Loudspeakers that measure bad but sound good

[Vladimir]

Should loudspeakers that don't have a flat frequency response of -/+3dB 60Hz - 20kHz these days be considered Hi-FI (High Fidelity)? Seems like a simple requirement for every speaker to enter the Hi-Fi club. Make it uncolored and without any nasty cabinet and driver resonances. Everything above that may be considered premium and should gradually climb the performance vs bling vs price ladder.

Any examples where coloration simply didn't matter for you because everything sounded so good? This seems the default buyer mode and then comes the box swapping to fix the initial error of buying into fun coloration. This box swapping is conveniently called 'components synergy'. I don't know should I even call it 'error' as it seems it has become a policy, to always comprise a system with inaccurate components and whatever is the end result calling it 'character'.

These Vienna Acoustics always seem to get amazing subjective reviews, but measure badly. Obvious discrepancy noted here in these two Stereophile reviews. The reviewer loves them, while JA politely says they are shiny turds.

Vienna Acoustics Mozart loudspeaker Measurements
Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Concert Grand loudspeaker Measurements
It all seems like unneccesary complication of things. If I start with neutral sounding speakers in the first place, it is much easier for me to deal with the rest of the chain, even if there is an analogue source at the end/begining of it.

Devialet and others seem to have grown a whole business around this audiophile overcomplication. "So you bought colored speakers? No worries, buy our amp and we will fix the problems the manufacturer should have sorted out in the first place".

How can a loudspeaker designer kiss another mother's cheek with those lips of bitter shame for designing intentionally colored speakers selling as audiophile premium products? I wonder and so should you.

Ever owned flat FR speakers without diffraction problems and cabinet or driver resonances?

 

[ID.]

FR? Full range?

anyway, don't be silly. Nobody looks at those measurements. You're lucky if they check out the sensitivity, ohms, and how deep the bass goes.

You have to make a special effort to find a frequency response graph for most speakers.

Just get some bright kit powering your Vienna Acoustics (I hear Cyrus is good) and you'll be right. I believe that this is the point in my post where I imply that you can't really appreciate music because you want things measures and within certain tolerances first and that you should just relax and enjoy your tunes.

 

[Vladimir]

Whatever you guys want. I thought we could use a change? *unknw*

 

[drummerman]

Good point.

Another manufacturer which has evolved into using USP's such as Alu woofers, 'rear vented' tweeters, boat shaped cabinets and so on rather than good old fashioned engineering is MordauntShort. Imo a shadow of its former self.

Yet, most Manufacturers will have us believe that driver engineering has evolved so much that older designs can simply not compete anymore. - That may be so in isolation but as you pointed out, there is more to a speaker than just the drivers and there are probably quite a number of 'modern' designs which could take some lessons by going back a decade or two ... or three.

 

[ID.]

I think that it's interesting that there's such a disdain for a flat frequency response. There are certain things that just seem to have filtered through even to the general public, so you have people who haven't listened to anything for themselves ever joing the forum asking for something warm, rather than neutral and accurate, because it's something they've picked up from somewhere probably together with CDs sounding cold and boring while vinyl sounds warm and fun. There is something seductive about warmth in sound. I'm not sure whether it is to do with memory or some other psychological factors, but for some reason warmth often sounds more natural. Or maybe real life is just a bit too bright.

What you consider basic knowledge isn't really that widely known. Very few people can look look at a frequency response graph and look at the crossover point data (which is one spec. normally given by manufacturers) and draw a correlation.

So what can you do if you want a speaker that sells? Prioritise looks and something that grabs your attention in a short listening session. There are also compromises with small speakers, especially with the more modern desire for bass (BASS!). So further compromise by putting in a mid bass hump. Maybe balance it out with a lift in the presence region. I remember when I was buying my DB1is it actually took me quite a lot of Googling to find out what the presence region is and what specific frequencies. If you know nothing it can be hard to even dig some of this up online, and with everything I read the BBC dip didn't sound like such a bad thing.

