Will consumers buy the Dutch & Dutch 8C?

[Sergei]

What exactly is it about the design of the 8C that makes it "less effective as a studio monitor"?

The largest factor is 8C's uneven frequency response on axis, in the range between 80 and 160 Hz, which happens to be both the range of male vocal fundamental, and a very important range for electronic music. In by book, -6 dB at 100 Hz is a disqualification factor for a studio monitor.

Second factor is the more pronounced beaming, and drivers discontinuity, at frequencies over ~1,600 Hz, compared to the Genelec. This could be important for multi-channel work, especially in demo situations when several people listen to a mix in your studio.

In addition to not being technically superior, 8C is significantly more expensive. With volume discounts, major studios can get five Genelec 8351A monitors for the money comparable to what they'd need to spend on a pair of 8C.

Last week, I attended a demo in a studio mixing room with five such Genelecs + Genelec subwoofer. Clever owner used his studio mixes produced for action sequences shot in rooms with dimensions comparable to the dimensions of the mixing room. They were very convincing!

One of the movies the studio owner demonstrated already achieved award-winning status. Another one will be released several months later as an exclusive of a major global streaming network. Serious sound engineers prefer serious studio monitors ...

And a serious studio monitor is not that easy to design and make. You may want to read more about the Genelecs: https://www.audioxpress.com/article/r-d-stories-genelec-8351-acoustically-coaxial-sam-system.

8C
View attachment 30275

Genelec 8351A
View attachment 30276View attachment 30275View attachment 30276

 

[dc655321]

The largest factor is 8C's uneven frequency response on axis, in the range between 80 and 160 Hz, which happens to be both the range of male vocal fundamental, and a very important range for electronic music. In by book, -6 dB at 100 Hz is a disqualification factor for a studio monitor.

Second factor is the more pronounced beaming, and drivers discontinuity, at frequencies over ~1,600 Hz, compared to the Genelec. This could be important for multi-channel work, especially in demo situations when several people listen to a mix in your studio.

Uneven and beaming?
Where do you find evidence of those claims?

8C is significantly more expensive.

Agreed.
Yay, a fact?

 

[Biblob]

The largest factor is 8C's uneven frequency response on axis, in the range between 80 and 160 Hz, which happens to be both the range of male vocal fundamental, and a very important range for electronic music. In by book, -6 dB at 100 Hz is a disqualification factor for a

Show me where this is actually measured..?

 

[Sergei]

Oh I'm not at all "so sure". However, I am generally skeptical when presented with information that doesn't make physical sense.

We are very much alike in this respect. The reason I said "I'm not so sure", instead of "I'm sure that".

And I found nothing in those video clips about the JBL system that indicates directivity was a design goal, only low frequency response.

Hmm, you may be right. I guess I watched too many of such videos. Some of them did discuss the directivity as an important "Neighbors Acceptance Factor".

Acoustically, if the JBL Boombox designers just wanted to maximize the low-frequency radiation, they could use a transducer with very large surface. The boombox would look more like a short drum in that case.

Anecdotal, ear-based measurement?

Indeed, I wish the usual Hi-Fi measurements were readily available for the mass-market bluetooth speakers. However, there is a silver lining: ready availability of actual bluetooth speakers being used in quasi-anechoic environments.

The pier I mentioned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belmont_Veterans_Memorial_Pier. We can consider it as a publicly-funded multi-million quasi-anechoic testing grounds. When the wind dies out at night, it could be in fact pretty quiet too, if not for the fishermen with their boomboxes.

 

[Sergei]

Show me where this is actually measured..?

There is a thread on that very site with exhaustive discussion of 8C measurements:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...soundstage’s-review-of-dutch-dutch’s-8c.7308/

I personally found two starting points deeper in the thread most informational:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...w-of-dutch-dutch’s-8c.7308/page-7#post-173726

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...w-of-dutch-dutch’s-8c.7308/page-7#post-174266

How does it relate to my earlier statement that 8C are unlikely to make a dent in Neumann, Genelec, and Focal sales? In a very simple way. Professionals expect their monitors to have uncontroversial anechoic chamber measurements, and thus being plug-and-play in their well-acoustically-treated studios.

It is understandable that some members of this forum perceive my statements about the limited suitability of 8C for professional studio monitors duties as too harsh. After all, if the room is "right", and the 8Cs are placed "right", they reportedly do sound pretty well: technically they are a pair of good mid-sized studio monitors combined with a pair of decent subwoofers.

