• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

DIYSG 1099 Speaker Review Monday, Jun 7, 2021

napilopez

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
1,921
Likes
7,282
Location
NYC
I think you would get better bang for your buck with the HTM-12s as they have very impressive directivity and thus would be more amenable to EQ (as the direct and reflected sound is near the same).
For sure, was just looking at these independently. It's my experience that people usually decide on the form factor/size/appearence of speaker they want first, and then try to find the best option within that category.
 

ooheadsoo

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2020
Messages
52
Likes
36
For sure, was just looking at these independently. It's my experience that people usually decide on the form factor/size/appearence of speaker they want first, and then try to find the best option within that category.
I agree - in this case, as Ryan alluded to, this is probably one of the few high sensitivity center channel options for those who don't use an AT screen. HTM-12 is a better value for most, but pretty hard to implement as a center without an AT screen.
 

Rick Sykora

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 14, 2020
Messages
1,652
Likes
2,698
Location
Stow, Ohio USA
Thanks again Erin!

Seems to do what the designer intended and so is a decent deal for a large home theater or a party speaker. A little disappointed in the need for a subwoofer as big as these are, but seems they more about being loud than much else. The huge center channel variant is indicative of this too.

Am glad you were able to acquire them and take some time to test. Between the availability issues and the size, would not have gotten done by Amir and I! :D
 
Last edited:

TimVG

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
1,005
Likes
1,901
Simple filterset

1623185056158.png


And in-room estimation

1623185090498.png
 

3ll3d00d

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
41
Likes
55
What's the point of these dual midranges, other than destroying directivity? Only sensitivity?
"Destroying" is the point, i.e. to be able to bring the relatively small waveguide to meet the dual 10s woofers and control directivity to a lower frequency than could otherwise be achieved (and obviously sensitivity is the other benefit)
 
Last edited:

abdo123

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
4,089
Likes
3,646
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Somewhat comical looking, almost in the white van category. Atrocious measurements. Every apartment dweller's nightmare.

You can say as much shit about these speakers as you want but you’re not achieving the 110 dB peaks (sans sub-bass) necessary in home cinema without the speakers crapping out if you don’t use something similar. (or pay the worth of few human organs for a large perlisten or Revel)
 

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
301
Likes
2,134
Location
French, leaving in China
Copy/paste from my website. If the format doesn't transfer well, again, go to my website:
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/diysg_1099/


DIYSG 1099 Speaker Review
  • Monday, Jun 7, 2021
DSC01986.JPG

Foreword / YouTube Video Review
The review on this website is a brief overview and summary of the objective performance of this speaker. It is not intended to be a deep dive. Moreso, this is information for those who prefer “just the facts” and prefer to have the data without the filler.

<<video review coming soon>>

For a primer on what the data means, please watch my series of videos where I provide in-depth discussion and examples of how to read the graphics presented hereon.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnIxFR_ey0b37Ex4KV2mBz-kYB7QLffR1


Information and Photos
The DIY Sound Group 1099 is a DIY design from Ryan Bouma which is available in kit form from DIYSG. Here are some notes from the product page:
The Elusive 1099 has gained a cult following since it hit the DIY scene many years ago. ‘1099’ refers to the 10” woofers and the high sensitivity of 99db (2.83V/1m). Keeping parts in stock for this speaker was difficult, which is how it received the ‘Elusive’ name. And custom 10” black coned woofers for this speaker had to be manufactured by Eminence and the Celestion midranges are special ordered from the UK. Most people wanted the front baffles without roundovers, so I’m no longer getting them made with roundovers and they all have square edges.

These speakers were loaned to me by their owner, who built them from the kit. Note, speakers pictured are on stands built and loaned also by the owner.

DSC01984.JPG






CTA-2034 (SPINORAMA) and Accompanying Data
All data collected using Klippel’s Near-Field Scanner. The Near-Field-Scanner 3D (NFS) offers a fully automated acoustic measurement of direct sound radiated from the source under test. The radiated sound is determined in any desired distance and angle in the 3D space outside the scanning surface. Directivity, sound power, SPL response and many more key figures are obtained for any kind of loudspeaker and audio system in near field applications (e.g. studio monitors, mobile devices) as well as far field applications (e.g. professional audio systems). Utilizing a minimum of measurement points, a comprehensive data set is generated containing the loudspeaker’s high resolution, free field sound radiation in the near and far field. For a detailed explanation of how the NFS works and the science behind it, please watch the below discussion with designer Christian Bellmann:

The reference point for these measurements is just below the tweeter axis (approximately 15mm).

