Dutch & Dutch 8c Review

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Do you live in an anechoic chamber or are you completely crazy?

Most good rooms have +/- 10 dB error rate, usually +/- 15 dB or +/- 20 dB in regular domestic settings. Only state of the art rooms approach +/- 5 dB and below. for example the D&D 8C anechoic response is ±1.5dB from 30Hz to 18kHz, which is out of this world bonkers good.

I talked about a singular big null, no the entire smothness in the FR. In fact I posted here how i fixed the null.

I finded the post, now i can post more clearly the idea.

The goal was remove the big nul:

I moved the speakers handred of times and i got this:

Which is very easy to work with EQ. If you find a way to remove the biggest null and then flat the rest with EQ you can have a very good FR.

Something like this

Again, is not that i got a +-1dB in the entire audio band. I talked about this null, that being said the 8c because its cardiod doesn't gonna have the typical FR in room? the fr gonna be something very linear?

 

[Scholl]

you would really benefit from a flatter speakers at this point. way too much jiggleness above 2KHz.

It does not come from the speakers (Eve Audio SC3010), which, according to manufacturer's measurements at least, are ruler flat (+/-2dB). It is the desk and screen monitor creating comb-filtering. Without the desk, FR above 2Khz is much flatter, but I need that desk to work of course. I correct the response with subtractive EQ below the Schroeder frequency, but not above (FR changes with each small movement of the head in high frequencies).

Speaker On Axis FR, 1/6oct smoothing + distortion Left ; My room FR without the desk right

 

[Spocko]

I was browsing preference ratings yesterday (here: https://pierreaubert.github.io/spinorama/) and noticed something odd. If you use a subwoofer, apparently you are better off spending a fraction of the price getting a pair of KEF R3s (rating of 8.2 w/sub) or Polk R200s (rating of 8.3 w/sub) rather than the 8Cs, which score 8.0 for the same.

I own the D&D 8Cs so not trying to dismiss their full range achievement here, it just made me wonder what could have been possible at a lower price with excellent satellite speakers and a well integrated sub.

This is exactly why my number one upgrade recommendation for anybody considering replacing their bookshelf speakers with something larger for more bass and dynamics is to first integrate a good pair of subs, properly placed. Shocking what a pair of 10" subwoofers can do with something as modest as Elac/Polk bookshelf speakers.

 

[Shorty]

Waiting for another review to further this opinion.

Have you read Mitchco’s review of the D&D? https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/reviews/dutch-dutch-8c-loudspeaker-review-r739/

 

[Massimo]

But the 8c have a little hole because its a lot more harder to match that tweeter and the 8'' woofer. No matter what angle you chosse, you always gonna have that little hole, not a problem but the real problem is the D&D 8C cost 5 times the KEF R3.

Oh yes i forgot to say that, but you can match very close these kind of speakers with EQ, aren't going to sound the same, but close
Kef r3 is recommend to listen at 20-30°, the speakers doesn't have any problem at that angle

But the 8c have a little hole because its a lot more harder to match that tweeter and the 8'' woofer. No matter what angle you chosse, you always gonna have that little hole, not a problem but the real problem is the D&D 8C cost 5 times the KEF R3.

You need to spend some time understanding the difference between these speakers. The KEF R3 is a passive bookshelf speaker. You need to add amplification, subwoofers, a streaming device, lots of cabling and lots of time to integrate everything. Even then, you will never get the cardiod capability of the 8C. The Dutch 8C includes all of the above.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

You need to spend some time understanding the difference between these speakers. The KEF R3 is a passive bookshelf speaker. You need to add amplification, subwoofers, a streaming device, lots of cabling and lots of time to integrate everything. Even then, you will never get the cardiod capability of the 8C. The Dutch 8C includes all of the above.

No. But thanks for clarify the r3 it's passive.

 

[saggett]

You need to spend some time understanding the difference between these speakers. The KEF R3 is a passive bookshelf speaker. You need to add amplification, subwoofers, a streaming device, lots of cabling and lots of time to integrate everything. Even then, you will never get the cardiod capability of the 8C. The Dutch 8C includes all of the above.

The question I have here is whether the speaker preference rating score is affected by the cardoid dispersion pattern. Given that the cardoid behaviour seems to be strongly correlated with listener preference, it should really have a higher speaker preference rating due to it. But I believe the rear wall and side wall bounce is taken into consideration when calculating the score, and cardoids do well with room interaction because there isn't much acoustic energy reflecting off these surfaces compared with a traditional design.

Both the R3 and the 8Cs will be omni-directional at 80Hz and below, so it's a fair fight that the 8Cs ought to be able to win given their cardioid design...

 

[frangle]

You need to spend some time understanding the difference between these speakers. The KEF R3 is a passive bookshelf speaker. You need to add amplification, subwoofers, a streaming device, lots of cabling and lots of time to integrate everything. Even then, you will never get the cardiod capability of the 8C. The Dutch 8C includes all of the above.

Yes. I briefly considered the Reference 1 and 3 before choosing 8c. These KEFs are at the high end of the consumer hifi segment with lots of trade-offs around styling and fitting in with larger company product marketing considerations and hype. For those who follow these things, the 8c delivers a package that integrates many of the most important factors for assuring good performance in a relatively small room (wide dispersion, phase coherence, higher quality drivers, good built-in amplification, line-level filtering rather than non-linear power crossover components, DSP flexibility for individual room configs) without the aforementioned commercial trade-offs. Also I have 2 13" subwoofers I could add to my 8c setup, but I don't because they are not necessary in the size of room that the 8c works well in.

