From what I've researched so far, the two most important frequency response measurements are the listening window and the sound power. For forward radiating speakers, the former should be flat and straight, and the latter should be sloping downwards and straight. These composite measurements tend to correspond with a high Olive score of 6.0 or higher, and are going to sound "similarly good" in most rooms. End game achievement unlocked. Going through Pierre Aubert's spinorama website of measurements and some other sites, the only speaker manufacturers who consistently nail this are Axiom Audio, Bryston, Neumann, and Perlisten. Genelec, Infinity, KEF, Revel can do well, but they have a lot of stinkers too; Dutch & Dutch, Kii and Magico also measure well in their limited product range. Anything between a 4.0 and 5.5 Olive score will still sound high-fidelity, but will lose in a double-blind listening test compared to the best on the market. The estimated in-room response is problematic in how to interpret the best-fit line, and doesn't make a consumer-friendly measurement. The missing measurement that's important for large rooms is frequency response at high SPL (85, 95, 105 dB); compression is an issue with smaller speakers and drivers. I've glossed over a few things, but for someone confused as to which measurements matter, this is a good starting point.
Erin you are one of the most useful and informative sources to me on speaker performance and preference. I appreciate these videos a great deal. I'd love to see you do a stream with James Larson or Gene. I think that would be an interesting conversation. You really do an incredible job covering this. Above and beyond.
I spent a lot of time researching speakers on line for my budget which landed me on a set of ELAC UniFi 2.0's, and then I discovered the more scientific sites with the measurements, etc. However, I knew I would like the ELACs because one reviewer called them "boring" and "clinical" which, if you paid attention to his other videos, meant they weren't "scooped" in the mids. So, I knew they'd be more detailed and flatter compared to others that got better reviews. I remember back-inna-day (I'm old) when I went to listen to speakers the first thing I had to do was turn the bass and treble to 0 (flat) and turn off the "Loudness" control, because stores had them maxed out for sales. Since many of us can no longer go to an audio store and find a range of speakers to audition in person, I'm glad there are some places where we can see measurable performance data. It's easier for someone to predict which speakers they might like based on actual measurements.
Excellent vid, Erin. Thanks for going so in depth. I’m the owner of Tekton Pendragons for years now, which are just big black boxes. Certainly didn’t buy em for the looks. Their MTM speaker configuration, crossover design, and higher sensitivity (aprox 95dB) are easily driven by most amplifiers. They’re rather easy to set up correctly at least in my room. They also go very low and have a fantastic mid range as well as great non-fatiguing highs, which make them the perfect speaker for me in my system. It did take a lot of auditioning many speakers before finding and going with them though.
What I see from the Linton is that it can be awful in an untreated room with lots of hard surfaces (which is pretty much almost every living room). Bass extension + room reflections & room modes = unbearable sound.
Erin, Thank you so much for the information you have provided in this video lesson. Now I have a much better way to decide on speakers when and if I can afford them. Or, to use these details when I suggest a speaker to someone. Thanks a again and all the very best to you and yours.
I have Lintons and indeed like them a lot and they are not perfect. In the vertical, they sound a bit better still when you're standing in the listening position, so the best sound is just above your head when sitting there. It works best (in my room) when the Lintons are tilted just a little bit forward on their stands
This rings true for me, yesterday I went to see Thor in IMAX, & the IMAX theatre had one of the worst audio systems I've heard in a theatre. GARBAGE 5.1, & if you were in the back 3-5 rows, you only got 3.1, as the surrounds were individual speakers in front of you. Pretty trash.
Yes I don't really like most cinemas as the sound seems to be run of the mill Pro gear with some old surround speakers, they probably haven't changed them for 20 years. And then they turn it up loud. I'd love for it to have more bass especially, really rumble the whole room (hard in that size of course)
I LOVE this video. LOVE it. I learned the same thing in music school: There is NO perfect performance, there is only better. That attitude actually helps reframe things so musicians focus on their art, not bean counting "mistakes." I would also ague there are NO perfect recordings as well. There are better ones, some okay, and a few truly awful ones, but thanks to improved audio engineering, you have to be a doofus of a recording engineer to completely botch things these days. It appears that speaker design, like recording, has greatly benefitted from better technology. This is also true for performance (better designed instruments, in general). What I am arguing is that better design makes it easier to focus on polishing one's art, and not fighting an instrument (or your own voice), or fighting with the microphones, or the amps, etc. and speakers. And realizing there is no such thing as PERFECT when it comes to music performance, recording, and reproduction, should be liberating across domains. Thank you for taking the time to map this out with speaker design. Again, you do a wonderful job of TEACHING the data. THANK YOU!
Thank you, Catherine! That's the kind of feedback I hope I will get when I create these videos. I would also agree there is no perfect recording as well. Wish I knew more about that whole process to better educate on that front as well.
@Douglas Blake Then there are the recordings where I swear the recording engineer is drunk, stoned or otherwise "unfocused." Example: The 1988 Album of Nadja Solerno-Sonneberg and Licad performing the Brahams and Frank violin sonatas. These are GREAT performers, but the recording is unbearable thanks to the gain set far too high when recording the master. So, lots and lots of distortion. Needless to say, you can't find this album in either Tidal or Qobuz. It sounds like crap whether I play the CD, or the FLAC version.
@@ProfessorJohnSmith I have 2 set ups. In our living room I use the KEF LS50 wireless (first version). They have great resolution, play well with our TV, and have a sub out to the SVS 3000 micro. In another set up, I have Q acoustics 3030i (I was really curious), using a Bluesound powernode, and another SVS 3000 sub. The KEFs give me more detail, but has the high treble ZING every once in a while that then sets off my tinnitus. The Q Acoustics have an "easier" treble, but at times I have a hard time finding the 2nd bassoon on orchestral passages. Both systems have strengths and weaknesses, but I like both a lot.
To obtain the very best out of any quality speaker is to have a dedicated listening room with sound treatment. No speaker is perfect along with front end and source equipment or recordings. All that aside, a properly set up system can sound amazing.
I really think this is where KEF shines, they have budget options as well as entry level Hi fi albiet made in china that looks spectacular and to top it off the hand made glory of the refence line
About 20 years ago there was the Revel M20 -- pretty close to perfect, in real-world terms. I'll never understand why they didn't continue to produce a speaker similar to it. Check out the Stereophile measurements.
The reason why "near perfect" products are discontinued is actually rather simple, When you've found such a near perfect, you will never buy anything else so the industry will die. So they stop making them, yours wears out and you have to buy something else ....... and the whole cycle restarts
Great video Erin. There's one more thing you didn't consider: size. What can you live with? I compare speakers to cars. You're not going to find a car that goes 0-60 mph in 1 second, seats 12 people comfortably, gets 1000 mpg, looks sleek and sexy, and costs $1,000. Not ever going to happen. So you choose a car depending on which aspects are most important to you. Also, in speakers there are different designs: horn vs dome tweeter, bass reflex vs sealed port, 2-way vs 3-way. None of these designs are inherently better than another, it all depends on how well each particular design is IMPLEMENTED. Cars are the same way, a V8 isn't necessarily better than a 6-cyl or 4-cyl, a turbo isn't necessarily better than normally aspirated, and so on. It all depends on how well the engineers implemented that design.
Love the video! When you listed all the things not covered in the video, my immediate thought, even before you stated it, is I hope you cover all those topics in future videos.
Thank you very much. Very helpful as always. Hope so some day you will have a chance to review TAD speaker, one of the best sounding and best measuring speakers
I bought a pair of Bose 901's back in the 80's. I wanted something that came close to creating the illusion of a live performance. Sold em a year later and I'm still looking for the "Perfect" speaker today.
Lol, me too. Got a pair of series VI about two decades ago --was drooling over the Stereo Review full-page ad which shows 18 pretty blue drivers with a slogan, if memory serves, 'only live sounds better'. Still have them and every now and then, try them w/ different amp/preamp, cables, room, placement, hoping to hear something new and different. But every time, back in the storage they went after a day or two. There are some pluses --coherence, clarity at certain frequencies (e.g mid/lower treble & mid bass), reflected sound/spaciousness. Minuses are highs lacking nuances & delicacy, and lows one note, lacking body & texture etc. Overall the recreated 'live' experience leaves much to be desired.
Great video, as always Erin. Very educational and illuminating, and, even though I didn't learn anything new, it still helps to reinforce my understanding of it all. But, there's one thing I'd like to add, which I'm not sure is even relevant to this topic, but I'll say it anyway, lol. However, that being said, as with everything these days, especially online and on social media, far too many of us band together into our tribes, and look down on and disdain and ridicule those that have different tastes than we do. Even though we don't like speakers with big midrange suckouts and too hot tweeters that can melt steel, like most B&W and Klipsch models, some people love those speakers, and if they get the most enjoyment from their favorite music listening to those speakers, who are they hurting? (I have to add that some Heritage series Klipsch models, like the K-Horns and La Scalas are, IMO, the greatest speakers ever made, because nothing else sounds as much like live music in your room, no matter how much better it may measure than they do). After all, in the end, it's whatever gear gives you the most enjoyment listening to the music you love, even if that gear is inaccurate, as long as you know that it's not accurate, and still like it more than gear you've auditioned that is.
