Definitive Demand D11 Speaker Review

[napilopez]

Thanks @amirm!

Since I've spent some time analyzing offset tweeter setups, I have some thoughts. First off, the D11 looks quite similar to what I got from the smaller sibling, the D9, except the D9 seems to run hotter in the treble:

Not a big deal as the speaker is specifically designed to be listened off-axis. Note that amir measured the D11 'slightly to the left of the tweeter axis' while i measured on the tweeter axis.

Is it mirrored on each side, or are they identical? I hate non-symmetrical designs which aren't mirrored, totally looks off.

It does looks to do the job though, the rise in the horizontal off-axis around 5kHz is lower than other speakers also using flat edge cabinets. But who know how it would compare to a centered tweeter and rounded/chamfered edges.

They are mirrored and labeled for each side -- the tweeters are specifically meant to be on the outside; a bit more analysis below.
P.s., I'd suggest posting the negative and positive horizontal angles when tweeters are offset. They are usually quite different.

This speaker is ridiculously overpriced. At Crutchfield and elsewhere the price per pair is over $1100. There are lots and lots of better speakers for a whole lot less money. This newer Definitive Technology line looks nice, but the measurements just do not support the price. Not even close.

Speaking based on my experience with the D9, I think the measurements need to be taken with different consideration compared to a standard centered tweeter speaker. Plus this speaker really looks way nicer than most in the ~$1000-ish range or below.

Anyway, a quick google search shows most places selling the D11 for $800-900, and I've seen them go for less.

Not the most bang for your buck, but not an awful deal either imo.

@amirm liking this speaker subjectively throws the hypothesis of him looking wide directivity speakers out of the window

In my view, this is a wide directivity speaker, or at least is a bit on that side of the spectrum. I definitely don't think it's particular narrow.

I personall disagree a bit where the beamwidth lines are drawn. Anecdotally the region between 2-8kish is what most defines the perception of 'wide vs narrow' I also think we don't notice the 'narrow' regions' as much as we notice the 'wide' regions of the frequency response, much the same way we don't notice dips as much as peaks. It is a bit uneven though so it'll depend on your setup.
___________________________

Anyway, this speaker is designed to be used with the offset tweeters on the outside edges, and appears be designed for use with minimal toe in (manual says: "Toeing the speakers in slightly, if possible, toward your listening area will also provide a stronger center image.) That's how the D9 sounded best.

Because of the offset tweeter, it's worth keeping in mind it actually is a speaker that probably would get a bit of an advantage in stereo compared to mono listening. That's because with two of these speakers, the early reflection coming from the 'good' sides of the tweeter (the short side, or to the right of the speaker measured in this case) is going to be significantly louder than the early reflection from the 'bad' side.

For example, when I estimated the path length for both sides of the speaker in my measurements of the L82 in my own home, the 'good' side reflection was about 4 dB louder than the 'bad' side. As the good side also has a shorter path length, I suppose that also makes it perceptually a bit more important.

I imported amir's data on the D11 into vituixcad. Here is the how the good, louder side of the directivity looks, normalized to the on-axis

Not bad!

Then the 'bad side of the tweeter:

That's far worse.

We can summarize this a bit by looking at the good and bad side of the 'side reflection' component of the early reflections curve:

The spin accounts for includes both sides evenly, but in reality, the 'good' side will have a bigger effect on our perception due to the higher SPL and earlier arrival.

Even taking the bad side into account, the overall horizontal performance is quite solid:

You could further consider that in a minimal toe-in setup, everything gets shifted over by about 20 degrees, keeping the sidewall reflection even closer to the listening window. Of course, then the other side becomes more negative. The net effect of this, in my experience, is widening the soundstage, though it might not get that bigger, deeper 'larger than life' feeling you get with overall better-controlled speakers.

Biggest problems for this speaker for me are clearly the 600Hz resonance and the vertical directivity affecting timbre. But imaging should be quite good. I do think the D9 has better horizontal directivity behavior, which is unsurprising given the smaller woofer.

 

[richard12511]

@amirm liking this speaker subjectively throws the hypothesis of him liking wide directivity speakers, out of the window

I'm not so sure. These still look fairly wide to me. Amir drew the red line at 50 degrees, but if you look(especially on the bottom), it's more like 60-70 degrees for everything below the top octave. That's pretty wide(imo).

 

[KaiserSoze]

The strong dip/peak ~600Hz is quite similar to what we saw with the Buchardt S400.

