Dayton Audio OPAL1 speaker launches

[thewas]

If you say so

I do

One deviates for only approximately 1.5 octaves (and at region which just makes the sound lacking attack) while the other several and at a region which makes it sound boxy. Also not be ignored that the OPAL costs more than double compared to the 12.1 (which isn't great either and was chosen by you for comparison).

 

[uwotm8]

I realize that there is a tendency lately to try to label a product as simply good or bad

Actually this is what makes me generate all that irony.
And double standards if I see it.
And that way of emotinal judging when "it's from a Mr. Nice Guy so while it has some caveats but Mr. Guy is so nice and open, speaker just needs a bit of emprovement" and the next one is "from that idiots who deny the sience, omg it's +- 3 dB look! How awful! And that's what smug audiofools praise!!!"... yet difference can be rather marginal. What is that, a response to public image of a brand, undeservedly good? Payback for some emotional harm?

 

[thewas]

And that way of emotinal judging when "it's from a Mr. Nice Guy so while it has some caveats but Mr. Guy is so nice and open, speaker just needs a bit of emprovement" and the next one is "from that idiots who deny the sience, omg it's +- 3 dB look! How awful! And that's what smug audiofools praise!!!"... yet difference can be rather marginal. What is that, a response to public image of a brand, undeservedly good? Payback for some emotional harm?

Can you post links which show that exact behaviour you accusate to happen?

 

[uwotm8]

while the other several and at a region which makes it sound boxy

Broadly recessed midrange will not make a speaker sound boxy if "boxy" means the same for both of us. To me it will be rather opposite, that showroom/cold tuning. Detailed sound. Also as I said I'd prefer Wharfedale tune just by graphs - if I was not familiar with their older Diamonds Would not spend even $1 before listening check if newer gen became a speakers worth listening at all.

Can you post links which show that exact behaviour you accusate to happen?

First of all, I'm not accusing Amir, Erin or that Audioholics guy.
It's about broad comment reactions by "experts" who really can only apply a ruler to FR graph. You can just check PMC threads or this one and compare it to Micca threads. Or check a people reaction to really flawed Kali IN-8 1st gen, there's not much good to pick at all but hey! Om nom nom, what a great product. 8" 3-way with a 2 mm plastic front baffle.

 

[thewas]

It's about broad comment reactions by "experts" who really can only apply a ruler to FR graph. You can just check PMC threads or this one and compare it to Micca threads. Or check a people reaction to really flawed Kali IN-8 1st gen, there's not much good to pick at all but hey! Om nom nom, what a great product. 8" 3-way with a 2 mm plastic front baffle.

As I expected, you didn't show any concrete such "expert quotes", you just use such emotional arguments to play down the problems of loudspeakers like the PMC. And what was so flawed with the supposed 2 mm baffle 1st gen Kali except that the first sample he got arrived damaged? By the way the 2nd gen has the same "horrible" plastic baffle and would still sound less coloured than the discussed PMC.

 

[uwotm8]

By the way the 2nd gen has the same "horrible" plastic baffle and would still sound less coloured than the discussed PMC

It has rather shameful level of distortion at LF and LMF, untypical for a normal 8" at that SPL. Plastic-faced JBL 3 series have that problem as well.
While FR curve is better than PMC have, it's still uneven for a studio monitor by modern standards - starting from something like Genelec 8030.

play down the problems of loudspeakers like the PMC

Why should I? I'm not a fan of it, it's ugly and expensive for what it is. At the same time, not that awful if we take into account not only FR/tuning. I mean, not awful enough to get such a reaction, and also it's like evetyone was forced to buy it and told it's superior to anything - which was never the case. I was always sceptical somehow, reading reviews long before ASR was even founded. Same goes for ATC and Spendor. Undoubtly great BIG models from these three cost like a car or a plane, so nowhere my area of interest; budget ones just scream that they're overpriced.

