Buchardt E50

[MarkS]

So that I can better understand this "scoop", could somebody please identify for me where it might be audible here? A time stamp would be great. Also please tell me what is the frequency range (eg A= 440Hz) where this is noticeable?

The effect is always present. The frequency range is centered 3 octaves above 440Hz; see graph below (clipped from Erin's youtube video):

Fluty, is there any chance you could get a listen to the made-in-Australia March Audio Sointuva AWG speakers? These are a quite similar design, but they do not have a comparable midrange dip. Your comparative evaluation of them would be interesting.

Sointuva AWG Stand Mount Speaker (PAIR) – March Audio

The Sointuva WG is a stand mount speaker featuring state of the art drivers from Purifi and SB Acoustics with beautiful solid wood or painted cabinets. Class leading technical and subjective audio performance.

marchaudio.com

 

[Deleted member 34697]

The effect is always present. The frequency range is centered 3 octaves above 440Hz; see graph below (clipped from Erin's youtube video):

View attachment 472047

Fluty, is there any chance you could get a listen to the made-in-Australia March Audio Sointuva AWG speakers? These are a quite similar design, but they do not have a comparable midrange dip. Your comparative evaluation of them would be interesting.

Sointuva AWG Stand Mount Speaker (PAIR) – March Audio

The Sointuva WG is a stand mount speaker featuring state of the art drivers from Purifi and SB Acoustics with beautiful solid wood or painted cabinets. Class leading technical and subjective audio performance.

marchaudio.com

Thanks for the helpful reply. As a flute (and piccolo) player my ears are very familiar with that frequency range - its where I spend a lot of time. I haven't noticed anything audibly amiss with the E50s in that area. I've never heard better, faster, percussive attack, leaving the Dynaudio Esotar tweeters in the SFs in the dust! Which is why I thought the lack of ferrofluid was responsible.

I heard the Sointuva speakers at a local HiFi show in Sydney. March Audio won an award for "Best Sounding Room" at the show, using their build of the Purifi amp also (which is what I'm using). They sounded excellent, but I was not able to try them at home as they build only to order & unlike Buchardt don't offer a return if not satisfied. I find their appearance not to my liking however, particularly since having lived for an extended period with a pair of beautiful Sonus Fabers. I dislike both the proportions & the finishes on offer, and I find the wood grain particularly disappointing across the top of the cabinet.

 

[MarkS]

Ah, too bad. It would be interesting to have had a direct comparison.

Buchardt went with their design because people who listened to prototypes liked that version better, so you are certainly in good company with your liking of it.

I have a Lyngdorf amp that has a number of built-in "voicings" (EQ settings) that can be selected to change the sound to taste. One of them is called "Music 1":

I do sometimes use it.

 

[Deleted member 34697]

The effect is always present. The frequency range is centered 3 octaves above 440Hz; see graph below (clipped from Erin's youtube video):

View attachment 472047

Fluty, is there any chance you could get a listen to the made-in-Australia March Audio Sointuva AWG speakers? These are a quite similar design, but they do not have a comparable midrange dip. Your comparative evaluation of them would be interesting.

Sointuva AWG Stand Mount Speaker (PAIR) – March Audio

The Sointuva WG is a stand mount speaker featuring state of the art drivers from Purifi and SB Acoustics with beautiful solid wood or painted cabinets. Class leading technical and subjective audio performance.

marchaudio.com

The effect is always present. The frequency range is centered 3 octaves above 440Hz; see graph below (clipped from Erin's youtube video):
This is helpful & helps me to identify that it would centre around a high A for piccolo. For me, that range is perfect with the E50. If any stronger then I'd find it too bright. Is it possible that Erin's examples were not fully run-in?

 

[MarkS]

No, Buchardt says that what Erin measured is consistent with their design. Many speaker designers "fine tune by ear". Forty years ago, Stereophile founder J Gordon Holt wrote a manifesto, "Down with Flat!", arguing that "flat" frequency response did not necessarily produce the best subjective sound. The good news is that many different speakers are available to us, and if you've found ones that sound right to you, congratulations! Enjoy the music!

 

[Deleted member 34697]

No, Buchardt says that what Erin measured is consistent with their design. Many speaker designers "fine tune by ear". Forty years ago, Stereophile founder J Gordon Holt wrote a manifesto, "Down with Flat!", arguing that "flat" frequency response did not necessarily produce the best subjective sound. The good news is that many different speakers are available to us, and if you've found ones that sound right to you, congratulations! Enjoy the music!

Thanks for the helpful research!

 

[ssashton]

The effect is always present. The frequency range is centered 3 octaves above 440Hz; see graph below (clipped from Erin's youtube video):
This is helpful & helps me to identify that it would centre around a high A for piccolo. For me, that range is perfect with the E50. If any stronger then I'd find it too bright. Is it possible that Erin's examples were not fully run-in?

It should be understood that this scoop in the response does not only affect the fundamental pitch of notes such as a piccolo sitting in that range, but also harmonics of every other instrument that is in that range. Thus, the effect can be present at all times.

