Any objective measurements available for Audio Products ( eg Indiq audio)

[arj]

Not speaker design per se, but please read this interview of Rob Watts, the designer of Chord's DACs. He uses measurements to design DACs and correlates measurements with subjective listening. The main takeaway for me is the fact that he said that seemingly inconsequential measurements/parameters have far reaching sonic repercussions. All design endeavours of audio electronics and speakers necessarily involves mathematical calculations and a deep understanding of physics. But these are starting points. These are made to reproduce music and therefore any designer would listen to his creation. When psychoacoustics is skillfully added to fine tune the design the end product is more wholesome and pleasing. So both measurements and listening are essential ingredients, IMO.

But to come to the subject, I'm assuming the subject line is a question. If it is, are the measurements needed so that they can be emulated by DIYers?

So true ! Perhaps One of the key difference in mindset between a manufacturer and DIYer is

Manufacturer makes a product for a specific existing market or attempts to carve/create one. so a lot of Psychoacoustics, market preferences and branding needs to be layered over a product. its design/engineering/specs are assumed to be hygiene factors and without it may be difficult to survive in the long run. Specs being published could be dependent on its competitive differentiation which they may choose to display or hide.

A DIYer, on the other hand , I would assume, usually makes a product driven by ones own objective of sound.while may hope for a larger acceptance in a market. Here perhaps measurements might be the key way to getting sales if the Diyer is inclined to do so.

 

[Hari Iyer]

Advantage of being a DIYer is you have control over your design and choice of components. Because of this you can tailor your sound as per your own listening needs and requirements. One more major advantage in DIY speaker design for your own room is - all measurements are made in the exact room where you are going to listen the speakers. So the room equations are built into the measured results.

If you DIY for others, then the measurements won't hold true for their room and here's where the anechoic measurements are useful. Gated measurements of the impulse response does too much smoothing at the bottom end which may be technically correct but can't be practically implemented imo.

If you read both the interviews posted above, listening is not a priority for both listeners - until they are technically accurately measured. Listening comes much much later.

 

[Vineethkumar01]

The response is not at all flat in room. Most FMs in this thread will like this speaker. -

The on-axis response lies within +/- 2.5 dB roughly from 500Hz to 10KHz. So there is some amount of flatness. But there are power response humps which maybe more problematic. I had a like-hate relationship with these speakers for 7 years. Tried to change the modest electronics around them but to not much use. On some songs, they sounded good to my ears. On some I hated it. Added to that was distortion from ports/driver at relatively higher volumes. Eventually I bought a calibrated mic and measured it and got results above.
I ended up preferring/liking a sound signature similar to what is shown by the graphs below (Please ignore the humps and dips in response around 1kHz. Those are measurements artifacts made more aggressive looking by errors in box construction.). And this was obtained with the drivers in a make shift xps foam cabinet.

Others at home find it to be slightly "dull" sometimes (though EQ remedies it), and liking the QA2020i response more (given the relatively less time they spend listening to speakers) but I don't. While most others listened to melodies, I listened to all kinds of 'junk' on them.
Here itself I could see that preferences with respect to graphs and sound signature change from person to person.
Anyway. The whole point was to convey that if the manufacturer chooses to show measurements, it can be easily got for smaller speakers like typical 2ways and 3 ways. But it is ultimately their choice having 'N' number of factors behind the 'why' of it. As long as people buying those are satisfied, it is no problem for both parties.
Maybe I am one among the odd ones who ask for "measurements for speakers"..

 

[Hari Iyer]

The dip/ hump around 1 kHz are +/-5 dB and indicates serious resonance issues. It will be interesting to see the impedance graphs to check if they too indicate resonance. Atleast we will be sure they are measurements bias.

 

[Vineethkumar01]

The dip/ hump around 1 kHz are +/-5 dB and indicates serious resonance issues. It will be interesting to see the impedance graphs to check if they too indicate resonance. Atleast we will be sure they are measurements bias.

They were resonance issues.. and I corrected them. Measurements are from before that. Final cabinet for this is awaited

 

[Enkay78]

