Which speaker would you prefer?

[<eargiant]

If you were shopping and unable to audition these speakers - just based on looking at these plots, which would prefer and which would you avoid?

What overall characteristics will one speaker have that the other may lack? Can you describe how they will sound?

Speaker A


Speaker B

 

[PENG]

Can't comment without seeing the scales, also, let's at least include the distortions vs frequency graphs, if not the impedance and phase ones.

 

[<eargiant]

Can't comment without seeing the scales, also, let's at least include the distortions vs frequency graphs, if not the impedance and phase ones.

My mistake, I cut them out in error.

Speaker A scale is 20Hz-20kHz

Speaker B scale is 10Hz-30kHz.

Lets say these visualizations are all someone was focusing on. After all, these are the measurements that are most used in marketing and they are also most often cited in isolation in online forum discussions comparing the merits/demerits of speakers.

 

[PENG]

My mistake, I cut them out in error.

Speaker A scale is 20Hz-20kHz

Speaker B scale is 10Hz-30kHz.

I can guess the frequency scale of B but not A, so still can't comment, sorry.. Off axis FR are also important in this case because both graphs look pretty good otherwise. If you can provide the scale markers on the axis then I suppose one can say something based on FR alone, assuming everything else are "equally good", but then it will be academic.

 

[<eargiant]

I can guess the frequency scale of B but not A, so still can't comment, sorry.. Off axis FR are also important in this case because both graphs look pretty good otherwise. If you can provide the scale markers on the axis then I suppose one can say something based on FR alone, assuming everything else are "equally good", but then it will be academic.

I fixed the images in the first post. they now include the scales.

 

[ski2xblack]

A single on axis measurement is but a tiny slice of a much larger whole, so it's really difficult to make any judgement on how the speaker that produced those graphs sound.

 

[<eargiant]

A single on axis measurement is but a tiny slice of a much larger whole, so it's really difficult to make any judgement on how the speaker that produced those graphs sound.

Agreed, but we see judgments made all the time based on this type of graph alone. Audio forum members here and elsewhere are know to refer to graphs like these to point out any objectionable deviation like a huge spike (as seen is Speaker B) or dip in certain speakers. This is probably THE most widely looked at and referenced speaker measurement graph out there.

For example, I get this type of graph pointed out to me all the time by people telling me about the supposedly egregious top end spike of my 805D2s (for the record neither of the graphs are of the 805D2s). I know there are people that would avoid Speaker B at all costs (even without ever having listened to them). That's what got me thinking about this topic.

 

[lovinthehd]

Just frequency response? I wouldn't judge a speaker that way if relying on measurements, I want more. What's your actual point?

 

[zieglj01]

Just frequency response? I wouldn't judge a speaker that way if relying on measurements, I want more.

Bingo!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If you were shopping and unable to audition these speakers - just based on looking at these plots, which would prefer and which would you avoid?

What overall characteristics will one speaker have that the other may lack? Can you describe how they will sound?

Speaker A


Speaker B

As others have stated, we would like more info like sensitivity, impedance, distortion, etc.

But if this were on an exam and this is the only info given, I would choose Speaker A because it seems more linear.

Speaker B seems a bit hot from 9kHz-20kHz. But this is all academic.

 

[<eargiant]

Just frequency response? I wouldn't judge a speaker that way if relying on measurements, I want more.

I wouldn't either but it happens all the time.

What's your actual point?

One of the point's is that it's tough to compare because the same measurements are not available for all speakers even when measurements are available so how can one judge. No one entity measures all speakers so how does one compare one to the other without equivalent measurements?

Based on what we have so far, is it safe to assume that the top end of Speaker B will be "hotter" than Speaker A?

 

[lovinthehd]

I wouldn't either but it happens all the time.



One of the point's is that it's tough to compare because the same measurements are not available for all speakers even when measurements are available so how can one judge. No one entity measures all speakers so how does one compare one to the other without equivalent measurements?

Based on what we have so far, is it safe to assume that the top end of Speaker B will be "hotter" than Speaker A?

Really? Sorry you pick your speakers that way Post up some equivalent graphs, too.

ps FWIW I think people choosing on frequency response usually just look at stated numbers without even consideration of +/- 3dB points let alone a graph....just look how many manufacturers offer such "spec"

 

[ski2xblack]

Based on what we have so far, is it safe to assume that the top end of Speaker B will be "hotter" than Speaker A?

Well, yes, but there is not a heck of a lot of musical content in those frequencies, so in practical terms it may be less problematic than that single measurement would suggest. Also, speaker B digs deeper, which may be more important to some folk's subjective enjoyment, possibly more so than a slightly elevated response up at the high extreme.

 

[<eargiant]

Really? Sorry you pick your speakers that way Post up some equivalent graphs, too.

I would post equivalent graphs if they existed. That's one of the points. But seriously, based on those two graphs is it safe to assume that the top end of Speaker B will be "hotter" than Speaker A?

I think by now you know that I don't pick my speakers that way. I learned from experience not to make that mistake but as I said in post #7 - "I get this type of graph pointed out to me all the time by people telling me about the supposedly egregious top end spike of my 805D2s (for the record neither of the graphs are of the 805D2s). I know there are people that would avoid Speaker B at all costs (even without ever having listened to them). That's what got me thinking about this topic."

Not having equivalent graphs has never stopped anyone from commenting on the attributes of a speakers shortfalls based on this measurement.

So let's just stick to the top end, which would you prefer?

