Ascend SE Owner's Thread - Page 6

I just received my 170 SEs for LR and my 340c SE, and am very pleased! I am using HTM-200s for surrounds and an SVS PB10-ISD sub. I don't have a lot to compare it to, but I can't get over how good everything sounds. Everything is so clear, and the sound envelopes me, to where I can't tell which speaker or sub the sound is coming from. I'm hearing details I've never heard before.

What date did you place your order with Ascend?

End of December I believe. I got in on the first non-preorder batch

I don't think you want to have the 170's flat against the wall; I believe the minimum recommended distance is ~4" from the back to the wall. Therefore you would need some sort of bracket, and not just 'hang them on a nail'.

The 200's, of the other hand, can be mounted flush against the wall (since they have a sealed cabinet); another reason they are great for surrounds.

Does anyone have any real time experience comparing an SE setup to a Paradigm Studio(40s/20s/470) setup. After reading all the great things people have to say about the Ascends I am thinking hard about selling my Studios. INET only equipment doesn't scare me, I own SVS and Outlaw and love them both,besides more money goes into the equipment instead of the salesmans pocket. Anybody want to buy some Paradigm Studios??LOL
Thanx in advance

Hah! Maybe Dave F. at Ascend should consider a trade-in program of other Vendor speakers. Might make all you sitting on the fence to take the leap....

In my opinion the original 170 compared favorably with the Studio 20 except bottom end extension. The original 340 to at least the Studio 60 if not the 100s except bottom end extension again.

koach, what receiver are you using? got pictures of your set up? i got the same speaker set up as you do but i think i am still missing the "clear, sound enveloping where i can't tell where the speakers are" thing. maybe i still haven't tweaked it right. btw, newbie here so pretty much an amateur on how things should be set up or how to do it right. any help will be gladly appreciated.

I just spent a week with Paradigm Studio 40s and Ascend 340SEs. The Ascends are staying and the Studios went back last night. You can see some of mine and a friends comments in another thread. I hope to post a new long thread tonight with all my impressions from my in-home demo.

TexAmp, it is interesting that you thought the Studio20s had better bottom extension than the 170. I found that the 340SE outperformed the Studio40s in bottom extension. Apples and Oranges, I know. The dealer didn't any have Studio20s to try or I would have.

I have an Onkyo 603. I don't have an SPL, so I just used Onkyo's auto calibration mic to set the levels, so it did everything for me.

I have pictures from when I was runnign the HTMs up front with the sub, but not the whole setup. If that helps, check out the basement pictures in my gallery

Also have to remember that Tex was referring to the "classic" 170's. The 170SE's extension is more than 10hz deeper than the classics.

My 7.1 setup (3 - 340's and 4 - 170's) was supposed to ship on Monday. Unfortunately, I'm in Sweden right now and can't access the one email account I gave to Dave at Ascend. Also ordered the VTF3-HO with turbo and can't wait till I have this whole setup up and running. I've been listening to some old Kenwood surround speakers as my mains (wife made me do it) and I just about puke when I hear how horrible it sounds......

I ordered mY 340'S yesterday...looks like March shipment worst case. I sold my Onix Rocket 750's so I am looking forward to the Ascends.

10Hz deeper -- can this really be heard, appreciated, even in A/B comparison? And in many real-world situations, w/ crossover at 80 (or in my case, restricted by Panny XR-55, at 100)?

The XR-55 goes down to 80hz btw.

Fullrange...it can definitely be heard in an A/B setup with the right material.

Crossovered at 80hz...no. But the SE's cleaner/smoother mids can be detectable by some, and the nicer highs even more easily detectable in an A/B setup.

Thanks, I got my signals crossed. I was looking at some bookmarks to try and remember the number: I have the SA-XR70 (HDMI).

Thanks for that. I'm in a female-space-restriction situation, the HTM-200 being the obvious solution. But I can't help anticipating listening to my favorite songs and always having the nag-thought of "spectacular...170s would be even more so." She doesn't get it, but she understands. We all gotta pick and choose our battles, and I guess it wouldn't serve to make this one. W/ a crossover of 100.

If you are ever in the LA area...drop me a line. Maybe we can educate her.

Just received my tracking number for the 170SE's and 340C SE They should be here on Monday the 6th!!!

BTW, is anyone using MCACC or another receiver EQ with their Ascends? If so, do you like it, or prefer no EQ with them?

I have heard MCACC with Ascends on two occasions....both times I didn't like it, but that doesn't mean that you won't like it as well. Doesn't hurt to try since it is a simple process.

I think on different models of Pioneers, MCACC does slightly different things. I am not sure what models I heard. Maybe someone else can chime in on the differences.

I have the Pioneer 1014 receiver and the MCACC does wonders for my JBL Northridge speakers. I have heard other say they prefer not to EQ their Ascends at all. I guess I will see soon!

What is the source of your info? I have an email from Ascend that says 170SE extension was improved by about 5HZ over the Classic - you're stating more than 10HZ.

Any idea what could explain this apparent discrepancy? Is this info stated on the Ascend forums anywhere?

http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages...m170specs.html

Frequency Response (Anechoic) 58Hz - 22kHz +/- 3dB

It used to be 69hz....I think.

When I had JBL E80's, the auto eq on my 1014 made the JBL's sound MUCH better (got rid of some of the midrange muddiness).
I DO NOT use auto eq with my 340 LCR.
I do not like the sound with it on., no matter how many times I run MCACC on it.

It's impossible to tell because Ascend says they used a different method of measuring bass on the SEs. If you notice, the classic and SE bass extension points look very close, around 3-5hz difference at the 40 and 30hz points.

I have a Yamaha HTR-5790 that powers my surrounds and does processing duty. Even after trying the YPAO EQ in several different configurations such as "Flat" and "Front", I just can't like it. The "Flat" setting is supposed to do just that, make the response as flat as possible. To me, it sounds like an over-the-top version of THX post processing where the highs are significantly rolled off. The "Front" setting is supposed to make all speakers sound like the front mains. Again, to me, they sounded better left alone. Maybe I like a bright sound, but to me it's not bright........it's detailed, and that detail was lost when using YPAO. This is just another good example of what sounds great to me may sound like crapola to you, so take this for what it's worth and YMMV, etc., etc.

My Pio1015TX does help a little when EQing the center channel and the rears that have poor placement. But I don't like what it does to the mains. Note, at this point my center and rears arn't Ascends though, but I don't think that will change my opinion.

That's correct. You can still see the specs for the CBM-170 and CMT-340m Classics at plasmadocs-dot-com (I can't post something in URL format on this site...yet)

I have the Panny XR55, Mirage S12, and a pair of 340SEs. Everyone says set the Mains to small and x-over to sub at 80.

I'm wondering since the 340SE's are so good full range, couldn't you set the L/R to large (which would disable the x-over on the receiver,) turn on the built-in filter on the S12 and set the variable x-over to say 50hz since the 340's are good down to 48hz @ -3dB? Wouldn't this sound better since the 340's have tighter, faster bass than the 12" driver of the S12?