I value your measurements, reviews and tutorials very much. Thank you Erin. Personally, I would try to avoid audio gear which measures poorly but measurements alone probably shouldn't be the deciding factor in buying gear. If you can live with the measurements and adore the sound then go with your listening preference. Problems arise when the measurements are rubbish but you still enjoy the sound. Ha !!!!
The rabbit hole of "audiophile lies" is a bottomless pit, and >50% of audio companies that target the audiophile market need to keep it that way to continue existing.
Context is always the greatest aid in understanding anything, where having an expert document a short history of noteworthy technological innovations would be quite helpful. It would be interesting to hear what these current technological improvements are, and what your assessment of them is. Also, which manufacturers are making these technologies available at affordable prices. Are there any "boutique" companies that always use high-quality parts, but still offer an affordable model? Boutique companies for enthusiasts like this exist in the musical instrument market.
The perfect speaker is in my head. At some point they will be able to create the perfect transducer. I bought these cheap Jamo s803 speakers and they sound pretty good for the price. Even at moderate volumes they impress with music and clarity.
There may be no perfect speaker, but I think I've heard ones that are close enough to perfect that you wouldn't care if its perfect or not, as far back as 1981. For one instance there was a speaker called the Watson Labs model 10. There are pics of it on the net. The speaker had a dedicated bass cabinet filled with denser than air gas and a dipole midrange/tweeter section. It was so cool it left everything else behind. It was designed and marketed by Dayton Wright, better known for their full range electrostatic speakers. The Watson speakers used dynamic drivers not anything planar or electrostatic. A line of speakers that was under the radar and then they stopped producing them.
Cerwin-Vega, surprisingly, made a similar speaker with bass loading like that in the 1970s, called the S1. It was their top of the line two way model that used one of their long throw woofers, and their widely used horn loaded fabric dome tweeters that they called a "Dhorm". It was more refined and polite than many of their other speakers, most of which aimed for maximum output and explosive dynamics. However, the best of their designs were actually very well designed and were quite linear.
Excellent video. I'm not sure two-way versus three-way should be listed the way you listed it. Yes a three-way arguably has more features than a two-way, but performance wise...
Excellent videos! Audio reproduction (and engineering in general!)is all about trade off (i'm an electical engineer). You're dead on spot about using data as your advantage, you can save a lot of time if you know the kind of spec you like, the electronic you have (remember that every device in the signal path has its own transfer function that adds as the signal traval from source to your ears!), the room you have and finally your own preferences. Again, very nice video!
Every loudspeaker is a set of compromises of some kind. Some designs are very elaborate and address issues regular monkey coffins have problems with, but they still use transducers which have their limitations. So no, there's no perfect loudspeaker even if someone would try to design and build one.
The dip at or around 700hz, isn't because of too steep of a slope in the crossover? Because it's a 15" woofer and a HLCD, wouldn't a more shallow slope or perhaps a zobel (on the woofer) alleviate much of this dip???
Ha ha. Studio monitors are not the bees knees for music enjoyment.They are merely a tool used by music pro's to get their work done. They really aren't very enjoyable to listen to. If this were truly the case, then manufacturers would all be making speakers that are literaly ultra-flat, ultra-neutral and consequently ultra-boring. Same goes for audio electronics. I say this as one on the side of objectivity in audio.
@@davidcarr2216 Very controversial take. I don't have experience listening to anything even close to Genelec level so I can't pretend like I have real life experience to counter. However, from my understanding most speakers, studio or 'hi-fi' strive for the harman target. It just so happens, the best and most reputable studio monitors tend to do it better than anyone else. I don't understand how that can't be enjoyable to listen too given its just a more accurate representation of what 'hi-fi' is trying to achieve anyway.
@@dudemanismadcool I’m really not into controversy, just honesty .Ask yourself whether a company such as KEF couldn’t take on the studio monitor market. Focal make both monitors and Hifi speakers and you can bet they don’t sound alike. Could Ford take on Ferrari or Porsche ? They did that back in the 60s. Horses for courses. A Hifi speaker is about engaging and entertaining the listener, not so a studio monitor. If you get the chance, try to listen to some Genelecs and or Neumanns and then ask yourself honestly if you'd want to listen to them for enjoyment. I was at a guy's place the other week who used 8331s for his home production set up and JBL L100 Classics for chill out listening. Purely anecdotal, I know, but you'll find other guys who make similar choices.
If anybody is able to say single word how speaker sounds, what he observed in listening it is enough evidence that it is not perfect speaker - no matter all computer analysys and dB data
What is your thoughts on the Kali for home theater crossed at 80hz? Are "studio monitors" too narrow for home theater if you are only doing a few seats on one row?
Transducers of all kinds have fixable parameters and non-fixable parameters. Response curve is largely fixable, with important caveats. Dynamic nonlinearities are pretty much baked in and nothing can correct them. Importantly, dynamic misbehavior can make a speaker non-correctable with EQ. Driver manufacturers concentrate their quality control on dynamic misbehaviors for this reason. The truth is, manufacture of an accurate (in many ways) speaker is damned hard to do. A lot of pre-proto research and even more work during production is required. Spend money on speakers before any other piece of gear.
A perfect example is the guy that says no matter what stereo speakers you use, you need subs, and then the other guys that are perfectly happy with speakers that dig deep enough for most music and fit their environment so that subs are non essential..it’s all about preference and opportunity. I personally only use subs when I need to, and for me right now, that happens to be on an HT setup in a family room. I will never tell anyone never use subs or always use subs. That kind of logic is always faulty!
Nice video. Always appreciate the honesty and things you cover. Are you going to do a video on the Overnight Sensations? I see from your website that you've tested them. Thanks for all that you do! Keep up the awesome work. :)
Erin, how do you determine that angle of horizontal radiation? Is that a certain level drop from on-axis response? What frequency range do you consider more important regarding the width of radiation?
Hey Erin, It would be really nice if you could include in your measurements some time domain data. Say a Step Response and Group Delay chart for example. It so nice to see your objective approach to reviewing loudspeakers and matching and contrasting your initial listening impressions with the science and measured data, this is exactly what we need from channels like yours and e.g. @audio science review - thank you! I am also so grateful for the huge advances Dr. Klippel and brilliant team have made in speaker measurements. Forget about huge and very costly to build anechoic chambers, the NFS and the first principles science approach behind it is just so nice to see. I don't know how many speaker manufactures have a Klippel NFS and to what extend their goal is getting closer to a more perfect speaker. As you rightly point out there are some constraints that the loudspeaker product manager must work to and can only do so much at certain price point etc. But what about the high-end very expensive and elaborate "box" design speaker manufactures. Without naming names, most of them are still pretty much ignoring the fundamentals of loudspeaker research and design known and available to us all, such as described by legends like Floyd E. Toole, Sean Olive, the late and great Sigfried Linkwitz and several other important contributors. Yet many high-end speakers clearly have astronomical price points that should allow them to get things much more right. As the Audio Critic, and also late, Peter Aczel said: "one thing I am fairly sure of: No breakthrough in sound quality will be heard from “monkey coffins” (1970s trade lingo), i.e. rectangular boxes with forward-firing drivers. I’ll go even further: Even if the box is not rectangular but some incredibly fancy shape, even if it’s huge, even if it costs more than a luxury car, if it’s sealed or vented and the drivers are all in front, it’s a monkey coffin and will sound like a monkey coffin-boxy and, to varying degrees, not quite open and transparent". Probably historically without too many DSP active speakers, the time domain has had little focus because of the difficulties in controlling its behaviour with passive designs. Even Floyd Tool has paid little attention to the time domain, but Sigfreid Linkwitz (hugely important figure for the audio community) changed his mind in the later years once DSP tools became a practical reality. Digging deep there are papers that lay out the psychoacoustic reasoning behind time coherence, but apart from a couple of papers, group delay in the lower bass frequencies is largely still dismissed as a factor. Again I think because the fundamental design of bass sound reproduction is still mostly some form of vented or closed box, where achieving a low group delay is hard if not impossible and so there has been no practical way to test the audibility of group delay in the lowest end of the spectrum. Open Baffle bass, H-frames and even the folded dipole (Ripole) designs avoid the issues inherent to conventional box bass. It is possible resolve low frequency sound reproduction to a more natural and detailed bass and to lower group delay to explore the limits if audibility. The downside is that low frequency SPL is a limitation compared to what possible with one or more box subwoofers pumping up the room with muddy bass. There are solutions that too, but not yet on the market... Anyway really grateful if you might consider extending your work into reviewing time domain behavior and your listener comments on the data differences between the speakers you measure.
@@ErinsAudioCorner , ah very nice. Must admit I mostly watch your videos and see now all the extra data you provide. I see some very nice examples of time response and group delay from active speakers like e.g. the Kii Audio THREE and some pretty horrible ones from most of the passive speakers. Have you formed some views on the audibility of those difference? Of course time domain behavior will also be reflected in the frequency response, although not with the full explanatory power without reference to the time domain.