The on-axis response lies within +/- 2.5 dB roughly from 500Hz to 10KHz. So there is some amount of flatness. But there are power response humps which maybe more problematic. I had a like-hate relationship with these speakers for 7 years. Tried to change the modest electronics around them but to not much use. On some songs, they sounded good to my ears. On some I hated it. Added to that was distortion from ports/driver at relatively higher volumes. Eventually I bought a calibrated mic and measured it and got results above.
I ended up preferring/liking a sound signature similar to what is shown by the graphs below (Please ignore the humps and dips in response around 1kHz. Those are measurements artifacts made more aggressive looking by errors in box construction.). And this was obtained with the drivers in a make shift xps foam cabinet.
View attachment 68263
Others at home find it to be slightly "dull" sometimes (though EQ remedies it), and liking the QA2020i response more (given the relatively less time they spend listening to speakers) but I don't. While most others listened to melodies, I listened to all kinds of 'junk' on them.
Here itself I could see that preferences with respect to graphs and sound signature change from person to person.
Anyway. The whole point was to convey that if the manufacturer chooses to show measurements, it can be easily got for smaller speakers like typical 2ways and 3 ways. But it is ultimately their choice having 'N' number of factors behind the 'why' of it. As long as people buying those are satisfied, it is no problem for both parties.
Maybe I am one among the odd ones who ask for "measurements for speakers"..

How is the response below 200hz?

 

[Vineethkumar01]

How is the response below 200hz?

Even with the 5inch SB15CAC30_8 5 inch drivers in a sealed box, I got real nice/enjoyable output below 200Hz. But that is just a precursor to what is coming.
The bass on this speaker will be handled by a twin SB acoustics Satori WO24P-8 driver per speaker based bass module.. (again all awaiting their boxes)

 

[Nitin K]

Even with the 5inch SB15CAC30_8 5 inch drivers in a sealed box, I got real nice/enjoyable output below 200Hz. But that is just a precursor to what is coming.
The bass on this speaker will be handled by a twin SB acoustics Satori WO24P-8 driver per speaker based bass module.. (again all awaiting their boxes)

Hi Vineeth,

How to you find the quality ( materials used and sound) of the woofers from SB Accoustics?
From what I have read, they are Danish designed drivers made in Indonesia by Sinar Baja (SB) who have been around for quite long. Thanks.

 

[Vineethkumar01]

Hi Vineeth,

How to you find the quality ( materials used and sound) of the woofers from SB Accoustics?
From what I have read, they are Danish designed drivers made in Indonesia by Sinar Baja (SB) who have been around for quite long. Thanks.

Hi Nitin.
Quality of materials-wise, I find the SB drivers that I have used so far to be really good for the money. But my experience with SB drivers is limited to the following ones for mid/woofers: SB15CAC30 (ceramic coated aluminum membrane), SB17MFC35 (polypropylene membrane), Satori WO24P-8 (hardened paper membrane), and SB26CAC, SB26STAC, SB26STC tweeters. All the above drivers are highly regraded for their price to performance ratio.
Describing the sound quality of drivers is hard for me. This is because it is heavily dependent on the application. The low end/bass quality depends on the bass alignment used (sealed/bass reflex/others). The mid range quality depends on both the low and high cut filters used in the crossover. The low cut determines the cone movement and associated harmonic and intermodulation distortion related effects. The high cut filter determines the suppression of cone breakups and related distortions. The bandwidth over which the driver is used determined by both the high and low cut filters also dictate the time domain performance of the driver in the cabinet. Then rest of the quality of sound is determined by the passband linearization EQ filters (analog/DSP). With respect to all the above aspects, I find that when the above drivers are used properly, they result in an enjoyable sound for low, and moderate to moderately high SPLs in a home environment.
In general all the above drivers have an excellent motor which aids their performance. In that aspect the Satori motor is the among the best in the market, off course, all relative to price. If you want to check out any more technical details of any of the above or other SB drivers, check out this site: https://hificompass.com/ru/speakers/measurements. Search for the SB drivers there. There is a comprehensive list of measurements for each driver.
Hope this info helps..

Thanks
Vineeth

 

[Nitin K]

Hi Nitin.
Quality of materials-wise, I find the SB drivers that I have used so far to be really good for the money. But my experience with SB drivers is limited to the following ones for mid/woofers: SB15CAC30 (ceramic coated aluminum membrane), SB17MFC35 (polypropylene membrane), Satori WO24P-8 (hardened paper membrane), and SB26CAC, SB26STAC, SB26STC tweeters. All the above drivers are highly regraded for their price to performance ratio.
Describing the sound quality of drivers is hard for me. This is because it is heavily dependent on the application. The low end/bass quality depends on the bass alignment used (sealed/bass reflex/others). The mid range quality depends on both the low and high cut filters used in the crossover. The low cut determines the cone movement and associated harmonic and intermodulation distortion related effects. The high cut filter determines the suppression of cone breakups and related distortions. The bandwidth over which the driver is used determined by both the high and low cut filters also dictate the time domain performance of the driver in the cabinet. Then rest of the quality of sound is determined by the passband linearization EQ filters (analog/DSP). With respect to all the above aspects, I find that when the above drivers are used properly, they result in an enjoyable sound for low, and moderate to moderately high SPLs in a home environment.
In general all the above drivers have an excellent motor which aids their performance. In that aspect the Satori motor is the among the best in the market, off course, all relative to price. If you want to check out any more technical details of any of the above or other SB drivers, check out this site: https://hificompass.com/ru/speakers/measurements. Search for the SB drivers there. There is a comprehensive list of measurements for each driver.
Hope this info helps..