Measurements are provided in a format in accordance with the Standard Method of Measurement for In-Home Loudspeakers (ANSI/CTA-2034-A R-2020). For more information, please see this link.

CTA-2034 / SPINORAMA:
CEA2034%20--%20DIYSG%20Elusive%201099.png



Early Reflections Breakout:
Early%20Reflections.png


Estimated In-Room Response:
Estimated%20In-Room%20Response.png


Horizontal Frequency Response (0° to ±90°):
SPL%20Horizontal.png


Vertical Frequency Response (0° to ±40°):
SPL%20Vertical.png


Horizontal Contour Plot (not normalized):
DIYSG%201099_Horizontal_Spectrogram_Full.png


Horizontal Contour Plot (normalized):
DIYSG%201099%20Beamwidth_Horizontal.png


Vertical Contour Plot (not normalized):
DIYSG%201099_Vertical_Spectrogram_Full.png


Vertical Contour Plot (normalized):
DIYSG%201099%20Beamwidth_Vertical.png




Additional Measurements

Impedance Magnitude and Phase + Equivalent Peak Dissipation Resistance (EPDR)

For those who do not know what EPDR is (ahem, me until 2020), Keith Howard came up with this metric which he defined in a 2007 article for Stereophile as:
… simply the resistive load that would give rise to the same peak device dissipation as the speaker itself.
A note from Dr. Jack Oclee-Brown of Kef (who supplied the formula for calculating EPDR):
Just a note of caution that the EPDR derivation is based on a class-B output stage so it’s valid for typical class-AB amps but certainly not for class-A and probably has only marginal relevance for class-D amps (would love to hear from a class-D expert on this topic).
DIYSG%201099_Impedance_0.1v.png



I was curious what would happen if you increased the voltage to 2.83vRMS so I measured the impedance at this voltage level and plotted the EPDR for it and 0.10vRMS below. The two are identical and therefore you see only what appears to be one set of data in the graph below.

DIYSG%201099_EDPR_Compare.png

On-Axis Response Linearity
DIYSG%201099%20FR_Linearity.png

“Globe” Plots
These plots are generated from exporting the Klippel data to text files. I then process that data with my own MATLAB script to provide what you see. These are not part of any software packages and are unique to my tests.

Horizontal Polar (Globe) Plot:
This represents the sound field at 2 meters - above 200Hz - per the legend in the upper left.
DIYSG%201099_360_Horizontal_Polar.png



Vertical Polar (Globe) Plot:
This represents the sound field at 2 meters - above 200Hz - per the legend in the upper left.
DIYSG%201099_360_Vertical_Polar.png



Harmonic Distortion
Harmonic Distortion at 86dB @ 1m:
DIYSG%20Elusive%201099%20Harmonic%20Distortion%20%2886dB%20%40%201m%29.png


Harmonic Distortion at 96dB @ 1m:
DIYSG%20Elusive%201099%20Harmonic%20Distortion%20%2896dB%20%40%201m%29.png


Harmonic Distortion at 102dB @ 1m:
DIYSG%20Elusive%201099%20Harmonic%20Distortion%20%28102dB%20%40%201m%29.png




Dynamic Range (Instantaneous Compression Test)
The below graphic indicates just how much SPL is lost (compression) or gained (enhancement; usually due to distortion) when the speaker is played at higher output volumes instantly via a 2.7 second logarithmic sine sweep referenced to 76dB at 1 meter. The signals are played consecutively without any additional stimulus applied. Then normalized against the 76dB result.
The tests are conducted in this fashion:
  1. 76dB at 1 meter (baseline; black)
  2. 86dB at 1 meter (red)
  3. 96dB at 1 meter (blue)
  4. 102dB at 1 meter (purple)
The purpose of this test is to illustrate how much (if at all) the output changes as a speaker’s components temperature increases (i.e., voice coils, crossover components) instantaneously.
DIYSG%201099_Compression.png


