Buchardt S400 *MKII* Spinorama and measurements

[thewas]

That is the S400 MKII which is different at the crossover. It is at 1800 Hz, which is quite low.

It sounds linear to me. More so than the MKI. The MKI crossover is 2670 Hz.

New MKII measurements:

View attachment 270385

Speculation: the directivity change occurs around/before an important transition area for our hearing, which may be why it's not offensive.

Around 2 kHz is according my past experience quite audible, ideally I prefer no directivity steps or kinks above 500 Hz.

 

[mSpot]

Didn't Buchardt say they flipped the drivers for the s400 because they said it gave better time alignment?

The tweeter is positioned more forward than the woofer for time alignment. However, the tweeter on top would make the box look like it is leaning forward. Buchardt said that they flipped it purely for aesthetic reasons, and it is fine to use the speaker upside down. The A500 doesn't have this issue because time alignment is done in DSP.

 

[Chromatischism]

Around 2 kHz is according my past experience quite audible, ideally I prefer no directivity steps or kinks above 500 Hz.

500 Hz...how many consumer speakers achieve that without Cardioid effects?

 

[thewas]

500 Hz...how many consumer speakers achieve that without Cardioid effects?

You can get a smooth directivity above 500 Hz also with a quite a conventional design:

If you want it to extend lower though like you say you need either cardioid or large baffle.

 

[Chromatischism]

I'd like to hear the difference. Most people say the R3 has too much bite but with EQ to bring down the treble it's probably a good speaker. On the other hand the S400 MKII doesn't benefit a lot from EQ because it's already very flat, likely done in hardware.

 

[fineMen]

The tweeter is positioned more forward than the woofer for time alignment.

The design of the speaker in question is quite 'old school'. If it actually depends on a few degrees of a slanted baffle, it is anyway to critical for a product considered 'good enough'. Despite of praising it, I would send the designer back to the drawing board. Sorry, but I feel a bit irritated by the hype. There is really a lot better around.

 

[JAJDACT]

I'd like to hear the difference. Most people say the R3 has too much bite but with EQ to bring down the treble it's probably a good speaker. On the other hand the S400 MKII doesn't benefit a lot from EQ because it's already very flat, likely done in hardware.

I am in the process of demoing Philharmonic BMR's,CSS Criton 1TDX's and KEF R3's and they definitely had too much bite for me. I found them extremely fatiguing and after a few days of listening off and on I have already boxed them up for return.

 

[Chromatischism]

The design of the speaker in question is quite 'old school'. If it actually depends on a few degrees of a slanted baffle, it is anyway to critical for a product considered 'good enough'. Despite of praising it, I would send the designer back to the drawing board. Sorry, but I feel a bit irritated by the hype. There is really a lot better around.

I think you should give them a listen because there's only so much you can determine based on looks. The measurements are objectively good and they sound subjectively good.

 

[Chromatischism]

I am in the process of demoing Philharmonic BMR's,CSS Criton 1TDX's and KEF R3's and they definitely had too much bite for me. I found them extremely fatiguing and after a few days of listening off and on I have already boxed them up for return.

No EQ facility, or just don't want to fuss with it? I can understand, wanting to get speakers as close as possible to your ideal so less tweaking is needed...it's what I did.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Glad to see you back. Hope you keep your hand in reviewing even if it's not with your previous frequency. Great job, and thanks for this one.

 

[JAJDACT]

No EQ facility, or just don't want to fuss with it? I can understand, wanting to get speakers as close as possible to your ideal so less tweaking is needed...it's what I did.

I just didn't want to mess with it. I use eq below 1khz but I'd rather keep the speakers natural response after that. I can see why the R3's are adored but it just isn't right for me and my room.

 

[fineMen]

I think you should give them a listen because there's only so much you can determine based on looks. The measurements are objectively good and they sound subjectively good.

There are 2100$/pair speakers around with better measurements, obviously. What I'm particularly concerned about is the looks, sure.