Very interesting comment about radiation pattern. I am soundstage-nut and classical music maniac where soundstage is quite special. I am interested in stereo only. I like the "lifelike" soundstage where stage is in front of me like in live concerts and expanded behind my speakers. I think I understand your comment about narrow radial pattern where instruments and singers are more precisely positioned (I like that also). I don't completely understand your comment about width of stage. I've never heard speakers where stage is wider than space between speakers. Except when there are special effects on the recording. But I am curios about soundstage depth. I am not quite familiar with pop/rock music but soundstage depth is quite special for classical music recordings as I mentioned. Unfortunately I don't have measurements about my current speakers, which are made by a local manufacturer from SB drivers. These speakers have exceptional soundstage depth, I've never experienced anything like this and I love this effect. It depends on recording also but when I shut my eyes I feel that the wall beyond my speakers is disappeared and I feel that there is a big "hall" behind my speakers where the orchestra placed. As I mentioned it is very dependant on recording and the room also. When I placed my speakers in a bigger room where there is bigger space behind the speakers, this effect is much more effective. This speaker is a 2 way floorstanding type with port on the speaker's bottom (it has little feet). Tweeter axis is little below my ears, I think this also relevant to the "soundstage" effect. If I try to raise the speaker, this effect is decreasing. Do you have any experience about this soundstage effect and its relation to radiation pattern?
I heard somewhere that a significant portion of the sound of a room or hall (on a recording) is found in the lower frequencies. So some people swear by stereo subwoofers to enhance this effect further. Apparently, some of our spatial cue information can be found much lower than you may have intuitively thought. Is it possible that your low frequency response changes when you lift the speakers, and although you're not consciously aware of any changes in sub frequency response, it may just be these spatial cues that diminish when you change the position. I really am not sure, but it's an avenue to possibly pursue further.
@@erics.4113 Thank you for the reply! There was a conversation about this on a local hifi-forum months ago and subwoofer-maniacs said the same too. Like you, they said that sub bass somehow modifies overal soundstage perception. But they are not classical music fans so I can't decide what they call "good soundstage". I don't have subwoofer and my speaker's midwoofer is only a 6 inch SB17NBAC35 (you measured its ceramic version months ago I think). So in my case I don't think that the sub range is the cause. And my experience is that the distance of the speakers and the wall behind them is a major component for good deep soundstage. I don't know, interesting question.
@@1984robert I'm not Erin by the way, just some random guy that is actually quite new to this hobby myself, but picking up steam (gear) quickly and diving in deep to learn as much as I can. Interesting that you mentioned distance from the front wall as I've also heard explanations about this effect as well. Apparently, it isn't always about directivity of sound and the distance into the room for speakers to produce a deep soundstage, although most contend that is a contributor. One video I watched about psychoacoustics brought up the fact that the visual boundary (the wall itself) prevented most people from hearing a soundstage deeper than that physical barrier. And even if you closed your eyes, you maintain a mental picture of the physical space you are listening in. Basically, the presence of the wall destroys some of the illusion that you are fighting so hard to create for your music. Most high end systems will be setup pulled into the room for even bass response (to not have SBIR effects and artificially enhanced bass by reflection) and also to enhance soundstage. I suspect some of that psychoacoustics could be a factor, but that's just my intuition. I also liked your reference to subwoofer maniacs. Haha. That's probably a fitting description for bass heads. Hopefully you dive deeper into the science of sound. I think you'll confirm that spatial information can resonate or exist in sub frequencies. Some of that reverberation from the hall or space exists in that portion of the frequency response. And with that being the case, you would want good, even response throughout that range if you hope to recreate the effect at home the same that the live listener was treated to at the event.
@@erics.4113 Oh, sorry I misread your name. It is interesting what you wrote about distance. Maybe I have advanced imagination and that hepls me to switch off the physical borders from my mental picture. Based on my experience this effect depends on my mental condition also. Actually I think mental condition affects much more the percepted sound than most hifi guy accept. But in this case I am sure that the perceived soundstage is deeper in a larger room and that is not because of this psychological thing. I don't have proof to this of course. I had a tall hifi rack years ago. I used a small coffee table before that but that time I had more hifi device and I needed a larger rack. I put that between the speakers and that disturbed me especially when I listened to opera recordings. Singers usually placed between speakers and when I used the small coffee table, there was space "for them" between speakers. But when I replaced that with this tall rack, that disturbed this mental image. I couldn't use to it. Finally I replaced this back to the original coffee table. I think there are more than one type of person in this hobby. There are people who interested more in the technical side of this hobby. I have a Dayton measurement microphone as a toy and I use it to find the best possible place for the speakers in my little listening room but I am basically a music fan and CD collector. I am interested more in music history, composers, performers, recordings and music of course.
@@1984robert there's plenty of published data on mental state and perceived sound quality within psychoacoustics as well. I know if I'm congested it won't be as pleasurable either. And sometimes my ears aren't working as good as other days due to old age and abuse of them too. I haven't gotten the measuring mic but that's next. Of course I'm a music lover, but I've always been a tech head and interested in gear and playing around with the setup to make it better... All good for me!
The 4367 uses the same 15" driver as the M2, right? Noticed the 500hz dip that was due to a resonance in the driver seen in the M2 isn't nearly as pronounced here. Could that just be variances between drivers?
@@ErinsAudioCorner Wow, that's very interesting. I wonder if the newer model would benefit the M2 once the M2 DSP corrections for the new part are made
Lately, I’ve felt like I’m just “chasing dragons” with my system. It’s fun to learn about cool new speakers, the science behind good sound, etc., but man, sometimes I wish I could ignore the annoying OCD tendencies that come with starting to learn a thing or two, and just ENJOY music and movies. Probably just a “me” thing, but I’m guessing a few here can relate. 😂
I didn't find any video of you reviewing "MONITOR AUDIO" speakers... it would be possible to talk about the new Silver 100 7G, I would appreciate your opinion and analysis of this new series, thanks in advance!
@@ErinsAudioCorner hahaha… yes, I have and would love to lend the speakers for you to review, but I'm on the other side of the world, in Brazil, so the process would be impossible, anyway thank you very much for your answer, I'll be following the channel…
Speakers can change their sound considerably... Due to room acoustics or amplification. I would think both would be measurable, but I have only seen tests on room acoustics. And that makes me wonder... What was the source driving the speaker as it was tested and to what extent is that reflected in the measurements? Have you ever tested this, Erin? Impedance curves of speakers play a roll... big vs small watts, tube vs transistor...
Every speaker is a compromise. Janos already talks about this. Ask a designer what they had to compromise to get their product out the door. *crickets*
What ever you buy, with whatever budget you have, it has to make you smile at the end of the day. will i ever be able to afford an 8000 dollar Macintosh amp and some 6000 dollar Focals? Never. But when i sit back with what i could afford, bottom line...MAKES ME SMILE!
Great content, again! I'm on the DIY side of things. But just sent this to a german channel about DIY speakers. Let me add a 4th point to the 3 main decisions to make: space! Do I have enough space to place a speaker in a room, keeping it one foot away from the next wall? Or does my living situation a bookshelf speaker? Very well pointed out!
Thank you Mr Erin for the nice video on various technical aspects of speakers... Waiting for KLH model 5 review and comparison with Linton Heritage speakers though there is significant price difference. I own Linton Heritage speakers and using them with BIC Acoustics Sub for full frequency spectrum feel... Recently Mr Tharbamar said KLH 5 are in a different league compared to Linton's, but I do believe Lintons can perform well against KHL. Thanks a lot for your time and effort....🙏🏻
@@nielsoe8970 Feeling nice to hear from You... Andrew and cheapaudioman seem to have too much praise for the Lintons, which for me looked a bit biased. But Erin's analysis cleared all doubts about Linton speakers. Thank You very much for the reply...🙂
Is there a good way to measure compression without Klippel? I've tried measuring my speakers at various SPL levels (with REW) but after aligning the curves, they all matched so I didn't see any compression that way and am wondering if there's a better way
@Douglas Blake I understand the mechanisms behind the compression but I just haven't been able to measure it myself even past 100dBSPL at 1m. Variations less than 0.1dB when I align measurements. Maybe my speakers just don't compress at all even at those levels... I'll try again with some smaller drivers
@Douglas Blake Aligning is the only way to do this. Increase output level by 6dB, lower curve by 6dB, does it perfectly match the previous measurement? When I did this to levels past 100dBSPL I got no difference compared to at 86dBSPL. Always aligned perfectly (compensating with the correct increase in dB so any overall decrease in SPL would be visible)
@Douglas Blake Comparing the curves is just an easy way to compare the distances. That's exactly what I'm doing. Input -30dB, input -20dB, offset -20dB measurement by 10dB, does it match to -30dB input. If it does, then I got +10dB and no compression. If it doesn't match then there's compression and I can see exactly how much compression. This is exactly what the Klippel graph does. If I wanted to be fancy about it I could use the functions in REW to do the math and display the difference between the curves which would be exactly the same graph as Klippel. I just haven't been able to get any compression on my system so I want to know if Klippel uses some other kind of signal to test for this or if my system just doesn't compress at these levels.
@@gerhardwestphalen I think Erin's compression tests are not instantaneous. I believe it's regarding thermal compression (sustained heating of voice coils etc) and not just running sweeps at different db levels. This is likely why you were not able to reproduce the results. The Distortion tests are a better indicator of spl handling.