Long Term Compression Tests
The below graphics indicate how much SPL is lost or gained in the long-term as a speaker plays at the same output level for 2 minutes, in intervals. Each graphic represents a different SPL: 86dB and 96dB both at 1 meter.
The purpose of this test is to illustrate how much (if at all) the output changes as a speaker’s components temperature increases (i.e., voice coils, crossover components).
The tests are conducted in this fashion:
  1. “Cold” logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand)
  2. Multitone stimulus played at desired SPL/distance for 2 minutes; intended to represent music signal
  3. Interim logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand) (Red in graphic)
  4. Multitone stimulus played at desired SPL/distance for 2 minutes; intended to represent music signal
  5. Final logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand) (Blue in graphic)
The red and blue lines represent changes in the output compared to the initial “cold” test.
DIYSG%201099_Long_Term_86_Compression.png

DIYSG%201099_Long_Term_96_Compression.png





Parting / Random Thoughts

If you want to see the music I use for evaluating speakers subjectively, see my Spotify playlist.
  • Subjective listening was done in my living room at a listening distance of about 4 meters from the speakers. The speakers were placed from the wall behind them about 1 meter and many meters from sidewalls. Power was provided via Parasound HINT-6 (rated ~160w x2 @ 8ohm, 240w x2 @ 4ohm). SPL levels generally remained in the 85dB region but I did occasionally increase the output level to test the limits (more on this below). Aiming varied from on-axis to cross-firing by about 20 degrees and toed-out by about 10 degrees. Generally, I preferred cross-firing by about 10 degrees. No DSP was added; my goal is to assess the performance of the speaker without “room correction” or other DSP in the signal path (other than some tonal adjustments; noted below).
  • Rolled off below 100Hz? No midbass (definitely no kick). Definitely needs a subwoofer.
  • Lower vocal regions sound thin.
  • Can be sibilant (Kodachrome).
  • Hi-hat a bit strong (2-3dB) (Kodachrome).
  • Soundstage isn’t wide. Low/no envelopment.
  • Strong around 400-600Hz (Everybody Wants to Rule the World).
  • Free Fallin - left guitar around 50 seconds moves around the soundstage from just outside the speaker to at the speaker; should stay put; radiation mismatch ?

First thing is first: these speakers can flat out hammer. At my listening distance of about 4 meters, I had my Parasound HINT-6 not even full tilt and the output measured in the seated position was 111dB. For effect…. one-hundred-eleven. That’s insane. At this level, I literally was wearing hearing protection (gun suppression). Even with the suppressors on, the music at my ears was incredibly loud. This is “wake the neighbors up on the other end of town” loud. If your seated position is within a few meters of the speakers then these, honestly, would probably be overkill. Though, one could potentially run these off an AVR and still have plenty of headroom to wake the dead.


The dynamic capability of these speakers is - as expected - quite high. With a measured (anechoic) sensitivity of about 96dB @ 2.83v/1m, they have the ability to take a little power and make a lot of sound. Along the same lines, these speakers suffer zero compression with even continuous playback of 96dB multitone stimulus featuring a crest factor of 12dB (in other words, these speakers can play loud for a while and not change in response). Of course, with high sensitivity comes a trade-off and in this case it is namely in low frequency. Despite their size and use of dual 10-inch woofers, these speakers don’t have much about at all below 100Hz. Expect to use a subwoofer at least as high as the typical 80Hz and expect that you may need to go a bit higher to properly sum to these speakers and provide the same sort of SPL levels from low frequencies to high frequencies.


The horizontal radiation window is rather narrow compared to conventional speakers, especially dome tweeters on a flat baffle design. Where those designs are typically capable of a radiation pattern as much as ±70°, these speakers are closer to the ±30° window. This, too, is another tradeoff of the waveguide-design where you gain more controlled dispersion with higher sensitivity at a detriment to wide dispersion. Personally, I prefer a wider soundstage and I prefer the interaction with the side walls as it increases the overall sense of soundstage width. But not everyone likes that and - aside from personal preference - the room may play better to a narrower directivity speaker. This is precisely the kind of thing that takes experience and data to begin to resolve. But, once you have had enough experience with measured speakers, you can begin to correlate to the relationship between soundstage width, radiation patterns and what you like.


While the measurements validate some issues I heard - namely the high frequency boost and the midrange issues - the overall result was pleasing. For home theater junkies, I believe equalization will be used which will/can help resolve some issues regarding overall tonal balance they may find displeasing. Still, unlike the DIYSG HTM-12v1 I tested recently, this speaker will not benefit as much from equalization due to the asymmetry in the horizontal radiation pattern; meaning that what is EQ’d on-axis will also impact the off-axis sound and since these two do not always follow the same form in response, some issues cannot be “EQ’d out”.


