• 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!

Buchardt S400 Speaker Review

AudioJester

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
912
Likes
1,211
On cabinet resonances, I put my ear to the S400 cabinet. I could clearly hear practically every note it was playing with some distortion. I then did the same with Revel M16. Here, most notes were quiet but the ones that stood out (in female vocals) were more distorted than S400.

Is this something that can be quantified/measured?
 

koro

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
33
Likes
46
Location
Spain
No i would not think so. You can say that the bass performance looks way better in these mesurements compared to our own hah :D

Haha they look impressively flat indeed, but ironically that makes a negative impact in the context of the “ideal Harman in room response curve”
 

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,240
Likes
11,462
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
No i would not think so. You can say that the bass performance looks way better in these mesurements compared to our own hah :D
True, but a good deal of books speakers (like the Revel Amir compared it to) add a bass boost before rolling off (which is what your own measurements looks to have), which tries to make up for the lack of deep bass. So, sort of a trick to improve listening impressions even though it reduces how neutral the graphs look.
 

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,240
Likes
11,462
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
Haha they look impressively flat indeed, but ironically that makes a negative impact in the context of the “ideal Harman in room response curve”
Not in this case (it has been for other speakers), if you look at my datasheet, “Tonal Balance” uses the predicted in-room response and normalized, 100Hz is only down by like 1dB.
 

edechamps

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
910
Likes
3,620
Location
London, United Kingdom
S400 measures the best across all passive speakers currently in Amir's database

It's pretty good, but it's certainly not the best:

visualization(69).png
 

koro

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
33
Likes
46
Location
Spain
Not in this case (it has been for other speakers), if you look at my datasheet, “Tonal Balance” uses the predicted in-room response and normalized, 100Hz is only down by like 1dB.

Oh, I see now, sorry. I still have lots to learn, thank you!
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
So, if not edge diffraction, what is your explanation for the the 500 Hz resonance?
You got me!

The resonance at 550Hz has a wavelength of 0.6m, which makes influences of the speaker cabinet due to the wavelength unlikely.

For a surround resonance the interference at 550Hz is too low, should rather be in the range around 1kHz. Assume that the chassis is a (modified?) SB17NBAC35-4. There is a review (Hobby Hifi 2018-6) of this loudspeaker chassis. The range around 500Hz is completely free of interference (FR + Imp).

Maybe it has something to do with the passive diaphragm, but then I would expect a resonance in the impedance frequency response too - the same would apply to a defective woofer.

UPDATE: Complete wrong conclusion in the part below, see Post#212 and Post#215

On the other hand, relatively low frequency resonances also occurred in other loudspeaker measurements - which were also unusually pronounced.
1587853086397.png

During the measurement of @hardisj the interference was not visible.
1587853758583.png


Therefore I would not exclude that the resonance is caused by the measuring device itself or the environment.
 
Last edited:

Matias

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
5,029
Likes
10,794
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
That Amir likes his Harman sound is nothing new to me. To each his own. Personnaly I weight some 10% of the value of the review on the subjective listening of a single speaker. For me the bulk 90% of importance here are the very in depth measurements. If I want subjective reviews I can search a reviewer with a taste similar to mine and read his observations elsewhere. Specially using 2 speakers.

What really surprised me here is the difference in measurements from the same expensive Klippel system. If I were @Mads Buchardt I would ask that sample back to the factory, measure it too, and if indeed different, I would send both measurements to Klippel and ask what the hell. :D
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
But it looks like this measurement is made with impulse windowing (higher resolution in high frequencies, and the curve stops at 200 Hz). Therefore the smoothing around 500 Hz is extreme, and the resonance, if it is here, can't be seen.

Yep, I guess you're right.
Just noticed the gate was only 8ms during the test. That might not be enough time for the narrowband resonance.

But a measurement window of 10-12ms (this might be not enough, see link in Post#212) should be enough to make the resonance visible in the beginning.

As an example the frequency response measurement of a wideband loudspeaker in a anechoic chamber (red curve) and once with a measurement window of 3.3ms and 10ms.
1587856951485.png

1587856967375.png
 
Last edited:

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,907
Likes
13,908
Location
North Alabama
You got me!

