Loudspeakers that measure bad but sound good

[Vladimir]

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"?

That is superb measured FR.

Yes indeed, people who are used to dips in the upper midrange will consider a flat FR as bright. Studio monitors for professionals are typically very flat and they sound bright to the home hi-fi enthusiast. Too much detail, not enough laid back.

 

[Vladimir]

That's 200W in 4ohms, so 100W - 130W in 8ohms. I would try a bigger amp than that Marantz just out of curiosity.

 

[ID.]

That's 200W in 4ohms, so 100W - 130W in 8ohms. I would try a bigger amp than that Marantz just out of curiosity.

Because they're Onkyo the stores I've seen them on display in never have them on the end of anything much more powerful than this

http://www.eu.onkyo.com/en/products/cs-1045-34497.html?tab=Details

"70w/ch at 4 ohms one channel driven". Love it. While not a lie, pretty much completely useless.

Would be interesting to hear them driven by something like this instead

http://www.luxman.com/product.php?pid=6

While I've never looked at the frequency response graphs, my active monitors beat out any other speaker I've owned in that they seem to work well no matter what the type of music and seem very natural to me, giving a real insight into the music as it was recorded. But maybe I'm a little biased.

 

[davedotco]

To measuring speakers than just frequency response.

Human hearing is remarkably tolerant to frequency response variations, either we do not hear them or compensate automatically as we move from one 'acoustic' (room) to another, same thing with loudspeakers. Similarly harmonic distortion is not such a big deal either, real instruments produce plenty of harmonics and a few more are not going to be that audible.

By far the most important issue is the way speaker manufacturers 'tune' their products to the market requirement, at the budget and mid-fi level the 'smiley face' response dominates because the average punter playing modern 'pop' music, expects a punchy sound with a bit of presence (in the frequency response) boost. Play something well recorded employing 'real' instruments and the results are often laughably.

I always found it extremely useful playing some voice or acoustic music to give a reference point, to my mind the modern method of choosing the 'sound' you want simply does not work for me.

 

[davedotco]

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"?

That is superb measured FR.

Yes indeed, people who are used to dips in the upper midrange will consider a flat FR as bright. Studio monitors for professionals are typically very flat and they sound bright to the home hi-fi enthusiast. Too much detail, not enough laid back.

Firstly, the peak at very high frequencies is there to give a sense of 'air' and 'space', it's a well known trick that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. There is no musical information at those frequencies so the peak will not make anything sound bright. Interestingly, a lot of speakers that sound 'bright' do so because of the characteristics of their bass drivers, nothing to do with the tweeters at all.

Good studio speakers have a flat response and do not sound bright unless deliberately equalised to do so. In modern two way designs the active crossover and direct coupled power amplifiers control the bass drivers well, the drivers breakup modes that produce much of the brightness/harsness in hi-fi speakers are pushed below audibility.

Also, in an earlier post, Vlad mention the distructive nature of diffraction effects in some speakers, compare these.

 

[Andrewjvt]

Having this hobby cause a lot of conflict as normal people dont think all the time about improvements and equipment. They just switch on the hifi and enjoy music even if its not true hifi.

Us guys are over analytical of everything and maybe dont enjoy as much as always looking to improve.

 

[ID.]

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"?

That is superb measured FR.

Yes indeed, people who are used to dips in the upper midrange will consider a flat FR as bright. Studio monitors for professionals are typically very flat and they sound bright to the home hi-fi enthusiast. Too much detail, not enough laid back.

Firstly, the peak at very high frequencies is there to give a sense of 'air' and 'space', it's a well known trick that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. There is no musical information at those frequencies so the peak will not make anything sound bright. Interestingly, a lot of speakers that sound 'bright' do so because of the characteristics of their bass drivers, nothing to do with the tweeters at all.

Good studio speakers have a flat response and do not sound bright unless deliberately equalised to do so. In modern two way designs the active crossover and direct coupled power amplifiers control the bass drivers well, the drivers breakup modes that produce much of the brightness/harsness in hi-fi speakers are pushed below audibility.

Also, in an earlier post, Vlad mention the distructive nature of diffraction effects in some speakers, compare these.