I presume the whole thing has been a learning experience for you too, even though from what I can tell you have more of a technical background to your education than mine. And yet didn't you buy a pair of CM1s? To be honest, I've often felt that the smallest speaker in a range is sometimes just an afterthought when the manufacturer decides that they need to provide a small speaker to use as rears in a surround system. It's ok, I nearly bought pair of CM1s myself, but ended up buying the 685s.

 

[CnoEvil]

Audio Note speakers spring to mind.....their lively cabinets show up in the measurements, but IMO. they sound great on the end of an AN system.

 

[lindsayt]

And then there's Lowther type single driver speakers. Which have poor frequency response curves, compensated by having no crossover and high efficiency.

Some people like them a lot. Some don't.

 

[Infiniteloop]

Something from the old masters is dealing with diffractions (sound waves bouncing off edges). KEF in its Blades sorts them out by curving the front baffle.

But what can a poor boy do? In the oldee days they used felt, neopren and sponges, as many of you would remember.

For some reason these have fallen out of fashion (more priority for furniture than fidelity I guess). So when a cabinet produces diffractions, the midrange sounds grainy and instead of putting these fugly felts and sponges, today manufacturers just use nothing, but drop the midrange so the grain isn't noticable. When you turn up the midrange on the B&W CM1 it sounds a bit nasty, so you turn it back down to factory settings, the wet blanket effect. Notice the cabinet has no solution for diffractions.

My poor man's solution for the Sony's, although they don't show much grain and sybilants untill turned really really loud. Just cut out some foam and stick it on with doublesided tape.

Makes me wonder, how much of today's speaker design is compromised to sell more in compliance as furniture.

You're probably on to something here Vlad. Both speaker pairs that I use and prefer, have curves a-plenty.

Maybe that's why I didn't like the sound of the new KEF reference 1's as much as I was expecting to?

 

[Infiniteloop]

Audio Note speakers spring to mind.....their lively cabinets show up in the measurements, but IMO. they sound great on the end of an AN system.

I was present in the AN room at an audio show some years ago in Manchester. The sound was so 'boxy', I thought they'd not bothered to unpack the speakers and plugged them in anyway.

Maybe it was the room.......

 

[Thompsonuxb]

????......

Vlad what speakers do you own now?

How do they measure?

 

[Andrewjvt]

A curse

 

[Vladimir]

I mentioned speakers that I have personal experience with. IMO the CM1 fits in the "appealing but technically terrible" category. Some hear its flaws and nothing else straight away. It shows how subjective personal apraisal of whats good or bad is. But with experience and time spent I think it shows.

Panel speakers just blow my hat off, they are astonishing, but when you live with them for a while you realize the bass and treble are not so good. Actually dynamic drivers do it better but for the midrange, panels and stats are kings. Just compare the little membrane a typical 25mm dome tweeter uses and the whole foil in a panel speaker. And so the rat race in the audiophile maze begins. Swapping boxes, wires, augmenting with subs etc.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

So what speakers do you currently own and use?

 

[Vladimir]

Instead of buying a warm amp for my bright speakers, I buy neutral speakers that I fancy in the first place.

Instead of buying Naim amps to simulate fast transient response in a lazy speaker, I buy a fast transient speaker in the first place.

Seems logical, right?

 

[Vladimir]

Something from the old masters is dealing with diffractions (sound waves bouncing off edges). KEF in its Blades sorts them out by curving the front baffle.

But what can a poor boy do? In the oldee days they used felt and sponges, as many of you would remember.

For some reason these have fallen out of fashion (more priority for furniture than fidelity I guess). So when a cabinet produces diffractions, the midrange sounds grainy and instead of putting these fugly felts and sponges, today manufacturers just use nothing, but drop the midrange so the grain isn't noticable. When you turn up the midrange on the B&W CM1 it sounds a bit nasty, so you turn it back down to factory settings, the wet blanket effect. Notice the cabinet has no solution for diffractions.

