Dynaudio LYD 5 Studio Monitor Review

[LTig]

Dynaudio showed with the LYD the correct approach to take for a studio monitor; roll off the bass early and keep it clean. Neumann's unwillingness to do the same destroys its usefulness as a studio tool.

I'm sure any studio worth its name has an EQ to do exactly this, if required.

 

[thewas]

The KH 120 has no place in a studio and you WILL have translation issues because the 5" driver (whether it's one of the best or not) is simply tasked with too much. At 85dB, which is a a common working level, it's already distorting in the bass and masking the low mids. You will make poor decisions because your monitors are steering you wrong.

Then any 5" monitor would be useless, you seem to ignore that we listen to at least two monitors giving almost 6dB gain in the bass, plus several dB due to room gain and lowest room mode.
By the way in the article I linked the experienced testers from the DIY loudspeaker scene also analysed its distortion behaviour, here I electronically translated the text:

According to our study Distortion factor - how much is too much? K2 would be inaudible in the complete frequency range up to 100 dB (at 100 dB we only measured > 100 Hz). This also applies to K3. Even the higher distortion factors are so low > 70 Hz that even with sinusoidal excitation they are below the threshold of perceptibility - this is sensational! Only due to the wind noise around the bass reflex frequency and the adjustment of the amplifier there is audible distortion in this range (listen to the sound example in the right picture above).
The distortion of both speakers was nearly identical - that's how it should be!

Finally, we were also interested in how the distortion factors we measured were in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. After all, we measured with a very inexpensive BEHRINGER ECM-8000 in a "temporary anechoic chamber" with a reflective floor, whereas the professionals use e.g. the expensive BRÜEL & KJAER microphones and measure in large anechoic chambers with an absorbent floor.
When looking at the distortion factor at an average sound pressure level of "only" 85, for example, you can see that it is higher than 90 and 95 dB - this is certainly an indication that our measurement chain will have to deal with background noise at some point. Since the manufacturer has specified the distortion factor at 90 dB (upper picture), we have converted our standard display so that the format is largely identical. In this case, we also used the "usual" calculation rule for the distortion factor (see pink box above)

Sure, but I don't know why you wouldn't just get 80s instead.

They have significantly lower limit in the bass.

Simply put - no, it is not one of the best performing 5" monitors. Not even close. Maybe in 2011 but certainly not in 2020. Dynaudio showed with the LYD the correct approach to take for a studio monitor; roll off the bass early and keep it clean

The LYD 5 approach is exactly the opposite of progress with no bass reminding of the old minimonitors on which you were unable to judge or mix the bass of music.
Also I find it funny that in a forum where the significance of loudspeaker radiation is understood and pursed on every test, now suddenly it should be ignored in products where it count most, namely at the production part, to give an end to the miserable audio circle of confusion.

 

[richard12511]

With studio monitors, directivity is hardly a concern. The room is generally configured to solve acoustic problems and has to be treated for RT60 and clarity anyways, so reflections are less concern. The listening position is also small and practically fixed, so the Klippel predicted in room response & Olive scores are worthless.

This is not true. Directivity is very important, regardless of listening distance, as it heavily influences what you hear. My M105s and 8030c measure identically on axis, yet sound different due to the more narrow dispersion of the 8030c.

 

[AnalogSteph]

I'm sure any studio worth its name has an EQ to do exactly this, if required.

Plus there is an adjustable bass EQ (down to -7.5 dB at around 50 Hz if need be) that would no doubt help.

 

[temps]

I'm sure any studio worth its name has an EQ to do exactly this, if required.

A studio worth its name isn't running prosumer grade monitors, and almost certainly isn't running 5" monitors either. Hobby studios almost certainly don't have external crossovers, and only a few will have interfaces with DSP functions. My interface is over $2k new and doesn't have any EQ or filters.

 

[TimVG]

I agree.
8" is good for bass, distortion and power handling but difficult to blend into a tweeter and more likely to have cone breakup at a difficult to deal with frequency.
All these little driver 2-ways are uninteresting to me, personally, and are probably amongst the easiest to get the good scores.
It would be interesting to see how makers have managed to design these more difficult speakers. Maybe 8" is too big for a 2-way but also maybe somebody has made a good job of it.