Using the tonal balance knobs on the Parasound HINT-6, I decreased the treble and found that to help remedy the sibilance. Though, the next step for me would definitely be to work on the midrange trough; either by using a wide-Q filter centered at about 300Hz to bring this up and/or using a filter with a Q of about 3, centered at about 700Hz and cut this by 2-3dB to flatten this peaky region out.


As for placement, as I mentioned above, I personally found that toeing in these speakers by about 10° yielded the best overall response. However, if you do use DSP or something of the sort to alter the frequency response, you may find a different axis response better suits your tastes/needs. So, it is recommended to take time to listen at different angles. Even more so, take time to run your room correction software at different speaker aiming angles to find what you prefer most. Aside from the horizontal aiming, though, the vertical position of your ears to the speakers should be in-line with the midpoint between the tweeter and midrange drivers. Specifically, it appears the acoustic center (vertically) is just below the tweeter line. I would not recommend listening more than ±10° beyond this axis as the vertical response begins shifting a good bit from nominal.


At any rate: these speakers get loud and are a blast to listen to. Would I consider them high-fidelity? No. But I don’t think anyone who is looking at these speakers and looking at the price for all the parts to build them are expecting symphony-hall-esque reproduction. What you do get is a great time, a speaker that will plain knock your socks off and a grin on your face. And with a little bit of EQ you can take what I would consider “good” response to “solid” response. How’s that for subjective?! That’s it for me!

Peace!


Support / Donate
If you like what you see here and want to help me keep it going, please consider donating via the PayPal Contribute button below. Donations help me pay for new items to test, materials to build rigs to measure, a chicken sandwich, server space, etc. All of which I pay out of pocket. So, if you can help chip in a few bucks, know that it is very much appreciated and that the support means a lot to me.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/contribute/

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 2.3
With Sub: 5.5

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • Quite Not really flat but high sensitivity
  • Mid to HF Xover?
  • Must be used with a sub
DIYSG 1099 No EQ Spinorama.png

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height or just above.
Horizontally, narrower than usual,
DIYSG 1099 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png

DIYSG 1099 LW Better data.png

EQ design:

I have generated one EQ. The APO config file is attached.
  • Quite few things to iron out.
  • Quite decent after the EQ

Score EQ Score: 5.1
with sub: 8.0

Code:
DIYSG 1099 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
June082021-183659

Preamp: -1.3 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 76.5 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.21
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 144 Hz Gain -4.27 dB Q 1.66
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 295 Hz Gain 0.88 dB Q 3.66
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 565 Hz Gain -4.27 dB Q 1.98
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1188 Hz Gain -1.68 dB Q 2.47
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1821 Hz Gain 1.76 dB Q 4.6
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2222 Hz Gain -1.33 dB Q 1.58
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3024 Hz Gain 1.74 dB Q 2.25
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 4652 Hz Gain -2.8 dB Q 3.12
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 8458 Hz Gain -4.53 dB Q 0.9

DIYSG 1099 ZEQ DEsign.png


Spinorama EQ Score
DIYSG 1099 Score EQ Spinorama.png


Zoom PIR-LW-ON
DIYSG 1099 Zoom.png


Regression - Tonal flat ON after EQ
DIYSG 1099 Regression - Tonal.png


Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Some improvements!
DIYSG 1099 Radar.png


The rest of the plots is attached.
 

Attachments

  • DIYSG 1099 APO EQ Score 96000Hz.txt
    537 bytes · Views: 19
  • DIYSG 1099 Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    DIYSG 1099 Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    597.7 KB · Views: 21
  • DIYSG 1099 Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    DIYSG 1099 Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    592.2 KB · Views: 16
  • DIYSG 1099 Normalized Directivity data.png
    DIYSG 1099 Normalized Directivity data.png
    527.7 KB · Views: 14
  • DIYSG 1099 Raw Directivity data.png
    DIYSG 1099 Raw Directivity data.png
    884.6 KB · Views: 19
  • DIYSG 1099 Reflexion data.png
    DIYSG 1099 Reflexion data.png
    273.2 KB · Views: 11
  • DIYSG 1099 LW data.png
    DIYSG 1099 LW data.png
    278.3 KB · Views: 14
  • DIYSG 1099 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    DIYSG 1099 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    320.8 KB · Views: 18
  • DIYSG 1099 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    DIYSG 1099 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    428.4 KB · Views: 23
  • DIYSG 1099 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    DIYSG 1099 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    436.5 KB · Views: 28

pierre

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
629
Likes
1,402
Location
Switzerland
I am slowly catching up.