I think there is one fundamental Problem with all those measurements - all of them is one tone at a time with single power value on the input. And the real music is permanently changing values of multiply tones. None of those measurements says something about resolution or clarity of single tones in a multitone. We dont talk also much about phase, or impulse characteristics, or decay of single and multiply impulses in combination. After all they are so many speakers that measure nearly good (or bad) but sounding so different. Juts my theory, why we still cant characterize a speaker only with measurements :) (actually pretty absurd - we landed on Mars or playing with elementary practical and quantum physics, but are still so bad at speakers)
You should read this book. It addresses your concern with research and scientific data that shows the usefulness of these measurements. amzn.to/3PBQMXM Alternatively, watch this: m.ua-cam.com/video/TcTydBUd8Wc/v-deo.html
When you get to really high end audio with such ridiculous prices like on the last speaker, the JBL, you are entering the "Realm of Diminishing Returns". For real, the speaker before it, the Wharfedale Linton, seems to be better overall. This has me asking the question, "Why?" There is NO WAY in HELL that the JBL is worth over $16k. This is trolling on JBL's part and they are preying on the audiophile, to suck them into thinking they need to spend that amount of money to get decent sound. The bottom line is that you are wasting your money. You want something big and loud, then get a pair of Klipshorns. You can get them for far cheaper than $16k. Heck, I don't even spend $5 on a WHOLE system! Those that buy into this speaker are demonstrating a degree of ineptitude that borders on the imbecilic. Don't feed the hi-end audio trolls! Great video though!
Erin Do a review of ZetaZero orbital ref speakers. The most technically advanced drivers ever made - just talk to its designer! I promise you will learn something. They are the size of a bit larger floorstanders but can play in 60,000 seat stadium without distortion, how about that?
I'd probably be a little more careful about how you interpret some of the peaks and dip of a speakers on-axis and power response. Most of them you explained away with "alignment of woofer and tweeter" "Vertical spacing" and so on. Because it could be so many things. Cabinet diffraction, driver break-up and for power response, not a good mash up of the individual drivers directivity, so that one driver has way wider dispersion at the crossover point.
That's probably as much to do with room and placement, plus front-end, plus recording, and THEN some character of the speaker or measured performance. My 2 cents, and mostly just my intuition so take that for what it's worth
Erin, let me start by just simply saying your voice sounds good, (and you have a good pretty down-to-earth) channel and I'm sure you know what I'm trying to say and that's real important for me, as for some reason have damn good voice recognition even at 75 (had it when I was younger but for some reason pay more attention now) It's very hard for people to make decisions about how something sounds w/o hifi stores hot around hardly. It does get down to taste in the end and budget. Lintons, so maybe you like "Brit sound" I know I do. No mention of stats/planars but u explained that. Quite a hole between 1500.00 and JBL at 16.5K$ Was more of a gearhead when I had more $$$, but at least I have ended up with my "Holy Grail" and I went thru changes to get them. Totally rebuilt by KC Electrostatic Solutions a short while ago. I have the typical 4K notch that pretty much of sound engineers have (all in 40's and 50's but they make very good sounds) I do go on, sorry! Just an old Hippie, soon of to Audio Heaven not too soon I hope
take 5k💳 and pump this in 2 speakers and 2 woofers, bam, done the fiddely part is the bass adjustment on DSP woofers ( witch you bought out of ur 5k) but its not hard! stop beeing cheap u get what u pay no shortcuts no magic no woohoo (like sport) go and hear a calibrated system and then go home and feel how far ur cheap stuff is away from it.. believe me iam a complete audio nerd for 20 years, heard and read a lot. again , dont be cheap..im not saying burn 20k😉 but with 5k u can generate a sweet hearing spot to work or just listen without thinking #meh😅 i have rl906 and 2x sb2000 pro damp ur room👌
Inherent biases shouldn't influence your measurement assessments as flaws. A drop in treble to make a speaker sound "warm" may be positive to you, but a negative to another. I don't think viewers can differentiate that as a preference, but as a defect, based on the way you're presenting it. As challenging as that is, I do wish you could be more neutral on that.
I have said countless times what I prefer. I said it in my most recent two videos as well. Can’t be much more clear than that. 👍 But aside from that, research shows that the vast majority of people prefer a flat on axis response with a smooth off axis response. And logic dictates that a speaker with flat on axis response would be the one that would not color the sound in any way if you were shooting for accuracy. Whether or not people truly want accuracy, however, is a separate discussion. 👍 On the same topic of being transparent, it would be helpful if other reviewer‘s which state their biases and their preferences upfront. But I believe that many of them simply don’t know what that is because they don’t know how to read data and won’t spend the time to try to understand in order to better educate their audience on the things that they like or dislike about a speaker. But that, too, is a separate topic.
@@ErinsAudioCorner All really good points, Erin. Yes, lots of different topics to dissect, and debate (like if everyone does prefer linearity, vs. a common V shape showroom signature). On the topic of other reviewers, you could be right that they don't discuss their biases, because they're not quite clear what they are, or how to articulate them with measurements. And it's more understandable, and somewhat logical, to stay on the positive side of things, because one man's flaw, is another man's preference. To prevent alienating their audience, it's best for them to error on the side of caution, and not state something is a flaw, if it simply isn't to their liking. I still have issues with calling "brightness" a flaw. You do a great job of articulating your bias for not liking it, but most will read between the lines, and assume you just think they "suck." That's very narrow scope, limited thinking, but it's hard to shake. Conversely, when you mention something is even below linearity, with a drop off in treble, you communicate it as a good thing (but I also see that as a flaw, it's further from linearity). You've always been honest in your assessments, and that's uncommon to find on YT, for sure. I truly value the breakdowns you do for what you can possibly EQ to your liking, and how or why is it or isn't possible. That's a tremendous value for all of us.
@@ErinsAudioCorner nope everyone is different and hear things different I heard 2 speakers of different brands that were altered to have the same exact frequency response and they still sounded different but I personally hate flat speakers a perfer a more in your face type of speaker I've watched almost all of your videos keep up the good work!
@@Sc2God724 I can guarantee you those two speakers don’t measure the same. There is more to measurements than just a single axis response. 👍 Watch this video for explanation: ua-cam.com/video/sps8mc-snQU/v-deo.html
@@ErinsAudioCorner the measurements were on and off axis the very similarly built horn speakers give or take a 2 db difference off axis as humans don't really pick up and alter both speakers with addentional bracing and padding for less resonance even on the horns room slightly elevates highs by 3 db and on horns had to turn highs down to get them measured pretty close
Look! Pretending that we can tell IF a speaker is or is NOT perfect is kinda pretentious and nonsensical at all! I studied so many designs and evaluate all components used to build all these speakers only to realize that they are made to last only 5 to 10 years! I have developed a type of wooden cabinet that makes any woofer give you deep and smooth bass and the ideal components for the 3 drivers and I can tell that my speakers are totally capable of reproducing every single sound with the highest details. Well, maybe I didn't find the way to build the (perfect) speaker...but I can tell you that those I build will have the job done!
Probably one of my favorite videos...thank you for all of the help in understanding this hobby!
Glad to hear it!
That's probably one of the most informative videos I've ever seen on UA-cam about speaker overviews. Thanks!
From what I've researched so far, the two most important frequency response measurements are the listening window and the sound power. For forward radiating speakers, the former should be flat and straight, and the latter should be sloping downwards and straight. These composite measurements tend to correspond with a high Olive score of 6.0 or higher, and are going to sound "similarly good" in most rooms. End game achievement unlocked.
Going through Pierre Aubert's spinorama website of measurements and some other sites, the only speaker manufacturers who consistently nail this are Axiom Audio, Bryston, Neumann, and Perlisten. Genelec, Infinity, KEF, Revel can do well, but they have a lot of stinkers too; Dutch & Dutch, Kii and Magico also measure well in their limited product range. Anything between a 4.0 and 5.5 Olive score will still sound high-fidelity, but will lose in a double-blind listening test compared to the best on the market.
The estimated in-room response is problematic in how to interpret the best-fit line, and doesn't make a consumer-friendly measurement. The missing measurement that's important for large rooms is frequency response at high SPL (85, 95, 105 dB); compression is an issue with smaller speakers and drivers.
I've glossed over a few things, but for someone confused as to which measurements matter, this is a good starting point.
Erin you are one of the most useful and informative sources to me on speaker performance and preference. I appreciate these videos a great deal. I'd love to see you do a stream with James Larson or Gene. I think that would be an interesting conversation. You really do an incredible job covering this. Above and beyond.
I spent a lot of time researching speakers on line for my budget which landed me on a set of ELAC UniFi 2.0's, and then I discovered the more scientific sites with the measurements, etc. However, I knew I would like the ELACs because one reviewer called them "boring" and "clinical" which, if you paid attention to his other videos, meant they weren't "scooped" in the mids. So, I knew they'd be more detailed and flatter compared to others that got better reviews. I remember back-inna-day (I'm old) when I went to listen to speakers the first thing I had to do was turn the bass and treble to 0 (flat) and turn off the "Loudness" control, because stores had them maxed out for sales. Since many of us can no longer go to an audio store and find a range of speakers to audition in person, I'm glad there are some places where we can see measurable performance data. It's easier for someone to predict which speakers they might like based on actual measurements.
This is one of the most useful, informative videos on speaker sound that I have yet come across on the web. Thank You!
Best bumper sticker I have seen recently. "I go where I'm towed". hahah
Excellent vid, Erin. Thanks for going so in depth. I’m the owner of Tekton Pendragons for years now, which are just big black boxes. Certainly didn’t buy em for the looks. Their MTM speaker configuration, crossover design, and higher sensitivity (aprox 95dB) are easily driven by most amplifiers. They’re rather easy to set up correctly at least in my room. They also go very low and have a fantastic mid range as well as great non-fatiguing highs, which make them the perfect speaker for me in my system. It did take a lot of auditioning many speakers before finding and going with them though.
