Barefoot Footprint 01 Review (Studio Monitor)

[Bohr]

Hi all. I currently own a pair of Adam s2v monitors in my home studio. It is quite a small room (10 m2), although very well treated acoustically and use Trinnov Nova for correction. I find that my setup sounds pretty well, but I miss a bit of better low-end extension. I chose not to use subwoofer as I do not want to overpower the low end, and I have been for a while seriously considering the Barefoot FP01 as a potential option. Form what I hear, the most commonly mentioned characteristic is that they seem to deliver tight low extension without subwoofer, which made me think they would likely be a perfect solution to my situation, and I was quite convinced.

However, after carefully reading this post, I am now having serious doubts. It seems that changing my s2v for the FP01s may not be best idea. Do you have any advise? S2v or FP01? Would it be worth the investment (maybe €3000 net investment after selling the s2v)? Unfortunately, there is no option for me to test upfront them where I live.

@amirm may I ask if Barefoot ever reach out again? Are you aware if they maybe updated their calibration references? (Great work, btw. Very thorough and useful review. Thanks so much)

 

[Soniclife]

Hi all. I currently own a pair of Adam s2v monitors in my home studio. It is quite a small room (10 m2), although very well treated acoustically and use Trinnov Nova for correction. I find that my setup sounds pretty well, but I miss a bit of better low-end extension. I chose not to use subwoofer as I do not want to overpower the low end, and I have been for a while seriously considering the Barefoot FP01 as a potential option. Form what I hear, the most commonly mentioned characteristic is that they seem to deliver tight low extension without subwoofer, which made me think they would likely be a perfect solution to my situation, and I was quite convinced.

However, after carefully reading this post, I am now having serious doubts. It seems that changing my s2v for the FP01s may not be best idea. Do you have any advise? S2v or FP01? Would it be worth the investment (maybe €3000 net investment after selling the s2v)? Unfortunately, there is no option for me to test upfront them where I live.

@amirm may I ask if Barefoot ever reach out again? Are you aware if they maybe updated their calibration references? (Great work, btw. Very thorough and useful review. Thanks so much)

Have you seen the measurements of your speakers?

Adam S2V Studio Monitor Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Adam S2V Professional Studio Monitor (powered speaker). It is on kind loan from a member. The S2V costs US $1,750 (each, NOT a pair). This is one beefy, heavy and deep bookshelf speaker: Yes, the cone was a bit dusty. :) The back panel...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Subwoofers wont overwhelmed a room, your nova will sort that.

Tight bass usually means not very much bass.

 

[Bohr]

Have you seen the measurements of your speakers?

Adam S2V Studio Monitor Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Adam S2V Professional Studio Monitor (powered speaker). It is on kind loan from a member. The S2V costs US $1,750 (each, NOT a pair). This is one beefy, heavy and deep bookshelf speaker: Yes, the cone was a bit dusty. :) The back panel...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Subwoofers wont overwhelmed a room, your nova will sort that.

Tight bass usually means not very much bass.

I did have a look at the Adams measuremets. not an expert, but if I look at the frequency response graph, it seems like, indeed the the FP01 seem to deliver a deeper low end extension. They seem to reach lower frequencies than the s2v, and with a less pronounced slope (the latter probably as they are sealed box as opposed to ported as the s2v are).

I can also notice the strange behavior of the SP01 on the cross over between high and mid frequencies, and their bass boost, but I would imagine that with the Nova, it should be possible for me to correct issues. Also, if I understand correctly the OP conclusions, those issues might be caused by the way Barefoot applies their calibration. They might even have implemented a correction to their process that might have solved the issue.

 

[Skyhouse]

The 5.25" and 2.5" drivers are for sure Vifa NE series (the MM27 and MM26 use the 5.25" for midrange/midwoofer purposes). The 6.5" I think is a Visaton AL170 - or maybe a slightly customized version? Still no clue what the subs are.

Hey, sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I stumbled across this while looking for a replacement driver for my Barefoot MicroMain 26, which got damaged in a move.

The tweeter is 100% for sure a Scanspeak R3004 (see pic of damaged tweeter that came out of my Barefoot MM26). It's full model number is R3004/602012, which does not appear to be a standard R3004 variant. It's possible that it's just a re-badged or OEM variant of something in their normal line, or maybe it's actually some kind of proprietary variant voiced for Barefoot. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ In any case, I ended up just contacting Barefoot directly, and they were great to deal with, and shipped me a replacement for not too much more than Scanspeak tweeters sell for online.

