Dutch & Dutch 8c Review

[purebordem]

There is no transient response mentioned, is there? Easyness? As it comes to the amplitude of reflections, in this experiemnt they were up to 8dB greater than the first sound, maintaining roughly localization from the first. With speakers reflections are necessarily quiter than the direct sound. Reflection loss, directivity and attenuation by distance! Mind You, this experiement was centered at 750Hz, where even sloppily designed speakers exhibit quite a deal of directivity, if not unvoluntarily.

Not the least, the research quoted is focussed on human hearing, decidedly not on stereo.

While certainly not a percussion duration transient, I would hardly consider 200ms sustain either. Perhaps listener fatigue would have been a more appropriate term than "easiness". Increased variability in perception (ie: difficulty) is going to slowly wear during long listening sessions.

As for the paper, if you had read in the time frame you claimed, you would have noticed they actually centered it on 500Hz with a 800hz bandwidth.

(Yes, I'm reading and understanding a bit fast, don't worry. 5min it took, and You read it?)

If you are going to keep up with the decidedly snarky attitude and poor excuse for wit, it might behoove you to at least spell correctly occasionally.

 

[fineMen]

As for the paper, if you had read in the time frame you claimed, you would have noticed they actually centered it on 500Hz with a 800hz bandwidth.

If you are going to keep up with the decidedly snarky attitude and poor excuse for wit, it might behoove you to at least spell correctly occasionally.

See summary (4)--this investigation was about the automatisms in the auditory system of humans. Precedence effect was to be better understood regarding its inner mechanisms.

Of course this is more intersting for physiologists than for stereo producers, let alone consumers. PE was found to be dominant for at least 8dB of a louder later reflection. What's the deal with such an investigation when it comes to speakers, namely the benefit of so called cardioid variants?

Even with standard solutions reflections in the critical (!) 750Hz region stay well below -6dB, hence 14dB below any criticallity.

To put it simply, a cardiod would in case introduce or not (wall mounted) an additional circle to the confusion with stereo (Toole). It doesn't make sense to optimize for an ideal, that is *not* considered during the production process of the software. The music media.

The product is actually man made, there is no 'original'. The esthetics of the product is evaluated using reverberant studios. To reproduce the final satisfaction of the sound engineer with that product at home needs similar conditions at home. Same as with the enjoyment of a painting. Would anyone dare to state that a green tinted lighting would increase the sharpness of the vison?

Not the least, to introduce only loosely related "science", because it accidentially uses some audio buzzwords, adding poorly speculative derivations, isn't that gentelmanly either. Only excuse may be the enthusiasm for music, me thinks. Alas, audiophilia doesn't care too much. Otherwise the activity of concious listening would take more room in the discussion, as opposed to longing for totally passive virtual reality.

E/g The Beatles, the timing, anyone?

 

[fineMen]

Erin did test it somewhat like that so maybe he does have some data that might help

Exactly so, I would like to see the sound distribution to the sides. Do I see snow in the image?! I'll wait for summer, though.

 

[fluid]

Not the least, to introduce only loosely related "science", because it accidentially uses some audio buzzwords, adding poorly speculative derivations, isn't that gentelmanly either.

I can see the relevance but there is other research that considers this topic more directly, I posted it before and it might already be in this thread, in case it has been missed (there are others)

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...quest-for-the-grail-is-over.23198/post-776886

Treating the room and speakers as a system is a good idea, controlling directivity is generally considered a good thing even if someone desires the widest pattern it still benefits from being controlled. The pattern of the speaker doesn't remain intact with a boundary near it, but that isn't the important point, it is that the interaction with the boundary is reduced and the speaker is more likely to sound as designed if placed where it was intended to be used.

There can be a difference between what is preferred for production and what is preferred for reproduction, it is unlikely they will ever be the same as there is no overall agreement between professionals as to what they prefer to use.

The 8c and Kii 3 are designed as production tools, (that doesn't mean they can't be great home speakers) it makes sense because that is where they are likely to sell considerably more product, and price isn't as problematic.

 

[fluid]

Exactly so, I would like to see the sound distribution to the sides.

I don't think Erin would have taken polar data like that, it appeared to be to check distortion and how the boundary EQ functioned. The on axis SPL would show the effect of the boundary on the response vs free field though.

 

[hardisj]

Do I see snow in the image?!

Haha. No. That's just what bermuda grass does in the winter months. It wasn't even cold that particular day. Otherwise, I wouldn't have tested it outside.

 

[fineMen]

I can see the relevance but there is other research that considers this topic more directly, I posted it before and it might already be in this thread, in case it has been missed (there are others)

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...quest-for-the-grail-is-over.23198/post-776886
...
There can be a difference between what is preferred for production and what is preferred for reproduction, it is unlikely they will ever be the same as there is no overall agreement between professionals as to what they prefer to use.

Having looked through it, I'm not convinced. That experiment doesn't meet scientific standards. If he had only equalized to flat before the test?! Without, the doubled woofer has less boom, so. Who wonders that people prefered that a bit?

Maybe I'm a bit tough here. In my professional life I use science, and in the end people rely on it for health and life.

The diff between production tools and recreational set-ups, o/k. But I expect the sound engineer to test her delivery before--on a consumer set-up. How would she otherwise serve me well?! I was under the impression, that Toole resolved the case. In case I didn't get it right, I sell all my gear to finish this nonsense. For the moment my set-up works quite well. Please tell me that I'm wrong.

 

[fluid]

Maybe I'm a bit tough here. In my professional life I use science, and in the end people rely on it for health and life.