The sharp peak accompanied by an equally sharp dip at frequency only a small fraction of an octave lower than the peak is a tough one. I don't think any sort of simple resonance would produce this effect. It seems to maybe suggest two strong resonances at frequencies nearly in the 2:1 ratio but far enough away from that ratio for the sharp dip to prevail over the peak.

If we ask what the D11 and the Buchardt have in common, one thing that is obvious is that they both use passive radiators. Perhaps this is a clue. Ports extend into the interior of the enclosure whereas passive radiators reside at the surface. With the D11, the interior height and depth appear to be almost a dead match, surprisingly. But if there is anything similar to this in the Buchardt it is not obvious.

I suspect that it is related to the passive radiator, and I suspect that the fact that the passive radiator resides at the enclosure surface is important to the explanation. The interior dimensions of the enclosure may also be important to the explanation, but exactly how so is a difficult question.

 

[ROOSKIE]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Definitive Technology Demand D11 bookshelf/stand-mount speaker. It is on kind loan from a member who I think bought it used. The normal cost on Amazon is US $1,000 including Prime shipping.

I must stay, the enclosure is very attractive and well built. But I don't care for the look of the drivers:

Thanks again for the great review and test.

For anyone who is interested I purchased these refurbished from "accessories for less".
They were $499.
I wanted to plug that site now as I have consistently found great prices from them over the years and appreciate them.

I went with white because it was cheaper at the time and these were purchased for testing. Interesting in photos I do like the look, we will see when I have them in person.

One of my main reasons with these was the high praise in the press and the general need to see more Definitive product tested. They are very popular in the main stream of audio.
The second reason was the offset tweeter. I try and test a lot of equipment as a hobby, much more than the average person. Despite this I have very little experience with the offset design. (the last real offset was my NHT 2.5i's from long ago)
While they may not be as easy to measure in the way that they are intended to be set up, I do find these measurements interesting. I am certainly interested in listening.

Generally the offset is discouraged in the DIY community especially with wave-guide tech eroding much of the design benefit of the offset & the offset being difficult to implement in a beneficial way. Never-the-less, because I may try some offsetting with DIY personal projects (due to often not having an appropriate wave-guide). Testing this set with be informative and with these reference measurements I have a lot to look at! Awesome.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Thanks @amirm!

Speaking based on my experience with the D9, I think the measurements need to be taken with different consideration compared to a standard centered tweeter speaker.

I read your post several times, and each time I tried scratching my head to see if it would help me figure out the point you were trying to make. Sadly, it did not help. As for the part I excerpted above, which relates to the question of value, it does not seem to me that there would be any alternative way to take the measurements that would change what seems obvious to me. Aside from the rather industrial aesthetics that appeal to some people, perhaps the majority, the D11 is a mediocre speaker at a premium price. For people who really like the industrial aesthetic, they might be worth the price, but of course this is very subjective. They will look right in a room with modern decor, the kind of room you see in Modern Architecture, but out of place in a room with more traditional decor. Warm in appearance they are not. Frigid would be a better word. Some people like frigid, other people do not. I'm kind of on the fence. I like modern architecture, and if I had a room decorated in the modern style I would probably look more than once at the D11, but I would likely decide in the end that the aesthetic does not justify the price. One speaker that comes to mind as an alternative is the DBR62. It is almost certainly a better speaker, it costs a lot less (unless you catch the D11 on sale for $500 and the DBR62 still has not been put on sale...), and to my eye the white one is more attractive than the D11 even in a modern decor setting. All of this is very subjective of course, except for the fact that the DBR62 is a better speaker that ordinarily costs less.

 

[Maiky76]

So 1000 bucks buy you:

• A fine looking box (when the grille is on)
• A Speaker that ignore directivity matching between the LF and HF units (nothing to do with the asymmetrical arrangement)
• A Mid-woofer with a fancy "phase plug" but a surround that goes mental at 615Hz and 1230Hz (same issue in both cases)
• This surround compromise does not even provide any LF extension/dynamic range advantage
• A speaker that “almost sound right”.

Does not sounds like a commendable effort to me… and R&D money not well spent.

I don't see the advantage in the horizontal plan of the asymmetric arrangement.
The "speaker's horizontal and vertical plan" are just tilted that's it.
One could simulate the same thing with any symmetrical speaker by tilting it.
Not saying that asymmetrical has no merit (lessen diffraction *could* be one), but it is not improving horizontal dispersion in my opinion.

EQ wise:
Score no EQ: 4.54
I don't feel comfortable with boosting the 530Hz notch, could be part of the surround issue.
it is narrow enough to probably not matter anyways.
The peak though is probably better notched out.

