# New - 2015 Affordable Accuracy Tower 2 review.



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

I wanted to evaluate the New (2015) Affordable Accuracy Tower2 Loudspeaker.

One thing I have learned is that the human ear (mine, at least) is incredibly sensitive for relative (or comparative) measurement, but not so good at absolute measurement. Consequently, it made sense to find appropriate speakers for comparison.

*Affordable Accuracy Tower (AA TOWER2) vs Stock Pioneer SP-FS52 (FS52)*.
The Pioneer is an obvious choice to compare against the new Towers (a Dayton Audio T652 modded by Dennis Murphy). The Pioneers go for $260/pr. The Pioneers are generally considered to be the best value in their price range.

At $180 plus shipping ($32 to GA), the AA TOWER2’s cost less. 

Somewhere I need to comment on the light weight of the AA TOWER (about 16 pounds each). This raises a lot of flags, but, with the added bracing, these speakers sound good - without offensive resonance. At the end of the day, that is what counts!

*Setup.*
I used two Marantz SR-6001 receivers in Pure Direct Mode and level matched the speakers (using music and adjusting when needed to keep levels matched). Muting one receiver, allowed instant switching every time the mute button is pressed. Speakers were set side by side in an A-B A-B configuration (so width between the pairs of speakers was equal).

*On A-B Comparisons of Speakers*.
It is always amazing to me! When I have a reasonably good speaker being A-B’ed against a better speaker, the “reasonably good” speaker becomes “unreasonably bad”. It is a strange phenomenon, but I believe it has to do with hearing a more open/realistic/detailed sound, then switching to the lessor speaker… it just sucks, plain and simple. If I was unplugging and switching speakers I don’t think it would be so bad, but hearing the sound quality decrease in the middle of a musical phrase is an obnoxious experience.

I wanted to make this comment because I know there will be a perceived hypocrisy between what I will say about the Pioneers in this review and what I have said in the past (and will likely say in the future). I like the Pioneers and have consistently recommended them as a great speaker in their price class. The AA TOWER2’s eclipse them in almost every way. Nonetheless, if a buyer wants immediate gratification of local store pick-up and the convenience of a free 14 day in-home trial (Best Buy), or if the AA TOWER2’s are ruled out for some other reason, I will happily continue to recommend the Pioneers because they are great speakers compared to their competition (aside from the AA TOWER2’s).

I have a saying about this, and in the case of these two speakers, it is worded:

“The Pioneer FS52’s are great speakers…as long as you keep the AA TOWER’s out of the room.”

*Music*.
I tried to select music based on the following criteria:
High quality recording
Common (some chance you might know it or have it in your collection)
My personal familiarity with it
Diverse (listening to a wide array of music reveals characteristics that would not be revealed if all tracks were similar)

Note: I provided YouTube links for some songs, but did not check for sound quality of YouTube version. I used CD’s for all review material.

*Comparison (organized by music track)*.

*Pink Floyd - Time (DSOTM)*.I selected this mainly to get an idea of the high frequency character of the speakers when the alarm clocks and various chimes present a cacophony of resonating metals.
The sound of the AA TOWER2’s immediately called attention to their increased level of detail on the sounds of the clock movements prior to the alarms. When the bells started, it gave a more open and full presentation.
I was confused when the toms sounded fuller on the FS52’s! I had already listened enough to know the AA TOWER2’s had a fuller, and more accurate sound in the low-mid – bass range. I later listened on Focals and heard that the sound is thin. While they used plenty of reverb in the recording, the FS52’s imparted a resonance somewhat like a kettle drum would have. It was warm and full and I liked it, but it was not accurate.

I found a clip (this is a mock-up, not Pink Floyd, but it gives you the idea of how the toms are a bit thin - if you have good speakers):
If you are the impatient sort, go to 1 minute in.

https://youtu.be/BPtT1vf3wQQ

The main difference through the rest of the song is the AA TOWER2’s gave a sense of depth to the stage that made the FS52 sound 2D.

*Yes – The Heart of the Sunrise (Fragile)*.This is a standard of mine. I listen primarily for the unique sound of Chris Squire’s bass, but there have been several times where the unusual instrumentation reveals something unique (this was one of them).

First off, the bass sound was boxy on the FS52’s, sounding more natural and open on the AA TOWER2’s. However, the FS52’s sounded better when the song was just Jon Anderson’s vocals, bass, and drums. The high-hat and ride cymbal sounded more present, substantial, and simply better on the Pioneer. Once the rest of the band joined in, the FS52 lost its edge! My best notion on this is that the Pioneers have some kind of artificial (I'm guessing at this) treble enhancement that sounds better with some particular content, but reveals itself as "wrong" if there is content involving the frequencies close to the “enhanced” frequencies.