Thanks
Vineeth

Thanks a lot Vineeth for removing the time and effort to explain the same so comprehensively. Actually I forgot to mention my query was for the ceramic woofer which you have explained so well.

Best regards,
Nitin K

 

[Hari Iyer]

I have used the Satori midrange in an sealed enclosure crossing them between 250Hz to 2.5kHz. But after listening to my 8"Sachenwerk field coil driver at the similar crossover point, the Satori won't even come close to that. Mind you the field coils are from the pre WW2 era and has a phenolic spiders in their suspension, very low CMS, very low MMS paper cones.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

and now you’ll be hit with the weird logic that those speakers , only those speakers , reproduce music the way the musicians / mastering engineer intended.

déjà vu …

Most people here aren’t looking for an accurate reproduction of the recording but a version which has the exaggerations or suppressions of certain parts of it according to their preference. But if it’s accuracy that’s your preference, then there is no other way other than going flat.

 

[liverpool_for_life]

But if it’s accuracy that’s your preference, then there is no other way other than going flat.

Do you verify that you're getting a flat in-room response?

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Do you verify that you're getting a flat in-room response?

i meant the flat at the listening spot, not the speaker alone.

 

[liverpool_for_life]

i meant the flat at the listening spot, not the speaker alone.

My question was the same: Have you verified that you get a flat response at your MLP?

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

My question was the same: Have you verified that you get a flat response at your MLP?

no, I don’t have a measuring mic. But I understand that the room colors the sound of the speaker before it reaches the spot in any room. If my goal is accuracy, I would use some kind of DSP to correct it to flat at my spot. Anyway what I have at my home is not relevant here

 

[square_wave]

There are different opinions about this. But this is a worthwhile watch.

 

[vkalia]

Flat measuring studio speakers are work tools. Not for enjoying music.

This.

My contribution to the pot of controversy on this thread is this: reliance on flat frequency response or measurements is a crutch for 95% of the people (a different 95%, of course ) who dont trust their ears to decide what sounds best to them.

I go to (well, used to before this stupid virus) a lot of classical concerts and I have yet to hear a symphony with "tight bass" or a "precise soundstage" or any of that audiophool nonsense. I have come to the conclusion that audiophile preferences cater towards analyzing the information present in a CD vs actually enjoying the music.

For the record, i dont think ears are very reliable when it comes to telling the difference between gear either (especially when we get to the realm of amplifiers, where people are able to hear a massive difference between amps which purportedly have a variation of 0.1dB across their frequency range... go figure). Placebo plays a big role. I just think we complicate things too much. Listen to it. Decide if you like it it - whether it is placebo or real, if you think you hear a difference and it sounds better to you, it counts. And if you do like it, get it.

Back to the question - how do you plan to correlate an anechoic FR chart with how it will sound in your room? Not all speakers will respond the same in the same room.

 

[square_wave]

This.

My contribution to the pot of controversy on this thread is this: reliance on flat frequency response or measurements is a crutch for 95% of the people (a different 95%, of course ) who dont trust their ears to decide what sounds best to them.

I go to (well, used to before this stupid virus) a lot of classical concerts and I have yet to hear a symphony with "tight bass" or a "precise soundstage" or any of that audiophool nonsense. I have come to the conclusion that audiophile preferences cater towards analyzing the information present in a CD vs actually enjoying the music.

For the record, i dont think ears are very reliable when it comes to telling the difference between gear either (especially when we get to the realm of amplifiers, where people are able to hear a massive difference between amps which purportedly have a variation of 0.1dB across their frequency range... go figure). Placebo plays a big role. I just think we complicate things too much. Listen to it. Decide if you like it it - whether it is placebo or real, if you think you hear a difference and it sounds better to you, it counts. And if you do like it, get it.

Back to the question - how do you plan to correlate an anechoic FR chart with how it will sound in your room? Not all speakers will respond the same in the same room.

Totally agree with this. I am an avid concert goer. When young it used to be the rock concerts. Nowadays it is the acoustic variety. When looking for a music system, I look for something that recreates the live experience. Biggest focus area is the ability of the system to evoke the same emotions that you get when listening to music live. That is the only measurement.

 

[ssf]

There are different opinions about this. But this is a worthwhile watch.

So, the clever chaps that we are, bring these non flat musical speakers into our homes, bring out our measuring equipment and try our darn best to get the flatest sound in our room. Or is one not related to the other.