Interesting. What exactly about the bass driver? The breakup point or something impacting on higher frequencies or just simply bass quantity? I know that playing with the bass shelving allows me to change the character of the speaker- hey presto warm speaker. A few more twists and now I've got a bright speaker, but considering the trend for bassy speakers I assume this isn't the issue

 

[davedotco]

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"?

That is superb measured FR.

Yes indeed, people who are used to dips in the upper midrange will consider a flat FR as bright. Studio monitors for professionals are typically very flat and they sound bright to the home hi-fi enthusiast. Too much detail, not enough laid back.

Firstly, the peak at very high frequencies is there to give a sense of 'air' and 'space', it's a well known trick that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. There is no musical information at those frequencies so the peak will not make anything sound bright. Interestingly, a lot of speakers that sound 'bright' do so because of the characteristics of their bass drivers, nothing to do with the tweeters at all.

Good studio speakers have a flat response and do not sound bright unless deliberately equalised to do so. In modern two way designs the active crossover and direct coupled power amplifiers control the bass drivers well, the drivers breakup modes that produce much of the brightness/harsness in hi-fi speakers are pushed below audibility.

Also, in an earlier post, Vlad mention the distructive nature of diffraction effects in some speakers, compare these.

Interesting. What exactly about the bass driver? The breakup point or something impacting on higher frequencies or just simply bass quantity? I know that playing with the bass shelving allows me to change the character of the speaker- hey presto warm speaker. A few more twists and now I've got a bright speaker, but considering the trend for bassy speakers I assume this isn't the issue

Cone breakup is the most obvious issue.

A typical example of the raw response that we get from a 5-6 inch bass mid driver. Nice and smooth up to between 2-3 khz, the usual crossover region for a modern two way.

But look at the peak at around 5 khz, some 15dB higher than at 3 khz, not only that, but the breakup is not harmonic and very unpleasant in character. A conventional 12dB/octave crossover at, say, 3 khz does not even come close to attenuating the breakup below audibility so the speaker will display a nasty, distorted peak that will make the system sound bright and harsh.

Ok, This is a generic speaker and a not very good one at that, but it does illustrate the nature of the problem. Some modern hi-tech metal coned drivers exhibit some very sharp breakup modes, easily as bad as the illustration above.

So if your speakers sound bright and harsh, don't blame the tweeters, it is often not their fault!

Edit for spelling.

 

[Vladimir]

Of course there is much much more to sound reproduction from speakers than just getting the frequency response right. That is why I find it odd in this industry very few actually bother producing a neutral speaker without resonances, breakups, and tonal colorations, even at high premium prices. How can you put on a "Hi-Fi" sticker on something that doesn't even get the instrument tonality right? And I honestly think this concept of fixing speaker design issues with passive swapping of electronics or cables doesn't really work with lasting results.

When I said 'bright' I didn't mean 'harsh', which would be a more appropriate term for the breakup Dave just described. This makes me think of Monitor Audio and their aluminium drivers. As I understand the problem with metal, it isn't self dampening like paper or plastic. While it works very well in its pistonic movement within safe operating area, when things go wrong, they go very wrong. Not as forgiving as aquaplas, poly or kevlar.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Seriously you guys have unreasonable expectations/ideas in how you define hifi gear.

Especially when most tracks have all kinds of jiggary pokery added and taken away during the mixing / mastering stage.

From added reverb to phase shifts and so on.

Even on 'live' recordings.

 

[Vladimir]

A flat FR is something reasonable and fairly basic. No wonder Hi-Fi has no meaning, there are no standards.
And, Thompson production and reproduction are two different things. Artists and producers get to do hokery pokery, hi-fi doesn't. If you buy a Renoir painting, do you hang it bare or put a skew lens and red foil in front of it?

 

[davedotco]

A flat FR is something reasonable and fairly basic. No wonder Hi-Fi has no meaning, there are no standards. And, Thompson production and reproduction are two different things. Artists and producers get to do hokery pokery, hi-fi doesn't. If you buy a Renoir painting, do you hang it bare or put a skew lens and red foil in front of it?

A flat FR may be reasonable but other factors are significantly more audible, phase response, time smear, diffraction effects etc. There are many ways to make a loudspeaker sound accurate, good transient response gives recorded music presence (of the 'in the room' kind) and simply makes things sound more real, a lack of dynamic compression allows the music to 'swell' in a natural way, minimal time smear allows the bass lines to 'flow', etc, etc.