Despite this, the AA TOWER2 was the clear winner. The Places where the FS52 sounded better, the AA TOWER’s merely did not seem to be playing the full highs. Where the AA TOWER’s sounded better, the FS52 made wrong sounds. I’ll take absent sounds over wrong sounds.

*Steely Dan – I Got the News (Aja)*.I always have Steely Dan in the mix. Their sound is tight and percussive, with sharp attacks, and the recording quality is always very good.
This was easy – The AA TOWER2 totally dominated with more articulate and deeper bass than the FS52. Midrange articulation was also better on the AA TOWER2’s, but it was the bass that really distinguished the AA TOWER2s on this piece!

*Chet Atkins – Sunrise (Stay Tuned)*.Musically, it borders on Muzak, but between George Benson and Chet Atkins, there are some very nicely played light and delicate details in this piece that cause me to like it (despite the Muzak). It is very well recorded and I love the nature of the bass on this piece (especially the contrast of the slap notes).

The AA TOWER2 captured that bass sound very nicely, while the FS52 sounded comparatively thin and imprecise. The AA TOWER2 had a transparency in the midrange that really shone with the fast, light, and delicate picking in this song. Again, the AA TOWER2’s had a good 3D depth while the FS52’s sounded 2D.

I realize most people would not have this song, so here is a link:

https://youtu.be/88yDgm6TFes

*Herbie Hancock – River (River, the Joni Letters)*.I have found that this song is good at revealing issues with speakers. I’d liken Corinne Bailey Rae to taking Norah Jones voice and raising it about ½ octave. She has high frequencies in her voice that extend on up there. There is also the brushes on the drums and cymbals which doesn’t always sound right, depending on the speakers.
More than anything else I listened to, this song was the FS52’s Achilles heel. It had way too much content in the high frequencies and especially with Corinne’s voice, the inappropriate balance is obvious. This is a great piece, but I suspect it would fall off of my favorites list if I listened exclusively to the FS52’s. As reflected in the FR chart, The FS52 made the treble way too hot for certain harmonics in her voice. I would even use the words harsh or shouty.
While not perfect with this demanding content, the AA TOWER2 came across much clearer and gave a presentation that was enjoyable.
I realize most people would not have this song, so here is a link:

https://youtu.be/Xukwe6bSYVo

*Katy Perry – I Kissed a Girl (MTV Unplugged)*.Pop star, Katy Perry is a guilty pleasure of mine (though I felt somewhat vindicated when Jon Anderson listed her among his favorite modern singers). I am also a big time fan of acoustic versions…especially for vocals. It keeps them very honest. I believe there are not as many places for a singer to “hide” so they up their game even beyond their normal level of extraordinary! In this particular version of this song, it begins with an upright bass solo which repeats the same phrase so I can listen to the phrase on one speaker, then hear it again on the other. Also love the jazz leanings of this version.

I was surprised that the differences on the introductory bass line were minor (the AA TOWER2 was better, but not enough difference to give much concern). However, later, when the band joins in, the bass gets lost in the band on the FS52 while it stays its own voice on the AA TOWER2.

While not so bad as with Corinne’s; Katy’s voice is wrong and the treble was off on the FS52s. The AA TOWER2’s managed a much more open and realistic sound.

Here is a link:

https://youtu.be/oIekDlyhHCg

*Ed Palermo Big Band – RDNZL (Take Your Clothes Off When You Dance)*.Since I play in a big band, this is where I listen to the instruments I know best.

The better bass of the AA TOWER2 proved its worth on the drum lead in. It was more solid and had the right weight. Trombone was about equal on both, but alto sax sounded a little kazoo-like on the FS52. AA TOWER2 came across as decidedly more natural for alto sax and (to a lesser degree) throughout the song.

Sorry, no link available.

*Norah Jones – Don’t Know Why (Come Away With Me)*.Norah has so many subtle nuances in her voice that it is rare to switch between speakers and not hear significant differences in presentations.

Listening to an array of speakers with a friend, he talked about how the playfulness in her voice got lost with some of the speakers. That is an excellent description. On good speakers, you can hear subtle nuances in her delivery that make it clear she is not just singing the song beautifully, but she is enjoying the song! Not too many speakers did a good job of capturing that playfulness. The FS52’s do not, but the AA TOWER2’s do a fair job of it. In a $180/pr. speaker, that alone is a feat!
*
Conclusion*.
Is the AA TOWER perfect? Of course not. However, given its modest components/price, it is an incredibly nice sounding speaker! As compared to the FS52’s, the AA TOWER2’s are clearly better. Only the tipped up treble of the Pioneer can, on rare occasion, make them sound better, but more often that extra treble is a liability. Looking for a fault, I miss the extra detail and highest frequencies of a well-designed metal or ribbon tweeter, but that would push these speakers well beyond budget category. The bass is impressively palpable which is, in itself, a real find in such an inexpensive speaker!

