• 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!

Binaural blind comparison test of 4 loudspeakers - II

Which speaker comes closest to the original recording?

  • Speaker A

    Votes: 7 25.9%
  • Speaker B

    Votes: 4 14.8%
  • Speaker C

    Votes: 3 11.1%
  • Speaker D

    Votes: 13 48.1%

  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .
OP
C

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
I still don't understand why would the Grimm Audio measure in reality better when the KEF has the better spin?
We don't know that for sure. The KEF probably has better directivity in the treble range.
However, the Grimm has an very even sound power and PIR frequency response, especially below 1.5kHz.

... and the frequency spectra of the music recordings are not frequency response measurements.
 

Andreas007

Active Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
137
Likes
353
Location
Germany, Bavaria
I went against the crowd this time and chose B. It had the most natural timbre of piano. I noted that it was a bit bass heavy on other tracks though. Listening on the other speakers, the piano was just wrong. There must be some errors either distortion or in frequency response causing this.
I did also notice that the piano on B is quite different to the others, not timbre but attack. However, I put it into category “overemphasized”.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
in absolute values, no it's not. for comparison purposes it's essentially the same.
The spectrum of the original recordings itself is already extremely wavy and not comparable to a measurement with, for example, pink noise. Therefore, certain frequency ranges can convey completely wrong impressions.
1634645663033.png
 

PierreV

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,437
Likes
4,686
I still don't understand why would the Grimm Audio measure in reality better when the KEF has the better spin?

Room interaction? Grimm says they focus a lot on that in their literature. We all know, I guess/hope/think, that room interaction, positioning and orienting matters a lot in real life, especially for far-field floorstanders.

The endless discussions about a couple of dBs here and there in measurements are probably valid when one is discussing Genelec vs Neuman near-field monitors. But it is near useless, imho, to focus on those for far-field speakers where room interaction will dominate most other factors. What I am saying here is not that a science-based design doesn't matter. Just that the small differences we argue about aren't necessarily significant in real-life settings.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
The spectrum of the original recordings itself is already extremely wavy and not comparable to a measurement with, for example, pink noise. Therefore, certain frequency ranges can convey completely wrong impressions.
View attachment 160139

I would typically agree, but here the speaker that received positive impressions also was the speaker that reproduced the spectrum with most fidelity.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Just that the small differences we argue about aren't necessarily significant in real-life settings.

well it is obviously significant as D received the most votes. this sort of opinion would make sense when all 4 speakers recieves equal number of votes. obviously that is not the case and 'small differences' matter even in real-life settings.
 

Andreas007

Active Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
137
Likes
353
Location
Germany, Bavaria
I’ve heard the Grimm once at High End Munich, the last speaker audition of the day. I was blown away. My first thought was: “This is another level of performance compared to all the other stuff I’ve heard before during the day. This is soo different and sounds just right and natural. There is no speaker anymore, you don’t think about it. The music just flows!”
(Ok, there was no Genelec, Revel or Neumann before, just the usual audiophile suspects… :D)

Without the horrid price tag I would have bought them instantly! :cool:

I’m glad that I’ve voted for the Grimm again here. Seems that these speakers are doing something right.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
I would typically agree, but here the speaker that received positive impressions also was the speaker that reproduced the spectrum with most fidelity.
Agree with you. If you only look at the measured deviations from the original recording, then you can deduce how much it has been changed by loudspeakers and room (assuming that the recording conditions have not led to any significant frequency response changes) - plots from post#93

Extremely difficult is the interpretation of the plots from post#90, because of the ripples in the original spectrum.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Agree with you. If you only look at the measured deviations from the original recording, then you can deduce how much it has been changed by loudspeakers and room (assuming that the recording conditions have not led to any significant frequency response changes) - plots from post#93

Extremely difficult is the interpretation of the plots from post#90, because of the ripples in the original spectrum.

Wait i just realised that the Kef Reference 3 is not tuned flat :oops:. it's obviously now the worse measuring speaker.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,421
Likes
2,406
Location
Sweden
So who is next on setting up a binaural speaker challenge? Very entertaining subject with both suprises and hopefully some learning. :)
 

PierreV

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,437
Likes
4,686
well it is obviously significant as D received the most votes. this sort of opinion would make sense when all 4 speakers recieves equal number of votes. obviously that is not the case and 'small differences' matter even in real-life settings.

Let me repost the result of one of my first binaural recordings.
Two different floor standers. Lowest priced is at same price level as B&W/Grimm here.
Designs are very different. 2 is a 3 way with a front woofer, 1 is a 4 (or 3.5 depending on your definition) way with dual side firing woofers.
Both measure differently in the measurements I could find ( not Amir's quality measurements mind you, I don't see Amir putting 80+ kgs speakers on the Klippel soon.

Correlated null at 49.08dB

1634648153095.png


I did not even pay much attention to time alignment as you can see from the unaligned data

1634648869127.png


No EQ, that would defeat the purpose of comparing speakers.
The in-room positioning is obviously a bit different (but optimized for my taste) since they are simultaneously present, they have a lot of space to breathe (at least 1.5m at the back, around 3m on the sides)

I could theorycraft at length based on their differing stereophile and other sources measurements.
But in my case, at least, it seems that armchair speculation has its limits.
 

