IndieSynth
Member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2023
- Messages
- 39
- Likes
- 36
Thanks for the responses, makes sense!
They sound pretty good. Need to revisit them.Just ordered a pair of these.
Want to see what they sound like mostly, and like the idea of them being an English brand, and the looks.
My wife is starting to wonder what is wrong with me though......She thinks one pair of speakers are all a guy needs!
Don't want to disappoint but on this Diamond generation the engineering and tuning was done by ze GermansWant to see what they sound like mostly, and like the idea of them being an English brand, and the looks.
Just got my pair in yesterday!
My opinion: VERY neutral, and just extremely listenable. Nothing draws attention, nor feels lacking for the size.
Resolution is quite good, and everything bass to treble, simply sounds very coherent and just "Right"
Vocals are extremely smooth and neutral sounding.
I felt no need to EQ, which is always a good thing to me.
Paired them with a sub and the sound then went from very good to close to excellent overall, especially considering their price and size. I simply did not notice the "lack of energy" in the 2-3 Khz range at all, and found them oddly enough, one of the most listenable speakers I have heard under $1,000, I expected somewhat less for some reason.
KEF LS50 IMHO, is now a notch or two down in sound to these, in some key ways.
Quite amazed overall.
Depends on how you can place the woofer, how large your room is and if you like to let it rip.80 Hz for the Diamonds and 90 Hz for the Kef?
i have emo b1's(Dennis Murphy mods) in a small room mid field set up , single svs pb1000 pro crossed at 110 , no noticeable localization, but the sub is under the left speaker so i'm "cheating" a bit...btw , i'm in no rush to upgrade any of it...Depends on how you can place the woofer, how large your room is and if you like to let it rip.
If there where two subs in a stereo like placement, i would go to 120Hz or even higher, for both. You would reduce distortion and get higher clean SPL. Even if it's just one sub, it may be worth it to try to cut off higher. You really have to listen, or better measure, and see what works best in your particular room.
My point was that it isn't a directivity error but a crossover design issue. Either the speakers aren't correctly level-matched at the xover point, they are out of phase, or both. Boosting that region will help with a flatter response but will also increase the midrange distortion, seeing that the 2-4kHz region already has some distortion at moderate listening levels.
Thank you for saving me the trouble of looking for that post (which I was just about to do)! Yes, folks the dip is indeed intentional, and it's there for a reason, though some may not agree that it's a good reason.The designer of this speaker posted a while back about the dip:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-12-1-review-speaker.26780/page-8#post-951979
Yes, that depends also on the room acoustics, listened recordings and personal preferences, Amir for example liked it on most tracks more with flattening this dip:Thank you for saving me the trouble of looking for that post (which I was just about to do)! Yes, folks the dip is indeed intentional, and it's there for a reason, though some may not agree that it's a good reason.
This made the vocals, especially that of females, to stand out more which I liked. And added a bit of resolution to them as is typical of this type of boost. On some tracks I thought there was a bit extra brightness but overall, I liked it better with EQ than without.
Yes, that depends also on the room acoustics, listened recordings and personal preferences, Amir for example liked it on most tracks more with flattening this dip:
A dip in that region definitely takes the edge from some harsh recordings, although the dip actually is bigger in the PIR and the sound power than on the direct sound and listening window as its a result from the directivity mismatch.The enlightening thing about those comments, for me, was that Amir preferred it with EQ, but could see why some tracks might sound better without. When you look at the estimated in-room response, it’s a reasonably-sized dip - just looking at that graph you’d have thought it’d have been a major issue, but that’s not how Amir’s comments come across.
Yes, people even can even import his data and create more precise filters based on those, have done it quite few times and members like Pierre and Maiky76 provide also nice computed filters based on those.It’s good that he offers details of his EQ so people can do a fairly simple A-B comparison.
A dip in that region definitely takes the edge from some harsh recordings, although the dip actually is bigger in the PIR and the sound power than on the direct sound and listening window as its a result from the directivity mismatch.
And they are always highly appreciated. I wish someone would do the hard work and import these to spinorama.org as well, but i guess it's just too much hassle.Yes, people even can even import his data and create more precise filters based on those, have done it quite few times and members like Pierre and Maiky76 provide also nice computed filters based on those.
Yes, that depends also on the room acoustics, listened recordings and personal preferences, Amir for example liked it on most tracks more with flattening this dip: