-
Welcome to ASR. 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!
Are speakers the Achilles heal in sound reproduction?
- Thread starter gags11
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- #62
No I do not
but my understanding was that there could be transients that may go that loud when listening to music
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #63
They are DIY active speakers utilizing Klipsch rf7ii cabinets with its 2 10” woofers, Scanspeak midrange and Pioneer beryllium ribbon tweeters
Waveform Fidelity
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2025
- Messages
- 314
- Likes
- 187
OP No need to blow anyone gear, to understand the physics. Distortion occurs because the magnetic flux in the air gap where the voice coil moves is not uniform. So if you plotted voice coil current against coil displacement, you have some value like this coil current vs displacement ( I made numbers up)
1A 5mm displacement
2A 9mm displacement
3A. 11mm displacement
4A 17 mm displacement
So you can see a 4X increase in current does produce a 20mm displacement, so it not linear. Same for 3A and 2A.
If you put 10A in the voice coil it pushes the cone out of its suspension, breaking it. Manufacturer’s design the driver for a specific max SPL and matching %THD. The magnetics and suspension are all very non-linear compared with solid state amps, so its pretty much always the speaker that dominates the distortion in the complete replay chain.
So you should forget about DAC and amplifier distortion, and even the small amounts of distortion from the crossover inductors and capacitors - they are all very small compared with the loudspeaker.
As other have noted, the room treatment is the next main obstacle to good sound re-production. Control the reflections with absorbers and you’ll have a nice sound. IMHO, don’t waste your money on room correction software -it doesn’t really work and its not easy to explain why in layman’s terms.
Agreed, controling first reflections is one of the most improtant things you can do to add clarity and focus to your image.
Absolutely wrong. Not even the very best of static room treatments can exert the level of improvement in the bass range that good DRC software can bring to the plate.
You don't need to understand it to hear and measure the level of improvement that even basic, mainly automagic correction from Audyssey XT32 or Dirac LBC willl bring.
Waveform Fidelity
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2025
- Messages
- 314
- Likes
- 187
Nothing qie
Nothing quite like keeping an open mind vs an “absolute assertion” keep drinking the cool aid.
Waxx
Major Contributor
The best to deal with the room is a combo, good room acoustics (trough treatment) and room correction. That is how most mastering studio's work now, and they are in general the freaks on this. And science does support that view.
But for hifi other factors are into play and a full room treatment is very rarely a real option, so software may be the key element to fix as much as possible. But software alone won't be perfect, that is true. But it can fix a lot, and is certainly better in most cases than no room correction if you want a perfect reproduction.
But for hifi other factors are into play and a full room treatment is very rarely a real option, so software may be the key element to fix as much as possible. But software alone won't be perfect, that is true. But it can fix a lot, and is certainly better in most cases than no room correction if you want a perfect reproduction.
Talisman
Major Contributor
Personally, the money I spent on Dirac Live Art has improved the sound quality in my environment the most, and not by a little.
badtimeticket
Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2026
- Messages
- 41
- Likes
- 30
Same here. Much more ROI from Dirac ART than room treatment. I'm sure if you're setting up a dedicated room you can't beat a fully treated room, but for a normal living room that can't be fully treated, ART is amazing.
Not that I disagree with ART, but I thought that at the level of enthusiasts we here are, applying at least some good basic room treatment would be our norm?
I'd still highly recommend doing that first before depending on any software to do all the work for you.
@Kal Rubinson , just finished reading your review of ART in this months "phile", good one! What Stereophile needs much more of.
RexrothPigeon
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2025
- Messages
- 1,579
- Likes
- 3,296
This is really at odds with my experiences. The improvements I got from REW made a huge difference in a room I am completely unwilling to properly acoustically treat.
Keith_W
Master Contributor
What's with the gravedig?
So go ahead and explain why it doesn't work in non-layman's terms. Use as much jargon as you like, we can understand it.