Been impressed by the Genelec 1032 for weeks now. 10" to a 1" tweeter in a 6" waveguide. Was very sceptical at first but here we are. Seems to measure well anechoically and the in-room curve is equally good.

 

[temps]

Then any 5" monitor would be useless, you seem to ignore that we listen to at least two monitors giving almost 6dB gain in the bass, plus several dB due to room gain and lowest room mode.

Yes, okay, these will also apply to the LYD 5 and its much cleaner bass...

Even the higher distortion factors are so low > 70 Hz that even with sinusoidal excitation they are below the threshold of perceptibility - this is sensational!

All I see is an admission that the distortion <70hz is audible. This is what I've been saying the entire time.

They have significantly lower limit in the bass.

You cut off the application I was proceeding to make a recommendation on. If you are doing spoken word, you don't care about bass because there is none. Vocal humps will tend to be in the region >150hz and you will heavily roll off anything below that - therefore, bass response is of almost no concern, so why not save $300 per speaker and gain DSP while you're at it?

The LYD 5 approach is exactly the opposite of progress with no bass reminding of the old minimonitors on which you were unable to judge or mix the bass of music.

As tested it has practically the same amount of bass as the 8030, except much cleaner. 10hz of extension was left on the table.......

Also I find it funny that in a forum where the significance of loudspeaker radiation is understood and pursed on every test, now suddenly it should be ignored in products where it count most, namely at the production part, to give an end to the miserable audio circle of confusion.

I wanted you to link me to a paper saying what I would hear going from narrow to wide directivity... I literally just switched from monitors with a razor thin sweet spot to the LYDs and measured both extensively...

 

[KaiserSoze]

Well, those measurements are standardised and not easy to falsily or manipulate even if you want too and I will explain also why I believe they aren't wrong.

In the graph of vertical dispersion provided on Neumann's site, the "eyes" that indicate the location of the point of strongest cancellation are found at 45 degrees to 50 degrees above and below the horizontal, exactly as they should be, separated by 90 to 100 degrees. The graph you provided indicates that the nulls are separated by 235 degrees.

https://static-neumann.s3.amazonaws...ile/507/neumann_kh310_ver_directivity_510.gif

Before writing condescending to others you should first understand that real non-point source radiating drivers in real encloses with their baffle diffraction effects and real crossover slopes show different radiation pattern then your oversimplified assumption and calculation of point sources with no diffraction and infinite crossover slopes.
This also come to you back about arrogance...

I have difficulty when someone has behaved toward me in a consistently rude, condescending manner, and then accuses me of being condescending. Since you have evidently manufactured some history that is not consistent with the true history, I will again recapitulate what transpired here.

Some other people had spoken favorably of the LYD48. At least one of them had also mentioned the KH310. I wrote a post wherein I said that considering the difference in the cost of the two speakers, that the LYD48 would be the better value. This was a perfectly reasonable thing for me to have said, considering that there is in fact a very big difference in the price. You wrote a reply to my post, wherein you included that graph of the KH310's vertical polar response.

In response to your objection to my having said that the LYD48 is a better value, I wrote a reply that was perfectly polite. I pointed out that value is subjective. I pointed out the problem with the graph, and I did so in a perfectly respectful, matter-of-fact tone. In that same post of mine, I also wrote this:

Value is entirely subjective. ... I don't think there is any question that the KH310 is the better speaker. I just am hesitant to think that the difference is great enough to make up for the very significant difference in price. Were I to sit down and listen to the LYD48 I doubt very much that I would hear anything that would make me hesitate to buy it if the alternative were to spend nearly twice as much on the KH310. But value is subjective.

You replied to that by writing this:

I would strongly recommend you listening to the KH310 if you have the chance...