Your over-all enjoyment of the speaker is probably not down to one specific fa tor such as that slight scoop in the response or ferro fluid etc, but the whole design - directivity, distortion, cabinet resonances (or lack), diffraction and far from least, suitability for your listening room.

It's perfectly reasonable that, among so many variables, some people prefer that slight scoop in the response while others would not. It would certianly be interesting to hear your thoughts after a time spent with this speaker eq'd more neutral vs. as it is.

Maybe someone kind could volunteer to eq some of your favourite tracks to compensate and you could do a a/b listening test? The IR Erin uses for the pink noise tests could be used to generate an inverted response and eq tracks.

 

[Deleted member 34697]

It should be understood that this scoop in the response does not only affect the fundamental pitch of notes such as a piccolo sitting in that range, but also harmonics of every other instrument that is in that range. Thus, the effect can be present at all times.

Your over-all enjoyment of the speaker is probably not down to one specific fa tor such as that slight scoop in the response or ferro fluid etc, but the whole design - directivity, distortion, cabinet resonances (or lack), diffraction and far from least, suitability for your listening room.

It's perfectly reasonable that, among so many variables, some people prefer that slight scoop in the response while others would not. It would certianly be interesting to hear your thoughts after a time spent with this speaker eq'd more neutral vs. as it is.

Maybe someone kind could volunteer to eq some of your favourite tracks to compensate and you could do a a/b listening test? The IR Erin uses for the pink noise tests could be used to generate an inverted response and eq tracks.

"harmonics of every other instrument that is in that range" I shoud have realised this, of course you're correct. Wind players in particular, and flute players even more so, being the weakest instrument in the orchestra, learn to enhance our overtones / harmonics in order to project our sound especially in louder passages. As with brass, this projection gives the sound an "edge" which penetrates. I hear this effect extremely well with the E50s, despite the "scoop". Never before have I heard reproduced such a fine "edge" where it should be. Thinking about the Sointuvas, without said "scoop", leads me to believe I would find them too bright. Hearing them at the HiFi show they were in a very large room with plenty of air between them and the listeners. We know (in a concert hall situation) that the air mass between performer and listener absorbs high frequencies. The further away the listener is, the brilliance diminishes. Thankfully actually - you would not want to be even 10 or 12 feet in front of a piccolo playing high notes - your ears would be shredded! Those sitting immediately in front of a piccolo, trumpet and percussion players in an orchestra often need ear plugs, and would turn and glare at the players because of the inflicted pain! So maybe the "scoop" is a good thing, mimicking the actual attenuation of those frequencies in a performance space.

 

[MarkS]

So maybe the "scoop" is a good thing, mimicking the actual attenuation of those frequencies in a performance space.

I am not a musician myself, but I attend a lot of classical music performances, and I've listened to a lot of classical music recordings. It is not at all uncommon for this range to seem overly prominent in recordings (compared to a mid-hall audience seat).

 

[Purité Audio]

I might advise a ‘flat’ speaker design to which you could apply effects such as the BBC ‘dip’.
Keith

 

[Deleted member 34697]

I might advise a ‘flat’ speaker design to which you could apply effects such as the BBC ‘dip’.
Keith

Thanks, I didn't know this - so there's a precedent! Quotes from Mr Google:

The term "BBC dip" can refer to an audio engineering principle of subtly reducing frequencies around 2-4 kHz in a speaker's frequency response to achieve a more natural and spacious sound.
In audio, the dip was developed by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) to address the perceived harshness and forwardness of flat-frequency-response monitors, making the sound less fatiguing and more pleasant to listen to.

 

[ssashton]

Thanks, I didn't know this - so there's a precedent! Quotes from Mr Google:

The term "BBC dip" can refer to an audio engineering principle of subtly reducing frequencies around 2-4 kHz in a speaker's frequency response to achieve a more natural and spacious sound.
In audio, the dip was developed by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) to address the perceived harshness and forwardness of flat-frequency-response monitors, making the sound less fatiguing and more pleasant to listen to.

Yes, there is precedent for this, but it’s worth remembering that those monitors were designed many decades ago. At the time, the mid-bass driver would play up to a certain frequency before handing over to the tweeter. Near that crossover point, the mid-bass driver’s output becomes quite directional (a narrow beam), while the tweeter’s output is much wider at the same frequency.

When the crossover happens, the tweeter suddenly sprays more sound energy into the room, giving the impression of brightness in that range. The way designers compensated was to reduce the tweeter’s level in the lower part of its range. That balanced the in-room sound, but it also produced a dip in the measured response when tested in an anechoic chamber.

Today, speakers like your E50 are designed with careful attention to driver directivity and crossover integration, which tackles the root cause more effectively. For that reason, the so-called “BBC Dip” has less objective justification in modern designs.

If you send me 3 or 4 of your favourite tracks (Google Drive?), I’ll EQ out the dip so you can compare. My guess is that the difference will be fairly subtle. If you lived with one version for a week, your ears and brain would adapt, and the difference would fade. In quick A/B comparisons, you might notice more, but you still may not form a clear preference.

 

[AC1]

If you know of a speaker in that price range that measures flat in all listening rooms without eq, please share the make and model!