I didn’t do anything to push the SPL limits of the AA TOWER2’s, but I ran them fairly loud (at the volumes I would normally listen) in a living room with gabled ceiling, and open to dining room and kitchen without any sign of distress.

It is a shame that Dennis was not involved in the original design of these speakers, that way the cost of the original tweeters and crossover components could be avoided.

In the end, I am delighted to report that the standard of quality of sound on a shoestring budget ($180/pr.) just took a substantial leap forward!

Cheers,
Kurt


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Thanks for taking the time to do a review. I really have to question how a tower speaker weighing only 16lbs could "beat the pioneers in almost every way" That weigh twice as much.

Pictures and maybe a link to the actual speaker would be nice as doing a search for "Affordable Accuracy Tower" comes up with nothing but some verge reviews.
Also an in room frequency response graph using REW would be very helpful.


----------



## nova (Apr 30, 2006)

Tony,
The "Affordable Accuracy" speakers are Pioneer speakers that were modified by Dennis Murphy with a Vifa tweeter and a new crossover. I do not believe they are available anymore, at least not on the Philharmonic Audio website. In fact there is not even a reference to them there anymore???
I believe there is a new version based on an inexpensive Dayton speaker this time. I do not believe they are available either.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

These are Dennis Murphy's latest AA Tower2 design.
Apparently his cost for the Pioneers went up, which led him to look for another alternative.
As I understand it, he adds bracing to tame resonance, swaps out the tweeter, and swaps the crossover (of course).
They are not yet on his website, but he is taking orders for them.

Cheers,
Kurt


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

tonyvdb said:


> Thanks for taking the time to do a review. I really have to question how a tower speaker weighing only 16lbs could "beat the pioneers in almost every way" That weigh twice as much.
> 
> Also an in room frequency response graph using REW would be very helpful.


Tony,

I totally agree and understand where you are coming from. I had the same reservations. For me, low weight in a cabinet would suggest sloppy resonance in the cabinet. There is no doubt that the cabinet is not nearly as substantial as the Pioneer FS-52, but the bass performance is tighter and deeper than the Pioneer! It defies my expectation, as well! I think the T652 must just have better mid-woofers, and Dennis figured our the right places for adding braces.

Sorry that I don't have measurements. I am looking forward to seeing some when someone with REW buys a pair.

Cheers,
Kurt


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

FidelitySeeker said:


> These are Dennis Murphy's latest AA Tower2 design.
> Apparently his cost for the Pioneers went up, which led him to look for another alternative.
> As I understand it, he adds bracing to tame resonance, swaps out the tweeter, and swaps the crossover (of course).
> They are not yet on his website, but he is taking orders for them.
> ...


I have two new Affordable Accuracy speakers--the tower discussed here and a monitor. I'm starting with the monitor because I suspect it will have broader appeal. I have details on my website now.


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

DennisMurphy said:


> I have two new Affordable Accuracy speakers--the tower discussed here and a monitor. I'm starting with the monitor because I suspect it will have broader appeal. I have details on my website now.


I reviewed the AA Monitor2's here:
http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...ble-accuracy-monitor2-review.html#post1271705


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> Thanks for taking the time to do a review. I really have to question how a tower speaker weighing only 16lbs could "beat the pioneers in almost every way" That weigh twice as much.
> 
> Pictures and maybe a link to the actual speaker would be nice as doing a search for "Affordable Accuracy Tower" comes up with nothing but some verge reviews.
> Also an in room frequency response graph using REW would be very helpful.


I find REW room response plots uninformative unless they are presented with a number of other speakers so that you have a chance of sorting out specific room effects from the inherent response of the individual speakers. Also, I don't think a lot of people implement those measurements properly. I do have what I think is a more useful measurement of the towers in the form of an anechoic on-axis curve. I don't feel comfortable posting that here for fear of breaking the forum's self-promotion rules, but I would be happy to send it to you if you PM me.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

Mr. Murphy, please feel free to post your measurements. And welcome to HTS.


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

tesseract said:


> Mr. Murphy, please feel free to post your measurements. And welcome to HTS.


Thanks very much for permission. It looks like I have to accumulate 5 posts before I can do that, however. I guess I'll have to think of some more things to say.


----------



## ajinfla (May 10, 2009)

Measurements! Measurements! (chant)

Welcome Dennis.

SQ based on weight? Really? I'll have to search the AES library for that one!
As long as the enclosure is sufficiently damped, in the far field, where our ears reside...

cheers


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

ajinfla said:


> Measurements! Measurements! (chant)
> 
> Welcome Dennis.
> 
> ...