What I'm advocating is spending more energy on penetrating market niche(s) where 8C advantages demonstrably out-weight its disadvantages. We discussed one of them: acoustically-untreated smaller yet very symmetrical living rooms, characteristic of urban areas in colder climates.

Maybe it could be corporate conference rooms: they are usually highly-acoustically-reflective, symmetrical, and their two front corners are typically unoccupied. Here in San Francisco Bay Area one can often see Dynaudio and other three-way speakers mounted closer to the front upper corners.

By "demonstrably" I don't mean good enough for an article with measurements, so popular in the 20th century. I mean either a live demo by a sales representative, or a high-sound-quality video posted on Vimeo, which D&D advocates could use to convince their purchase-check-signing bosses.

IMHO, thinking about how to design new DSP modes for such living spaces and corporate conference rooms, how to test them, how to market them, what kind of warranties and service guarantees would be required for these niches, could be much better uses of D&D time and money.

 

[restorer-john]

What I'm advocating is spending more energy on penetrating market niche(s) where 8C advantages demonstrably out-weight its disadvantages.

I would consider that D&D are already targeting for several markets at once- the professional studios, the professional at home, the design conscious and the modern audiophile.

I wish them the best of luck and would sure like a pair myself, albeit at a much lower price..

 

[Biblob]

There is a thread on that very site with exhaustive discussion of 8C measurements:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/soundstage’s-review-of-dutch-dutch’s-8c.7308/

I personally found two starting points deeper in the thread most informational:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/soundstage’s-review-of-dutch-dutch’s-8c.7308/page-7#post-173726

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/soundstage’s-review-of-dutch-dutch’s-8c.7308/page-7#post-174266

How does it relate to my earlier statement that 8C are unlikely to make a dent in Neumann, Genelec, and Focal sales? In a very simple way. Professionals expect their monitors to have uncontroversial anechoic chamber measurements, and thus being plug-and-play in their well-acoustically-treated studios.

It is understandable that some members of this forum perceive my statements about the limited suitability of 8C for professional studio monitors duties as too harsh. After all, if the room is "right", and the 8Cs are placed "right", they reportedly do sound pretty well: technically they are a pair of good mid-sized studio monitors combined with a pair of decent subwoofers.

What I'm advocating is spending more energy on penetrating market niche(s) where 8C advantages demonstrably out-weight its disadvantages. We discussed one of them: acoustically-untreated smaller yet very symmetrical living rooms, characteristic of urban areas in colder climates.

Maybe it could be corporate conference rooms: they are usually highly-acoustically-reflective, symmetrical, and their two front corners are typically unoccupied. Here in San Francisco Bay Area one can often see Dynaudio and other three-way speakers mounted closer to the front upper corners.

By "demonstrably" I don't mean good enough for an article with measurements, so popular in the 20th century. I mean either a live demo by a sales representative, or a high-sound-quality video posted on Vimeo, which D&D advocates could use to convince their purchase-check-signing bosses.

IMHO, thinking about how to design new DSP modes for such living spaces and corporate conference rooms, how to test them, how to market them, what kind of warranties and service guarantees would be required for these niches, could be much better uses of D&D time and money.

I thought you would show the NRC measurements. Multiple people think this is caused by the backfiring woofers causing interference in the anechoic room. Because it is only anechoic to 80 Hz. D&D were surprised themself because they haven't seen such anomaly anywhere else.
So I would not trust that dip actually.

 

[Absolute]

Can't remember the last time I did this on any forum, but I did. Ignored.
Erratic bullshit is not why I read this forum.

Sorry, Sergei.

 

[dc655321]

How does it relate to my earlier statement that 8C are unlikely to make a dent in Neumann, Genelec, and Focal sales? In a very simple way. Professionals expect their monitors to have uncontroversial anechoic chamber measurements, and thus being plug-and-play in their well-acoustically-treated studios.

Perhaps you should check out the review and measurements by @mitchco.
Or, more recently at Stereophile.

The only thing "controversial" about the anechoic measurements you sourced was their publication without accompanying interpretation for what were clearly anomalies (bass and distortion).

The local ASR links you provided above clarify those anomalies.
Not sure what you were going for by linking to something that counters your own argument...

You can always go check out what the professionals think (good and bad,) instead of armchair quarterbacking postulating.

