Round 5: RBH Sound MC-6C vs. Ascend Acoustics Sierra 1
Round 5 Price Category: $800 - $850)
Clint DeBoer: The loudspeaker comparisons were getting harder and harder as we climbed the pricing scale. Honestly I had expected some products to poke above their pricing - perhaps some underdog revelations that a lower-priced product would smoke a higher-priced model, but so far that hadn't been the case. As we moved on, for the most part, the sound got progressively better - and we got progressively more critical. We continued our brief respites between listening sessions to recoup and discuss some of our findings - mostly in terms of "Speaker 1 and "Speaker 2" though we typically figured out who was who in short order. As we settled into the next phase I focused in on the MC-6C speakers. We were listening to "One" by Tina Dickow (aka Tina Dico) which has some beautiful female vocals, bass, guitar and drums (plus a smooth, pervasive shaker). This track was off the Bang & Olufsen Vol XIII compilation disc, but it made me want to run out and buy the whole In the Red CD. The RBH Sound MC-6Cs presented a thinner vocal sound, slightly unnatural in tone to my ears with an almost artificial edge to it that resulted in sibilance enhancement (easily detectable in this track). Regardless of these tonal issues, there did seem to be additional high-end extension in the RBH speakers, though after a while it felt a tad fatiguing. When we listened to this track again, it seemed like the vocals may have masked some of the background elements (drums in particular.) Drums and low-end hits came through like butter with no bottoming out or compression. In fact, we queued up the difficult "Cousin Dupree" track and even though we were slamming the speaker with tons of SPL output it never wavered on the bottom-end.
The Ascend Acoustics speakers were very natural sounding. They had a smoother bass sound and actually produced more low-end extension with a crisp and authoritative "thump" that didn't go unnoticed. The RBH Sound speakers had much more top-end "air" to them which was absent on the Sierra-1's. Soundstaging was about even on both. Based on looks and pure listening enjoyment alone I'd pick the Sierra-1's, but if you know you're going with a bass-managed system with sub the RBH Sound MC-6C speakers will deliver slightly more accurate sound and imaging overall.
Gene DellaSala: This was certainly the battle we were all waiting for. Having spent nearly 3 months with the RBH MC-6C’s, I was quite familiar with their sound character. The one thing I loved about the MC-6C’s was their very linear and pronounced midrange. In fact, as you will see in my measurements (formal review), these speakers have the most uniform on/off axis response of all the others in this comparison. The weak point about the MC-6C is actually a purposeful design attribute – they don’t have a lot of bottom end extension. According to RBH, these speakers are meant to be paired with a sub. Much like a THX speaker, they have a steep roll off (14dB/Oct) and a high system Q value approaching 1. This is one of the reasons why it’s virtually impossible to bottom the systems woofers out.
When directly comparing the MC-6C’s to the Sierra 1’s, I found the former to sound a bit thin since the latter had so much pronounced bass. Not since the likes of the Dynaudio 52-SE’s have I heard a bookshelf speaker with so much deep and extended bass. Unlike the 52-SE’s, the Sierra 1’s weren’t as prone to bottoming out which was a sign of a quality woofer with plenty of excursion capability. The bass on the Sierra 1’s wasn’t boomy, it was just too excessive for my tastes making them sound dull in the top end.
Trying to not focus on bass extension, I compared the rest of the frequency spectrum between the two speakers. I found the Sierra 1’s lacked width in soundstage and detail in the top end. The vocals were more laid back and a bit warmer, but just didn’t come through with has much clarity or authority. In contrast, the RBH’s to me had much more anchored vocals though they did sound a bit cupped which I wasn’t used to with these speakers. I later came to realize that these speakers sounded much better if they were placed a tad closer together with about 15 degrees of toe-in.
The one inherent problem with doing A/B testing of speakers is you cant optimally position either speaker which is why I recommend in addition to doing these type of tests, to supplement them with critical listening sessions of each speaker ideally set up for extended periods of time.
From the looks department, the Sierra’s were the clear winner but overall, I’d take the MC-6’s especially when mated with a subwoofer because I felt them to be more tonally accurate.
Tom Andry: The RBH's and the Sierra-1's were a very interesting pair in the comparison. If I had to use a word to describe each speaker, I'd say the RBH's were "sterile" and the Sierra-1's were "warm." There was little doubt in my mind that the RBH's had more extension on the top end and that the Sierra-1's had more bottom-end kick. Both of these speakers presented a convincing soundstage though the vocals were slightly better anchored with the Sierra's. The detail of the RBH's was superior though the midrange was a bit recessed and lifeless. While the Sierra's seemed to have a bit of holdover on notes giving them a slightly muddy presentation, the RBH's were a little sibilant. I felt that the RBH's were probably more true to the source material, but that I'd more than likely enjoy listening to the Sierra's more in the long run.
J. Walker Clarke: We had quite a bit of spirited debate on this matchup. I had strong opinions on the vocals between the two speakers. On the RBH's, Tina Dico's vocal sounded "cupped" to me, and was not as natural as with the Ascends. I thought the Ascend's displayed a cleaner timbre in the vocal, and warmer overall tone. I loved the wide soundstage and authentic vocal. The RBH's sounded a bit compressed and harsh to my ears. For me, the Ascend's were clear sonic winners, and as a bonus I loved the unique bamboo cabinets.