The resonance at 550Hz has a wavelength of 0.6m, which makes influences of the speaker cabinet due to the wavelength unlikely.

For a surround resonance the interference at 550Hz is too low, should rather be in the range around 1kHz. Assume that the chassis is a (modified?) SB17NBAC35-4. There is a review (Hobby Hifi 2018-6) of this loudspeaker chassis. The range around 500Hz is completely free of interference (FR + Imp).

Maybe it has something to do with the passive diaphragm, but then I would expect a resonance in the impedance frequency response too - the same would apply to a defective woofer.

On the other hand, relatively low frequency resonances also occurred in other loudspeaker measurements - which were also unusually pronounced.
View attachment 60360
During the measurement of @hardisj the interference was not visible.
View attachment 60361

Therefore I would not exclude that the resonance is caused by the measuring device itself or the environment.


Please see this post and why the above conclusion could be inaccurate:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...uchardt-s400-speaker-review.12844/post-382446
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
As i recall the pair Amir has, was broken in before he recived them which is ushally the case for review units we ship out. It was mainly a question i saw being asked by others which was why I included it :)

Btw thank you for sending in the unit(and for making an account to join a discussion). I don't know, but I'd wager many here share the same opinion that - we appreciate it highly the initiative it takes to send units in for reviews to places like this. I'm sure you know why some companies would be disinterested in the revelations reviews from here sometimes bring.

Also thank you for espousing some of the over reliance on this burn-in idea people seem to place heavy import on. It's still nice you conduct the process for units you send out. But better to hear you don't consider burn-in to be the end-all | be-all reason for any undesirable aspects coming out of a speaker you guys make.
 

napilopez

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
2,109
Likes
8,420
Location
NYC
You got me!

The resonance at 550Hz has a wavelength of 0.6m, which makes influences of the speaker cabinet due to the wavelength unlikely.

For a surround resonance the interference at 550Hz is too low, should rather be in the range around 1kHz. Assume that the chassis is a (modified?) SB17NBAC35-4. There is a review (Hobby Hifi 2018-6) of this loudspeaker chassis. The range around 500Hz is completely free of interference (FR + Imp).

Maybe it has something to do with the passive diaphragm, but then I would expect a resonance in the impedance frequency response too - the same would apply to a defective woofer.

On the other hand, relatively low frequency resonances also occurred in other loudspeaker measurements - which were also unusually pronounced.
View attachment 60360
During the measurement of @hardisj the interference was not visible.
View attachment 60361

Therefore I would not exclude that the resonance is caused by the measuring device itself or the environment.

@ctrl I Don't know if you saw my earlier post in the thread, but there is something to it being from the speaker in this area. In my case, you can see a small scoop with the S400 in the nearfield bass similar to what Buchardt shows, but no evidence of a similar peak. Would a cabinet resonance peak show up in a nearfield woofer measurement?

(Again, I don't think this is a big deal, but for intellectual curiosity...)

S400 Bass.png
 
Last edited:

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
Please see this post and why the above conclusion could be inaccurate:

My conclusion is probably not only inaccurate, but wrong.

I just made a near-field measurement on a 6'' bass-midrange driver and was able to detect a resonance exactly in the range measured by Amir.
1587859469411.png


Using this driver and measuring with NFS would probably show exactly such a resonance with high Q-peak like the Buchardt.
 

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,907
Likes
13,908
Location
North Alabama
<snip> All the best Mads Buchardt
CEO Buchardt Audio


This post has so many things I like about it...

Why our data look so different to yours needs to be investigated, its especially odd as we both use the Klippel NFS….

Yes. Let's face it, these systems aren't fool proof. But the purpose of the NFS is to essentially remove all external variables and the only ones left would then be user-dependent. Warkwyn is literally in the business of testing speakers and providing analysis. No disrespect to Amir, but my inclination is to be more trusting of their data. The NFS I’m sure has a learning curve. So I would personally like to know more about this difference (though, I realize the reasons may not be discovered and may not be shared if they are).


