Do affordable far field dsp speakers exist?

[giraffejumper]

Hello.
Love the forum, videos, and measurements here!
I'm now hooked on the idea of powered dsp speakers and would love to buy a set for 5.1 home theater.
However, after what seems like millions of hours reading and watching videos, it seems that there are basically only two options of near field monitors for sitting a foot or two in front of - or PA speakers meant for garage bands and weddings.
The other ones, like the Dutch and Dutch, that actually seem like they are made purely for listening purposes are well beyond my budget.
Is there even an affordable far field specifically for listening and not music production speakers that exist for less than several thousand dollars?

(I was just going to buy the jbl 308 mk2s until I read that they were not loud enough, especially for what movies require, thus sending me on this endless research spiral that only seems to end if I spend my life savings lol)

 

[Frank Dernie]

The other ones, like the Dutch and Dutch, that actually seem like they are made purely for listening purposes are well beyond my budget.

That is probably the problem and I sympathise. If you want high volume capacity at a reasonable listening distance the "ingredients" are more expensive.
The D&D is very good value for the engineering it contains IMHO and it is unlikely that anybody has the technology to do something anywhere near as good for less.

 

[AudioJester]

Im thinking for 5.1 a dsp/room correction AVR and passives would be a better option??

 

[abdo123]

You haven’t told us how loud you listen and how far from the speakers you will sit.


Anyway the Neumann KH 120 can play as loud as 100 dB @1 meter while the THD remains below 1% above 100 Hz.

 

[Rick Sykora]

I suggest there is a fundamental system issue that (at this time) does not support pushing the electronics into the speakers. It is very comparable to centralized vs distributed computing models, but with the addition of the need to also support multiple speakers as (real-time) peripheral devices.

As long as the software architecture for doing surround processing is much less expensive to implement as a centralized system, this is unlikely to change. As I add more speakers to the system, adding more cost in each speaker seems a non-starter. The better short term question may be if we will get more capability in surround processors. I have been waiting for this for a while. IMO, it seems we should be getting more value out of surround sound processors over time. Instead, the price seems to be rising for surround processors that seem unable to keep up with the software.

Hoping will get to see this change in the next decade or two. Likely will require some better standards or open software developments. Otherwise we are stuck awaiting patents to expire to get drive costs down on software that is good enough to implement a solution.

 

[q3cpma]

I'd say the KEF R3 with subs and external DSP is probably the best price/performance ratio for far field. Erin's review shows its incredibly low distortion above 100 Hz (0.1~0.2% H3 at 96 dB!) and its narrow dispersion will help achieve a higher direct-to-total sound ratio.
I expect the R7/R11 to be even better (KEF's own quasi spins show no directivity problems with the bigger woofers), if you have the money and want floorstanders.

Genelec's 1237/8A might be good if you can get them at a small price as is Neumann's KH420A (need external DSP), but their price/size (and look for some) put them in another category.

 

[abdo123]

I'd say the KEF R3 with subs and external DSP is probably the best price/performance ratio for far field. Erin's review shows its incredibly low distortion above 100 Hz (0.1~0.2% H3 at 96 dB!) and its narrow dispersion will help achieve a higher direct-to-total sound ratio.
I expect the R7/R11 to be even better (KEF's own quasi spins show no directivity problems with the bigger woofers), if you have the money and want floorstanders.

Genelec's 1237/8A might be good if you can get them at a small price as is Neumann's KH420A (need external DSP), but their price/size (and look for some) put them in another category.

I wish the KEF R3 wasn't rear ported, infact i wish no speaker in the world would be rear ported for home cinema purposes.

 

[giraffejumper]

Abdo123, I forgot to mention that it is a small to medium room where I am roughly 8 to 9 feet from the speakers. I have heard that Kalis 'might' be good for the volume I need, but have yet to find anyone with an actual setup like this for home theater that can verify. Since my Denon does not have preouts, it will have to be upgraded also, so I want to be a little more sure about it before spending a bunch of money and then being disappointed because they sound like tiny computer speakers that would sound amazing if I put my head up to them lol

 

[Frank Dernie]

I wish the KEF R3 wasn't rear ported, infact i wish no speaker in the world would be rear ported for home cinema purposes.

It has the big benefit of making port resonance (which are probably directional) less audible and even easily absorbed.

 

[abdo123]

Abdo123, I forgot to mention that it is a small to medium room where I am roughly 8 to 9 feet from the speakers. I have heard that Kalis 'might' be good for the volume I need, but have yet to find anyone with an actual setup like this for home theater that can verify. Since my Denon does not have preouts, it will have to be upgraded also, so I want to be a little more sure about it before spending a bunch of money and then being disappointed because they sound like tiny computer speakers that would sound amazing if I put my head up to them lol

well you need to use the metric system from now on for speaker comparisons.

two speakers will give you +3dB loudness for free.

everytime the distance between you and the speakers is doubled you take -6 dB out.

you're roughly 2.75 meters away from the speakers so distortion @96 dB at 1 meter would be aproximately distortion at ~88 dB for two speakers playing mono content/elements, 85 dB playing stereo content.

 

[abdo123]

It has the big benefit of making port resonance (which are probably directional) less audible and even easily absorbed.

how are they easily absorbed?

 

[giraffejumper]

Thanks for the info.
Being American, my brain is not wired for meters lol.
I have to use a Google converter.
It was tricky driving around in Iceland using kilometers instead of miles

 

[zheka]

Have you looked at Seaton Catalysts?

 

[giraffejumper]

Those are definitely above the price range.
I'm looking for something around the price of jbl 308s or Kali lp8s or In8s.
But willing to go a bit higher if needed.
When one speaker is thousands of dollars, I'm out.
I could do it, but then I would need to get divorced first lol.
I wish there was something in between the 308s and the 708s, made just for home theater listening

 

[Frank Dernie]

how are they easily absorbed?

with a panel with sound absorbing foam on. At the frequencies of port resonances it doesn't need to be all that thick and can be reasonably close and just big enough to cover the radiation from the port. Impossible to do without ruining the sound if the port is on the front.

 

[Frank Dernie]

well you need to use the metric system from now on for speaker comparisons.

Why?
dB is a ratio so dimensionless, doubling a distance doesn't matter what units you use.

 

[abdo123]

Why?
dB is a ratio so dimensionless, doubling a distance doesn't matter what units you use.

because distortion is measured at meter distance. you either convert everything to feet or everything to meter. doesn't matter which really.

 

[abdo123]

with a panel with sound absorbing foam on. At the frequencies of port resonances it doesn't need to be all that thick and can be reasonably close and just big enough to cover the radiation from the port. Impossible to do without ruining the sound if the port is on the front.

this is just shoddy engineering all together, a customer should not be expected to deal with port resonances because they should have been omitted from the speaker all together by the designer.

Also anechoic measurements are taken at tweeter level and reflections are minimized, so if the resonances are beaming from the rear port towards the wall they should be excluded. yet they still effect the frequency response.

Additionally, i wasn't able to minimize rear port resonance via absorption placed on the front wall myself.

 

[Thomas savage]

What about the devialet phantoms ? Hooked up to something with room correction or just eq to tame the base and I think they are both reasonably priced and amazing performers .

 

[Frank Dernie]

because distortion is measured at meter distance. you either convert everything to feet or everything to meter. doesn't matter which really.

Well having used Imperial units until 1968 then SI from then on for all my engineering for stuff as approximate as listening distance I use 3' ~ 1m, near enough and I just look at the distortion plots, more worse, less better, whatever the distance.