 

[lovinthehd]

I think your case is exaggerated in any case. Just shows you if people are looking at poor information such as this when spending that much money (as on B&W) is they have more money than sense. If forced to guess on these dissimilar measures it seems B is more accentuated at frequencies above 7kHz

 

[ski2xblack]

As others have stated, we would like more info like sensitivity, impedance, distortion, etc.

Electrical parameters are helpful with amp pairing, but for sound quality it's the acoustic measurements that matter.

Think JBL's "spinorama" method for example, where the speaker is measured on and off axis, from pretty much every oblique angle possible, in order to provide a more accurate representation of the speaker's overall power response. It's still not as good as a personal audition in your own listening room, but closer to the OP's questions regarding the characterization of how a speaker will sound from mere data.

 

[<eargiant]

I think your case is exaggerated in any case. Just shows you if people are looking at poor information such as this when spending that much money (as on B&W) is they have more money than sense. If forced to guess on these dissimilar measures it seems B is more accentuated at frequencies above 7kHz

Don't really know what you mean by the bolded part. I think you misunderstood, a similar graph is usually shown to me to knock the 805D2s because the graph indicates that their highs are elevated on the top end. Just ask ACDTGuy.

Anyway, this is not about the 805D2s or senseless people, it's about some speaker measurements and what they tell us.

Ok, so you'd also view Speaker B as having an accentuated top end based on what we have. Thanks for your input.

As others have stated, we would like more info like sensitivity, impedance, distortion, etc.

But if this were on an exam and this is the only info given, I would choose Speaker A because it seems more linear.

Speaker B seems a bit hot from 9kHz-20kHz, which could possibly mean ear fatigue during extended listening.

Let's assume that sensitivity, impedance and distortion are nearly identical. Then what? Is that sufficient to confirm that Speaker B is less neutral? Has an elevated top end?

 

[lovinthehd]

Don't really know what you mean by the bolded part. I think you misunderstood, a similar graph is usually shown to me to knock the 805D2s because the graph indicates that their highs are elevated on the top end. Just ask ACDTGuy.

Anyway, this is not about the 805D2s or senseless people, it's about some speaker measurements and what they tell us.

Ok, so you'd also view Speaker B as having an accentuated top end based on what we have. Thanks for your input.



Let's assume that sensitivity, impedance and distortion are nearly identical. Then what? Is that sufficient to confirm that Speaker B is less neutral? Has an elevated top end?

Sure you do. Why don't you just educate your friends on what to actually look for then rather than dissimilar graphs? Or talking about speakers without graphs for those speakers? Again, what is your point (with this thread)?

 

[PENG]

Let's assume that sensitivity, impedance and distortion are nearly identical. Then what? Is that sufficient to confirm that Speaker B is less neutral? Has an elevated top end?

Now you are talking, but let's add two more assumptions, that their off-axis performances, and the resolutions/smoothing of the plots are also identical. Then I would say without seeing the typical full sets of measurements Stereophile typically provide, such as CSD plots, impulse response etc., speakers B appear to be a slightly safer bet due to the more extended bass, smoother response within most of the important frequency range up to 8 kHz, and the apparent lower chance (this one is hard to tell) of bad resonances. The elevated but not bumpy 9-18 kHz range could be EQ'ed easily if found necessary.

We cannot assume the acoustical plots are identical obviously, otherwise the questions would make no sense at all. Oh, needless to say but I'll say it just for clarity, that we have to assume the plots were done in an anechoic chamber, or equivalent environment.

For reference, I highly recommend the AH article linked below.

https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/loudspeaker-measurement-standard

"The Audioholics Loudspeaker Measurement Standard will focus on the following measurement metrics:

• On-Axis Frequency Response
• Sensitivity
• Listening Window Response
• Polar Response
• Impedance & Electrical Phase
• Distortion Analysis"

 

[<eargiant]

Sure you do. Why don't you just educate your friends on what to actually look for then rather than dissimilar graphs? Or talking about speakers without graphs for those speakers? Again, what is your point (with this thread)?

Stay tuned.

Now you are talking, but let's add two more assumptions, that their off-axis performances, and the resolutions/smoothing of the plots are also identical. Then I would say without seeing the typical full sets of measurements Stereophile typically provide, such as CSD plots, impulse response etc., speakers B appear to be a slightly safer bet due to the more extended bass, smoother response within most of the important frequency range up to 8 kHz, and the apparent lower chance (this one is hard to tell) of bad resonances. The elevated but not bumpy 9-18 kHz range could be EQ'ed easily if found necessary.

We cannot assume the acoustical plots are identical obviously, otherwise the questions would make no sense at all. Oh, needless to say but I'll say it just for clarity, that we have to assume the plots were done in an anechoic chamber, or equivalent environment.

For reference, I highly recommend the AH article linked below.

https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/loudspeaker-measurement-standard

"The Audioholics Loudspeaker Measurement Standard will focus on the following measurement metrics:

• On-Axis Frequency Response
• Sensitivity
• Listening Window Response
• Polar Response
• Impedance & Electrical Phase
• Distortion Analysis"

Wouldn't those two additional assumptions vary depending on who measured them?

Are Stereophiles tests done in an anechoic chamber?


Great link- I like when Gene says "I try to listen to the product before I do any measurements because what I've found is that if I measure a product first, I'm going to have preconceptions of what it's going to sound like." and Hugo correctly adds- "You get biased." This is also one of the points I'm trying to make.

Based on the graphs, most who then listen to Speaker A we will probably believe it is clearly superior and be predisposed to hearing a very neutral flat top end and most who listen to Speaker B after looking at the graph will also be predisposed and comment on it's elevated top-end that they can clearly hear.