Also, just to say a very un-scientific word about the speakers themselves...I have been working as a professional studio engineer for a long time, and these are by far my favorite nearfield-style monitors to work on. I have heard big floorstanding Augspurgers and Duntechs that probably beat them, but those designs don't really work with a big mixing console between me and the speakers. I think it's probably also possible to beat nearfields with soffit-mounted designs in the right room construction, but I work out of a leased space and am too cheap to go that route, lol. What I love about the MM26 in general is just plain and simple how well mixes translate. I no longer need to check on alternate systems, because listening on alternate systems doesn't surprise me. The mix sounds like it did in the control room, except on different speakers.

I like the MM26 significantly more than the MM27, which I have also used, specifically for how well it allows me to hear the effects of things like limiters, clippers, and saturation-type processors, which are a big part of modern production styles. It's sometimes hard to distinguish good, flattering, or pleasing distortion from ugly, nasty, or unpleasant distortion, until you hear it on a system that is sensitive and responsive in the particular frequency range where the nasty stuff is happening. Sometimes a pair of cheap earbuds from Walgreens tells you something that the expensive studio speakers somehow smoothed over. With MM26, I have not yet had that experience. As a professional who gets paid for my time, the best thing I can say about a pair of speakers is that it helps me get better results faster.

In any case, cheers for having such a cool forum, with a great intersection between a passion for good sound, and smart and technical approach to understanding it!

 

[a4eaudio]

ScanSpeak Illuminator R3004/6020-00 1" Tweeter Small Ring Radiator

ScanSpeak Illuminator R3004/6020-00 1" Tweeter Small Ring Radiator. High-quality tweeter in stock. Crossover and system matching advice available. Contact us.

www.madisoundspeakerstore.com

....The tweeter is 100% for sure a Scanspeak R3004 (see pic of damaged tweeter that came out of my Barefoot MM26). It's full model number is R3004/602012, which does not appear to be a standard R3004 variant. ...

If you zoom in and look at the tweeter in the MM26 vs the Barefoot01 (and 02 and 03) you can see the faceplate is slightly different. The MM26 is Scanspeak (you can put your model number in and look at the raw tweeter at Madisound and see they match). The tweeter in the Barefoot01 is the Peerless XT25SC90 (you can look at the raw driver at Parts Express and see they match).

 

[Skyhouse]

If you zoom in and look at the tweeter in the MM26 vs the Barefoot01 (and 02 and 03) you can see the faceplate is slightly different. The MM26 is Scanspeak (you can put your model number in and look at the raw tweeter at Madisound and see they match). The tweeter in the Barefoot01 is the Peerless XT25SC90 (you can look at the raw driver at Parts Express and see they match).

Sorry, I might have gotten confused by the crosstalk about different Barefoot models! As I said, I stumbled across this thread in a Google search for info on the MM26 drivers, and thought it might be helpful to update for any future person looking for similar info.

Along those lines, btw, the tweeter in your link at Madisound is not actually the same one that came out of my MM26. The MM26 complete model number is R3004/602012, which returns a null result if you search Madisound. The one you linked to is a related Scanspeak R3004/6020-00. Scanspeak makes a number of variants on the R3004 model line. Cosmetic differences just from the picture include a much larger chamber on the Barefoot tweeter, and no protective screen.

It might be the case that they otherwise perform identically, and that Barefoot just requested a private-label model number because reasons, idk.

 

[dfuller]

Sorry, I might have gotten confused by the crosstalk about different Barefoot models! As I said, I stumbled across this thread in a Google search for info on the MM26 drivers, and thought it might be helpful to update for any future person looking for similar info.

Along those likes, btw, the tweeter in your link at Madisound is not actually the same one that came out of my MM26. The MM26 complete model number is R3004/602012, which returns a null result if you search Madisound. The one you linked to is a related Scanspeak R3004/6020-00. Scanspeak makes a number of variants on the R3004 model line. Cosmetic differences just from the picture include a much larger chamber on the Barefoot tweeter, and no protective screen.

It might be the case that they otherwise perform identically, and that Barefoot just requested a private-label model number because reasons, idk.

The larger chamber is an odd choice, IMO - Barefoot doesn't cross it very low, so shouldn't need a large rear chamber.

 

[Skyhouse]

The larger chamber is an odd choice, IMO - Barefoot doesn't cross it very low, so shouldn't need a large rear chamber.

I'm not a speaker designer, just a user who basically follows my own subjective experiences, but who is interested in and has respect for those who do the deep-dive technical research.

I make no claim that Barefoot made the correct decision in their choice of tweeter (although I do think the speakers sound incredible, especially for their size).

I'm just posting the info that I have, on a thread that I stumbled upon while researching Barefoot drivers.