 

[Sergei]

Perhaps you should check out the review and measurements by @mitchco.
Or, more recently at Stereophile.

Such reviews were informative, yet contradictory. Can anyone tell what is the DSP-uncorrected room-effects-untangled frequency response is? Especially in the 80Hz-160Hz region? Which one of the three graphs below shall I believe?

https://www.stereophile.com/content/dutch-dutch-8c-active-loudspeaker-system-measurements

http://www.mcleans.info/shop/productDetails.do?categoryId=1254&productId=264619

The only thing "controversial" about the anechoic measurements you sourced was their publication without accompanying interpretation for what were clearly anomalies (bass and distortion).

Measurements of monitors with established professional reputation tend to be boringly uncontroversial. Their interpretation is simple. Behavior predictable in typical studio environments. 8C are different, because they are designed to couple with a room much stronger: this is both their strength and weakness, depending on the room.

The local ASR links you provided above clarify those anomalies.
Not sure what you were going for by linking to something that counters your own argument...

Clarification of an anomaly is a sequence of words. Fixing an anomaly requires a sequence of actions. Some of the anomalies can be fixed with the 8C embedded DSP. Some others require properly coupling 8C to the front wall, which could be quite challenging, especially if a room is non-symmetrical, or you need more channels than two.

You can always go check out what the professionals think (good and bad,) instead of armchair quarterbacking postulating.

Professionals rarely say bad things about well-established studio monitors. For instance:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showpost.php?p=13457893&postcount=19
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/1010122-genelec-8351-anyone-else-using-these.html
I tried to find negative reviews of the Genelec 8351 on Gearslutz, and couldn't. Different engineers prefer different monitors for various reasons, yet there are no obvious 8351 faults reported.

Let's now turn our attention back to 8C.
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showpost.php?p=14016165&postcount=1272
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showpost.php?p=14005118&postcount=1265
I see multiple reports about 8C issues, mechanical and electronic.
Here's an account of real-life experience with them:
https://darko.audio/2019/05/unfinished-business-with-the-dutch-dutch-8c


Regarding the "armchair quarterback postulating". Indeed, some of the 8C characteristics can be easily discerned from an armchair. For instance, look at the photo below. There's an armchair

What is the person sitting in armchair thinking? Maybe: "Are the customers really supposed to put a 26 kg thing on a skinny pole like this? Unless it is bolted to the floor of course" In reality, the dealers who care about keeping their customers and their pets healthy and alive for long enough, so that the customers could buy from them again, recommend using other stands, for instance these:

This is an example of how what the designers or marketers of 8C envisioned differs from reality. Such gap is a usual and normal thing for a young company.

My "postulate" (observation actually) is that there are market niches for which 8C could be suited better than it is suited for general studio monitors market. Sure, some audio engineers buy them, and out of those some percentage love them. But is it going to be a runaway success there? My prediction is that it most likely won't.

At the same time, I can totally imagine how young professionals living in smaller apartments, and spending significant time inside corporate conference rooms, could advocate the 8C case to their spouses, bosses, friends, and colleagues.

I repeat once again. I'm not putting it unconditionally down. 8C is an attractively designed all-in-one combination of a good conventional monitor and a decent subwoofer. Teething problems aside, it has the potential to make it big, just not necessarily in the general studio monitors market, and not at the current price.

 

[dc655321]

Can anyone tell what is the DSP-uncorrected room-effects-untangled frequency response is? Especially in the 80Hz-160Hz region? Which one of the three graphs below shall I believe?

The "DSP-uncorrected" frequency response is irrelevant.
These speakers are utterly dependent upon DSP for crossovers and time-alignment (of subs).
The fact that their output can be tailored affords much flexibility, though at the cost of complexity and appare reliability (as Darko reported).

Measurements of monitors with established professional reputation tend to be boringly uncontroversial.

Perhaps, but I've only seen a handful of measurements that were in the same league as those of the 8C.
Some Genelec come to mind. And once subwoofer and integration hardware/software are accounted for, are in a similar pricing tier as 8C.

Clarification of an anomaly is a sequence of words. Fixing an anomaly requires a sequence of actions.

That's not nearly as profound as you might think it is... ;-)

Some of the anomalies can be fixed with the 8C embedded DSP. Some others require properly coupling 8C to the front wall, which could be quite challenging, especially if a room is non-symmetrical, or you need more channels than two.