And now OPAL, not great not terrible; reviewer who listened to it says it sound better than looks by spinorama; review gets accused to be biased

 

[RickS]

Actually this is what makes me generate all that irony.
And double standards if I see it.
And that way of emotinal judging when "it's from a Mr. Nice Guy so while it has some caveats but Mr. Guy is so nice and open, speaker just needs a bit of emprovement" and the next one is "from that idiots who deny the sience, omg it's +- 3 dB look! How awful! And that's what smug audiofools praise!!!"... yet difference can be rather marginal. What is that, a response to public image of a brand, undeservedly good? Payback for some emotional harm?

Am not sure what you expect here. This thread seems unlikely to address your broader concerns though.

This is just one speaker in the end and Parts Express is a diverse supplier for that matter. They have some great values, but despite marketing claims, their recent Dayton Audio speakers are not targeted towards the objective audiophile. Am not an insider so my comments are based on observation (and like others), some frustration at times. I think they have more to offer but are missing the mark.

As I think your OPAL1 opinion is more than clear at this point, no need to keep repeating. You appear to have some larger grievances. In that case, you are welcome to start your own thread and have at it. Thanks!

 

[a4eaudio]

Which is in 2025 a very unnecessary tradeoff as a decent waveguide...

I think you are missing some of the points that are being made. A waveguide is a tradeoff. The OPAL1 chose not to use a waveguide. This thread is about the OPAL1, which doesn't use a waveguide.

A poor directivity is for me and also some others a no-go criterion ...

As someone who doesn't rank SPDI in my top 5 concerns, you could really help me out and maybe change my priorities.
Can you (1) rank the speakers below in terms of what you would expect in terms of sound quality or (2) state which ones would be a "no-go"?
(Below is SPDI for five speakers - blue, red, orange, yellow, green)

 

[AdamG]

As I think your OPAL1 opinion is more than clear at this point, no need to keep repeating. You appear to have some larger grievances. In that case, you are welcome to start your own thread and have at it. Thanks!

@uwotm8, this thread is dedicated to a specific product and model. Please try and keep your comments and observations on topic. As @RickS has kindly suggested, please feel free to start your own thread to discuss these issues you raise about off topic subjects.

Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.

 

[RickS]

I think you are missing some of the points that are being made. A waveguide is a tradeoff. The OPAL1 chose not to use a waveguide. This thread is about the OPAL1, which doesn't use a waveguide.

Waveguides aside, you have made your points here in favor of the OPAL1. Let's move on...

As for the exercise proposed below, if you do not value, not sure the point. Seems a good opp for your own thread if you want to explore further.

As someone who doesn't rank SPDI in my top 5 concerns, you could really help me out and maybe change my priorities.
Can you (1) rank the speakers below in terms of what you would expect in terms of sound quality or (2) state which ones would be a "no-go"?
(Below is SPDI for five speakers - blue, red, orange, yellow, green)


View attachment 437694

 

[a4eaudio]

As for the exercise propose below, if you do not value, not sure the point. Seems a good opp for your own thread if you want to explore further.

The point is only about the OPAL1, which is THIS thread, so I'm not sure another OPAL1 thread would be very efficient.

@thewas posted the SPDI of the OPAL1 with a nice red circle around the mismatch in post #152 and later stated it was a "no-go" for him. The graph is the SPDI of the OPAL1 and 4 other speakers that you indicated must be better than the OPAL1 because they were in Erin's video. My point is not about the value of SPDI, it is about an invalid argument that the OPAL1 is a "no-go" due to its directivity mismatch when there are several highly recommended speakers with the same issues.

What is the point of having a thread about a commercial speaker, allowing one side to argue it is not very good based on measurements and then not allowing others to refute that point using objective measurements and logic? By the way, I don't own the OPAL1 and don't "favor" the OPAL1. But it is a disservice to speaker consumers who come to ASR to get objective advice to help make their speaker-buying decisions if they are only going to get one side of the argument.

But I respect that you are the OP of this thread, and if you don't want to have the discussion here I can start another.

 

[thewas]

It has rather shameful level of distortion at LF and LMF, untypical for a normal 8" at that SPL. Plastic-faced JBL 3 series have that problem as well.