All PEQ format Freq/Gain/Q

Flat-ish LW EQ: 5.61with similar tonal balance to the no EQ speaker
if the bass EQ is left out the score 5.47

     117.5,    -1.50,   0.77,...
     631.0,    -4.90,   8.10,...
    1245.0,    -1.50,   7.35,...
    1832.0,    -0.50,   1.36,...
    2785.0,     1.35,   4.80,...
    8267.0,    -1.75,   0.83,...

Score/flatness EQ : 5.94
With the Bass untouched : 5.71

      117.5,    -2.40,   0.77,... % -1.90 for similar tonal balance than no EQ
      633.0,    -4.90,   8.60,...
     1235.0,    -1.76,   7.27,...
     1827.0,    -0.51,   2.91,...
     2762.0,     1.41,   5.05,...
     6645.0,    -2.58,   1.10,...

What's is interesting to me is that my optimizer automatically performs a "voicing" by deviating from the flat target to decrease the HF energy in the 3-8kHz range just like a human *might* do.

EDIT:
picture of the PR and the inside here:
https://www.on-mag.fr/index.php/top...che-dans-une-enceinte-compacte-tres-civilisee

 

[ROOSKIE]

I read your post several times, and each time I tried scratching my head to see if it would help me figure out the point you were trying to make. Sadly, it did not help. As for the part I excerpted above, which relates to the question of value, it does not seem to me that there would be any alternative way to take the measurements that would change what seems obvious to me. Aside from the rather industrial aesthetics that appeal to some people, perhaps the majority, the D11 is a mediocre speaker at a premium price. For people who really like the industrial aesthetic, they might be worth the price, but of course this is very subjective. They will look right in a room with modern decor, the kind of room you see in Modern Architecture, but out of place in a room with more traditional decor. Warm in appearance they are not. Frigid would be a better word. Some people like frigid, other people do not. I'm kind of on the fence. I like modern architecture, and if I had a room decorated in the modern style I would probably look more than once at the D11, but I would likely decide in the end that the aesthetic does not justify the price. One speaker that comes to mind as an alternative is the DBR62. It is almost certainly a better speaker, it costs a lot less (unless you catch the D11 on sale for $500 and the DBR62 still has not been put on sale...), and to my eye the white one is more attractive than the D11 even in a modern decor setting. All of this is very subjective of course, except for the fact that the DBR62 is a better speaker that ordinarily costs less.

Interesting take on the astetic.
I personally like a lot of different looks but I am sure that as many or more folks around my hood would take the Definitive over any speaker that has a "wood" look.
The number of contemporary - industrial ("modern" is tricky word in the arts and design because it refers to a specific period of time in the past, "contemporary" refers to now) designed condos being thrown up and filled in a heart beat in my city is astounding. Looks of folks around here doing the industrial look. Best Buy HQ nearby is filling these homes with Steel appliances and piano gloss audio gear.
Anyway, just a thought here that the look is very urban "now" at least in the new builds.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Thanks @amirm!

Since I've spent some time analyzing offset tweeter setups, I have some thoughts. First off, the D11 looks quite similar to what I got from the smaller sibling, the D9, except the D9 seems to run hotter in the treble:

View attachment 79955

Not a big deal as the speaker is specifically designed to be listened off-axis. Note that amir measured the D11 'slightly to the left of the tweeter axis' while i measured on the tweeter axis.



They are mirrored and labeled for each side -- the tweeters are specifically meant to be on the outside; a bit more analysis below.
P.s., I'd suggest posting the negative and positive horizontal angles when tweeters are offset. They are usually quite different.



Speaking based on my experience with the D9, I think the measurements need to be taken with different consideration compared to a standard centered tweeter speaker. Plus this speaker really looks way nicer than most in the ~$1000-ish range or below.

Anyway, a quick google search shows most places selling the D11 for $800-900, and I've seen them go for less.

Not the most bang for your buck, but not an awful deal either imo.



In my view, this is a wide directivity speaker, or at least is a bit on that side of the spectrum. I definitely don't think it's particular narrow.

I personall disagree a bit where the beamwidth lines are drawn. Anecdotally the region between 2-8kish is what most defines the perception of 'wide vs narrow' I also think we don't notice the 'narrow' regions' as much as we notice the 'wide' regions of the frequency response, much the same way we don't notice dips as much as peaks. It is a bit uneven though so it'll depend on your setup.
___________________________

Anyway, this speaker is designed to be used with the offset tweeters on the outside edges, and appears be designed for use with minimal toe in (manual says: "Toeing the speakers in slightly, if possible, toward your listening area will also provide a stronger center image.) That's how the D9 sounded best.