My poor man's solution for the Sony's, although they don't show much grain and sybilants untill turned really really loud. Just cut out some foam and stick it on with doublesided tape.

Makes me wonder, how much of today's speaker design is compromised to sell more in compliance as furniture.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Jeez, is it so hard to give a straight answer to a simple question Vlad?

I have to assume you still own the CM1's - I always thought that was an odd choice for your amp - considering your 'obsession' for figures.

Question I'd like to ask is your opinion on them - how they sound to you.

This thread makes little to no sense imo. Can't see what your gripe is..... :-D

 

[ID.]

To be honest, I'm not sure that everyone does go on to swap boxes or cables, or whatever, trying ot "fix" the colouration in the speakers. I think people aim for a sound that they like and the idea of matching say warm amp with bright or neutral/analytical speakers is to stop it veering off too far in a certain direction rather than to aim for an end result of neutrality.

Having said that, I might be imagining it but I'm sure I've read someone on these forums going on about the fact that in blind testing people prefer the flattest, most accurate sound.

As for coloured speakers, I've never seen a frequency response graph for these Onkyo speakers

http://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=D-TK10&class=Speaker

But they are designed with thin cabinets that area meant to resonate like an acoustic guitar. They are pretty fun little speakers with the right music, but I'm guessing that they are far from flat.

 

[Vladimir]

What 99.99% of audiophiles don't understand (or refuse to) despite decades and thousands of dollars in the hobby is that hi-fi shouldn't behave like an instrument in any way. From an engineering perspective it is a bad thing, despite how romantic the idea of it is. If we go on that path then anything goes, Cerwin Vegas hanging on chains in corners, playing through Naim amps, connected with Kimber 8TC cables. Speaker designers are not same as instrument designers and transducers that reproduce sound of instruments shouldn't add their own sound signature. But considering manufacturers want to stay in business I guess they will keep catering to this misconception that musical reproduction is intrinsically the same as musical production.

I truly believe in all digital front ends everyone is trying to fix the issues of their speakers. In an analogue front end one has to attack from both sides, try to balance out for both transducers, the turntable and the speakers. "I'm not fixing errors in my colored speakers with box swapping" is same as "I'm looking for system synergy", just the later seems a romantic positive spin of the prior, as if it is a crafty skill. I don't consider box swapping a bad thing, I do it for years. I just love trying out gear, old and new, my only limitation being my disposable income. I have to admit acting like I'm yoda seems more fun than fiddling with electronics 101 embarassing myself infront of guys like Andy here.

Obviosly I'm looking for neutrality or synergy and so is everyone else. When you realize a speaker has a design flaw something like midrange grain and harshness due to baffle diffractions, can an amp compensate for this? Brights speakers + warm amp = just right (like poridge). Shouldn't a speaker costing 1000 pounds have this issue sorted out? Why should I do the fixing by looking for flawed amp that adjusts this and without any tone controls, mind you. Look ma no hands!

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Jeez, is it so hard to give a straight answer to a simple question Vlad?

I have to assume you still own the CM1's - I always thought that was an odd choice for your amp - considering your 'obsession' for figures.

Question I'd like to ask is your opinion on them /- how they sound to you.

This thread makes little to no sense imo. Can't see what your gripe is..... :-D

Vlad gave his answer - he uses loud speakers. What's up mate?

 

[Vladimir]

As for coloured speakers, I've never seen a frequency response graph for these Onkyo speakers

http://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=D-TK10&class=Speaker

Holy cow!

Sensitivity: 80 dB/W/m Max. Power: 200 W Nominal Impedance: 4 ohms

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Good point.

Another manufacturer which has evolved into using USP's such as Alu woofers, 'rear vented' tweeters, boat shaped cabinets and so on rather than good old fashioned engineering is MordauntShort. Imo a shadow of its former self.

Yet, most Manufacturers will have us believe that driver engineering has evolved so much that older designs can simply not compete anymore. - That may be so in isolation but as you pointed out, there is more to a speaker than just the drivers and there are probably quite a number of 'modern' designs which could take some lessons by going back a decade or two ... or three.