 

[H3CTIK]

It looks like Barefoot has launched the Footprint Gen 2 series. I would love to hear how they measure in comparison to the old models. I am in the market in the <5K range.

https://vintageking.com/blog/spec-check-barefoot-footprint-gen2/

 

[dfuller]

It looks like Barefoot has launched the Footprint Gen 2 series. I would love to hear how they measure in comparison to the old models. I am in the market in the <5K range.

https://vintageking.com/blog/spec-check-barefoot-footprint-gen2/

I doubt it will be meaningfully better. Slightly lower woofer-mid crossover, fully active, but still a very high mid-tweeter cross and now the mid is bigger so beaming will be worse.

Helpfully, they do have a frequency response graph in the manual including some off-axis behavior. It's very smoothed, though, so not a ton you can glean from it.

 

[Ktacos]

Gotta love that gen 2 marketing. I'm sure by widen, they actually mean narrow lol. Personally not a fan of how narrow ring radiators are.

• Dual Ring Radiator Tweeter: This unique tweeter design widens the high-end dispersion for greater flexibility and a more forgiving “sweet spot” as the listener moves around.

 

[geometrae]

Ive had the Gen 2 Footprint 01'a for a few days.... They sound more balanced and work with my room way better than my Hedd Type 20's. Pretty sure they figured something out with this new generation. Would be curious to see testing on them in the future.

 

[a4eaudio]

Gotta love that gen 2 marketing. I'm sure by widen, they actually mean narrow lol. Personally not a fan of how narrow ring radiators are.

• Dual Ring Radiator Tweeter: This unique tweeter design widens the high-end dispersion for greater flexibility and a more forgiving “sweet spot” as the listener moves around.

HERE is some more marketing about the sweet spot of ring radiators.

Note, the ring radiator is not usually about wider dispersion but smoother directivity - which most on ASR advocate for.
Here is a Peerless dome followed by the "pinned version", i.e., ring radiator. This is the reason the Scan-speak and SB Acoustics flagship tweeters are ring radiators.

DOME

RING RADIATOR

 

[dfuller]

HERE is some more marketing about the sweet spot of ring radiators.

Note, the ring radiator is not usually about wider dispersion but smoother directivity - which most on ASR advocate for.
Here is a Peerless dome followed by the "pinned version", i.e., ring radiator. This is the reason the Scan-speak and SB Acoustics flagship tweeters are ring radiators.

DOME
View attachment 485830

RING RADIATOR
View attachment 485831

Yeah, but let's pay attention to how low the beaming is. We're 12dB down from axial by about 9k at 60 degrees off axis. That's indicative of the typical problem with ring radiators, they behave like a larger driver than they actually are.

 

[a4eaudio]

Yeah, but let's pay attention to how low the beaming is. We're 12dB down from axial by about 9k at 60 degrees off axis. That's indicative of the typical problem with ring radiators, they behave like a larger driver than they actually are.

Yes, the narrowing directivity of the ring radiators is often the thing emphasized (usually by those who don't like them). But I was just pointing out that the SMOOTH directivity is an advantage. Narrower directivity can be an advantage too in some cases, as it reduces reflected sound. It can be a problem for some, but I just consider it one of the many trade-offs in speaker design. Domes, ring radiators, ribbons, waveguides, etc. all have their pros and cons.

 

[Ktacos]

Problem with ring radiators is described in the purifi blog. I don't care for them as they tend to be just as wide as a typical dome around 4-5k and under, but narrow so much faster above that, doesn't make for a DI that sounds good to me. A DI that tends to be flat to the top end I find to sound more realistic, something like ascilab or behringer 2030.

The PURIFI Tweeter Project - Part 1

A Short Story of a Long Multi-Disciplinary R&D Effort

purifi-audio.com

 

[a4eaudio]

Yep, tradeoffs.
I would definitely take the Purifi tweeter for $585 over the XT25SC40 for $22 if someone is interested in giving me a pair.

 

[dfuller]

Yep, tradeoffs.
I would definitely take the Purifi tweeter for $585 over the XT25SC40 for $22 if someone is interested in giving me a pair.

Well, even at $22 there are domes I'd buy first. The DA25BG08 is definitely more my speed.

 

[geometrae]

Klippel measurements of the F01 Gen 2. From this video:

I'm not an expert to curious for anyone to talk a bit about these numbers. I have these speakers for a couple months and theyve been really nice so far.

 

[dfuller]

Klippel measurements of the F01 Gen 2. From this video:

I'm not an expert to curious for anyone to talk a bit about these numbers. I have these speakers for a couple months and theyve been really nice so far.

Nothing particularly good there. That midbass hump and low mid dip screams "box too small". Unsurprising, honestly.

ETA: Barefoot quote it at 12.8L internal. The KH310, which is already notoriously small, is at 16.2L, and it only uses one woofer. I'm not surprised that the bass response is as jacked up as it is.