PierreV

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,437
Likes
4,686
So who is next on setting up a binaural speaker challenge? Very entertaining subject with both suprises and hopefully some learning. :)
Now that I have come to terms with the limits of binaural recordings and have prepared myself psychologically to the fact that my wonderful speakers will sound as poor cardboard boxes ;) I will try to come up with something. It may take a while as I need a silent house, maybe move heavy stuff around and, having teens at home isn't especially stress and noise free.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
I could theorycraft at length based on their differing stereophile and other sources measurements.
But in my case, at least, it seems that armchair speculation has its limits.
If the measurements are presented in this way, I can also make no statement at all between the two speaker.

in the diagrams in the previous posts I used 1/3oct smoothing, which makes the interpretation much easier.
And if you have the spectrum of the original recording, then you can derive some more information.
 
OP
C

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
So who is next on setting up a binaural speaker challenge?
When the DIY speakers I'm working on are finished, I can imagine making binaural recordings from them (three different top speakers, one bass module).
It looks like one can rent a KU100 dummy head for 70€ a day. But that will be the case in a few months at the earliest.
 

PierreV

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,437
Likes
4,686
If the measurements are presented in this way, I can also make no statement at all between the two speaker.

Oh, I am not sure one could. In fact, I would have sworn the differences between the speakers were very significant in a sighted test and, much to my horror, discovered I failed a blind test.

In fact, the idea I have is to come up with 4 different recordings and let you guys decide on the difference. I may throw a couple of outsiders in the mix, just for fun.

And for assured ROTFLs, include BOSE 901 Type6 ;)

in the diagrams in the previous posts I used 1/3oct smoothing, which makes the interpretation much easier.
And if you have the spectrum of the original recording, then you can derive some more information.

I even have umik measurements, EQ data for when I run it, etc...

IMHO, this shows nicely how the room is the great equalizer below 500Hz, regardless of the design (assuming in both cases competent designs)

1634650632371.png
 

Tangband

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
2,994
Likes
2,789
Location
Sweden
It could be that one or the other does not like the results. Therefore, right from the start, there is no conspiracy and the data were not manipulated by me.

The result of the poll:
View attachment 160089


Speaker A - Heco Direct (3000€)
View attachment 160090 View attachment 160094


Speaker B - KEF Reference 3 (9000€)
View attachment 160091 View attachment 160095

Speaker C - Bowers & Wilkins 802 D3 (22000€) (No manufacturer link found)
View attachment 160092View attachment 160096

Speaker D - Grimm Audio LS1 (22000€) with subwoofer modul
View attachment 160093 View attachment 160100

Source of the frequency response measurements is hifitest.de.
Source of the binaural recordings is German magazin lowbeats soundcloud.com database..

The current binaural recordings (by lowbeats.de) are made in an EBU-Tech 3276 compliant studio. The older recordings, used in our poll, were made in their own acoustically treated listening room (here is the link to the translation or use the translator of your choice). In the pictures you can see the typical setup.
View attachment 160102
Two MBHO small-diaphragm condenser microphones with free-field equalized omnidirectional characteristics in AB configuration were used for the binaural recording.
The current binaural recordings are performed with a KU100.
More details about their binaural recordings can be found here (here is the link to the translation or use the translator of your choice).
The best sounding loudspeaker in this test is apparently GRIMM audio LS1 . The only loudspeaker in the test that has dsp crossover and driven active. I´m not surprised at all. A good active design will always sound better, even compared with the best passive loudspeaker.
 
Last edited:

Tangband

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
2,994
Likes
2,789
Location
Sweden
Clearly the KEF lost on its peaky bass. Otherwise it is the speaker that has a bit more energy at 2 kHz vs 3-4 kHz. Which may be one reason that I liked the piano from KEF more than from the others.
Kef has a coaxial design wich is no garanty at all to sound good, quite the opposite I would say.

This is an interesting blind test, but the result might be slightly different if each loudspeaker had optimal placement in the room. 15 cm more apart or closer together would make the sound quite different. Ofcourse the active system ( GRIMM LS1 ) has a hugh advantage in the beginning, because of much lower distortion in the EMK area ( because its active ) and a more frequency linear dsp corrected sound.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,421
Likes
2,406
Location
Sweden
Kef has a coaxial design wich is no garanty at all to sound good, quite the opposite I would say.

This is an interesting blind test, but the result might be slightly different if each loudspeaker had optimal placement in the room. 15 cm more apart or closer together would make the sound quite different. Ofcourse the active system ( GRIMM LS1 ) has a hugh advantage in the beginning, because of much lower distortion in the EMK area ( because its active ) and a more frequency linear dsp corrected sound.

I would not be to certain. The GRIMM has very different design with wide baffle. The previous binaural challenge gave even higher diiferentation between speakers and it was a passive x-over in a Revel. The KEF has a very peaky bass and will be scored negative for that.
 

Tangband

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
2,994
Likes
2,789
Location
Sweden
I would not be to certain. The GRIMM has very different design with wide baffle. The previous binaural challenge gave even higher diiferentation between speakers and it was a passive x-over in a Revel. The KEF has a very peaky bass and will be scored negative for that.
Yes, a wide baffle seems to be very good. You dont need to compensate for the baffle step. The first test didnt have any active loudspeakers at all, so its hard to know. The revel has very good directivity and are not a coaxial design.
A perceived ”peaky bass ” can also depend on problems higher up in frequency, or less optimal loudspeaker placement, or simple less good bass aligment with wrong tuning frequency in a bass reflex construction.
In a coaxial design, the perceived pitch of each tone will be slightly blurred and indistinct because of IM distortion in a bad design.
 
Top Bottom