Short answer: the Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2. It ranks #112 of 216 bookshelf speakers by sound quality, rated 3.8/5, at $468; the Philharmonic BMR Monitor ranks #130, rated 3.6/5, and costs $2,200, so there is little reason to consider the other one.
The case for the Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2: On-axis response is impressively flat from about 100Hz to 2kHz, staying within roughly ±1dB, with a clean, gradual bass rolloff below that. The tradeoff: A narrow dip in the on-axis and listening-window response appears in the 3-5kHz range (down to about -2.7dB), mirrored by a matching dip in the directivity index at the same frequencies: likely a brief widening of dispersion right at the tweeter/woofer crossover.
The Philharmonic BMR Monitor is the deeper-bass choice. Three-way design combining a 6” SB Acoustics mid-woofer, a 2.5” Tectonic balanced-mode radiator (BMR) for the midrange, and a ribbon tweeter: premium component choices relative to the asking price. Its bass reaches about 47Hz before falling 3dB, against 70Hz for the Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2. Watch for: A 1-2dB bump around 2-3kHz creates a “glare” on vocals, guitars, and strings that the reviewer noticed consistently across many tracks.
Buy the Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2. It is rated higher for sound quality than the Philharmonic BMR Monitor and costs less, which makes it the one to get unless you need something the other one does better.
Looking for alternatives? See the complete Passive Home rankings.
Specifications Side By Side
| Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 | Philharmonic BMR Monitor | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $468 per pair | $2200 per pair |
| Ranked | #112 of 216 in Large Size Bookshelf Speakers | #130 of 216 in Large Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 70Hz (measured, manufacturer spinorama data) | 47Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 50Hz (measured, manufacturer spinorama data) | 32Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 86.8dB (2.83V/1m, measured, manufacturer spinorama data; 87dB manufacturer specified) | 84dB (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Drivers | 27mm custom SEAS soft dome tweeter, 6.5” proprietary composite polygel cone woofer | 6” Ceramic woofer, Balanced Mode Radiator 2.5” midrange, RAAL 64-10X OEM tweeter |
| Dimensions | 12H x 9W x 9.5D in | 20”H x 8”W x 12.5”D (508 x 203.2 x 317.5 mm) |
| Weight | 15 lbs (6.8 kg) each | 32 lbs (14.5 kg) each |
| Impedance | 8 ohms | 4 ohms nominal (3 ohms minimum above 80Hz, measured by Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Power Handling | 200W continuous, 400W peak | - |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear | ported, rear |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.30 | 6.02 (spinorama.org) |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 8.66 | 7.67 (spinorama.org) |
| DIY Kit | No | No |
Frequency Response Compared
Both speakers’ spinorama measurements, overlaid. A flatter line is more neutral: peaks sound forward or harsh, dips sound recessed. Each curve is shifted so its average from 300 Hz to 3 kHz sits at 0 dB, so loudness differences between the two are removed and only the shape is compared. The two were measured by different sources, so small differences, especially in the bass, can come from the measurement setup rather than the speakers.
Measurement data: Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 (measured by the manufacturer) and Philharmonic BMR Monitor (measured by Erin’s Audio Corner), via spinorama.org.
Related Speaker Comparisons
More top alternatives to Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2:
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Perlisten S4b
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs KEF Reference 1 Meta
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs GR-Research NX-Studio
- AsciLab C6B vs Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Audio First Cadentia 3
Prices on this page were last checked October 12, 2026 at 4:13 PM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Two Speakers In Full
Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2: $468 per pair Ascend Acoustics $468 eBay
Older model: the Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE (ranked lower, rated 2.1/5). See every Ascend CBM, HTM and CMT generation.
Same family: the Ascend Acoustics HTM-200SE2 (larger bookshelf, rated 4.3/5) and the Ascend Acoustics CMT-340 SE2 (larger bookshelf, ranked higher, rated 4.4/5).
Pros: On-axis response is impressively flat from about 100Hz to 2kHz, staying within roughly ±1dB, with a clean, gradual bass rolloff below that. The directivity index rises smoothly and predictably through the crossover region, and the estimated in-room response shows a smooth, consistent downward tilt from 100Hz to 10kHz with no major discontinuities: close to the ideal in-room target shape. Measured sensitivity of 86.8dB nearly matches Ascend’s 87dB spec. The manufacturer’s own preference-score modeling comes out to 6.30 unequalized (rising to 8.66 with an ideal subwoofer, or 6.79/8.86 with EQ applied): a strong result for a compact 2-way, and a clear step up from the original Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE this replaces. Measured sensitivity of 86.8dB.
