Dozer

This weekend I got a chance to listen to the new SE versions of the Ascend Acoustics 340s and 170s as well as the VTF-3 MkII. I had previously heard the original 170s a few years ago and was pretty impressed with them and I owned a VTF-2, so I was very curious to hear the new SE versions and the VTF-3. Three of us spent about 4 hrs listening to these guys, almost exclusively with music.

Build quality is very good as expected, and they are quite attractive, especially the 340s on their matching stands. The VTF-3 was actually smaller than I expected. In profile (depth and height), it is about the size of the PB-12, but it seems much narrower in width. The Ascends are very attractive, I can’t see how people would criticize these speakers as looking plain.

I’ll start with the VTF-3, since it is easy not much to say because it is a solid sub. It did well with everything we threw at it. It captured all but the very lowest of rumble on the Master and Commander cannon scene, though that may only have been because it was configured for max output rather than extension. Brian mentioned he could hear some port noise in max extension, so he configured it this way. It added just the right amount of support during music (80Hz x-over), keeping up with the Ascends in control and capability and blending very well. It doesn’t call attention to itself, it just does what it needs to – that has a lot to do with Brian calibrating it pretty much right on the nose so it integrated well with the system. No surprises here, this sub is excellent and should do well even in larger rooms.

Next the 340s: They sounded a little different from the classic 170s I remember, but not in a bad way. They seem a bit more forward than the 170s, a little more aggressive than them in the midrange (which I guess is to be expected). When I previously heard the 170s, it was on some very nice gear (I don’t remember models, but it was most or all Musical Fidelity, same guy I bought my VTF-2 from) and I thought they had a bit smoother/softer midrange; that was a few years ago too though. These guys extract a ton of detail – the tweeter is very nice – very crisp without any glare or ringing even on one particular passage that I use to evaluate highs (Patricia Barber Café Blue SACD - Nardis). It is a complex burst of high hat and percussion that can tax a speaker. They also did well with Diana Krall Live in Paris dts DVD – piano sounded natural, stand up bass was tight and acoustic guitar was plucky. The 340s render female vocals well, and seemed to do really go well with acoustic guitar. Beck's Sea Change DVD-A sounded great, as did DSoTM SACD and various Porcupine Tree tracks. The more detailed the recordings seemed to really shine with these speakers. The 170s were surrounds and were mounted, so I can’t really offer direct comments, but they sounded similar and blended perfectly sonically. SPL wasn't an issue either, I'd expect these guys will be able to fill sufficiently large rooms well.

I have no real complaints about these guys, but the only things I noticed that I would say were not strong points would be that their soundstage depth is not as good as some other (more expensive) speakers - not really a negative, just an observation. Their imaging is relatively narrow (my speakers are quite similar in that regard), and the fact that they are nearly too accurate sounding – almost a bit sterile. They don’t have ultra fine refinement that gives them a total 3 dimensional depth and a huge soundstage, but these are sort of minor, nit-picking points IMO, and certainly not what I would call weaknesses in the price class. IMO Brian was right, you’d have to step up quite a bit in price to really do a lot better than these guys, seriously. Hats off to the guys at Ascend for putting out speakers at this price with this level of performance. Do I recommend these speakers? Yes. Would I be pleased if I built a system based on these guys? Yes.

BlackKat

how is the VTF3 compared to your current sub?

bluray

Would you recommend using an SVS sub (PC 25-31 for example) with the Ascends? I'm looking to build a new system at a reasonable cost, and these were both companies high on my list.

bluray

I'm just cruising through...I was there too, so I'll answer your questions.

The VTF3 is a great sub, but John's DIY Tempest is closer to an SVS Ultra in output and SQ. Nod to the Tempest.

The 25-31 is also a great sub and will match with the Ascends very well. It's just a matter of calibration, room size and taste. IMO the VTF3 and 25-31 will sound very close, just a matter of liking the tube or box.

Foxy

The Plus is a noticable step up from the VTF-3, IMO. It isn't just the driver, there's the bigger amp too.

Ascend lists their pricing on the website for packaged systems and/or choose a custom system

http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages...isor.mv#bottom

bluray

Join Date: Dec 2004
Local Time: 04:16 PM
Local Date: 08-02-2006

Re: My thoughts on the Ascend 340SEs
I just remembered to check over here on HTF.


I've been experimenting with placement for my mains a lot, and I will be getting some room treatments (bass traps and 1st reflection point panels) soon. Room treatments should give me more of an improvement in sound than any equipment upgrade I could possibly afford or stretch to get.


For placement, I experimented with moving the couch forward/back, and the speakers with placement, distance from the walls, toe-in, etc.

Right now I have the speakers about 15-18" in front of the front doors of the side shelvings flanking the TV stand, toed in pretty drastically. I believe they are nearly 3' away from the side walls as well. They are aimed at a spot about 2' give or take in front of the LP. This gives me a very tight center image for vocals, and moving to either side of the couch still has a fairly centered image - since the speaker on the opposite side is facing you, and the speaker on the closer side is aimed inwards more. This also gets me the benefit of still having the center vocal image more towards the center, rather than having the sound of the speaker closest to you drowning out the sound from the other speaker. I can get a strong center vocal image with less severe toe-in, but with that positioning the image crumbles completely to one side if you move to the side more than 6-8" or so to either side. So with conventional positioning, the sweet spot is pretty narrow. But I think I've been able to widen it quite a bit.

Dozer

I am considering upgrading my speakers form my current Mirage Omni setup to either the Ascend 340 or three NHT M-6 acroos the front. Since you have heard both, the Ascend and the NHT M-6, which one would you consider to be the better speaker, ignoring the price difference between the two? My listening preference is 90% HT 10% music of all kind execept hard rock.
P.S. I don't like bright speakers. For reference I don't consider Paradigm studios bright but do consider Klipsch bright. I like my speaker to be a bit dynamic since my set up is geared more towards HT. Thanks for your input.

BlackKat

That's a tough one. It has been a while since I heard the M6s, but I preferred it to the Studio 40. I would actually say the Ascends sound more like the M6 than not, with the M6 probably being just a tad more crisp (not too crisp for me) in the highs due to the alum. tweeter. I prefer a more laid back speaker, but I would be happy with either the M6 or the 340 in my system. Neither is quite as bright as the Studios, IMO, which is one of the reasons why I would be more likely to choose them.

Dozer

Thanks for your quick reply, John. Your response however made it even more difficult to choose between these two. Since my room is 12 x 25 x 8, I thought the NHT might play louder and cleaner and is a more dynamic than than 340SE hence better fit for HT in a large room. Is this assumption about right?

Foxy

One thing about playing loud in a room. While it's not distortion, playing at loud levels will get more reflections bouncing around and make the bass a lot boomier. I added bass traps up front and treatments for the first reflection points on the sides, and the sound is noticeably cleaner at higher volumes (both music and movies).

For power, my HK 330 is basically rated at 65wx2 in stereo, although I'm not sure if it's the same or down to 55x7 because I run my Denon 2910 through my multi-channel inputs and use the 2910's BM (better crossovers).