What I see from the Linton is that it can be awful in an untreated room with lots of hard surfaces (which is pretty much almost every living room). Bass extension + room reflections & room modes = unbearable sound.
Erin, Thank you so much for the information you have provided in this video lesson. Now I have a much better way to decide on speakers when and if I can afford them. Or, to use these details when I suggest a speaker to someone. Thanks a again and all the very best to you and yours.
I have Lintons and indeed like them a lot and they are not perfect. In the vertical, they sound a bit better still when you're standing in the listening position, so the best sound is just above your head when sitting there. It works best (in my room) when the Lintons are tilted just a little bit forward on their stands
What a great upload. Thanks for putting this together. A lot of people are gonna find this helpful.
I hope so! Thanks!
This rings true for me, yesterday I went to see Thor in IMAX, & the IMAX theatre had one of the worst audio systems I've heard in a theatre. GARBAGE 5.1, & if you were in the back 3-5 rows, you only got 3.1, as the surrounds were individual speakers in front of you. Pretty trash.
Yes I don't really like most cinemas as the sound seems to be run of the mill Pro gear with some old surround speakers, they probably haven't changed them for 20 years. And then they turn it up loud. I'd love for it to have more bass especially, really rumble the whole room (hard in that size of course)
Last time I went to cinema the sound level was at least 10-12dB too loud. I put earphones in to lower the volume and that's how I survived.
IMAX theaters have always had poor quality sound and harsh.
My wife and I just saw Jurassic World Dominion and it was the loudest movie we’ve ever seen.
@Douglas Blake We did have hearing protection. The ear plugs were rated at 33dB attenuation and it was still loud!
I LOVE this video. LOVE it. I learned the same thing in music school: There is NO perfect performance, there is only better. That attitude actually helps reframe things so musicians focus on their art, not bean counting "mistakes." I would also ague there are NO perfect recordings as well. There are better ones, some okay, and a few truly awful ones, but thanks to improved audio engineering, you have to be a doofus of a recording engineer to completely botch things these days. It appears that speaker design, like recording, has greatly benefitted from better technology. This is also true for performance (better designed instruments, in general). What I am arguing is that better design makes it easier to focus on polishing one's art, and not fighting an instrument (or your own voice), or fighting with the microphones, or the amps, etc. and speakers. And realizing there is no such thing as PERFECT when it comes to music performance, recording, and reproduction, should be liberating across domains. Thank you for taking the time to map this out with speaker design. Again, you do a wonderful job of TEACHING the data. THANK YOU!
Thank you, Catherine! That's the kind of feedback I hope I will get when I create these videos. I would also agree there is no perfect recording as well. Wish I knew more about that whole process to better educate on that front as well.
Perfect only exist in the dictionary.
@Douglas Blake Then there are the recordings where I swear the recording engineer is drunk, stoned or otherwise "unfocused." Example: The 1988 Album of Nadja Solerno-Sonneberg and Licad performing the Brahams and Frank violin sonatas. These are GREAT performers, but the recording is unbearable thanks to the gain set far too high when recording the master. So, lots and lots of distortion. Needless to say, you can't find this album in either Tidal or Qobuz. It sounds like crap whether I play the CD, or the FLAC version.
@@catherinelugg4321 what speakers are you using?
@@ProfessorJohnSmith I have 2 set ups. In our living room I use the KEF LS50 wireless (first version). They have great resolution, play well with our TV, and have a sub out to the SVS 3000 micro. In another set up, I have Q acoustics 3030i (I was really curious), using a Bluesound powernode, and another SVS 3000 sub. The KEFs give me more detail, but has the high treble ZING every once in a while that then sets off my tinnitus. The Q Acoustics have an "easier" treble, but at times I have a hard time finding the 2nd bassoon on orchestral passages. Both systems have strengths and weaknesses, but I like both a lot.
To obtain the very best out of any quality speaker is to have a dedicated listening room with sound treatment. No speaker is perfect along with front end and source equipment or recordings. All that aside, a properly set up system can sound amazing.
If the music it puts out makes you happy it's a damn fine speaker :)
There are no perfect speakers, no perfect recordings, no perfect rooms, no perfect gear.
But most importantly: there are no perfect ears
I really think this is where KEF shines, they have budget options as well as entry level Hi fi albiet made in china that looks spectacular and to top it off the hand made glory of the refence line
About 20 years ago there was the Revel M20 -- pretty close to perfect, in real-world terms. I'll never understand why they didn't continue to produce a speaker similar to it. Check out the Stereophile measurements.
Found Amir!
The reason why "near perfect" products are discontinued is actually rather simple, When you've found such a near perfect, you will never buy anything else so the industry will die.
So they stop making them, yours wears out and you have to buy something else ....... and the whole cycle restarts
Check Audiosciencereviews (I thing Antonia meant that with "amir") measurements. Far from perfect.
@@ckra2001 But they sounded pretty close to perfect. And Amir can be a very harsh critic.
JBL M2. Basically as good as it gets.
Great video Erin. There's one more thing you didn't consider: size. What can you live with?
I compare speakers to cars. You're not going to find a car that goes 0-60 mph in 1 second, seats 12 people comfortably, gets 1000 mpg, looks sleek and sexy, and costs $1,000. Not ever going to happen. So you choose a car depending on which aspects are most important to you.
Also, in speakers there are different designs: horn vs dome tweeter, bass reflex vs sealed port, 2-way vs 3-way. None of these designs are inherently better than another, it all depends on how well each particular design is IMPLEMENTED. Cars are the same way, a V8 isn't necessarily better than a 6-cyl or 4-cyl, a turbo isn't necessarily better than normally aspirated, and so on. It all depends on how well the engineers implemented that design.
I now just give a thumbs up at the beginning of the videos.
Theres a similar breakdown used in detroit back in the day when designing cars.
Love the video! When you listed all the things not covered in the video, my immediate thought, even before you stated it, is I hope you cover all those topics in future videos.
Thank you very much. Very helpful as always. Hope so some day you will have a chance to review TAD speaker, one of the best sounding and best measuring speakers
Geeez, I didn't even say what the fuck my "Holy Grail" speakers were of course they were Peter Walker's best and final design QUAD 63's!!!!!!
Great video Erin. As with virtually everything in life there are inherent trade offs. Thanks a lot.
I bought a pair of Bose 901's back in the 80's. I wanted something that came close to creating the illusion of a live performance. Sold em a year later and I'm still looking for the "Perfect" speaker today.
Lol, me too. Got a pair of series VI about two decades ago --was drooling over the Stereo Review full-page ad which shows 18 pretty blue drivers with a slogan, if memory serves, 'only live sounds better'. Still have them and every now and then, try them w/ different amp/preamp, cables, room, placement, hoping to hear something new and different. But every time, back in the storage they went after a day or two. There are some pluses --coherence, clarity at certain frequencies (e.g mid/lower treble & mid bass), reflected sound/spaciousness. Minuses are highs lacking nuances & delicacy, and lows one note, lacking body & texture etc. Overall the recreated 'live' experience leaves much to be desired.
Funny this came up. I’m actually planning on creating an updated 901-type speaker.
@@cle9925 I totally agree
@@ErinsAudioCorner : A woofer AND tweeter facing listener and reflected speakers should be attenuated. I think that the wedge shape is important?
Great video, as always Erin. Very educational and illuminating, and, even though I didn't learn anything new, it still helps to reinforce my understanding of it all. But, there's one thing I'd like to add, which I'm not sure is even relevant to this topic, but I'll say it anyway, lol. However, that being said, as with everything these days, especially online and on social media, far too many of us band together into our tribes, and look down on and disdain and ridicule those that have different tastes than we do. Even though we don't like speakers with big midrange suckouts and too hot tweeters that can melt steel, like most B&W and Klipsch models, some people love those speakers, and if they get the most enjoyment from their favorite music listening to those speakers, who are they hurting? (I have to add that some Heritage series Klipsch models, like the K-Horns and La Scalas are, IMO, the greatest speakers ever made, because nothing else sounds as much like live music in your room, no matter how much better it may measure than they do). After all, in the end, it's whatever gear gives you the most enjoyment listening to the music you love, even if that gear is inaccurate, as long as you know that it's not accurate, and still like it more than gear you've auditioned that is.
Ive always bought used, even broken. my favs have been diy, beats unobtainium most every time.
I value your measurements, reviews and tutorials very much. Thank you Erin. Personally, I would try to avoid audio gear which measures poorly but measurements alone probably shouldn't be the deciding factor in buying gear. If you can live with the measurements and adore the sound then go with your listening preference. Problems arise when the measurements are rubbish but you still enjoy the sound. Ha !!!!
The rabbit hole of "audiophile lies" is a bottomless pit, and >50% of audio companies that target the audiophile market need to keep it that way to continue existing.
Context is always the greatest aid in understanding anything, where having an expert document a short history of noteworthy technological innovations would be quite helpful. It would be interesting to hear what these current technological improvements are, and what your assessment of them is. Also, which manufacturers are making these technologies available at affordable prices. Are there any "boutique" companies that always use high-quality parts, but still offer an affordable model? Boutique companies for enthusiasts like this exist in the musical instrument market.
I think sound is by far the hardest thing to get just good and impossible to get perfect. Sound interacts with everything.
The perfect speaker is in my head. At some point they will be able to create the perfect transducer. I bought these cheap Jamo s803 speakers and they sound pretty good for the price. Even at moderate volumes they impress with music and clarity.