The slanted baffle signals an extra portion of care to the eye of the beholder. But the contrary is actually true. If the design depends on it, then the cross-over has a problem that should have been solved with some extra effort elsewhere. E/g a passive phase shifter, very easy! There are other concerns, but I won't get into details, because I "won't stop continental drift all by myself". The hype is on its run.

 

[Chromatischism]

There are 2100$/pair speakers around with better measurements, obviously. What I'm particularly concerned about is the looks, sure.

The slanted baffle signals an extra portion of care to the eye of the beholder. But the contrary is actually true. If the design depends on it, then the cross-over has a problem that should have been solved with some extra effort elsewhere. E/g a passive phase shifter, very easy! There are other concerns, but I won't get into details, because I "won't stop continental drift all by myself". The hype is on its run.

I believe the research shows that we can't perceive the difference of drivers shifted forward or back an inch, so the decision was made either for vanity (they look cool) or audiophile approval. Or measurements. Either way, I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

 

[Ricardojoa]

I am in the process of demoing Philharmonic BMR's,CSS Criton 1TDX's and KEF R3's and they definitely had too much bite for me. I found them extremely fatiguing and after a few days of listening off and on I have already boxed them up for return.

Interesting. You might want to consider checking what frequencies ranges actually is more bothersome to you. I find myself in the 2-3 khz range. By the way between the citron and bmr, which has better bass?

 

[JAJDACT]

Interesting. You might want to consider checking what frequencies ranges actually is more bothersome to you. I find myself in the 2-3 khz range. By the way between the citron and bmr, which has better bass?

Yeah I need to investigate further and see what it is that bothered me. The bass response on both of them is almost identical in my room,under 100hz they basically measured exactly the same at my MLP. Past 100hz the Criton's have a little bit more up to 300hz. But if I'm being honest I like the BMR's better,just in sound quality alone. Male vocals come across too full sometimes on the Critons.

 

[Ricardojoa]

Yeah I need to investigate further and see what it is that bothered me. The bass response on both of them is almost identical in my room,under 100hz they basically measured exactly the same at my MLP. Past 100hz the Criton's have a little bit more up to 300hz. But if I'm being honest I like the BMR's better,just in sound quality alone. Male vocals come across too full sometimes on the Critons.

I only ise the app sonic, nothing sophisticated.

 

[fineMen]

I believe the research shows that we can't perceive the difference of drivers shifted forward or back an inch, ...

I agree with your comment regarding the 'audiophile' baffle, being slanted backwards for showing off meticulous care. An inch back or forth one driver relative to the other can in case do a lot regarding to on-axis amplitude response measurement, though. I'm tempted to reiterate, that if such sensitivities exist, the design choices weren't particular sensible to begin with.

 

[Paweł L]

Yeah I need to investigate further and see what it is that bothered me. The bass response on both of them is almost identical in my room,under 100hz they basically measured exactly the same at my MLP. Past 100hz the Criton's have a little bit more up to 300hz. But if I'm being honest I like the BMR's better,just in sound quality alone. Male vocals come across too full sometimes on the Critons.

To reduce the energy in low midrange, bass you can reduce the 3.0mH inductor down to 2.5mH. This will add about 0.5dB to the upper mids and make them more balanced. Of course low mids and bass is very room and position dependent. Is seem that they work best in large room, away from walls.

 

[mgrenwic]

Does anyone. Know the minimal impedance of this speaker? The only impedance and phase info I can find are on the original model. Love to know.

 

[chang]

I have been using the s400 MKII near field for about a year now. Actually very near field and horizontal.
The MKII can be used 'upside down'. I believe it is in their literature.
I had a discussion with one of the gents at Buchardt about my use of them and the near field thing.
Other speakers I used in this situation - Revel M105, ATC SCM7, Technics SB C700
All very fine.
No Problem.

How do you compare the S400 mk2 to the M105?