Perhaps this kind of thing would not bother most other people. But it bothers me, because over the years I've witnessed arrogant audiophiles do this very sort of thing countless times, and it isn't truly anything except a way to insult someone for not agreeing with you. That's all it really is. Even if this sort of rudeness happens all the time in audiophile forums, this would not make it any less rude. "The only reason you like that cheap swill wine that you drink is that you have never tasted the superior wine that is appreciated by people with more refined taste than yours."

I wrote a reply and asked why, instead of responding to the problem I had pointed out with the vertical response graph, you wrote instead about the inferior horizontal off-axis response of the LYD48. I thought this was a very odd thing for someone to have done. So I asked you why. Your response:

Because I personally find it much more critical than above "nitpicking" on the vertical one.
Jeez, you listened to the LYD48 and liked it and jumped to the conclusion that you doubt a KH310 would be worth more to you, I don't find it bad manner to recommend someone to try something different too, but a priori declining such and calling such a proposal like this.
For me not, spending more than $2000 for some monitors with poor directivity and unknown detailed measurements.
... but don't block other opinions in a public forum, even if you don't agree to them (talking about manners).

I had no objection to your sharing your opinion. I objected only to your rudeness and condescending attitude.

The only point I had made about the vertical polar response of either speaker was that the graph you provided for the KH310 was fishy. I hadn't said anything in the way of comparing the two vertical polar responses. But if I had, it would not have been appropriate for you to have characterized it as "nitpicking". More rudeness.

Following that strange post of yours I pointed out that I had not ever said or insinuated that I had ever listened to the LYD48. Most people would have acknowledged their mistake in having confused two different people. But you gave no indication of having realized that this was a mistake you had made. Instead, you responded with more rudeness:

Before writing condescending to others you should first understand that real non-point source radiating drivers in real encloses with their baffle diffraction effects and real crossover slopes show different radiation pattern then your oversimplified assumption and calculation of point sources with no diffraction and infinite crossover slopes.
This also come to you back about arrogance...

As said you might see it this way, I see it differently, this is a public forum and different opinions not only should be banned but also invited.

The reason this was rude is partly that you wrote, "...you should first understand..." First it was what speakers I should listen to instead of listening to Dynaudio LYD speakers, then it was what I "should first understand". I can only wonder what comes next.

This thread is about a Dynaudio LYD speaker. As such, it is not terribly unreasonable for people to comment favorably on other speakers in the same model line. But when someone else who does not like Dynaudio LYD asserts strongly that Dynaudio LYD is not even a good value much less a good speaker, that other person should not expect everyone else to agree with him. When someone simply continues to express preference for the Dynaudio LYD and the person who doesn't like Dynaudio LYD then starts behaving rudely, this is not reasonable behavior.

And you are not correct in the technical sense. When the vertical spacing between a tweeter and midrange (or woofer) is large in relation to the wavelength at the crossover point, there will be a pair of nulls in the vertical polar response, separated angularly by less than 180 degrees, usually by a lot less but depending on the actual ratio of the crossover wavelength to the vertical separation of the two drivers. This pair of nulls will define the main forward lobe in the vertical polar response, and this will not be masked or altered to any strong degree by baffle diffraction effects or crossover slopes. Steeper slopes will cause the null to be better defined, and baffle diffraction won't have any strong affect on the nulls. Asymmetrical slopes will generally cause the lobe to tilt downward, but won't affect the angular distance separating the nulls. According to you, my estimate of what the angular separation of the two nulls ought to be is an "oversimplified assumption". Well, if so, my actual calculation came out remarkably in agreement with what is evident in the graph I found on Neumann's site. I only found that graph earlier today, after I went to the trouble to do the calculation. After I did the calculation, I decided to go to Neumann's site and see what was there. Here's my calculation:

This is the calculated angle for the null above the horizontal. Note that this assumes that the lobe is symmetrical about the horizontal plane. This assumption is appropriate in this case, thanks to the even-order filters but evidenced in the graph found on Neumann's site. In cases where this assumption isn't valid, the angular separation of the two nulls, obtained by doubling the calculated value, still applies. In this case the calculated value for the angular separation of the two nulls is approximately 90 degrees, which is in remarkably good agreement with the graph I found on Neumann's site and is also about what I guesstimated it would be, based on the wavelength at the crossover point and on a visual estimate of the vertical separation between the midrange and the tweeter.