To a degree, given the state of the art, it makes some sense to choose speakers whose 'defects' are less noticeable on the kind of music likely to be played, but only within reason. As I said earlier, I think playing some well recorded acoustic music dives a very good starting position.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

A flat FR is something reasonable and fairly basic. No wonder Hi-Fi has no meaning, there are no standards.
And, Thompson production and reproduction are two different things. Artists and producers get to do hokery pokery, hi-fi doesn't. If you buy a Renoir painting, do you hang it bare or put a skew lens and red foil in front of it?

No, this argument still makes no sense. Not when you consider the use of speakers in the real world.

Hi-fidelity can be reproduced by speakers placed in a car door or a wall.

There are no set rules.

And if it suits hanging a Renoir bare or framed with red foil or whatever its my prerogative. ....hifi like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Vladimir]

Recommendations for music good to test transient response?

EDIT: Legitimate music, not test CDs.

 

[lindsayt]

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"?

The frequency response above 100hz is good.

The frequency response below 80 hz is a disaster. It's the type of frequency that I hate as it will make so many rock and pop recordings sound uninvolving. Those speakers are filtering out the bass drums and bass guitars. I prefer speakers that don't filter out whole instruments.

 

[lindsayt]

Recommendations for music good to test transient response?

EDIT: Legitimate music, not test CDs.

Rickie Lee Jones Flying Cowboys on CD.

Joan Armatrading, Me Myself I on vinyl.

Dire Straits Private Investigations on 12" single.

The Tape Project version of Exotic Dances.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Recommendations for music good to test transient response?

EDIT: Legitimate music, not test CDs.

Try Laura Mvula - Diamonds.

From the album 'Sing to the Moon'

 

[Vladimir]

I'm listening to an italian Dire Straits tribute band playing Tunnel of Love. This might be the lowest point in my life, but Expresso Love is coming next in cue.

 

[Vladimir]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0JV-1I7A20

 

[Electro]

Recommendations for music good to test transient response?

EDIT: Legitimate music, not test CDs.

Bob James - Grand Piano Canyon , especially track 'Bare Bones'

Bob James / Earl Klugh - Cool

Smooth jazz with real dynamics !

Gary Boyle - Electric Glide , especially the track 'Grumble'

I can list plenty more if you are interested *mail1*

 

[Vladimir]

Nathan East playing bass on Bare Bones very similar style like Marcus Miller. Snappy track!

 

[lindsayt]

Seriously you guys have unreasonable expectations/ideas in how you define hifi gear.

Especially when most tracks have all kinds of jiggary pokery added and taken away during the mixing / mastering stage.

From added reverb to phase shifts and so on.

Even on 'live' recordings.

I can understand where you're coming from.

But I'm currently listening to Never be the Same Again single mix by Melanie C.

For sure it's been over-produced. There's a certain amount of compression. And the bass has been pushed up in the mix.

But, a mediocre hi-fi system will make a hash of this track, whilst a good system will elevate it to a highly enjoyable work of art. With a nice tight punchy bass line. Melanie C plus her backing singers will sound as if they are standing in the room, singing directly to you. There's also the pleasantly sweet acoustic guitars and synths. It's a track that will grab your attention and get you tapping your feet - on a good system.

Two wrongs don't make a right. And I don't want any wrongs in the recording made worse by major wrongs in my hi-fi system.

 

[ID.]

Seriously you guys have unreasonable expectations/ideas in how you define hifi gear.

Especially when most tracks have all kinds of jiggary pokery added and taken away during the mixing / mastering stage.

From added reverb to phase shifts and so on.

Even on 'live' recordings.

That is why I love my speakers flat with as little distortion as possible. I can hear all of those elements for what they are.

 

[Vladimir]

He is so proud of his Mission 782SE's yet he doesn't care about fidelity. *wink*

 

[ID.]

He is so proud of his Mission 782SE's yet he doesn't care about fidelity. *wink*

And there's the problem. I'm looking at this and I don't know what it means. How it compares to other speakers on the market and what exactly that will mean for how it sounds to the me. I could spend a lot of time educating myself on it and then drawing connections between certain measurements and what I've heard in auditions over the years. But who's going to do that? Who's going to provide that information? It's a royal pain in the proverbial to do it for myself. Self edification? No thanks. This is a hobby to enjoy.