Affordable Accuracy Monitor Review

[mk05]

My question to @amirm, or anyone able to draw from experience is: how much of the changes from original to modded could one replicate with simple roomEQ or DSP? If I just connect original speakers to miniDSP, how close could I get? As in, if one had the ability to EQ, was this speaker even worth the modding?

 

[SMc]

My question to @amirm, or anyone able to draw from experience is: how much of the changes from original to modded could one replicate with simple roomEQ or DSP? If I just connect original speakers to miniDSP, how close could I get? As in, if one had the ability to EQ, was this speaker even worth the modding?

As mentioned before, noaudiophile has a DSP recommendation found here:

http://noaudiophile.com/DSP_Corrections/Pioneer_BS-22.php

He uses the BS22 as a desktop monitor.

 

[mt196]

The Dayton woofer has amazing bass performance--far better than the woofers used in other budget speakers. It does have to be crossed at around 1900 Hz, which is why I couldn't use the Vifa tweeter I used in the 22 mod.

Can you clarify this point for me? Why the Vifa couldn't be crossed at 1900hz?

 

[QMuse]

My question to @amirm, or anyone able to draw from experience is: how much of the changes from original to modded could one replicate with simple roomEQ or DSP? If I just connect original speakers to miniDSP, how close could I get? As in, if one had the ability to EQ, was this speaker even worth the modding?

Well, with 7 simple filters you can get LW and PIR like this:

Filter (requires 1dB of attenuation!):

 

[QMuse]

As mentioned before, noaudiophile has a DSP recommendation found here:

http://noaudiophile.com/DSP_Corrections/Pioneer_BS-22.php

He uses the BS22 as a desktop monitor.

That correction is useless. He didn't even show the expected response after filtering.

 

[617]

So, is the main upshot of this thread is that Dennis Murphy knows his stuff? gosh, who woulda thunk?



Arrrgh. Yet another endorsement of the CAC drivers specifically. Looking at the datasheets, they really look pretty much identical to the NBAC versions, but nobody is talking about those. It's always the CAC drivers that everyone is calling attention to. I really want the black cones for aesthetic reasons, though. (assuming I don't just go with the Purifi PTT6.5, that is. Or, give up on my own design and try the BMR, or Jim/Curt's Traveler which uses the CAC15, OW2 and RS225. too many decisions and choices)

Yeah it's funny I've noticed the same thing. They really are almost identical in measurement, and they should be (ceramic is just a coating) but people really do rave about them. I'd imagine they're not worth using if you're not using them in the midrange and up. I also dislike the white.

Aluminum seems to be going out of fashion for drivers but it's probably the only material that can be used to make a great woofer, midrange and tweeter.

 

[mk05]

Well, with 7 simple filters you can get LW and PIR like this:

View attachment 65905

Filter (requires 1dB of attenuation!):

View attachment 65906

Forgive me...I think LW is listening window. What does PIR stand for?
Did you do this experiment yourself?
Given your findings, what is your opinion on mods vs roomEQ/DSP?
It seems that for speakers with original measurements like this, mods are unnecessary. Instead, roomEQ/DSP is way more impactful?

 

[KEW]

Yeah it's funny I've noticed the same thing. They really are almost identical in measurement, and they should be (ceramic is just a coating) but people really do rave about them. I'd imagine they're not worth using if you're not using them in the midrange and up. I also dislike the white.

Aluminum seems to be going out of fashion for drivers but it's probably the only material that can be used to make a great woofer, midrange and tweeter.

I'm mostly inclined to agree with you for a woofer or mid-range, however for a tweeter the main problem with aluminum is that the breakup modes are usually in or too close to audible range. It seems, in that case, putting a ceramic coating increases stiffness and drives the breakup frequency well beyond audible range!

 

[QMuse]

Forgive me...I think LW is listening window. What does PIR stand for?
Did you do this experiment yourself?
Given your findings, what is your opinion on mods vs roomEQ/DSP?
It seems that for speakers with original measurements like this, mods are unnecessary. Instead, roomEQ/DSP is way more impactful?

PIR stands for "Predicted In-room Response", sometimes also called "estimated in-room response", as calculated by CEA-2034 standard and showed by Amir with his Klippel measurements.

I made a fitler myself but I can't test it as I don't have that speakers.

Room/speaker EQ can linearize LW and PIR. With speakers with smooth directivity it can linearize both. These Pioneers have quite decent directivity hence prediceted response of both curves looks nice. EQ can't help with bass drivers that can't produce sufficient SPL nor ith can help with distortions, for that you need better drivers. EQ also can't help with directivity issues caused by crossover, but this speaker looks quite decent in that respect. My guess is that with these Pioneers the EQ filter I posted would improve sound very noticeably.

 

[617]

PIR stands for "Predicted In-room Response", sometimes also called "estimaated in-room response", as calculated by CEA-2034 standard and showed by Amir with his Klippel measurements.

I made a fitler myself but I can't test it as I don't have that speakers.