Because of the offset tweeter, it's worth keeping in mind it actually is a speaker that probably would get a bit of an advantage in stereo compared to mono listening. That's because with two of these speakers, the early reflection coming from the 'good' sides of the tweeter (the short side, or to the right of the speaker measured in this case) is going to be significantly louder than the early reflection from the 'bad' side.

For example, when I estimated the path length for both sides of the speaker in my measurements of the L82 in my own home, the 'good' side reflection was about 4 dB louder than the 'bad' side. As the good side also has a shorter path length, I suppose that also makes it perceptually a bit more important.

I imported amir's data on the D11 into vituixcad. Here is the how the good, louder side of the directivity looks, normalized to the on-axis
View attachment 79973
Not bad!

Then the 'bad side of the tweeter:
View attachment 79972

That's far worse.

We can summarize this a bit by looking at the good and bad side of the 'side reflection' component of the early reflections curve:

View attachment 79985

The spin accounts for includes both sides evenly, but in reality, the 'good' side will have a bigger effect on our perception due to the higher SPL and earlier arrival.

Even taking the bad side into account, the overall horizontal performance is quite solid:

View attachment 79987

You could further consider that in a minimal toe-in setup, everything gets shifted over by about 20 degrees, keeping the sidewall reflection even closer to the listening window. Of course, then the other side becomes more negative. The net effect of this, in my experience, is widening the soundstage, though it might not get that bigger, deeper 'larger than life' feeling you get with overall better-controlled speakers.

Biggest problems for this speaker for me are clearly the 600Hz resonance and the vertical directivity affecting timbre. But imaging should be quite good. I do think the D9 has better horizontal directivity behavior, which is unsurprising given the smaller woofer.

Man I dig your style, your responses are always incredibly well constructed and value driven.

So the big shameful question is how did you subjectively like the Definitive D9 speaker? In comparison with some of the other models you have run through?

 

[watchnerd]

The look of the drivers is gimmicky

What's going on with the woofer dust cap?

From the picture, it's hard to tell if it's "decoration" or some kind of functional aspect?

Or a strange mushroom shaped phase plug?

 

[ROOSKIE]

What's going on with the woofer dust cap?

From the picture, it's hard to tell if it's "decoration" or some kind of functional aspect?

Or a strange mushroom shaped phase plug?

It is a phase plug. Likely a bit over engineered but it most certainly is a phase plug.

 

[watchnerd]

It is a phase plug. Likely a bit over engineered but it most certainly is a phase plug.

That must be the weirdest looking phase plug I've ever seen.

 

[Doodski]

That must be the weirdest looking phase plug I've ever seen.

It's disturbing.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Thanks again for the great review and test.

For anyone who is interested I purchased these refurbished from "accessories for less".
They were $499.
I wanted to plug that site now as I have consistently found great prices from them over the years and appreciate them.

I went with white because it was cheaper at the time and these were purchased for testing. Interesting in photos I do like the look, we will see when I have them in person.

One of my main reasons with these was the high praise in the press and the general need to see more Definitive product tested. They are very popular in the main stream of audio.
The second reason was the offset tweeter. I try and test a lot of equipment as a hobby, much more than the average person. Despite this I have very little experience with the offset design. (the last real offset was my NHT 2.5i's from long ago)
While they may not be as easy to measure in the way that they are intended to be set up, I do find these measurements interesting. I am certainly interested in listening.

Generally the offset is discouraged in the DIY community especially with wave-guide tech eroding much of the design benefit of the offset & the offset being difficult to implement in a beneficial way. Never-the-less, because I may try some offsetting with DIY personal projects (due to often not having an appropriate wave-guide). Testing this set with be informative and with these reference measurements I have a lot to look at! Awesome.

Thanks for the tip on that site, accessories 4 less. It looks like they have great prices on a lot of stuff, including some of those Yamaha integrated amps that I like. Even some newer models that aren't yet shown on Yamaha's site!

 

[ROOSKIE]

That must be the weirdest looking phase plug I've ever seen.

Yah and also the one on the MM de Capo Reference 3a Be, is pretty unusual.
I think both are hoping to draw attention to what is otherwise not interesting. Sales and or maybe they actually have developed a useful design ala KEF tangerine tweeter guides.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Thanks for the tip on that site, accessories 4 less. It looks like they have great prices on a lot of stuff, including some of those Yamaha integrated amps that I like. Even some newer models that aren't yet shown on Yamaha's site!