@Douglas Blake Always room for improvement.
There may be no perfect speaker, but I think I've heard ones that are close enough to perfect that you wouldn't care if its perfect or not, as far back as 1981. For one instance there was a speaker called the Watson Labs model 10. There are pics of it on the net. The speaker had a dedicated bass cabinet filled with denser than air gas and a dipole midrange/tweeter section. It was so cool it left everything else behind. It was designed and marketed by Dayton Wright, better known for their full range electrostatic speakers. The Watson speakers used dynamic drivers not anything planar or electrostatic. A line of speakers that was under the radar and then they stopped producing them.
Cerwin-Vega, surprisingly, made a similar speaker with bass loading like that in the 1970s, called the S1. It was their top of the line two way model that used one of their long throw woofers, and their widely used horn loaded fabric dome tweeters that they called a "Dhorm". It was more refined and polite than many of their other speakers, most of which aimed for maximum output and explosive dynamics. However, the best of their designs were actually very well designed and were quite linear.
Excellent video.
I'm not sure two-way versus three-way should be listed the way you listed it. Yes a three-way arguably has more features than a two-way, but performance wise...
Investing in edibles and Pink Floyd vinyl makes speakers sound a lot better.
Excellent videos! Audio reproduction (and engineering in general!)is all about trade off (i'm an electical engineer). You're dead on spot about using data as your advantage, you can save a lot of time if you know the kind of spec you like, the electronic you have (remember that every device in the signal path has its own transfer function that adds as the signal traval from source to your ears!), the room you have and finally your own preferences. Again, very nice video!
Every loudspeaker is a set of compromises of some kind. Some designs are very elaborate and address issues regular monkey coffins have problems with, but they still use transducers which have their limitations. So no, there's no perfect loudspeaker even if someone would try to design and build one.
The dip at or around 700hz, isn't because of too steep of a slope in the crossover? Because it's a 15" woofer and a HLCD, wouldn't a more shallow slope or perhaps a zobel (on the woofer) alleviate much of this dip???
Jim likes this, but John likes that. *Subjective.*
Dude, what a great video. Good stuff 👍
Erin: The perfect speaker doesn't exist.
Genelecs the one series: Am I a joke to you?
😂
Still has a massive trade off... Price tag
Ha ha. Studio monitors are not the bees knees for music enjoyment.They are merely a tool used by music pro's to get their work done. They really aren't very enjoyable to listen to. If this were truly the case, then manufacturers would all be making speakers that are literaly ultra-flat, ultra-neutral and consequently ultra-boring. Same goes for audio electronics. I say this as one on the side of objectivity in audio.
@@davidcarr2216 Very controversial take. I don't have experience listening to anything even close to Genelec level so I can't pretend like I have real life experience to counter. However, from my understanding most speakers, studio or 'hi-fi' strive for the harman target. It just so happens, the best and most reputable studio monitors tend to do it better than anyone else. I don't understand how that can't be enjoyable to listen too given its just a more accurate representation of what 'hi-fi' is trying to achieve anyway.
@@dudemanismadcool I’m really not into controversy, just honesty .Ask yourself whether a company such as KEF couldn’t take on the studio monitor market. Focal make both monitors and Hifi speakers and you can bet they don’t sound alike. Could Ford take on Ferrari or Porsche ? They did that back in the 60s. Horses for courses. A Hifi speaker is about engaging and entertaining the listener, not so a studio monitor. If you get the chance, try to listen to some Genelecs and or Neumanns and then ask yourself honestly if you'd want to listen to them for enjoyment. I was at a guy's place the other week who used 8331s for his home production set up and JBL L100 Classics for chill out listening. Purely anecdotal, I know, but you'll find other guys who make similar choices.
If anybody is able to say single word how speaker sounds, what he observed in listening it is enough evidence that it is not perfect speaker - no matter all computer analysys and dB data
What is your thoughts on the Kali for home theater crossed at 80hz? Are "studio monitors" too narrow for home theater if you are only doing a few seats on one row?
Transducers of all kinds have fixable parameters and non-fixable parameters. Response curve is largely fixable, with important caveats. Dynamic nonlinearities are pretty much baked in and nothing can correct them. Importantly, dynamic misbehavior can make a speaker non-correctable with EQ. Driver manufacturers concentrate their quality control on dynamic misbehaviors for this reason. The truth is, manufacture of an accurate (in many ways) speaker is damned hard to do. A lot of pre-proto research and even more work during production is required. Spend money on speakers before any other piece of gear.
A perfect example is the guy that says no matter what stereo speakers you use, you need subs, and then the other guys that are perfectly happy with speakers that dig deep enough for most music and fit their environment so that subs are non essential..it’s all about preference and opportunity.
I personally only use subs when I need to, and for me right now, that happens to be on an HT setup in a family room. I will never tell anyone never use subs or always use subs. That kind of logic is always faulty!
Nice video. Always appreciate the honesty and things you cover.
Are you going to do a video on the Overnight Sensations? I see from your website that you've tested them.
Thanks for all that you do! Keep up the awesome work. :)
Erin, how do you determine that angle of horizontal radiation? Is that a certain level drop from on-axis response? What frequency range do you consider more important regarding the width of radiation?
Im not Erin, but I consider the high frequencies are the most noticable if the off axis response doesn't match
Nice example of how a speaker that meassure OK-isch still can be prefered. :)
Hey Erin, It would be really nice if you could include in your measurements some time domain data. Say a Step Response and Group Delay chart for example.
It so nice to see your objective approach to reviewing loudspeakers and matching and contrasting your initial listening impressions with the science and measured data, this is exactly what we need from channels like yours and e.g. @audio science review - thank you!
I am also so grateful for the huge advances Dr. Klippel and brilliant team have made in speaker measurements. Forget about huge and very costly to build anechoic chambers, the NFS and the first principles science approach behind it is just so nice to see. I don't know how many speaker manufactures have a Klippel NFS and to what extend their goal is getting closer to a more perfect speaker. As you rightly point out there are some constraints that the loudspeaker product manager must work to and can only do so much at certain price point etc.
But what about the high-end very expensive and elaborate "box" design speaker manufactures. Without naming names, most of them are still pretty much ignoring the fundamentals of loudspeaker research and design known and available to us all, such as described by legends like Floyd E. Toole, Sean Olive, the late and great Sigfried Linkwitz and several other important contributors. Yet many high-end speakers clearly have astronomical price points that should allow them to get things much more right. As the Audio Critic, and also late, Peter Aczel said: "one thing I am fairly sure of: No breakthrough in sound quality will be heard from “monkey coffins” (1970s trade lingo), i.e. rectangular boxes with forward-firing drivers. I’ll go even further: Even if the box is not rectangular but some incredibly fancy shape, even if it’s huge, even if it costs more than a luxury car, if it’s sealed or vented and the drivers are all in front, it’s a monkey coffin and will sound like a monkey coffin-boxy and, to varying degrees, not quite open and transparent".
Probably historically without too many DSP active speakers, the time domain has had little focus because of the difficulties in controlling its behaviour with passive designs. Even Floyd Tool has paid little attention to the time domain, but Sigfreid Linkwitz (hugely important figure for the audio community) changed his mind in the later years once DSP tools became a practical reality.
Digging deep there are papers that lay out the psychoacoustic reasoning behind time coherence, but apart from a couple of papers, group delay in the lower bass frequencies is largely still dismissed as a factor. Again I think because the fundamental design of bass sound reproduction is still mostly some form of vented or closed box, where achieving a low group delay is hard if not impossible and so there has been no practical way to test the audibility of group delay in the lowest end of the spectrum.
Open Baffle bass, H-frames and even the folded dipole (Ripole) designs avoid the issues inherent to conventional box bass. It is possible resolve low frequency sound reproduction to a more natural and detailed bass and to lower group delay to explore the limits if audibility. The downside is that low frequency SPL is a limitation compared to what possible with one or more box subwoofers pumping up the room with muddy bass. There are solutions that too, but not yet on the market...
Anyway really grateful if you might consider extending your work into reviewing time domain behavior and your listener comments on the data differences between the speakers you measure.
All my written reviews contain step response and group delay. It’s all on my website. 👍
@@ErinsAudioCorner , ah very nice. Must admit I mostly watch your videos and see now all the extra data you provide. I see some very nice examples of time response and group delay from active speakers like e.g. the Kii Audio THREE and some pretty horrible ones from most of the passive speakers. Have you formed some views on the audibility of those difference?
Of course time domain behavior will also be reflected in the frequency response, although not with the full explanatory power without reference to the time domain.
Hi, Polkr200, Wharfedale 12.2 or Klipsch RP600M. Out of these 3 what would you recommend?
Excellent video! I was however, really hoping to see the Cornwall 4 in this comparison. Maybe another video? Thanks so much.
Very interesting comment about radiation pattern. I am soundstage-nut and classical music maniac where soundstage is quite special. I am interested in stereo only. I like the "lifelike" soundstage where stage is in front of me like in live concerts and expanded behind my speakers. I think I understand your comment about narrow radial pattern where instruments and singers are more precisely positioned (I like that also). I don't completely understand your comment about width of stage. I've never heard speakers where stage is wider than space between speakers. Except when there are special effects on the recording. But I am curios about soundstage depth. I am not quite familiar with pop/rock music but soundstage depth is quite special for classical music recordings as I mentioned. Unfortunately I don't have measurements about my current speakers, which are made by a local manufacturer from SB drivers. These speakers have exceptional soundstage depth, I've never experienced anything like this and I love this effect. It depends on recording also but when I shut my eyes I feel that the wall beyond my speakers is disappeared and I feel that there is a big "hall" behind my speakers where the orchestra placed. As I mentioned it is very dependant on recording and the room also. When I placed my speakers in a bigger room where there is bigger space behind the speakers, this effect is much more effective.
