• 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!

Definitive Technology ProMonitor 1000 Speaker Review

Curious, how come you review such a junk in last 3 reviews?
This products does not earn any attention.
Stuff needs to get reviewed at some point. In addition, my back is hurting so I opted for a lighter, smaller speaker to test. :)
 
Anyway would love to see a Deff Tech D11 in here. That one gets high subjective reviews and is pretty looking as well.
Too expensive at $1000+ for me to buy it. Hopefully someone sends one in for review.
 
Curious, how come you review such a junk in last 3 reviews?
This products does not earn any attention.

I think the knowledge that the products are junk comes from the review. You wouldn’t expect these products to do so poorly (except for the PS Audio Noise Harvester).
 
Question for the experts, is there something wrong with the passive membrane?

Is the first small impedancmax. the passivememb., why is it so small?
 
Looks like the product page for this speaker is down. To be fair in judgements, the cached site states:
"Compact High Definition Satellite Speaker "
"The best satellite speaker in the acclaimed Pro Series, ProMonitor 1000 speakers pair with a ProCenter 2000 and matching ProSub for a complete ProCinema sound system. "

So it is not a standard "pro monitor", as the name could suggest.

So maybe I guess the manufacturer's response to this would be: "Thou shalt not use it nor measure it without a sub" :)
[and they were sold with 5Y warranty for a little more price justification..]
 
Last edited:
To make sure I was not in a lousy "bad sound mood," I replaced the ProMonitor 1000 with the Pioneer SP-BS22-LR speaker. Wow, what revelation!
amir.jpg
 
The ununiformed rear of the cabinet appears to be a poor example of plastic molded injection (am I seeing this right?). The price per pair is incredibly disappointing.

Yes, there seem to be severe sink marks.
Either this is poorly designed or poorly processed. The latter would mean that overall cabinet target dimensions are also affected. This speaker screams „cheap“!
 
Last edited:
I once traded a pair of old Paradigm bookshelves for a complete 7.1 surround sound system from Definitive Technologies. When I saw the offer and the MSRP (which was WAY more than the MSRP of my Paradigms) I thought I hit the jackpot and would be trading up to an amazing system.

When I first saw them, I was shocked by the cheap construction and shoddy plastic and screws and sheet metal construction. When I plugged them in, it suddenly all made sense why I was able to trade for them so easily.

They are among the worst speakers I’ve ever heard in my life that attempts to sell themselves as “high quality“. Absolutely could not stand them. I didn’t have the heart to sell the whole set for more than $100 or so, which is what I believed them to be worth at most, sonically. Good riddance.
 
Makes me wonder how companies decide to design/release a speaker with such poor tonal balance from the factory (amoungst other faults) - I mean it's severely bass shy and treble heavy. I mean wouldn't you have to go out of your way to make such a badly balanced speaker or at least just slap together a few components without measuring them in any way! (Hell, couldn't they even just listen to the speaker before they sell it!)

EDIT: I wonder if it's been designed to sit really close to walls or in corners, which might pump up the bass and bring it more in-line with the treble....someone in this thread did mention that there were some rear panel design ques that indicated wall mounting as a feature.
 
Last edited:
I have added the Definitive Technology ProMonitor 1000 to Loudspeaker Explorer where it can be compared to other speakers.

Listening window consistency is bad on the vertical axis. That said, it seems like they would sound better when listened a few degrees below tweeter height, as it seems to fill the gap around 5 kHz. This would be consistent with an optimal design axis being between the woofer and tweeter, as opposed to the tweeter axis of the measurement. Still, a speaker should not be sensitive to such small vertical angles.

visualization(111).png
 
These speakers seem just odd.
The passive radiator is too small. Simple physics says that it needs to have an area significantly larger than the bass driver - its whole point is to take over shifting air at frequencies below where the bass driver has given up. I have a horrid feeling that the passive radiator doesn't even have a spider - the really cheap small ones don't. Which may be why the additional mass is apparent held on with a screw. A too small passive radiator is going to run into excursion problems very quickly, and is probably the source of a large fraction of the low frequency distortion. (I wonder, if the passive radiator is indeed spiderless, whether it is hitting a rocking mode near 500Hz, and that is where that distortion hump comes from. Just a thought.)

If this speaker is intended to be used with a sub-bass system, why does it have a passive radiator at all? (This is a question I have I of any small vented speaker intended for such use.) A fourth order alignment is intended to allow bass extension below where the excursion limit of the driver would prevent the speaker going. It has pros and cons. If a speaker is to be used with a sub, design it sealed. It will be cheaper, and you will be less likely run into unfortunate compromises. And this speaker sure has them. Despite the passive bass radiator it doesn't even seem to have enough bass extension to get into a region where it would match with a conventional sub.

One can only conclude that this is another example of a speaker designed by the marketing department.
 
-3dB down at 100Hz with a 5.25" Woofer. Why?
You'd need something like 150Hz crossover frequency with this, why would they do that?
 
EDIT: I wonder if it's been designed to sit really close to walls or in corners, which might pump up the bass and bring it more in-line with the treble....someone in this thread did mention that there were some rear panel design ques that indicated wall mounting as a feature.
That seems like the charitable interpretation, designed as wall mount rears crossed over to a sub, but as @Francis Vaughan points out, just using a simple sealed box would be a better and cheaper solution.
 
So maybe I guess the manufacturer's response to this would be: "Thou shalt not use it nor measure it without a sub" :)
What I find hilariously shameless is the manual has multiple sections talking about crossing over with the ProMonitor sub; not any sub, but their sub specifically. Don’t know if I’ve ever seen that.
 
-3dB down at 100Hz with a 5.25" Woofer. Why?
You'd need something like 150Hz crossover frequency with this, why would they do that?

It's get even stranger to have a passive membrane in it. I realy wonder what it does in this speaker? Does the membrane even work?

Edit says:Thats why iam interested what the speaker experts say to the design and the poor bass performance. I think something is wrong.
 
Last edited:
It's get even stranger to have a passive membrane in it. I realy wonder what it does in this speaker? Does the membrane even work?
Yes it works - the "middle screw tuning" prevents the speaker to fall apart in higher SPLs. Also rather than producing bass it acts as a suspension to supress even more resonances.
 
Yes it works - the "middle screw tuning" prevents the speaker to fall apart in higher SPLs. Also rather than producing bass it acts as a suspension to supress even more resonances.

Not shure if that makes sense to me. Than i would use a closed box and the money for the passive i would use for a better driver. But iam not a expert and if you could explain this more in detail i would be happy.
 
That seems like the charitable interpretation, designed as wall mount rears crossed over to a sub, but as @Francis Vaughan points out, just using a simple sealed box would be a better and cheaper solution.
Yeah, true, and you'd think if companies designed a speaker for a specific use or placement then they might refer to this in their sales blurb to make sure it was bought by the right people for the right implementation. (I'm not sure many companies are upfront about saying that their speaker needs to be close to a wall for best performance though, but still if it's designed for that purpose then I'd want my customers to know that).
 
Back
Top Bottom