Yes, and their stock changes often. It seems like they have less stuff in stock right now vs other times. I check every now and then and sometime the prices drop (like with these D11's, started at $599 and went to $499 so I bit)
Anyway you are welcome and enjoy perusing the site.

 

[restorer-john]

What's going on with the woofer dust cap?

It looks like a modern shower rose. You know, those ones that sprinkle water in all directions except where it is needed?

 

[watchnerd]

Yes, and their stock changes often. It seems like they have less stuff in stock right now vs other times. I check every now and then and sometime the prices drop (like with these D11's, started at $599 and went to $499 so I bit)
Anyway you are welcome and enjoy perusing the site.

Holy crap they have the Focal Kanta No 3 with Be tweeters at like a $6000 discount.....if you don't mind blue.

 

[KaiserSoze]

So 1000 bucks buy you:

• A fine looking box (when the grille is on)
• A Speaker that ignore directivity matching between the LF and HF units (nothing to do with the asymmetrical arrangement)
• A Mid-woofer with a fancy "phase plug" but a surround that goes mental at 615Hz and 1230Hz (same issue in both cases)
• This surround compromise does not even provide any LF extension/dynamic range advantage
• A speaker that “almost sound right”.

Does not sounds like a commendable effort to me… and R&D money not well spent.

I don't see the advantage in the horizontal plan of the asymmetric arrangement.
The "speaker's horizontal and vertical plan" are just tilted that's it.
One could simulate the same thing with any symmetrical speaker by tilting it.
Not saying that asymmetrical has no merit (lessen diffraction *could* be one), but it is not improving horizontal dispersion in my opinion.

View attachment 80005
View attachment 80007

EQ wise:
Score no EQ: 4.54
I don't feel comfortable with boosting the 530Hz notch, could be part of the surround issue.
it is narrow enough to probably not matter anyways.
The peak though is probably better notched out.

All PEQ format Freq/Gain/Q

Flat-ish LW EQ: 5.61with similar tonal balance to the no EQ speaker
if the bass EQ is left out the score 5.47

     117.5,    -1.50,   0.77,...
     631.0,    -4.90,   8.10,...
    1245.0,    -1.50,   7.35,...
    1832.0,    -0.50,   1.36,...
    2785.0,     1.35,   4.80,...
    8267.0,    -1.75,   0.83,...

View attachment 80015

View attachment 80014

Score/flatness EQ : 5.94
With the Bass untouched : 5.71

      117.5,    -2.40,   0.77,... % -1.90 for similar tonal balance than no EQ
      633.0,    -4.90,   8.60,...
     1235.0,    -1.76,   7.27,...
     1827.0,    -0.51,   2.91,...
     2762.0,     1.41,   5.05,...
     6645.0,    -2.58,   1.10,...

View attachment 80013
View attachment 80011

What's is interesting to me is that my optimizer automatically performs a "voicing" but deviating from the flat target to decrease the HF energy in the 3-8kHz range just like a human *might* do.

EDIT:
picture of the PR and the inside here:
https://www.on-mag.fr/index.php/top...che-dans-une-enceinte-compacte-tres-civilisee

An interesting post. I would like to know more about how it was determined that the surround is the cause of the nasty and peculiar resonance at 615 Hz.

I've been intrigued by Definitive's dual surround drivers for a while. I've only been able to think of one possible rationale, but haven't been able to follow up on it because I haven't had the raw driver to inspect. Possibly, the inner surround eliminates the need for the spider and improves the linearity of the suspension. I have no idea whether this is correct; it is just something that occurred to me as a possible rationale for the inner surround. If it happens that the spider is eliminated, it apparently did not have the intended effect of lowering distortion, judging by the distortion measurements.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Interesting take on the astetic.
I personally like a lot of different looks but I am sure that as many or more folks around my hood would take the Definitive over any speaker that has a "wood" look.
The number of contemporary - industrial ("modern" is tricky word in the arts and design because it refers to a specific period of time in the past, "contemporary" refers to now) designed condos being thrown up and filled in a heart beat in my city is astounding. Looks of folks around here doing the industrial look. Best Buy HQ nearby is filling these homes with Steel appliances and piano gloss audio gear.
Anyway, just a thought here that the look is very urban "now" at least in the new builds.

This seems to be the trend most everywhere. BTW I knew that "modern" now refers to a past period but was too lazy to go and figure out the right word. "Contemporary" definitely sounds more correct. "Modern" seems like more of a '60s thing (which also seems to have enjoyed a modest resurgence of late).

 

[KaiserSoze]

That must be the weirdest looking phase plug I've ever seen.

In a pinch, you could probably use it for some other kind of plug.