Room/speaker EQ can linearize LW and PIR. With speakers with smooth directivity it can linearize both. These Pioneers have qutie decent directivity hence the nice rpediceted response of both curves. EQ can't help with bass drivers that can't produce SPL nor ith can help with distortions, for that you need better drivers. EQ also can't help with directivity issues caused by crossover, but this speaker looks quite decent in that respect. My guess is that with these Pioneers the EQ filter I posted would improve sound very noticeably.

I think we should avoid using the acronym "PIR" here, since it has another meaning in this context - Periodic Impulse Response. .pir files are used by Arta and other measurement software to store raw measurement data.

 

[dwkdnvr]

I'm mostly inclined to agree with you for a woofer or mid-range, however for a tweeter the main problem with aluminum is that the breakup modes are usually in or too close to audible range. It seems, in that case, putting a ceramic coating increases stiffness and drives the breakup frequency well beyond audible range!

That's the theory, but it really isn't borne out in practice - at least not with the SB drivers. The SB26CAC doesn't actually change the breakup frequency much if at all - it's still right around 27kHz. What it seems to do is push that energy off-axis presumably via different phase shield design (at least according to the datasheet. If you look at 'augerpro's waveguide measurements, the ADC and CDC are almost identical since the phase shield is removed). Similarly, the specific details of the peaks/dips in the SB15CAC vs SB15NBAC do change very slighly, but don't really move in frequency (the main innovation in those drivers is the ribs which help moderate the break-up compared to conventional flat cones.

Now, a different dome material like in the corundum dome DA25Tx does manage to push the break-up higher. About 35-37kHz in that case, and the big selling point of Beryllium is that it not only pushes it higher but also damps it somewhat. You pay for that, though.

 

[mk05]

PIR stands for "Predicted In-room Response", sometimes also called "estimated in-room response", as calculated by CEA-2034 standard and showed by Amir with his Klippel measurements.

I made a fitler myself but I can't test it as I don't have that speakers.

Room/speaker EQ can linearize LW and PIR. With speakers with smooth directivity it can linearize both. These Pioneers have qutie decent directivity hence the nice rpediceted response of both curves. EQ can't help with bass drivers that can't produce SPL nor ith can help with distortions, for that you need better drivers. EQ also can't help with directivity issues caused by crossover, but this speaker looks quite decent in that respect. My guess is that with these Pioneers the EQ filter I posted would improve sound very noticeably.

Thank you, that was helpful. Looks like what I should take away for future is to look for decent looking freq response and then use roomEQ / DSP to improve.

 

[GelbeMusik]

It seems that for speakers with original measurements like this, mods are unnecessary. Instead, roomEQ/DSP is way more impactful?

Sure, but people want it to be "certified" by spinorama / preference rating to give their pure belongings some rational score. To know what they have, to make You know, You know? Spinorama score "8 with sub", only that there is not an integrated sub, neither nor to speak of, for simplicity reasons.

Some simply ignore with virtue the given fact, that spinorama is about an average, and a quite humble one. It addresses the supplier with wide spread market penetration, not the individual customer in his individual home with individual taste and individually preferred recordings from individual recording studios from all points in recent time sitting on his own sofa, not in the stereo triangle.

Again, in case You would measure the actual performance in Your very room(s) for yourself and, guided by very simple principles (courtesy of Toole/Olive) adjust to Your very taste, maybe dependent on the very recording or program whatever, You wouldn't score, but instead enjoy.



I've already stated why small speakers naturally score high. It's about the integration of physically disparate directivities of drivers and baffles. The smaller the easier to accomplish clean spinorama. Only that one loses the loud in the speakers. If that is beneficial to music as an artform, one might ask. Music wasn't some nasty extra anymore, but just another thing to do right with common sense.

 

[snapsc]

@Dennis Murphy

Dennis,

Looking at the spins and the various analysis and discussion around the analysis of a few of your speakers... I'd like to ask you two questions. I'm more of a mind that a good spinorama/measurements can get you in the ballpark of something that might sound good in your home...but they don't tell the whole story. What has your experience been in this area?

Second question...it seems that you have not tinkered much with open baffle, so I'm wondering about your thoughts on open baffle vs box speakers and is one more likely than the other to create that "magic" in your home?

 

[mk05]

Sure, but people want it to be "certified" by spinorama / preference rating to give their pure belongings some rational score. To know what they have, to make You know, You know? Spinorama score "8 with sub", only that there is not an integrated sub, neither nor to speak of, for simplicity reasons.

Some simply ignore with virtue the given fact, that spinorama is about an average, and a quite humble one. It addresses the supplier with wide spread market penetration, not the individual customer in his individual home with individual taste and individually preferred recordings from individual recording studios from all points in recent time sitting on his own sofa, not in the stereo triangle.

Again, in case You would measure the actual performance in Your very room(s) for yourself and, guided by very simple principles (courtesy of Toole/Olive) adjust to Your very taste, maybe dependent on the very recording or program whatever, You wouldn't score, but instead enjoy.



I've already stated why small speakers naturally score high. It's about the integration of physically disparate directivities of drivers and baffles. The smaller the easier to accomplish clean spinorama. Only that one loses the loud in the speakers. If that is beneficial to music as an artform, one might ask. Music wasn't some nasty extra anymore, but just another thing to do right with common sense.