Cons: A narrow dip in the on-axis and listening-window response appears in the 3-5kHz range (down to about -2.7dB), mirrored by a matching dip in the directivity index at the same frequencies: likely a brief widening of dispersion right at the tweeter/woofer crossover. High-frequency directivity narrows substantially above 10kHz, typical for a small dome tweeter, so the top octave will sound more reserved off-axis than on-axis. Bass rolls off as expected for a compact 2-way monitor: -3dB around 70Hz and -10dB around 50Hz, so a subwoofer is needed for full-range use. This data comes from the manufacturer’s own Klippel measurements rather than an independent third-party review, so there’s no outside verification of channel matching, distortion, or unit-to-unit consistency.
Full Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 review and specifications →
| Released | Jul 2026 (3 months ago) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 50Hz (measured, manufacturer spinorama data) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 70Hz (measured, manufacturer spinorama data) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 12H x 9W x 9.5D in |
| Drivers | 27mm custom SEAS soft dome tweeter, 6.5” proprietary composite polygel cone woofer |
| Impedance | 8 ohms |
| Power Handling | 200W continuous, 400W peak |
| Sensitivity | 86.8dB (2.83V/1m, measured, manufacturer spinorama data; 87dB manufacturer specified) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.30 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 8.66 |
| Weight | 15 lbs (6.8 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Polk Signature Elite ES20
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Klipsch RP-600M II
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Dynaudio Contour 20i
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Dynaudio Emit 20
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Mission LX-3 MKII
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs GR-Research X-LS Encore
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs Dynaudio Special Forty
- Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE2 vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2
- See all 48 comparisons
Philharmonic BMR Monitor: $2200 per pair Philharmonic Audio $2200 eBay
Older model: the Philharmonic BMR (v1) (ranked higher, rated 4.3/5). See every Philharmonic BMR generation.
Pros: Three-way design combining a 6” SB Acoustics mid-woofer, a 2.5” Tectonic balanced-mode radiator (BMR) for the midrange, and a ribbon tweeter: premium component choices relative to the asking price. A clear improvement over the V1: the earlier version’s overly hot, plateauing treble has been resolved, leaving a genuinely good in-room response outside of one specific area. Extremely wide horizontal radiation of about ±70-80°, creating an enveloping, wide soundstage that illuminates the sidewalls. Well-built, attractive cabinet. Midrange and tweeter show no stress or elevated distortion even at higher output: all the compression and distortion issues trace back to the mid-woofer alone. Measured bass extension of 47Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 84dB.
Cons: A 1-2dB bump around 2-3kHz creates a “glare” on vocals, guitars, and strings that the reviewer noticed consistently across many tracks. The extremely wide radiation trades off against imaging precision: instrument placement became noticeably more diffuse and harder to pinpoint in a narrower, more reflective room, though it improved substantially in a larger, more open room with less sidewall interaction. A suspected resonance around 500Hz shows up as an imbalance in sound power and horizontal directivity measurements, loosely correlating with a vague sense of resonance the reviewer heard subjectively. Moderate sensitivity (about 84.1dB anechoic) and a mid-woofer that runs out of steam under real stress: distortion exceeds 3% even at 100Hz at 96dB, and the reviewer notes SB Acoustics’ published excursion specs tend to overstate real-world linear excursion by nearly 2x. Significant compression appears at 102dB: the woofer audibly unloads around 120Hz, and the ribbon tweeter also compresses heavily at high output. Not well suited to very loud two-channel listening (above about 90dB at 4 meters). In-room bass rolls off around 50Hz, so a subwoofer is recommended for most music. Benefits noticeably from a few bands of EQ if available.
Full Philharmonic BMR Monitor review and specifications →
| Released | 2015 (11 years ago) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 32Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 47Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 20”H x 8”W x 12.5”D (508 x 203.2 x 317.5 mm) |
| Drivers | 6” Ceramic woofer, Balanced Mode Radiator 2.5” midrange, RAAL 64-10X OEM tweeter |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal (3 ohms minimum above 80Hz, measured by Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 84dB (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.02 (spinorama.org) |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.67 (spinorama.org) |
| Weight | 32 lbs (14.5 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs Dynaudio Emit 20
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs Mission LX-3 MKII
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs Klipsch RP-600M II
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs Natural Sound NS17
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs GR-Research X-LS Encore
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs Dynaudio Special Forty
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs Polk Signature Elite ES20
- Philharmonic BMR Monitor vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B6.2
- See all 48 comparisons