What might be the problem there?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Adam S2V Studio Monitor Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
What might be the problem there?
H
Hifihedgehog
Guest
I think he's miffed he has to go and buy a 10-euro pair of cables. I have no idea where he is doing his pounds to euros conversion, either.
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh boy, sweetheart
@pozz sent me this speaker a couple months back to do some additional testing on. Notably, he was curious what the differences between Preset 1 ("Pure") and Preset 2 ("UNR") were. So, I tested the FR differences which you can see below. I would like to conduct full spins but I am overwhelmed and since Amir has already conducted these I think it would be a waste of my time.
First, let me note how the measurements were conducted:
Far-Field measurement approximately 6 feet off the ground (shown below), merged to a near-field measurement (0.5m) at approximately 400hz. Response was measured at the tweeter axis, at 0° horizontal. The volume on the Adam S2V was set to "0". The applied signal for FR was 0.50 Vrms. Unfortunately, I ran out of time to conduct a 2m ground plane measurement to get the true low-frequency shape (the near-field nature causes the bass shape to be elevated). Therefore, I would default to Amir's & Adam's provided results for accuracy below 200hz and advise you to use the below comparison as simply a comparison of differences in response between presets.
Aside from this known nearfield-caused low frequency bump, my results mimic Adam's results quite well. They mimic Amir's above about 500hz where Amir's results show a -3dB shelf-like characteristic below 500hz. We see the same HF rise >4kHz in both Presets. However, we see that Preset 2 has a "smiley face" type curve to it with accentuated LF & HF response. The 2 presets converge only from 2.0 - 2.5kHz. It's interesting to see that Preset 2 also has about a 1.5dB dip from approximately 3-4kHz, compared to Preset 1.
In regards to harmonic distortion measurements, I think these look quite good. Of course, you have the typical low frequency rise in distortion because this is a 5 inch mid/woofer doing 110dB but as a whole, I'm impressed.
And here are the harmonic distortion sweeps taken at 90dB, 104dB and 110dB @ 1 meter equivalents.
First, let me note how the measurements were conducted:
Far-Field measurement approximately 6 feet off the ground (shown below), merged to a near-field measurement (0.5m) at approximately 400hz. Response was measured at the tweeter axis, at 0° horizontal. The volume on the Adam S2V was set to "0". The applied signal for FR was 0.50 Vrms. Unfortunately, I ran out of time to conduct a 2m ground plane measurement to get the true low-frequency shape (the near-field nature causes the bass shape to be elevated). Therefore, I would default to Amir's & Adam's provided results for accuracy below 200hz and advise you to use the below comparison as simply a comparison of differences in response between presets.
Aside from this known nearfield-caused low frequency bump, my results mimic Adam's results quite well. They mimic Amir's above about 500hz where Amir's results show a -3dB shelf-like characteristic below 500hz. We see the same HF rise >4kHz in both Presets. However, we see that Preset 2 has a "smiley face" type curve to it with accentuated LF & HF response. The 2 presets converge only from 2.0 - 2.5kHz. It's interesting to see that Preset 2 also has about a 1.5dB dip from approximately 3-4kHz, compared to Preset 1.
In regards to harmonic distortion measurements, I think these look quite good. Of course, you have the typical low frequency rise in distortion because this is a 5 inch mid/woofer doing 110dB but as a whole, I'm impressed.
And here are the harmonic distortion sweeps taken at 90dB, 104dB and 110dB @ 1 meter equivalents.
- Joined
- May 21, 2019
- Messages
- 4,036
- Likes
- 6,849
Thanks @hardisj
I've said this before—this kind of detailed data is industry-moving stuff.
The main thing I find strange is that there is no shelving. I'm not aware of any speaker phenomenon or measurement artefact that would cause one set of measurements to show a very distinct self at ~500Hz and another not other than a DSP setting. I know that @amirm measured the monitor twice, and that the results were the same each time. The predicted in-room response and the window graphs Amir posted are fairly similar to Erin's. Also good to see such low distortion confirmed.
I will write to ADAM and ask them to comment. If anyone has a plausible explanation in the meantime it be helpful.
I've said this before—this kind of detailed data is industry-moving stuff.
The main thing I find strange is that there is no shelving. I'm not aware of any speaker phenomenon or measurement artefact that would cause one set of measurements to show a very distinct self at ~500Hz and another not other than a DSP setting. I know that @amirm measured the monitor twice, and that the results were the same each time. The predicted in-room response and the window graphs Amir posted are fairly similar to Erin's. Also good to see such low distortion confirmed.
I will write to ADAM and ask them to comment. If anyone has a plausible explanation in the meantime it be helpful.
mononoaware
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2021
- Messages
- 816
- Likes
- 672
Interesting the 500hz shelf characteristic doesnt show in hardisj measurements...
Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
I thought maybe there is somekind of "DSP filter" on a timer built-into the speaker.
In professional use during the first hours of ownership there maybe a lot of movement of the monitor's position, plugging/unplugging equipment and also the occasional person tripping on a cable that wasn't there before etc.
So maybe Adam built in this "filter" on a timer (starts count-down from when first plugged in) to protect the speaker due to its high power amplification?
Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
I thought maybe there is somekind of "DSP filter" on a timer built-into the speaker.
In professional use during the first hours of ownership there maybe a lot of movement of the monitor's position, plugging/unplugging equipment and also the occasional person tripping on a cable that wasn't there before etc.
So maybe Adam built in this "filter" on a timer (starts count-down from when first plugged in) to protect the speaker due to its high power amplification?
Alkanshel
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2021
- Messages
- 4
- Likes
- 1
Super late reply but I upgraded from A77X and noticed an increase in clarity and instrument separation. The biggest reason for the upgrade was because I wanted to free up space. They are a lot better built as well.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll