite being aware what is missing; but SCST's go lower than the ST's or (I believe) Phil 1's

I am a *tremendous* fan of the Salk Line (having spent many hours with the SCST's and SS8's); so much so that I own the SCST's and have a set of Phil 2's (same designer: Dennis Murphey) ordered. But I've not heard the other speaker in question and would worry about LF output if a sub is not also budgeted for and if that's where his tastes lie.

If you are considering the speaker: I recommend reaching out to Jim Salk and seeing if there's a pair in your area you can listen to. There often is.
JerryLove is offline  
post #46 of 49 Old 02-16-2013, 05:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
Newbie01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Wales, PA
Posts: 834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

I don't agree. Sound is objective; particularly reproduction. What is subjective are the qualitative decisions of sub-optimal traits. For example: whether it is better to have an accurate on-axis response at the expense of a different off-axis response; or whether a lesser, but more consistent across the horizontal plane non-flat is "less offensive"; or whether the (incorrect for the original source) radiation is better as a omnipole or a point-source monopole. Neither is correct, and I can quantify that pretty well; but one will be subjectively *preferred* by a given listener at a given moment.
And that might be a problem for the SongTower (though the Ascend Sierra Towers look pretty similar on paper, so it may be a universal problem). I love my SCST's for anything other than the lowest-pushing songs (thing "Clubbed to Death", "Right Round", "Shake that", "The Tocatta Fuge", etc), and even then I still like them despite being aware what is missing; but SCST's go lower than the ST's or (I believe) Phil 1's

I am a *tremendous* fan of the Salk Line (having spent many hours with the SCST's and SS8's); so much so that I own the SCST's and have a set of Phil 2's (same designer: Dennis Murphey) ordered. But I've not heard the other speaker in question and would worry about LF output if a sub is not also budgeted for and if that's where his tastes lie.

If you are considering the speaker: I recommend reaching out to Jim Salk and seeing if there's a pair in your area you can listen to. There often is.

+ 1 with what JerryLove said. Although Phil's are right up there too!

And yes...I switched the subjective and objective around. Thats what happens after a long day at work when and you have your kids yelling in the background.

Everything is subjective... Even when you have supposedly objective criteria...like a flat graph...does not mean that everyone will like it. If it did, everyone just make speakers with the flattest sound graphs and we would not have anything left to talk about.

Like I always say... You have a 400 dollar pair of speakers and a 40,000 pair. You bring in a 100 people and a percentage of them will choose the 400 pair... And for them they would be right. For recommendations we can only go by what we liked and what appears to be a majority consensous on the speakers we recommend (if we have not heard them.)

Example: I have heard the Sonus Faber Verene and I really liked them...allot. They are fairly expensive ...and it seems that not allot of people agree with me. So I don't recommend them as much as I might other wise.

Subjective information is one person's opinion. In a newspaper, the editorial section is the place for subjectivity. It can be based on fact, but it is one person's interpretation of that fact. In this way, subjective information is also analytical.
Newbie01 is offline  
post #47 of 49 Old 02-16-2013, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
beaveav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

For muisic... Salk SongTowers or Phil 1's...

Don't think you can honestly get better than this. Sierra Towers are nice...but I think ST or Phil 1's are different lvl entirely. If you have heard the Sierra though...go with what your ear tells you is good! Absolutely nothing wrong with your 1912 either.

Unless you get your speakers in and you require a better room correction...but for music...you should be fine!

The 1912 lacks Audyssey MultEQ XT (it just has MultEQ, not XT), so an AVR that has it might be a better choice.

For every new thing I learn, I forget two things I used to know.
beaveav is offline  
post #48 of 49 Old 02-16-2013, 01:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
beaveav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

As in everything ...sound is subjective not objective.

I based my opinion on graphs of the two. Componets and I have heard ST / SST and the Forte ...which is a model down but of the same line as the Grand. Of course...there is also "type of music" to consider with and without a sub.

But for clarity and transparency...it was night and day. However, like I said..that may not be his or your cup of tea...and it is a small stretch but a stretch comparing the Forte to the Grand but they are cousins if not brother and sister.

That isn't to say that I am sure the Grands...are well Grand...Aperion makes a quality product.

I'm totally lost when reading this. What are the "Forte" and "Grand" and what do they have to do with a comparison between Salk and Ascend? Oh, unless you're confusing Ascend with Aperion....then it makes sense. Is that what's going on here?
avsnoob10 and Remonster like this.

For every new thing I learn, I forget two things I used to know.
beaveav is offline  
post #49 of 49 Old 02-16-2013, 07:19 PM
Senior Member
 
avsnoob10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Garden State
Posts: 216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaveav View Post

I'm totally lost when reading this. What are the "Forte" and "Grand" and what do they have to do with a comparison between Salk and Ascend? Oh, unless you're confusing Ascend with Aperion....then it makes sense. Is that what's going on here?

Yeah I can understand "after a long day at work when and you have your kids yelling in the background" once, but come on, newbie01 has not heard Ascend, he is telling me that sound is subjective then tells me he made the observation based on graph so not sure if he ever heard anything. Then when JerryLove explained how Sound reproduction is objective, Newbie01 agrees with him but still says...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post


Everything is subjective... Even when you have supposedly objective criteria...like a flat graph...does not mean that everyone will like it. If it did, everyone just make speakers with the flattest sound graphs and we would not have anything left to talk about.

Like I always say... You have a 400 dollar pair of speakers and a 40,000 pair. You bring in a 100 people and a percentage of them will choose the 400 pair... And for them they would be right. For recommendations we can only go by what we liked and what appears to be a majority consensous on the speakers we recommend (if we have not heard them.)

Example: I have heard the Sonus Faber Verene and I really liked them...allot. They are fairly expensive ...and it seems that not allot of people agree with me. So I don't recommend them as much as I might other wise.

Subjective information is one person's opinion. In a newspaper, the editorial section is the place for subjectivity. It can be based on fact, but it is one person's interpretation of that fact. In this way, subjective information is also analytical.

all I can say is wow.... !!!
avsnoob10 is online now  
Reply Speakers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off