This speaker is a 2 way floorstanding type with port on the speaker's bottom (it has little feet). Tweeter axis is little below my ears, I think this also relevant to the "soundstage" effect. If I try to raise the speaker, this effect is decreasing. Do you have any experience about this soundstage effect and its relation to radiation pattern?
I heard somewhere that a significant portion of the sound of a room or hall (on a recording) is found in the lower frequencies. So some people swear by stereo subwoofers to enhance this effect further. Apparently, some of our spatial cue information can be found much lower than you may have intuitively thought.
Is it possible that your low frequency response changes when you lift the speakers, and although you're not consciously aware of any changes in sub frequency response, it may just be these spatial cues that diminish when you change the position.
I really am not sure, but it's an avenue to possibly pursue further.
@@erics.4113 Thank you for the reply! There was a conversation about this on a local hifi-forum months ago and subwoofer-maniacs said the same too. Like you, they said that sub bass somehow modifies overal soundstage perception. But they are not classical music fans so I can't decide what they call "good soundstage".
I don't have subwoofer and my speaker's midwoofer is only a 6 inch SB17NBAC35 (you measured its ceramic version months ago I think). So in my case I don't think that the sub range is the cause. And my experience is that the distance of the speakers and the wall behind them is a major component for good deep soundstage. I don't know, interesting question.
@@1984robert I'm not Erin by the way, just some random guy that is actually quite new to this hobby myself, but picking up steam (gear) quickly and diving in deep to learn as much as I can.
Interesting that you mentioned distance from the front wall as I've also heard explanations about this effect as well. Apparently, it isn't always about directivity of sound and the distance into the room for speakers to produce a deep soundstage, although most contend that is a contributor. One video I watched about psychoacoustics brought up the fact that the visual boundary (the wall itself) prevented most people from hearing a soundstage deeper than that physical barrier. And even if you closed your eyes, you maintain a mental picture of the physical space you are listening in. Basically, the presence of the wall destroys some of the illusion that you are fighting so hard to create for your music.
Most high end systems will be setup pulled into the room for even bass response (to not have SBIR effects and artificially enhanced bass by reflection) and also to enhance soundstage. I suspect some of that psychoacoustics could be a factor, but that's just my intuition.
I also liked your reference to subwoofer maniacs. Haha. That's probably a fitting description for bass heads.
Hopefully you dive deeper into the science of sound. I think you'll confirm that spatial information can resonate or exist in sub frequencies. Some of that reverberation from the hall or space exists in that portion of the frequency response. And with that being the case, you would want good, even response throughout that range if you hope to recreate the effect at home the same that the live listener was treated to at the event.
@@erics.4113 Oh, sorry I misread your name.
It is interesting what you wrote about distance. Maybe I have advanced imagination and that hepls me to switch off the physical borders from my mental picture. Based on my experience this effect depends on my mental condition also. Actually I think mental condition affects much more the percepted sound than most hifi guy accept. But in this case I am sure that the perceived soundstage is deeper in a larger room and that is not because of this psychological thing. I don't have proof to this of course.
I had a tall hifi rack years ago. I used a small coffee table before that but that time I had more hifi device and I needed a larger rack. I put that between the speakers and that disturbed me especially when I listened to opera recordings. Singers usually placed between speakers and when I used the small coffee table, there was space "for them" between speakers. But when I replaced that with this tall rack, that disturbed this mental image. I couldn't use to it. Finally I replaced this back to the original coffee table.
I think there are more than one type of person in this hobby. There are people who interested more in the technical side of this hobby. I have a Dayton measurement microphone as a toy and I use it to find the best possible place for the speakers in my little listening room but I am basically a music fan and CD collector. I am interested more in music history, composers, performers, recordings and music of course.
@@1984robert there's plenty of published data on mental state and perceived sound quality within psychoacoustics as well. I know if I'm congested it won't be as pleasurable either. And sometimes my ears aren't working as good as other days due to old age and abuse of them too.
I haven't gotten the measuring mic but that's next. Of course I'm a music lover, but I've always been a tech head and interested in gear and playing around with the setup to make it better... All good for me!
I have always said that systems are personal choice that why we all have different systems same with music choice 👍👍
The 4367 uses the same 15" driver as the M2, right? Noticed the 500hz dip that was due to a resonance in the driver seen in the M2 isn't nearly as pronounced here. Could that just be variances between drivers?
Different driver. 4367 uses a newer model. 2216nd (M2) vs 2216nd-1 (4367).
@@ErinsAudioCorner Wow, that's very interesting. I wonder if the newer model would benefit the M2 once the M2 DSP corrections for the new part are made
Lately, I’ve felt like I’m just “chasing dragons” with my system. It’s fun to learn about cool new speakers, the science behind good sound, etc., but man, sometimes I wish I could ignore the annoying OCD tendencies that come with starting to learn a thing or two, and just ENJOY music and movies. Probably just a “me” thing, but I’m guessing a few here can relate. 😂
That's wild the JBL can play at 100DB but i'm sure there's cheaper options that can do it too.
I really enjoyed this segment
I didn't find any video of you reviewing "MONITOR AUDIO" speakers... it would be possible to talk about the new Silver 100 7G, I would appreciate your opinion and analysis of this new series, thanks in advance!
If you’ve got some to send in for review, let me know.
@@ErinsAudioCorner hahaha… yes, I have and would love to lend the speakers for you to review, but I'm on the other side of the world, in Brazil, so the process would be impossible, anyway thank you very much for your answer, I'll be following the channel…
Speakers can change their sound considerably... Due to room acoustics or amplification. I would think both would be measurable, but I have only seen tests on room acoustics. And that makes me wonder... What was the source driving the speaker as it was tested and to what extent is that reflected in the measurements? Have you ever tested this, Erin? Impedance curves of speakers play a roll... big vs small watts, tube vs transistor...
Every speaker is a compromise. Janos already talks about this. Ask a designer what they had to compromise to get their product out the door. *crickets*
The "perfect" speaker would have to have a perfect source component signal, which is impossible.
What ever you buy, with whatever budget you have, it has to make you smile at the end of the day. will i ever be able to afford an 8000 dollar Macintosh amp and some 6000 dollar Focals? Never. But when i sit back with what i could afford, bottom line...MAKES ME SMILE!
I dont know any long time audiophile that has only 1 pair of speakers. we usually have like at least 4 or 5.
BUT…the KLH 5 is darn near close to perfect, with a high caliber amp and dac. Wonderful all around speaker.
I’m actually getting a pair to review. I’m looking forward to comparing it to the Wharefedale Linton.
Great content, again!
I'm on the DIY side of things. But just sent this to a german channel about DIY speakers.
Let me add a 4th point to the 3 main decisions to make: space!
Do I have enough space to place a speaker in a room, keeping it one foot away from the next wall? Or does my living situation
a bookshelf speaker?
Very well pointed out!
Thank you Mr Erin for the nice video on various technical aspects of speakers...
Waiting for KLH model 5 review and comparison with Linton Heritage speakers though there is significant price difference.
I own Linton Heritage speakers and using them with BIC Acoustics Sub for full frequency spectrum feel...
Recently Mr Tharbamar said KLH 5 are in a different league compared to Linton's, but I do believe Lintons can perform well against KHL.
Thanks a lot for your time and effort....🙏🏻
I believe Andrew Robinson favoured the Lintons over the KLH Model 5. Like you I have a pair of Lintons and to me they are absolute keepers.
@@nielsoe8970
Feeling nice to hear from You...
Andrew and cheapaudioman seem to have too much praise for the Lintons, which for me looked a bit biased. But Erin's analysis cleared all doubts about Linton speakers.
Thank You very much for the reply...🙂
Hi Erin. Thanks for the videos and work you put into them. Any plans to review PSA speakers ?
Is there a good way to measure compression without Klippel? I've tried measuring my speakers at various SPL levels (with REW) but after aligning the curves, they all matched so I didn't see any compression that way and am wondering if there's a better way
@Douglas Blake I understand the mechanisms behind the compression but I just haven't been able to measure it myself even past 100dBSPL at 1m. Variations less than 0.1dB when I align measurements. Maybe my speakers just don't compress at all even at those levels... I'll try again with some smaller drivers
@Douglas Blake Aligning is the only way to do this. Increase output level by 6dB, lower curve by 6dB, does it perfectly match the previous measurement? When I did this to levels past 100dBSPL I got no difference compared to at 86dBSPL. Always aligned perfectly (compensating with the correct increase in dB so any overall decrease in SPL would be visible)
@Douglas Blake Comparing the curves is just an easy way to compare the distances. That's exactly what I'm doing. Input -30dB, input -20dB, offset -20dB measurement by 10dB, does it match to -30dB input. If it does, then I got +10dB and no compression. If it doesn't match then there's compression and I can see exactly how much compression. This is exactly what the Klippel graph does. If I wanted to be fancy about it I could use the functions in REW to do the math and display the difference between the curves which would be exactly the same graph as Klippel. I just haven't been able to get any compression on my system so I want to know if Klippel uses some other kind of signal to test for this or if my system just doesn't compress at these levels.