Are you perhaps confusing room and user anomalies (a la Stereophile) with product defects?
And again, the DSP "features" are central to the 8C design, integration, and operation.
Having said that, yes, I can see how an asymmetrical wall may pose problems. But it would have to be really odd to be impactful at < 100Hz.

What is the person sitting in armchair thinking? Maybe: "Are the customers really supposed to put a 26 kg thing on a skinny pole like this? Unless it is bolted to the floor of course" In reality, the dealers who care about keeping their customers and their pets healthy and alive for long enough, so that the customers could buy from them again,

Well, the critically thoughtful customer might look at that marketing photo and observe that it is nothing more than a marketing photo.
But, I appreciate the attempt at humor.

 

[restorer-john]

The "DSP-uncorrected" frequency response is irrelevant.
These speakers are utterly dependent upon DSP for crossovers and time-alignment (of subs

What phenomenally famous and successful speakers from the past were utterly dependent on equalization to sound remotely acceptable?

Gentlemen, I give you the Bose 901:

But if D&D can pull of 10% of Bose's sales, they'll be laughing all the way to the bank...

(PS, just having fun)

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Such reviews were informative, yet contradictory. Can anyone tell what is the DSP-uncorrected room-effects-untangled frequency response is? Especially in the 80Hz-160Hz region?

Sure. Those are the corrections that I inserted for use in my room and which I failed to defeat when I sent the speakers on to JA. He became aware of their inclusion only after he ran his sweeps. So, you can ignore those dips.

 

[restorer-john]

So @Kal Rubinson , assuming a clean slate (you own nothing at all HiFi related, but you have all the knowledge), what would you pick? A D&D package (multiple channels is fine) or Benchmark amplifiers and a high end passive speaker setup, or something completely different again?

What should the guy who rolls into a high end store, in this day and age, with young ears, a fat wallet, and a reasonable idea, be buying? What would you recommend to him, knowing that in 20 years time, you would bump into him at a party and chat about HiFi? I'm sure you've done that before, and there's probably nothing better than hearing how much they still love their music and their gear.

What path would you send someone on, in 2019?

 

[Absolute]

Peculiar question without specifying use/needs. A circular big room covered with in-wall good speakers and subs and the same for the ceiling, carefully selected acoustical treatments and a powerful dsp multichannel system?
Would be my pick if no considerations had to be taken.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

So @Kal Rubinson , assuming a clean slate (you own nothing at all HiFi related, but you have all the knowledge), what would you pick? A D&D package (multiple channels is fine) or Benchmark amplifiers and a high end passive speaker setup, or something completely different again?

See my next column.

What should the guy who rolls into a high end store, in this day and age, with young ears, a fat wallet, and a reasonable idea, be buying? What would you recommend to him, knowing that in 20 years time, you would bump into him at a party and chat about HiFi? I'm sure you've done that before, and there's probably nothing better than hearing how much they still love their music and their gear.

What path would you send someone on, in 2019?

That's another story. Knowing that people will and should make their own decisions about these things regardless of what we think, I would try to educate him. I would inform him that I see three paths: 1. a retrophile path (vinyl, tubes), 2. an audiophile path (digital, modern electronics and passive speakers and 3. a proactive path (integrated active DSP-based loudspeakers and whatever digital gear is needed to feed them). I would personally rank them in ascending order (1, 2, 3) for accuracy/sound quality of music reproduction but will acknowledge that this is a hobby that many enjoy as much or more for the hardware and the manipulations. So, some might rank my three in reverse order (3, 2, 1) for their personal pleasure.

 

[Sergei]

View attachment 30319

But if D&D can pull of 10% of Bose's sales, they'll be laughing all the way to the bank...

(PS, just having fun)

D&D could also reuse wisdom of the designers of vibration-resistant cooling fans of that era. One of the fans is prominently displayed on the page above

 

[Sergei]

Sure. Those are the corrections that I inserted for use in my room and which I failed to defeat when I sent the speakers on to JA. He became aware of their inclusion only after he ran his sweeps. So, you can ignore those dips.

Oh, the dips weren't the issue. They were below 80 Hz, and one of the articles reviewing this particular pair of 8Cs mentioned why they were introduced. Thank you for taking your time to clarify this once again.

The still remaining point of disagreement between me and some esteemed members of this forum is the desirability of such hybrid acousto-DSP crossover at 100 Hz for studio use.