Where audibility is low, while in multitone distortion where it matters being a 3-way it will perform better than most 2-ways of that price class.

Why should I? I'm not a fan of it, it's ugly and expensive for what it is. At the same time, not that awful if we take into account not only FR/tuning. I mean, not awful enough to get such a reaction, and also it's like evetyone was forced to buy it and told it's superior to anything - which was never the case.

Of course nobody was forced to buy it but people judge stuff in relation to the price and there is fairs especially bad, when you get well tuned loudspeakers and monitors for a fraction.

 

[thewas]

I think you are missing some of the points that are being made. A waveguide is a tradeoff. The OPAL1 chose not to use a waveguide.

What kind of a tradeoff is it? It is one of the rare things that doesn't cost much (except engineering, but even in aftermarket/DIY there exist nowadays good ready solutions which can be seen at what not few good DIY people achieve) and brings many advantages without significant disadvantages.

As someone who doesn't rank SPDI in my top 5 concerns, you could really help me out and maybe change my priorities.
Can you (1) rank the speakers below in terms of what you would expect in terms of sound quality or (2) state which ones would be a "no-go"?
(Below is SPDI for five speakers - blue, red, orange, yellow, green)

Actually none of those you selected seem to do very well there, if everything the same from purely that SPDI I would probably go for the blue curve as it has rather a non wide narrowing around 1.5 kHz vs the others which widen instead in the presence region and above, also the blue one is more continuous to the lower slope:

@thewas posted the SPDI of the OPAL1 with a nice red circle around the mismatch in post #152 and later stated it was a "no-go" for him. The graph is the SPDI of the OPAL1 and 4 other speakers that you indicated must be better than the OPAL1 because they were in Erin's video. My point is not about the value of SPDI, it is about an invalid argument that the OPAL1 is a "no-go" due to its directivity mismatch when there are several highly recommended speakers with the same issues.

It would be time now that you reveal which are the other that are supposedly highly recommended, even more by me! Also I would like to repeat that not only the directivity is the reason which makes it a poor value, but its price and total tuning, something which can be more excused on an eight times cheaper loudspeaker like the Micca (which even that I voted back then as "not terrible" and not better).

 

[RickS]

The point is only about the OPAL1, which is THIS thread, so I'm not sure another OPAL1 thread would be very efficient.

@thewas posted the SPDI of the OPAL1 with a nice red circle around the mismatch in post #152 and later stated it was a "no-go" for him. The graph is the SPDI of the OPAL1 and 4 other speakers that you indicated must be better than the OPAL1 because they were in Erin's video. My point is not about the value of SPDI, it is about an invalid argument that the OPAL1 is a "no-go" due to its directivity mismatch when there are several highly recommended speakers with the same issues.

What is the point of having a thread about a commercial speaker, allowing one side to argue it is not very good based on measurements and then not allowing others to refute that point using objective measurements and logic? By the way, I don't own the OPAL1 and don't "favor" the OPAL1. But it is a disservice to speaker consumers who come to ASR to get objective advice to help make their speaker-buying decisions if they are only going to get one side of the argument.

But I respect that you are the OP of this thread, and if you don't want to have the discussion here I can start another.

As you likely already know, I agree with @thewas observations on the directivity of this speaker (as well its very mediocre frequency response). You have been allowed to disagree on this thread and that is fine to a point. There is less value to continue to disagree just because you personally feel the speaker has not been treated fairly overall.

On the other hand, if you want to argue about whether the value of speaker measurements are fair overall, there are more appropriate threads for that. There are also some great videos by Amir and Erin that explain the value of controlled directivity. Finally, if not your own thread, suggest you can PM one of us rather than post to this thread.

So, as I do prefer to keep threads concise, would appreciate if you consider alternatives if you want to dive deeper. Thanks!

P.S.

I also expect any prospective OPAL1 customer looks at more than just ASR for speaker info. If I were interested, would get a set for my own evaluation. My deference to Erin was done as I do not plan to do so. My point was that they clearly did not blow him away and not whether his other choices measured well.