Hi AJ Great to see you're a biggy on the board. And this post will get me one closer to the number I need to post a measurement.


----------



## ajinfla (May 10, 2009)

Ok, one more post...then let's see some measurements.:T
Cool looking little projects


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

ajinfla said:


> Ok, one more post...then let's see some measurements.:T
> Cool looking little projects


I think this will make 4. We're getting thee.


----------



## ajinfla (May 10, 2009)

Ok just answer this one.
If you have trouble with the pics, lemme know


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

ajinfla said:


> Ok just answer this one.
> If you have trouble with the pics, lemme know


I certainly will. That should do it. But I have to eat now.


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

OK I should have enough junk posts to link to some measurements. These are one-meter quasi-anechoic plots taken on axis, 20 degrees off axis horizonatally, and 45 degrees off axis. Although I'm not claiming these sound better than my more expensive offerings, or those of others, the plots are actually better than any of my other speakers in terms of linearity on and off axis. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cymo4yrqc5r15yj/AAT2OnAxis.png?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o4xj6u25l9gscgs/AAT2OffAxis20.png?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/oqgshtl4chsk5j4/AAT2OffAxis45.png?dl=0


----------



## |Tch0rT| (May 2, 2013)

Fixed so people don't have to click links (change www to dl and use the Insert Image button):



DennisMurphy said:


>


----------



## FidelitySeeker (Sep 4, 2009)

Thanks Dennis and Ryan!

Okay, so I figure the top graph is on-axis, but what about the other two?


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

FidelitySeeker said:


> Thanks Dennis and Ryan!
> 
> Okay, so I figure the top graph is on-axis, but what about the other two?


See my post with the links--on axis, 20 off, 45 off.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

May I ask why the graph only goes down to 200hz? I would be curious what it does down to at least 50Hz
The upper range looks good.


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> May I ask why the graph only goes down to 200hz? I would be curious what it does down to at least 50Hz
> The upper range looks good.


Based on past experience, I usually just post the anechoic portion of the plot, which only goes down to around 200 Hz before the program runs out of resolution at the usual very narrow sample window. Below that point, you have two choices. You can do a nearfield measurement of the woofer and port, splice those to the anechoic portion, and achieve what will look like at dead flat response down to 50 Hz or so. Or, at least on my measurement program (Praxis), you can invoke the automatic blend feature that transitions the sampling window to a longer gate that will show you how the room affects the bass response. Those plots will always show a peak in the response around 80 Hz, which is present in most any room with 8 ft ceilings. and there will always be a narrow dip in the response between 100 and 200 Hz, which is floor bounce cancellation--again present in most any room and on most any speaker unless the woofer is placed very close to the floor. When I show the whole plot--anechoic plus bass response with room effects--I always run the risk that someone will reproduce it without explanation or misinterpret it. I could show the spliced plot, but that's kind of misleading. If I get a chance, I'll redo the on-axis measurement and save the whole thing, now that I've already spent time explaining what it will look like.

And here's a link to the full-range plot. Sorry, I don't know how to make the plot appear in the text: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ayk1oc8p0hq5ode/AAT2FullRange.png?dl=0


----------



## |Tch0rT| (May 2, 2013)

DennisMurphy said:


> And here's a link to the full-range plot. Sorry, I don't know how to make the plot appear in the text:


Take the www from *www*.dropbox.com/s/ayk1oc8p0hq5ode/AAT2FullRange.png?dl=0 and replace it with dl so it looks like *dl*.dropbox.com/s/ayk1oc8p0hq5ode/AAT2FullRange.png?dl=0 (I removed the https:// so the board software doesn't see them as links.) Then use







tags (also the little icon with the mountains and pasting the link with dl instead of www in the pop up box). So it's







without the spaces and it shows up as a picture instead of a link. This works for all pics uploaded to Dropbox.


----------



## DennisMurphy (Nov 28, 2011)

|Tch0rT| said:


> Take the www from *www*.dropbox.com/s/ayk1oc8p0hq5ode/AAT2FullRange.png?dl=0 and replace it with dl so it looks like *dl*.dropbox.com/s/ayk1oc8p0hq5ode/AAT2FullRange.png?dl=0 (I removed the https:// so the board software doesn't see them as links.) Then use
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the post and the tip. And it's a good thing you spelled everything out, because I don't think I ever would have stumbled onto that process. And I have to send out a mea culpa on those graphs. I thought they looked a little too smooth to be true. I've been working with a bunch of very high-sensitivity designs with compression drivers, and my Praxis software reset itself to slightly larger decibel demarcations on the vertical axis. If you look closely, they'r 7 dB instead of the more standard 5 dB. So any little up and down in the graph would look a little larger if the demarcations were 5 dB. Sorry about that.


----------