Here is an EQ boosting the score from 2.5 to 5.2. The directivity is average and that cannot be easily fix by an EQ.

filters0.png

filters1.png
filters2.png


Code:
EQ for DIYSG Elusive 1099 computed from ErinsAudioCorner data
Preference Score 2.5 with EQ 5.2
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.8
Dated: 2021-06-09-06:52:41

Preamp: -0.4 dB

Filter  1: ON PK Fc  6372 Hz Gain -3.90 dB Q 0.26
Filter  2: ON PK Fc  2816 Hz Gain +3.04 dB Q 2.49
Filter  3: ON PK Fc   556 Hz Gain -4.51 dB Q 2.12
Filter  4: ON PK Fc  5945 Hz Gain -1.10 dB Q 1.17
Filter  5: ON PK Fc  1842 Hz Gain +2.11 dB Q 5.76
Filter  6: ON PK Fc  3621 Hz Gain +1.77 dB Q 9.57
Filter  7: ON PK Fc 12959 Hz Gain -0.96 dB Q 2.34
Filter  8: ON PK Fc   477 Hz Gain -0.96 dB Q 12.00
Filter  9: ON PK Fc  1178 Hz Gain -1.23 dB Q 6.77
Filter 10: ON PK Fc   821 Hz Gain +0.66 dB Q 12.00
Filter 11: ON PK Fc  6000 Hz Gain +1.32 dB Q 12.00
Filter 12: ON PK Fc  7974 Hz Gain -0.77 dB Q 3.63
Filter 13: ON PK Fc 10309 Hz Gain -0.50 dB Q 12.00
Filter 14: ON PK Fc 11544 Hz Gain +0.79 dB Q 10.49
Filter 15: ON PK Fc  1385 Hz Gain -0.40 dB Q 12.00
Filter 16: ON PK Fc   694 Hz Gain -0.51 dB Q 12.00
Filter 17: ON PK Fc  4579 Hz Gain -0.67 dB Q 7.42
Filter 18: ON PK Fc  7293 Hz Gain -0.33 dB Q 12.00
Filter 19: ON PK Fc   446 Hz Gain +1.14 dB Q 12.00
Filter 20: ON PK Fc  1582 Hz Gain +0.63 dB Q 12.00
 
OP
hardisj

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,602
Likes
12,064
Location
North Alabama
I normally create video reviews but thought I'd do something different this time. Ryan Bouma joined me for a chat about his DIYSG 1099 speaker design and explained some of the process and goals with the design. I really appreciate his input here and I think there is a lot to be learned from those who are out there building and creating projects for all to enjoy.

FWIW, this video - like all my "interview" videos - is not monetized.



 
Last edited:

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
3,866
Likes
9,641
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
I normally create video reviews but thought I'd do something different this time. Ryan Bouma joined me for a chat about his DIYSG 1099 speaker design and explained some of the process and goals with the design. I really appreciate his input here and I think there is a lot to be learned from those who are out there building and creating projects for all to enjoy.


@40:35, you mention you found the near/far field transition distance. Was this using my suggestion or the method you state you discovered?

If it turns out to be accurate, it would be awesome to include for desktop/studio speaker reviews.
 

restorer-john

Master Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
7,816
Likes
20,838
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Wow, they are truly horrible measuring speakers in every respect. But considering they are basically an ugly but efficient PA bin, they'd probably be just the ticket for a barn dance or a back-woods DJ party.

Another comprehensive review @hardisj :)
 
Last edited:
OP
hardisj

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,602
Likes
12,064
Location
North Alabama
@40:35, you mention you found the near/far field transition distance. Was this using my suggestion or the method you state you discovered?

If it turns out to be accurate, it would be awesome to include for desktop/studio speaker reviews.

A different method. There is something in the Klippel software that hints at it and it made sense when looking at the NF/FF graphic. I need to verify with Christian, though.
 

Ericglo

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2020
Messages
350
Likes
252
I watched the video. Great job.

Could you expand on your observations on drivers in a MTM configuration?
 
Top Bottom