 

[hmt]

Man, keep it down. You behave like you were personally insulted just because someone recommended to listen to speakers like the KH310 before jumping to conclusions.

No need to nitpick here. And btw, you do realize that the two graphs (from neumann and anselm geortz) are scaled differently wrt to the angles, do you? Besides it is the same graph, the first one is just scaled differently.
So even when you use the neumann graph and compare the to the ones from dynaudio (both are scaled from -90 deg to +90 deg) one can see that the KH310 offer a smoother directivity. So nice algebra skills shown here but reading the graph would have been the right skill.

 

[q3cpma]

As tested it has practically the same amount of bass as the 8030, except much cleaner. 10hz of extension was left on the table.......

You're confused here, the measurements were done with the F6 at 60 Hz instead of 50 like the 8030C, so you can't really know if it's much cleaner. Personally, I see that the midbass to midrange distorsion is higher even with that setting, so I can't see where you can claim it to be superior.

Another way of seeing this is: the 8030C has lower distorsion at 86 dB at all frequencies except < 50 Hz while playing 10 Hz lower; it's only at 96 dB that the Dynaudio's default setting makes it cleaner in the deep bass range, but it's just a matter of a button's default position, nothing else really.

 

[LTig]

A studio worth its name isn't running prosumer grade monitors, and almost certainly isn't running 5" monitors either.

This is just plain wrong. There a lots of big studios which run a pair of small Genelecs or similar on the meter bridge, as addition to the big in-wall speakers.

Hobby studios almost certainly don't have external crossovers, and only a few will have interfaces with DSP functions. My interface is over $2k new and doesn't have any EQ or filters.

Too bad - mine (~$2k) has. Anyway you could use a software EQ in the PC.

 

[q3cpma]

This thread is about a Dynaudio LYD speaker. As such, it is not terribly unreasonable for people to comment favorably on other speakers in the same model line. But when someone else who does not like Dynaudio LYD asserts strongly that Dynaudio LYD is not even a good value much less a good speaker, that other person should not expect everyone else to agree with him. When someone simply continues to express preference for the Dynaudio LYD and the person who doesn't like Dynaudio LYD then starts behaving rudely, this is not reasonable behavior.

You're going off rails, mate. It's just someone pointing out that Dynaudio could have done better with the same form factor (if using waveguides). The point isn't that you said "good value", it's that you said "better value" which makes no sense, as the KH310 is better, but more expensive; considering only power and not directivity was also a strange and maybe biaised way of comparing.

By the way, this whole mess about measurements would have been solved by pointing to Neumann's own measurements:
Maximum SPL at 1m (Red: 1% THD, Blue: 3% THD)

Harmonic Distortion at 90 dB SPL (Green: THD, Blue: 2nd harmonic, Red: 3rd harmonic)

Harmonic Distortion at 95 dB SPL (Purple: THD, Red: 2nd harmonic, Green: 3rd harmonic)

 

[thewas]

Yes, okay, these will also apply to the LYD 5 and its much cleaner bass...

You want to say less bass...

All I see is an admission that the distortion <70hz is audible. This is what I've been saying the entire time.

The logical admission is that it could audible at highish levels, depending on the music material, the distortion measurements started at 85dB which as said translates usually to over 95dB at the bass region at near field monitoring, which is something noone really uses 5" monitors for.

I wanted you to link me to a paper saying what I would hear going from narrow to wide directivity... I literally just switched from monitors with a razor thin sweet spot to the LYDs and measured both extensively...

Which monitors did you use? My experience like Richards here is that loudspeakers with linear on-axis sound and different directivity sound very differently both tonally (wider dispersion sounds brighter due to the higher sound power at higher frequencies) and also image more diffuse and wide, vs. narrow dispersion which images closer and smaller to the listener, the extreme version of that is listening in an anechoic chamber or to headphones.