Nothing wrong with being tough or critical, but there is more than enough of that to go around already.

For the moment my set-up works quite well. Please tell me that I'm wrong.

If you like it that is all that matters.

 

[BoredErica]

Err, that's precisely the limitation it solves. Lack of space. The cardioid design specifically deals with SBIR when placed against the front wall (common practice in a living room). The subs are not supposed to have a cardioid pattern, they benefit from the boundary effect when close coupled to the front wall. What is bad for the midrange at that distance benefits the sub. It's basically an ideal speaker design for those people who have to have speakers between 10-60cm from the wall and would otherwise trip over them in the room.


Exactly my point. Living rooms, not dedicated listening spaces. Most of us don't have the space or the tolerant significant others to put speakers in the middle of the room and are limited to placing them against a front wall.

We say the same thing from different aspects, my comment was that its not a solver for someone who cannot place his loudspeakers close to the front wall.

Sorry, it will take me a very long time to sift through all 41 pages of discussion. I read through a handful of pages. If I'm listening in a room where the speakers aren't near the walls, does that mean the benefit of cardoid dispersion pattern is not very useful? Is it that we'd prefer to have speakers away from walls, but since many people can't do that, these speakers come into play?

ahhh yet more reading for me to do when I wake up tomorrow... Probably jumped into another rabbit hole again.

 

[jhaider]

Sorry, it will take me a very long time to sift through all 41 pages of discussion. I read through a handful of pages. If I'm listening in a room where the speakers aren't near the walls, does that mean the benefit of cardoid dispersion pattern is not very useful? Is it that we'd prefer to have speakers away from walls, but since many people can't do that, these speakers come into play?

It mostly means you’ll get less bass extension and output because you’ll lose boundary reinforcement for the (monopole) rear woofers.

 

[garbz]

Sorry, it will take me a very long time to sift through all 41 pages of discussion. I read through a handful of pages. If I'm listening in a room where the speakers aren't near the walls, does that mean the benefit of cardoid dispersion pattern is not very useful?

As far as I know the benefit of the cardioid wouldn't be fully realised. There is still a benefit in that less energy bounces off the front wall, (see high end listening rooms with speakers plenty distance away from the front wall but the front wall still has acoustic treatment), but I still think the biggest trick here is that the speakers can be placed where speakers generally shouldn't be.

That said in other metrics it's still a great sounding speaker with an excellent waveguide and good dispersion. I've actually only ever heard it when it has been 2m away from the front wall. I was supposed to audition them today in an environment where I was in control, but the owner of the speakers tested positive. COVID just ain't done screwing with me in 2021 yet. :-/

 

[hardisj]

FWIW, I updated my Dutch & Dutch 8c review with output (compression/limiting/distortion) testing. This is testing I wasn't doing at the time but since I still have the 8c's in my possession, I just ran those tests. You can find the new data in my review on my site.

 

[ctrl]

Wow! I would not have expected that.
The dynamic range behavior is good, but compared to the Perlisten S4b, a speaker with 6.5'' or 7''(?) woofer, the 8'' midrange of the 8c is inferior.
In the high frequency range, the Perlisten speaker is clearly superior due to the clever combination of the three "tweeters" (which is not surprising).

 

[Massimo]

Wow! I would not have expected that.
The dynamic range behavior is good, but compared to the Perlisten S4b, a speaker with 6.5'' or 7''(?) woofer, the 8'' midrange of the 8c is inferior.
In the high frequency range, the Perlisten speaker is clearly superior due to the clever combination of the three "tweeters" (which is not surprising).
View attachment 170509 View attachment 170510

What about the bass performance of the S4b?

 

[abdo123]

Wow! I would not have expected that.
The dynamic range behavior is good, but compared to the Perlisten S4b, a speaker with 6.5'' or 7''(?) woofer, the 8'' midrange of the 8c is inferior.
In the high frequency range, the Perlisten speaker is clearly superior due to the clever combination of the three "tweeters" (which is not surprising).
View attachment 170509 View attachment 170510

I'm pretty sure the S4b has an 8" woofer as well.

 

[hardisj]

I'm pretty sure the S4b has an 8" woofer as well.

Noooooo way. It's a 7-inch midwoofer and the speaker starts rolling off at 100Hz.

 

[ctrl]

What about the bass performance of the S4b?

There is none

Below 150Hz at the latest, the two speakers are no longer comparable (due to 100Hz crossover frequency to the subwoofers of the 8c).
Until then, the dynamic behavior of the 7'' woofer of the S4b is quite good, especially compared to the certainly not bad 8'' driver of the 8c.

 

[HammerSandwich]

The dynamic range behavior is good, but compared to the Perlisten S4b, a speaker with 6.5'' or 7''(?) woofer, the 8'' midrange of the 8c is inferior.

That's the price of the cardioid pattern.

 

[Massimo]

Noooooo way. It's a 7-inch midwoofer and the speaker starts rolling off at 100Hz.

Not very impressive

 

[fluid]

Not very impressive

The baby Perlisten is a speaker designed to be used as a satellite with a subwoofer, not a bookshelf with a port bump to try and make it sound like it has bass.

Also put in perspective the values in these linearity charts are +0.5 and -0.5 to -0.75 dB, the scale is intentionally small to magnify the differences because if they were on the same scale as the 2034 graphs you would be hard pressed to notice them.

Many speakers have similar or greater tolerances between drive units than the differences seen here.

This is not meant as any criticism of Erin's testing which is great but some perspective is needed when analysing them if anyone thinks these results are poor.