How dare u critisize MS..(See sig)

Kinda agree since we all want pretty, slim, shiney boxes (??) things have gone downhill. Physics says big fat boxes but manufacturers try to match the sound with pretty/cool furniture. To do it I recon u have to go "blade-silly". Curvey cabinets with big woofers in the side etc. Bring back the 70's.

Bit of a soggy comment but I'm not awake yet

 

[Vladimir]

 

[ID.]

As for coloured speakers, I've never seen a frequency response graph for these Onkyo speakers

http://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=D-TK10&class=Speaker

Holy cow!

Sensitivity: 80 dB/W/m Max. Power: 200 W Nominal Impedance: 4 ohms

They are tiny too. I'd be scared to put anything near 200 watts through them. I always see them powered by a mini system no more powerful than the Marantz M-CR610. Still sound good.

Speakers are always going to be the part of any system with the most distortion. There's a reason manufacturers don't publish distortion levels. So one could reason that if there are 2-3 dB fluctuations all along the response graph you should free to compromise for what sounds most appealing or least bad.

 

[friendly_ghost]

I'm kind of new to this, but found these graphs for my speakers:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1239:nrc-measurements-focal-aria-906-loudspeakers&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153

Is this considered "flat enough"?
What is the deal with the increase in the very high frequencies? Is this what would make people think Focals are "bright"?

 

[Vladimir]

FR? Full range?

Frequency Response.

anyway, don't be silly. Nobody looks at those measurements. You're lucky if they check out the sensitivity, ohms, and how deep the bass goes.

You have to make a special effort to find a frequency response graph for most speakers.

Just get some bright kit powering your Vienna Acoustics (I hear Cyrus is good) and you'll be right. I believe that this is the point in my post where I imply that you can't really appreciate music because you want things measures and within certain tolerances first and that you should just relax and enjoy your tunes.

A friend who works as a service tech made speakers from scrap particle board boxes, a mix of car woofers and old EV tweeters and mids just to test amps in the shop and background music. They measured and sounded neutral, with their only considerable flaw being they didn't go very loud. However, considering their building investment, I think they were sounding great. That showed me that a well sorted speaker can be had for little money. I don't expect them to do piano with accurate timbre and such, but the basics like neutrality were easy to achieve. I'm simply baffled why someone would go to the effort to build a nice cabinet, good drivers and finally ruin it with the crossover, like they do with Vienna's and aparently most hi-fi speakers today.

Here is a specification that everyone should read. The crossover points.

Why does B&W CM1 sound like covered with a wet blanket, despite being a very good speaker for its size? The design is a two way with tweeter starting from 4000Hz. This leaves a lot of midrange area for the small 5" woofer to handle, while it is also strugling to pump bass. There is a large dip in the 2-4kHz area where the drivers meet and that is a very sensitive region for our hearing, called upper midrange - presence area. It's what makes you feel the musical performance alive infront of you. If elevated, it sounds bright / harsh and if downsized, sounds like a wet blanket over the speaker.

Now on an old pair of Sony speakers, the tweeter works from 2,000Hz up to 25,000Hz, which covers most of the sensitive midrange section. The SEAS driver measured flat in its original OEM design and Sony just used it as is. Seems convenient and clever. With a good quality driver you have less problems to sort out in the passive crossover.

Why didn't B&W develop inhouse or just use OEM tweeter that covers a wider frequency range, thus leaving the little woofer simply do the bass and lower midrange? Make a 1kHz capable 30mm tweeter and use it down to 1.5kHz, and leave the rest to the woofer. It isn't rocket science, the wrong design choices seem obvious. Instead of this, they use 'nautilus' tube loading, kevlar membrane woofer and golf ball dimpled reflex port.... lots of fancy, but the design seems wrong and people have complained over this. Same case with Vienna Acoustics.

I don't get it.