Ever since I dabbled in Comsol Acoustic Simulations (https://www.comsol.com/products), I realized that dynamic transducers generate highly complex 3D pressure fields even in idealized or very simple settings.

The way to deal with this inherent complexity was to design studio monitors enclosures and waveguides that allowed keeping the pressure field uniform enough for the human hearing system to not notice the inconsistencies, as long as the listener's head is within sweet spot.

The rest of the pressure field, typically anything beyond 45 degrees horizontally and 15 degrees vertically from the axis, can't be effectively controlled, and thus is usually suppressed using room treatments (but not completely eliminated).

If 8Cs are placed in front of a reflective wall at zero degrees, or in a reflective corner of a rectangular room at 45 degrees, the crossover summation around 100 Hz works acoustically well, and I expect people using 8Cs in such environments to be happy with their spatial accuracy.

If, however, 8Cs reproducing L and R channels are placed at 30 degrees angle to the front wall, as recommended for reproduction of stereo and multi-channel sound, the acoustic picture becomes much more complex, especially if the room is asymmetrical or have asymmetrically-placed furniture.

The acoustic field generated in this case emphasizes some characteristics of sound at the expense of others. The oft-cited 8Cs "wall of sound" and "larger than life sound image" are there, yet accurate instruments placement no longer is.

Acoustically, 8Cs would be both highly accurate and compliant with the placement standards when installed in houses and mixing/mastering studios with hexagonal rooms (e.g. https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/mo...f8c07f5d41f5a8/Hexagonal-House-with-Courtyard).

Hexagonal rooms are sparse in the world. Thus the market niches that 8Cs could truly benefit are the ones where consumers care more about the aforementioned Wall of Sound than about the spacial accuracy.

 

[Snarfie]

The acoustic field generated in this case emphasizes some characteristics of sound at the expense of others. The oft-cited 8Cs "wall of sound" and "larger than life sound image" are there, yet accurate instruments placement no longer is.

Acoustically, 8Cs would be both highly accurate and compliant with the placement standards when installed in houses and mixing/mastering studios with hexagonal rooms (e.g. https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/mo...f8c07f5d41f5a8/Hexagonal-House-with-Courtyard).

Hexagonal rooms are sparse in the world. Thus the market niches that 8Cs could truly benefit are the ones where consumers care more about the aforementioned Wall of Sound than about the spacial accuracy.

Do you refer with "wall of sound" to the sound that phil Spector developt or high volume, saturation, distortion in music as describe here under i guess the latest.

This article is about Phil Spector's music production formula. It is not to be confused with the generic term "wall of sound", used to describe high volume, saturation, or distortion in music. For more details on that topic, see Noise music or Noise in music. For other uses, see Wall of Sound (disambiguation).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_of_Sound

 

[Juhazi]

Oh, the dips weren't the issue. They were below 80 Hz, and one of the articles reviewing this particular pair of 8Cs mentioned why they were introduced. Thank you for taking your time to clarify this once again.

The still remaining point of disagreement between me and some esteemed members of this forum is the desirability of such hybrid acousto-DSP crossover at 100 Hz for studio use.
...
If 8Cs are placed in front of a reflective wall at zero degrees, or in a reflective corner of a rectangular room at 45 degrees, the crossover summation around 100 Hz works acoustically well, and I expect people using 8Cs in such environments to be happy with their spatial accuracy.

If, however, 8Cs reproducing L and R channels are placed at 30 degrees angle to the front wall, as recommended for reproduction of stereo and multi-channel sound, the acoustic picture becomes much more complex, especially if the room is asymmetrical or have asymmetrically-placed furniture.

The acoustic field generated in this case emphasizes some characteristics of sound at the expense of others. The oft-cited 8Cs "wall of sound" and "larger than life sound image" are there, yet accurate instruments placement no longer is.
..
.

No, it's the contrary - the cardioid pattern above 100Hz makes D&D less sensitive to placement changes than normal speakers, less interferences with the front and sidewalls! Below 100Hz wavelength is so long that 30deg rotation is meaningless to reflections. "Monopole" speakers with same dimensions are omnipole up to around 300Hz, then gradually reach the directivity of D&D at roughly 1,5kHz

Getting cardioid response below 100Hz requires several pretty large drivers and trickery with the box or dsp. Something like this 2x18"

https://kimmosaunisto.net/CardSub/CARDSUB.html