 

[thewas]

In the graph of vertical dispersion provided on Neumann's site, the "eyes" that indicate the location of the point of strongest cancellation are found at 45 degrees to 50 degrees above and below the horizontal, exactly as they should be, separated by 90 to 100 degrees. The graph you provided indicates that the nulls are separated by 235 degrees.

As written above by hmt it is the same graph, the first one is just scaled differently.

Perhaps this kind of thing would not bother most other people. But it bothers me, because over the years I've witnessed arrogant audiophiles do this very sort of thing countless times, and it isn't truly anything except a way to insult someone for not agreeing with you. That's all it really is. Even if this sort of rudeness happens all the time in audiophile forums, this would not make it any less rude.

Well, the proposal to listen also to a pair of KH310 was really honest and I personally think the problem rather lied this time either on my english or the "receiver of the meesage", but am afraid you will find again reasons to write why that was also rude...

I had no objection to your sharing your opinion. I objected only to your rudeness and condescending attitude.

Says the one who started a simple recommedation to a personal virtual vendetta, writing in bold condescending texts like below:
"If you do not understand the simple analysis by which this is manifest, then please say plainly that you do not understand this and I will attempt to explain it again. If you do not want to do this, then I have no problem with that so long as you do not respond to me by insinuating that I am wrong because the person who took the measurement is incapable of error. Sheesh."

This thread is about a Dynaudio LYD speaker. As such, it is not terribly unreasonable for people to comment favorably on other speakers in the same model line. But when someone else who does not like Dynaudio LYD asserts strongly that Dynaudio LYD is not even a good value much less a good speaker, that other person should not expect everyone else to agree with him. When someone simply continues to express preference for the Dynaudio LYD and the person who doesn't like Dynaudio LYD then starts behaving rudely, this is not reasonable behavior.

Funnily I had no objections or problems with Dynaudio fans in this thread but only with you who made from 2 simple comparative plots and a listening recommendation this long off-topic mess.
But I don't need and want to continue this as other above posters (1, 2) also confirm that they also just read a simple recommendation which it actually was and I guess my non native English writing wasn't the problem this time.

 

[DanGuitarMan]

Please start a new thread for this. Off the dang rails.

 

[VenVile]

VenVile from Gearslutz here. Thanks for the review Amir; t'was just what the doctor ordered. Seems to be a decent monitor with some slight caveats here and there, but overall not bad at all.

Hopefully you get your hands on some of their flagships soon (the LYD 48 and newer Core series). Looking forward to more. Thanks again

 

[TheMarshal]

I did not say that I had listened to the LYD48, nor did I jump to any conclusions

I said this, that I had directly compared the LYD-48 with the KH310! Also, I did say that I am a bit biased as I am a Dynaudio fan.

@KaiserSoze just replied that indeed, LYD-48 has great value. You are putting this dude out of context.

 

[Steve Dallas]

The KH310 has a set of really neutral measurements and very low distortions https://de-de.neumann.com/product_files/1719/download , plus its 3" mid range dome is one of the lowest distortion drivers beating even legends like the ATC one, while for the LYD-48 there don't exist detailed 3rd party measurments and even the manufacturer ones (sonogrammes) don't look really great https://dynaudiodata.blob.core.windows.net/media/6539/spec_for_lyd48_2017pdf.pdf so while it may sound nice I personally wouldn't say its better value, which is something I would have wished as the KH310 are too expensive for my current situation.

Just as an example from above linked measurements this

View attachment 83406

vs this

View attachment 83407

Personally I am looking since years for cheaper equivalent alternatives to the KH310 and ADAM S3V but unfortunately haven't found ones yet.

How does one find these Dynaudio spec sheets? I would love to seem them for the Evoke series!

 

[thewas]

How does one find these Dynaudio spec sheets? I would love to seem them for the Evoke series!

From what I have seen unfortunately such measurement documents are only online for their LYD models.

 

[celroid]

I am happy that dynaudio was finally measured, hopefully some dynaudio speakers instead of monitors follow. I wish a kind soul loans the dynaudio emit m20s to amir, if you read this and own them emit, please consider loaning them to amir!