AsciLab speakers are about to launch

[Curvature]

After testing a bit more (still only a few hours in) I want to give a more balanced review.

On the picture below there are the C6B next to self made active driven closed Speakers with Waveguide and a 8,5" Scan Speak Woofer with Tweeter in big (less optimized) Waveguide.

My active speaker is more "sweet", fresh and less harsh. The C6B still sounds more realistic. The room is rather reflective and not too good sounding so there is a benefit of the more narrow radiation of the self made speakers.

My wife prefers the sound signature of other speakers more because C6B can sound harsher as there is no recession in midrange in power response. If I or the speakers are more away from the walls the midrange is even too prominent for me on C6B. Adding to that WAF is only medium (but I assume the modern Grey gloss could have fared better in this regard)

If I could only keep one speaker it would still be the C6B but I can understand that it will not be everyone's favorite in every case. That is even more true if EQ and Subwoofers are not at hand to help with room problems or preferences.
But again many other speakers in C6B price range and above sounded just plain worse.
View attachment 456081

Did you measure and EQ to the same curve? Did you match level, give the different sensitivities?

If you EQ a tilt to decrease HF, does the harshness of the C6Bs disappear?

 

[Halbknapp]

I am very interested in your situation, as I am really wanting a neutral speaker with minimal harshness.

I assume your diy crossing to an 8in woofer will have a sound power dip. If you have a measurement mic, can you post some room response measurements to compare them?

I did not compare room response but you are right, the 8 in Woofer to Waveguide tweeter crossing LR24 at 2khz will have a sound power dip.
I would rather not call the C6B harsh by itself but they just are not soft(end) in the midrange.

 

[Halbknapp]

Did you measure and EQ to the same curve? Did you match level, give the different sensitivities?

If you EQ a tilt to decrease HF, does the harshness of the C6Bs disappear?

I did level match between (but switched volume all the time). However I did not eq to some target and intentionally did not eq for room position.

Like noted in the post above I feel speakers with a power response dip in the 2khz region or who have softdome tweeters as softer. The C6B does not have this. So it's not really harshness but just not soft. If I wanted to soften up a bit I would probably daily down the midrange. Treble in my room is perfectly fine with the C6B.

 

[Curvature]

I did level match between (but switched volume all the time). However I did not eq to some target and intentionally did not eq for room position.

Like noted in the post above I feel speakers with a power response dip in the 2khz region or who have softdome tweeters as softer. The C6B does not have this. So it's not really harshness but just not soft. If I wanted to soften up a bit I would probably daily down the midrange. Treble in my room is perfectly fine with the C6B.

The following is less for you than others who lack context about speaker and room interactions.

My opinion is that the correct way to compare speakers is to isolate specific elements. In most cases this means comparing the off-axis directivity only, since on-axis response can be controlled through EQ, while distortion and other factors are usually not very important. So EQing to the same room curve, and paying attention to differences in bass response. Ideally, if it is impossible due to room conditions to flatten the bass, this means high passing the speakers such that differences in extension or room position are eliminated. The next step would be to put a little effort into figuring out what it takes to eliminate problems that are heard. Usually a little EQ.

Well designed speakers which have constant directivity-like radiation often sound bright or harsh. This is fixed, usually, even without measurement, by dialing in a tilt by ear, since it pertains to MF and HF response, which the speaker dominates. The room, which dominates the bass response outside of extension, which is to do the woofer and bass tuning, has to be addressed through measurement and corrective EQ, and perhaps some treatment, although not many rooms has space for proper bass treatment.

 

[kemmler3D]

I did level match between (but switched volume all the time). However I did not eq to some target and intentionally did not eq for room position.

Like noted in the post above I feel speakers with a power response dip in the 2khz region or who have softdome tweeters as softer. The C6B does not have this. So it's not really harshness but just not soft. If I wanted to soften up a bit I would probably daily down the midrange. Treble in my room is perfectly fine with the C6B.

I've found in situations like this, at first the "more correct" response can sound bad, like dull, lifeless, or harsh. Then if you keep listening until you get used to it and switch back, the old speaker you thought you liked more sounds kind of ridiculous, maybe hollow or exaggerated.

If you stick with them for a week or two I'd be interested to hear if your perceptions change.

 

[SivKiv]

Are there any updates on both the F5C and F6C? I'm curious about those in particular, as they're fairly affordable cardiods after all......