@@gerhardwestphalen I think Erin's compression tests are not instantaneous. I believe it's regarding thermal compression (sustained heating of voice coils etc) and not just running sweeps at different db levels. This is likely why you were not able to reproduce the results.
The Distortion tests are a better indicator of spl handling.
I think there is one fundamental Problem with all those measurements - all of them is one tone at a time with single power value on the input. And the real music is permanently changing values of multiply tones. None of those measurements says something about resolution or clarity of single tones in a multitone. We dont talk also much about phase, or impulse characteristics, or decay of single and multiply impulses in combination.
After all they are so many speakers that measure nearly good (or bad) but sounding so different.
Juts my theory, why we still cant characterize a speaker only with measurements :) (actually pretty absurd - we landed on Mars or playing with elementary practical and quantum physics, but are still so bad at speakers)
You should read this book. It addresses your concern with research and scientific data that shows the usefulness of these measurements.
amzn.to/3PBQMXM
Alternatively, watch this:
m.ua-cam.com/video/TcTydBUd8Wc/v-deo.html
When you get to really high end audio with such ridiculous prices like on the last speaker, the JBL, you are entering the "Realm of Diminishing Returns". For real, the speaker before it, the Wharfedale Linton, seems to be better overall. This has me asking the question, "Why?" There is NO WAY in HELL that the JBL is worth over $16k. This is trolling on JBL's part and they are preying on the audiophile, to suck them into thinking they need to spend that amount of money to get decent sound. The bottom line is that you are wasting your money. You want something big and loud, then get a pair of Klipshorns. You can get them for far cheaper than $16k. Heck, I don't even spend $5 on a WHOLE system! Those that buy into this speaker are demonstrating a degree of ineptitude that borders on the imbecilic. Don't feed the hi-end audio trolls! Great video though!
Great video as always. Someone told me you will be reviewing Triad LCR Gold soon. Is that correct? :)
That is correct. Well… soon-ish.
well there is the perfect speaker that's a blue horn if you're looking at measurements.
you should measure the JBL M2 I think about 4 grand
I already did. 🙂. ua-cam.com/video/C5iEgnAfwJQ/v-deo.html
Erin Do a review of ZetaZero orbital ref speakers. The most technically advanced drivers ever made - just talk to its designer! I promise you will learn something. They are the size of a bit larger floorstanders but can play in 60,000 seat stadium without distortion, how about that?
Very well explained 💯
So the compression is the thing to look for...
*a* thing to look for.
I'd probably be a little more careful about how you interpret some of the peaks and dip of a speakers on-axis and power response. Most of them you explained away with "alignment of woofer and tweeter" "Vertical spacing" and so on. Because it could be so many things. Cabinet diffraction, driver break-up and for power response, not a good mash up of the individual drivers directivity, so that one driver has way wider dispersion at the crossover point.
Most of the directivity mismatches I discuss here occur in the crossover.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Okay yeah, then we agree :-)
@@ErinsAudioCorner Do you have a video about your measurement setup?
@@maxb.simonsen2459 yep. A few of them, actually. 👍
@@ErinsAudioCorner Gotta check those out 😁
Great video. Curious to hear your thoughts on data and soundstage depth. Perhaps a topic for future videos.
That's probably as much to do with room and placement, plus front-end, plus recording, and THEN some character of the speaker or measured performance. My 2 cents, and mostly just my intuition so take that for what it's worth
Wise words from a cool cat 🤘
Great video 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Ridiculous amount of work for disposable cheap speakers.
There is no perfect speaker, but some are more perfect than others! :)
Is the echo on purpose?
Great stuff 👍
Great video…..
thank you.
👍
Erin, let me start by just simply saying your voice sounds good, (and you have a good pretty down-to-earth) channel and I'm sure you know what I'm trying to say and that's real important for me, as for some reason have damn good voice recognition even at 75 (had it when I was younger but for some reason pay more attention now) It's very hard for people to make decisions about how something sounds w/o hifi stores hot around hardly. It does get down to taste in the end and budget. Lintons, so maybe you like "Brit sound" I know I do. No mention of stats/planars but u explained that. Quite a hole between 1500.00 and JBL at 16.5K$ Was more of a gearhead when I had more $$$, but at least I have ended up with my "Holy Grail" and I went thru changes to get them. Totally rebuilt by KC Electrostatic Solutions a short while ago. I have the typical 4K notch that pretty much of sound engineers have (all in 40's and 50's but they make very good sounds) I do go on, sorry! Just an old Hippie, soon of to Audio Heaven not too soon I hope
take 5k💳 and pump this in 2 speakers and 2 woofers, bam, done
the fiddely part is the bass adjustment on DSP woofers ( witch you bought out of ur 5k) but its not hard!
stop beeing cheap u get what u pay
no shortcuts no magic no woohoo (like sport)
go and hear a calibrated system and then go home and feel how far ur cheap stuff is away from it..
believe me iam a complete audio nerd for 20 years, heard and read a lot.
again , dont be cheap..im not saying burn 20k😉
but with 5k u can generate a sweet hearing spot to work or just listen without thinking #meh😅
i have rl906 and 2x sb2000 pro
damp ur room👌
Like amps data cant determine listenability
Nah.
Magico M9 is close
not perfectly priced tho :P
@@sudd3660 it is A million dollar system yea lol…ugh and you can’t fit them in most houses
You do realize that perfection does not exist in anything if it did the Universe wouldn't have been able to form.
Exactly. Even punctuation hasn’t been mastered.
Seriously...
The KEF Blade meta might get pretty close...agree with everything you said though.
Would love to hear that speaker.
u r good man u r reaaally good
Inherent biases shouldn't influence your measurement assessments as flaws. A drop in treble to make a speaker sound "warm" may be positive to you, but a negative to another. I don't think viewers can differentiate that as a preference, but as a defect, based on the way you're presenting it. As challenging as that is, I do wish you could be more neutral on that.
I have said countless times what I prefer. I said it in my most recent two videos as well. Can’t be much more clear than that. 👍
But aside from that, research shows that the vast majority of people prefer a flat on axis response with a smooth off axis response. And logic dictates that a speaker with flat on axis response would be the one that would not color the sound in any way if you were shooting for accuracy. Whether or not people truly want accuracy, however, is a separate discussion. 👍
On the same topic of being transparent, it would be helpful if other reviewer‘s which state their biases and their preferences upfront. But I believe that many of them simply don’t know what that is because they don’t know how to read data and won’t spend the time to try to understand in order to better educate their audience on the things that they like or dislike about a speaker. But that, too, is a separate topic.
@@ErinsAudioCorner All really good points, Erin. Yes, lots of different topics to dissect, and debate (like if everyone does prefer linearity, vs. a common V shape showroom signature).
On the topic of other reviewers, you could be right that they don't discuss their biases, because they're not quite clear what they are, or how to articulate them with measurements. And it's more understandable, and somewhat logical, to stay on the positive side of things, because one man's flaw, is another man's preference. To prevent alienating their audience, it's best for them to error on the side of caution, and not state something is a flaw, if it simply isn't to their liking.
I still have issues with calling "brightness" a flaw. You do a great job of articulating your bias for not liking it, but most will read between the lines, and assume you just think they "suck." That's very narrow scope, limited thinking, but it's hard to shake.
Conversely, when you mention something is even below linearity, with a drop off in treble, you communicate it as a good thing (but I also see that as a flaw, it's further from linearity).
You've always been honest in your assessments, and that's uncommon to find on YT, for sure. I truly value the breakdowns you do for what you can possibly EQ to your liking, and how or why is it or isn't possible. That's a tremendous value for all of us.
This is pure gold!
It does exist if you love the way it sounds then it's the perfect speaker for you
Sure. But the point is there isn’t a perfect speaker that fits everyone’s needs. 😉
@@ErinsAudioCorner nope everyone is different and hear things different I heard 2 speakers of different brands that were altered to have the same exact frequency response and they still sounded different but I personally hate flat speakers a perfer a more in your face type of speaker I've watched almost all of your videos keep up the good work!
@@Sc2God724 I can guarantee you those two speakers don’t measure the same. There is more to measurements than just a single axis response. 👍
Watch this video for explanation:
ua-cam.com/video/sps8mc-snQU/v-deo.html
@@ErinsAudioCorner the measurements were on and off axis the very similarly built horn speakers give or take a 2 db difference off axis as humans don't really pick up and alter both speakers with addentional bracing and padding for less resonance even on the horns room slightly elevates highs by 3 db and on horns had to turn highs down to get them measured pretty close
@@Sc2God724 where is the data?
no.
NO.
*i will understand nothing.*
I refuse!!!
SONY the best
Fo sho.
Look! Pretending that we can tell IF a speaker is or is NOT perfect is kinda pretentious and nonsensical at all! I studied so many designs and evaluate all components used to build all these speakers only to realize that they are made to last only 5 to 10 years! I have developed a type of wooden cabinet that makes any woofer give you deep and smooth bass and the ideal components for the 3 drivers and I can tell that my speakers are totally capable of reproducing every single sound with the highest details. Well, maybe I didn't find the way to build the (perfect) speaker...but I can tell you that those I build will have the job done!
I’m looking!