So go ahead and explain why it doesn't work in non-layman's terms. Use as much jargon as you like, we can understand it.
Room correction won’t solve your time domain problems, and could even make things worse. It won’t reduce sound reflections, which means there’s nothing you can do about the nulls in your frequency response, and the peaks will continue ringing, just lower in volume. On top of that you will still have tons of reverberation smearing the sound. Basic stuff
thewas
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 9,187
- Likes
- 29,088
Room modes in the modal (bass) region are one of the main problems reducing reproduction quality and those are mostly minimum phase, so correcting them per exact opposite minimum phase PEQ not only corrects their amplitude peak but also their resonance ringing in the time domain.
Nope. You may reduce the ringing by a small amount (simply because of the volume level reduction on certain frequency) but get rid of the standing waves this way? Never
Damn Flaesh, how'd you destroy those KEF's LS50's like that, overpowered, extreme bass EQ ?
How did this become a room correction discussion given the title?
Some speakers clearly need more EQ correction that others... but I'd prefer ones that don't or barely need it. ... but that said, not all speakers are the same, nor are some of the electronics that feed them. So I'd say that:
(1) Not all speakers are the weakest link in a system.
(2) There are things PEQ and room correction can't fix.
On my main system, I use as little correction as possible. I simply get the components that (a) measure competently for my needs, and (b) please me sound wise out of the gate. I don't use inline PEQ in my main system, but most certainly have used room measurements to optimize sub placement. That doesn't mean I am against PEQ and most certainly I am not against bass optimization via measurements.
On my workstation/desktop system, I use some PEQ to optimize headphone output, but reject the more extreme PEQ recommendations that go against the nature of the headphone - I'd rather buy one that I like out of the gate for the most part, again.
Some speakers clearly need more EQ correction that others... but I'd prefer ones that don't or barely need it.
... but that said, not all speakers are the same, nor are some of the electronics that feed them. So I'd say that:(1) Not all speakers are the weakest link in a system.
(2) There are things PEQ and room correction can't fix.
On my main system, I use as little correction as possible. I simply get the components that (a) measure competently for my needs, and (b) please me sound wise out of the gate. I don't use inline PEQ in my main system, but most certainly have used room measurements to optimize sub placement. That doesn't mean I am against PEQ and most certainly I am not against bass optimization via measurements.
On my workstation/desktop system, I use some PEQ to optimize headphone output, but reject the more extreme PEQ recommendations that go against the nature of the headphone - I'd rather buy one that I like out of the gate for the most part, again.
i think "achilles heel" is a particularly negative way to look at it
i've been into audio and say, photography for decades... and its been true back then as it is now
GLASS is the most important thing to photography
SPEAKERS is supposed to be where you spend the most money
and as time goes on ASR has shown that technology like DACs has reached pretty much end game... remember the SU1?
Amps has pretty much reached end game too... you can match an SU1 or a price equivalent to a tpa3255 w/ the new mod cons like pffb and like...
how much do you have to spend to get an improvement that passes DBX?
and with speakers we have seen stuff like the DBR62, the Xmechanik and the new $450 Ascend and like... we are getting there
its only a ,matter of time someone cracks the barrier at you get Ascend like performance for a lot less than $450 and where do we go from there?
i've been into audio and say, photography for decades... and its been true back then as it is now
GLASS is the most important thing to photography
SPEAKERS is supposed to be where you spend the most money
and as time goes on ASR has shown that technology like DACs has reached pretty much end game... remember the SU1?
Amps has pretty much reached end game too... you can match an SU1 or a price equivalent to a tpa3255 w/ the new mod cons like pffb and like...
how much do you have to spend to get an improvement that passes DBX?
and with speakers we have seen stuff like the DBR62, the Xmechanik and the new $450 Ascend and like... we are getting there
its only a ,matter of time someone cracks the barrier at you get Ascend like performance for a lot less than $450 and where do we go from there?
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