 

[sigbergaudio]

Well designed speakers which have constant directivity-like radiation often sound bright or harsh. This is fixed, usually, even without measurement, by dialing in a tilt by ear, since it pertains to MF and HF response, which the speaker dominates. The room, which dominates the bass response outside of extension, which is to do the woofer and bass tuning, has to be addressed through measurement and corrective EQ, and perhaps some treatment, although not many rooms has space for proper bass treatment.

Well designed speakers does not sound bright or harsh. How can you define it well designed if it sounds wrong out of the box?

 

[Halbknapp]

Well designed speakers does not sound bright or harsh. How can you define it well designed if it sounds wrong out of the box?

Still - that was my point. Many very good speakers would not sound great in every acoustic situation. I consider my living room sounding not great and so do almost all speakers.

In the longer run I will consider a cardioid design with not too wide directivity to get less room interaction.

 

[Mike_Trueman]

Is there a sound diffrence between the Fiber F6B and the Ceramic C6B version?

 

[Marc v E]

Still - that was my point. Many very good speakers would not sound great in every acoustic situation. I consider my living room sounding not great and so do almost all speakers.

In the longer run I will consider a cardioid design with not too wide directivity to get less room interaction.

Would you consider changing the way your room is arranged? I'm well aware that many times it can't, because of familiy considerations or the wife's preference. Both of which play a role in my own household.

 

[BeeKay]

Is there a sound diffrence between the Fiber F6B and the Ceramic C6B version?

Or, more precisely, is there a notable difference after EQ?

 

[Curvature]

Well designed speakers does not sound bright or harsh. How can you define it well designed if it sounds wrong out of the box?

Constant directivity-like speakers can sound bright. Neumann, Genelec. They continue to sound bright long after of having them (@kemmler3D), so I dial in a tilt of around 3dB.

IMO, the goal of speaker design is not to sound good. That goodness is incidental. The goal is to hit some well-researched technical parameters, informed by all the branches of audio, including psychoacoustics. Then the listener, with a set of controls, like EQ, manipulates the sound to their liking.

 

[goat76]

Constant directivity-like speakers can sound bright. Neumann, Genelec. They continue to sound bright long after of having them (@kemmler3D), so I dial in a tilt of around 3dB.

IMO, the goal of speaker design is not to sound good. That goodness is incidental. The goal is to hit some well-researched technical parameters, informed by all the branches of audio, including psychoacoustics. Then the listener, with a set of controls, like EQ, manipulates the sound to their liking.

Hmm...

If a loudspeaker hits some well-researched technical parameters, informed by all the branches of audio, including psychoacoustics, and that doesn't lead to a sound that most people would find satisfying, I would like to question those technical parameters and ask if they really are that "well-researched".

 

[sigbergaudio]

Constant directivity-like speakers can sound bright. Neumann, Genelec. They continue to sound bright long after of having them (@kemmler3D), so I dial in a tilt of around 3dB.

IMO, the goal of speaker design is not to sound good. That goodness is incidental. The goal is to hit some well-researched technical parameters, informed by all the branches of audio, including psychoacoustics. Then the listener, with a set of controls, like EQ, manipulates the sound to their liking.

We have a very different approach and opinion on this.

 

[AsciLab]

The one thing I want to tell you guys is that most of Hifi-ish speakers have boosted high response. They sounds much more bright than flat constant directivity speaker.

 

[Esprit]

Will there ever be a top of the range, no compromise, in AsciLab production?

 

[Mike_Trueman]

How much can i trust this Tonality rating from Spinorama for the AsciLab speakers?
The fiber one's have a better score.

A collection of loudspeakers measurements

www.spinorama.org

 

[staticV3]

How much can i trust this Tonality rating from Spinorama for the AsciLab speakers?
The fiber one's have a better score.

A 0.1 or 0.5 Preference score difference is not meaningful. 1.0 debatable IMO.

 

[NTK]

Will there ever be a top of the range, no compromise, in AsciLab production?

View attachment 456398

The upcoming combination of S6C (all Purifi driver active cardioid design) and BX10C (Purifi driver cardioid bass extension module). Targeted for Q4 this year.

 

[sigbergaudio]

How much can i trust this Tonality rating from Spinorama for the AsciLab speakers?
The fiber one's have a better score.

A collection of loudspeakers measurements

www.spinorama.org

View attachment 456413View attachment 456414

The preference score is not a precise measurement of quality. Within +/-1 you won't know which one sounds better. It's an indication of linearity and tonality, nothing you can base a decision to blindly choose speakers on I am afraid.