Ascend 340SE vs Polk LSi9

[Joey_V]

What do you think guys? Has anyone heard the 2 side by side?

For some reason, I stumbled onto the Ascend website and their forum. It seems to me like Ascend has a loyal following and their speakers are held in very high regard within the Ascend community.

So I'm wondering, how good are the Ascends, really?

Joey

[Zero]

340 ? No. 170 versus the Lsi and others? Check.

[Early B.]

I've owned the 340 as a center channel. It is an excellent speaker, but probably should be compared to the RTi series, not Lsi. It was better than the Csi40 that it replaced, IMO, because it was not as bright and slightly more detailed.

[Joey_V]

Hmm... interesting.

I have a local audiophile buddy with the 340SE. I think I'll try to arrange for a little audition and hear for myself what all the Ascend people are clamoring about.

I'll post what I think.

[mulveling]

I had the original 340 and the LSi9 was definitly in a higher class. Dry dry dry. I'm a bit skeptical of the ravings of those guys in the Ascend forums. To me, they're much much more interested in the value HT end of things than in attaining 2ch musical nirvana.

I can sorta see why they get good reviews for HT, since most HT setups will use a separate sub to make make up for the completely absent bass, and the dry sound signature makes dialogue seem crisp and clear.

[Zero]

The CBM-170's sounded sterile and irritating on any tranitional sand amp. However, they sounded quite pleasant with good upstream components, specifically of the tube variety.

As for sonic signature.. think of the polar opposite of Polks Lsi.. and thats what you got.