I can't stop to wonder when i read through the review why there seems to be an unnecessary focus to highlight only the negatives, there is really not much positive in here which is the complete opposite to what nearly all other have to say about the S400 around the world, so what happened? One thing is for sure, this surely will start, and have already started a big debate online, so it's surely a successful review considering the views and attention it gets. We have been so fortunate and lucky to have created a product that have been highly praised to the point of hyped. With hype comes extreme attention to them that goes against the stream. Has the s400 been over hyped? I don’t know, but my job is basically telling interested people to still have realistic expectations from this shoebox sized speaker can do. Luckily they have exceeded many people's expectations, otherwise it would never had become a hyped product in the first place right?. Even though this is not the first negative review, I think it would be the most popular as it's SO negative.

I admit that I often have the desire to provide the “opposite” perspective when an item is heavily biased one way or another. I’m this way both in my hobby and in my profession. I can’t help but wonder, sometimes, if that is what shows up in discussion on occasion. The viewership knows there’s already a lot of either praise or criticism of a product so the mental approach is to go against the grain to help balance that overwhelming amount of praise (or simply to be a contrarian; but I don't see that here). That’s a psychology discussion, though. And I am not that. :D

I just feel like this thread is a fine example of that. I have seen praise for this speaker elsewhere. So I decided to go to the site where I read the product description and it caught my attention that so much weight was put in of the design progress was driven by objective analysis. It truthfully seemed like a well-engineered product that had correlating subjective praise. And I expected, based on that, for this group to say “oh, dang, that’s nice” but debate moreso on the value aspect (which I believe is more a personal decision). However, I am seeing more negative discussion about the data itself and potentially being driven by the subjective evaluation. I find that interesting.

Like I said in a previous post, for me, as a person who values test data this is a really interesting case study.
 
Last edited:

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
I Don't know if you saw my earlier post in the thread, but there is something to it being from the speaker in this area. In my case, you can see a small scoop with the S400 in the nearfield bass similar to what Buchardt shows, but no evidence of a similar peak. Would a cabinet resonance peak show up in a nearfield woofer measurement?

I think so, otherwise one would not notice the standing wave at all. A interference in the range 500-600Hz can also be seen in your near field measurement.
Assuming an inner height of 0.32m, this would produce a cabinet resonance at 540Hz.

Maybe even two effects come together:
- A resonance from the driver as shown in Post#215
- and in addition an enclosure resonance in the same frequency range.
 

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,907
Likes
13,908
Location
North Alabama
Ok. This assumption that the 520hz peak is enclosure resonance doesn't really jive with me. I am not saying that it's incorrect. I'm just saying, based on the data at hand, I don't think that's enough to make the determination.

And the annotation in the CSD result is misleading. Let's look at it:

1587861571989.png



If the 520hz peak in FR (not the CSD) is cabinet resonance as annotated in the CSD then what is the ~340hz trail? What about the ~250hz trail? Where is the dilineation made? Also, look back at the annotation in the CSD... notice it shifting from 400hz to 500hz (follow the x-axis lines; the mode shifts frequencies). And what's the additional, NEW blip showing up at ~ 560hz? And the same shifting of trail shows up in around 600hz. I can't recall the last time I really analyzed a CSD but the shifting of the trail in frequency is really curious, at least to me.

I annotated it to be more clear:
CSD_notes.png
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
I can't stop to wonder when i read through the review why there seems to be an unnecessary focus to highlight only the negatives, there is really not much positive in here which is the complete opposite to what nearly all other have to say about the S400 around the world, so what happened?
Hi Mads. My natural reaction is usually to defend a review but that is usually the case when manufacturers complain about objective measurements. Those are immutable so I don't accept that kind of criticism. Here, my final recommendation and thoughts were motivated fair bit by subjective impressions. Since that data is inherently less reliable, I think I erred as you mentioned. So I updated the review conclusion with this note:

EDIT: on further reflection, I think I did not do a good job of highlighting what the Buchardt S400 does well. And that is excellence in a lot of the objective measurements. Indeed its performance there is better than some speakers I have liked and recommended! As usual, objective data is much more reliable than any subjective impressions I have of a speaker. So I would say put the S400 on your target list of speakers to evaluate as it certainly passes the bar of being objectively good.

Thanks again for the kind loan and participation in the forum.
 
Top Bottom