I rather have something that sound flat to me ears (and in my room) than putting an equalizer in the signal. And you know what? Speaker designers applaud me for it because using digital EQ and DSP messes up the sound.

 

[Purité Audio]

I rather have something that sound flat to me ears (and in my room) than putting an equalizer in the signal. And you know what? Speaker designers applaud me for it because using digital EQ and DSP messes up the sound.

 

[ssashton]

I rather have something that sound flat to me ears (and in my room) than putting an equalizer in the signal. And you know what? Speaker designers applaud me for it because using digital EQ and DSP messes up the sound.

Do you mainly listen to music recorded on analog studio gear, before everything was done on computers (or even ADAT)?

Edit: Ahhh, sweet nostalgia... I can't get my head around this SOTA thing being only £60

 

[Deleted member 34697]

Yes, there is precedent for this, but it’s worth remembering that those monitors were designed many decades ago. At the time, the mid-bass driver would play up to a certain frequency before handing over to the tweeter. Near that crossover point, the mid-bass driver’s output becomes quite directional (a narrow beam), while the tweeter’s output is much wider at the same frequency.

When the crossover happens, the tweeter suddenly sprays more sound energy into the room, giving the impression of brightness in that range. The way designers compensated was to reduce the tweeter’s level in the lower part of its range. That balanced the in-room sound, but it also produced a dip in the measured response when tested in an anechoic chamber.

Today, speakers like your E50 are designed with careful attention to driver directivity and crossover integration, which tackles the root cause more effectively. For that reason, the so-called “BBC Dip” has less objective justification in modern designs.

If you send me 3 or 4 of your favourite tracks (Google Drive?), I’ll EQ out the dip so you can compare. My guess is that the difference will be fairly subtle. If you lived with one version for a week, your ears and brain would adapt, and the difference would fade. In quick A/B comparisons, you might notice more, but you still may not form a clear preference.

Interesting comments, thank you for taking the trouble. Some of those older BBC monitors are still highly sought after today - the LS3/5a for example, is still for sale by multiple companies, and is highly praised for its tonal balance even though, originally meant as a near-field monitor, it doesn't play very loud (or low).
I can really only send you one example that you might be able to find (on TIDAL) of my taste - the flute player is yours truly - but since I only play CDs I don't see how I could make the comparison that you suggest (don't use a computer). However, the tonal balance of the E50s is as close to perfect that I've heard from a speaker, and anything brighter would be too much for me!

 

[Svend P]

the LS3/5a for example, is still for sale by multiple companies, and is highly praised for its tonal balance

Not by Amirm

'Rogers LS3/5a (BBC) Speaker Review'

Nov 22, 2023

This is a review, listening tests and detailed measurements of a vintage Rogers L3/5a monitor implementation licensed from BBC with the same name. It is on kind load from a member. New, it costs US $4895 a pair.

From the outside, there is nothing to distinguish this speaker from cheap bookshelves sold when it was manufactured. Back panel reveals no secrets either:

Owner kindly gave permission to leave the serial number on the picture for those of you who want to trace its lineage. Owner says it was manufactured between 1980 and 1987.

Searching for...

• amirm
• Replies: 429
• Forum: Speaker Reviews, Measurements and Discussion

• 

 

[Deleted member 34697]

Not by Amirm

By those who judge a speaker by its tonal balace / sound, including many top reviewers and musicians. Its a particular champion with imaging and vocals, and still considered a reference by many, & by which others are judged (sonically).

 

[Svend P]

"Almost 50 years of double-blind listening tests have shown persuasively that listeners like loudspeakers with flat, smooth, anechoic on-axis and listening-window frequency responses. Those with smoothly changing or relatively constant directivity do best. When such loudspeakers are measured in typically reflective listening rooms the resulting steady-state room curves exhibit a smooth downward tilt. It is caused by the frequency dependent directivity of standard loudspeakers - they are omnidirectional at low bass frequencies, becoming progressively more directional as frequency rises. More energy is radiated at low than at high frequencies. Cone/dome loudspeakers tend to show a gently rising directivity index (DI) with frequency, and well designed horn loudspeakers (like the M2) exhibit quite constant DI over their operating frequency range. There is no evidence that either is advantageous - both are highly rated by listeners."

'Some comments from Floyd Toole about room curve targets, room EQ and more'

Jan 18, 2020

Room curve targets

Every so often it is good to review what we know about room curves, targets, etc.

Almost 50 years of double-blind listening tests have shown persuasively that listeners like loudspeakers with flat, smooth, anechoic on-axis and listening-window frequency responses. Those with smoothly changing or relatively constant directivity do best. When such loudspeakers are measured in typically reflective listening rooms the resulting steady-state room curves exhibit a smooth downward tilt. It is caused by the frequency dependent directivity of standard loudspeakers - they...

• thewas
• Replies: 185
• Forum: Room Acoustics and General Speaker Discussions

• 

 

[ckernel8]

I rather have something that sound flat to me ears (and in my room) than putting an equalizer in the signal. And you know what? Speaker designers applaud me for it because using digital EQ and DSP messes up the sound.

Why are you here?