I'm not sure what I took away from that other than how much roomEQ/DSP will help me achieve a catered sound to my environment and preference. If I'm missing anything technically revealing, please say so.

As for smaller speakers naturally scoring high, I'm not sure that I understand given my very limited knowledge. I thought the more speaker drivers, the less load each driver has - and of frequency range demand - therefore a cleaner, full-ranged, and more cohesive sound results. This is why I was considering line-array type (which, from my understanding, directs each tiny speaker to specific frequency range), and these speakers measure very well.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

This is highly self-interested since I own a pair, but I've always thought that the BIC RTR-EV15s fly under the radar as a platform for mods. At $400/pair for a 3-way with 15 inch woofers, there's plenty of room for a more complex crossover and maybe even an upgraded midrange or tweeter while remaining a crazy bargain. I wish I had the skills to do it.

So I take it you've heard this beast? The major red flag (and red woofer) I see is the horn tweeter. There was a lot of buzz about a BIC center channel for use with my speakers, and when I checked it out it was a real screamer. Typical horn sound, and that often can't be fixed with a better crossover. I agree it would be an interesting mod since so many high-sensitivity designs in that price range are highly colored. I very much like the sound of giant woofers, so it might be an attractive choice for a mod if the tweeter could be tamed.

 

[Sonny1]

I actually cannot find them for less than 140 shipped here in EU, do you know for somewhere I can look at apart eBay?

@Dennis Murphy as I understand the woofer are pioneer proprietary woofers, I saw that in the new version of the mod they are using https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-dc160-8-6-1-2-classic-woofer--295-305 will them be still good with your crossover or will they need different crossover?

Im really sorry, I’ve never checked the EU prices. In the US, you can find these for very cheap on Craigslist or eBay. I saw a local pair for $60 and he probably would have taken less. I’ve even heard from people who paid as low as $25 for a used pair at goodwill. I think I paid $50 on amazon during a sale.

If you can’t find a pair cheap, you might be better off pairing those tweeters with a better woofer anyway. I’ve seen some commercial DIY designs using it but you will have to do some digging. Good luck!

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Sorry if I was unclear, I went to the website philarmonicaudio, where there is the new affordable accuracy monitor plus, that sells for 249, and I understood that this was not designed by you, that is why I said "they", but maybe I got it wrong

Anyway, I saw that this new mod has a different tweeter that it is claimed to be "identical to the Parts Express unit in the previous AA monitor, but it uses higher quality parts and provides a substantially smoother response and much tighter quality control" and a "Parts Express 6.5" treated paper cone with rubber surround" that looks identical to this https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-dc160-8-6-1-2-classic-woofer--295-305

I was wondering then, since I trust your design and I also trust Amir measurements, that maybe I can replicate the original AAM instead of going with the new mod, but using this (https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-rs100-4-4-reference-full-range-driver-4-ohm--295-378) Dayton 4" woofer since the original Pioneer woofer you used in the AAM is proprietary and I cannot find it anywhere (except for this https://www.parts-express.com/4-treated-paper-cone-woofer-16-ohm--299-320 that looks similar but I don't think it is the same as the one A.J. used), will this change much? It seems a good woofer with a good fr and many good reviews

The AA+ speaker is on my archived pages showing previously available models in case anyone sees a used one for sale and wants to know more details. I designed it and very much wish I could still make it available, albeit with a nicer cabinet that befits the price of the tweeter. As for finding a substitute woofer for the proprietary woofer in the original AA mini monitor, there's almost always some kind of Gotcha when searching in for drop-in substitutes. The 4" Reference woof you list is 4 ohms, and even if its frequency response was identical to the Pioneer woof, the lower impedance would require a crossover redesign, and it might not be possible to keep the system impedance high enough. There is an 8 ohm version, but its sensitivity is below 85 dB, which means the resulting system sensitivity after building in baffle step compensation would be 82 dB at the highest, and also would need a crossover redo. I'm not sure either of them would fit the cabinet routing's thru-hole. The last woofer you cite is 16 ohms, which would require huge inductor values to implement, and I doubt that it's as good as the Pioneer original. Finally, there's no reason to think the port tuning AJ used would work on any of these woofers.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

How about the ring radiator tweeter from Vifa? This is a low cost version, Scanspeak has some more expensive ones. https://www.parts-express.com/peerl...g30-04-1-dual-ring-radiator-tweeter--264-1016

Maybe I overlooked some options, but I was constrained by the oversized 110 mm flange of the stock Dayton Silky tweeter. Most 1" tweets use 104 mm flanges and would leave a gap if mounted in the tweeter's baffle routing. The only option I could find for an upgrade was the Morel that PE used to design the Silky tweeter.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Can you clarify this point for me? Why the Vifa couldn't be crossed at 1900hz?

Its resonant frequency is too high. It would be overworked if I took it down low enough to merge smoothly with the Dayton Classic woofer. Also, its flange is too small to fit properly in the BR-1's tweeter routing.