Are the economies of scale less for D&D? Yes. If your budget is $1-2K go for the KEF R range. If you can stretch to $15K including amplification, I think that the 8c offers what is important for audio, whereas the similarly priced KEF offer a conventional design design to fit into a conventional audio system architecture (with all its disadvantages) draped in luxurious finishes and techno-hyperbole that sounds good on paper and probably doesn't cost them much to include.

 

[abdo123]

Given that the cardoid behaviour seems to be strongly correlated with listener preference

We don't know if that's particularly true, it's just that cadioid speakers would excite the room modes less and that might help. but a well dampened room could work just as well if not better.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Yes. I briefly considered the Reference 1 and 3 before choosing 8c. These KEFs are at the high end of the consumer hifi segment with lots of trade-offs around styling and fitting in with larger company product marketing considerations and hype. For those who follow these things, the 8c delivers a package that integrates many of the most important factors for assuring good performance in a relatively small room (wide dispersion, phase coherence, higher quality drivers, good built-in amplification, line-level filtering rather than non-linear power crossover components, DSP flexibility for individual room configs) without the aforementioned commercial trade-offs. Also I have 2 13" subwoofers I could add to my 8c setup, but I don't because they are not necessary in the size of room that the 8c works well in.

Are the economies of scale less for D&D? Yes. If your budget is $1-2K go for the KEF R range. If you can stretch to $15K including amplification, I think that the 8c offers what is important for audio, whereas the similarly priced KEF offer a conventional design design to fit into a conventional audio system architecture (with all its disadvantages) draped in luxurious finishes and techno-hyperbole that sounds good on paper and probably doesn't cost them much to include.

Can you clarify specific, which ''trade off around styling and fitting'' the R/Reference have and the D&D 8c have fixed ?

Talking about the '' higher quality drivers '', yes the kef R3 have higher quality drivers. In fact the 8c's drivers have a lot of distortion at this price.

 

[dc655321]

Talking about the '' higher quality drivers '', yes the kef R3 have higher quality drivers. In fact the 8c's drivers have a lot of distortion at this price.

The distortion has little, if anything, to do with "driver quality".
The 8c's upper-bass/low-midrange distortion is a result of bleeding energy for use to establish the cardioid field.

No free lunch, as they say...

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

The distortion has little, if anything, to do with "driver quality".
The 8c's upper-bass/low-midrange distortion is a result of bleeding energy for use to establish the cardioid field.

No free lunch, as they say...

Yes it is.
Well, most speakers doesn't have the feature of '' bleeding energy ''.

 

[thewas]

people don't buy the Dutch & Dutch 8C because they want a good bookshelf, they buy it because they want a bookshelf with F10 of 20Hz and controlled directivity from 100Hz onward. basically a no-drama plug it in and it just works all-in-one solution.

No other speaker in the world is capable of this, except the Kii 3 and Erin said he will measure it soon.

The ME Geithain K models should be mentioned too being cardioids even lower than 100 Hz and long before all the newer ones existed. Also in the PA world bass cardioids are nowadays rather the standard.

The question I have here is whether the speaker preference rating score is affected by the cardoid dispersion pattern.

My personal experience was that with decent room acoustics, placement and room correction the difference was smaller than most expected, see also my past posts #1,#2 and #3 so I would rather recommend them as simpler "plug and play solutions" but not as sound revelations for people like many us who like to fiddle with optimisations.

 

[Kvalsvoll]

There seems to be some disagreement around the benefits of the directivity control. And then there are frequency response graphs, to show that it improves things, or - makes it worse.

The benefits of directivity is mainly observable in the time-domain. Frequency response can be equalized, but early reflections and too much delayed energy from the room can not. So a frequency response really does not tell anything.

This is not so hard to understand. If the sound is more focused towards the listener, then there will be less total sound radiated into the room, for same spl at the listening position. And thus, there will be a reduction of all room contribution.

But the directivity control using acoustic ports - which is popular to call "cardioid" now - is only one property of the speaker. If you block those ports - will you hear a difference. An experiement that can give some unexpected results.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

There seems to be some disagreement around the benefits of the directivity control. And then there are frequency response graphs, to show that it improves things, or - makes it worse.

The benefits of directivity is mainly observable in the time-domain. Frequency response can be equalized, but early reflections and too much delayed energy from the room can not. So a frequency response really does not tell anything.

This is not so hard to understand. If the sound is more focused towards the listener, then there will be less total sound radiated into the room, for same spl at the listening position. And thus, there will be a reduction of all room contribution.

But the directivity control using acoustic ports - which is popular to call "cardioid" now - is only one property of the speaker. If you block those ports - will you hear a difference. An experiement that can give some unexpected results.

But, only a coaxial can be time-domain coherent.
Also, a narrow directivity will focus the sound more to the listener and interact less with the room.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Talking about the huge bleeding energy from 8c, a aluminum cabinet should help to mitigate the bleeding or not?

 

[dc655321]

Yes it is.
Well, most speakers doesn't have the feature of '' bleeding energy ''.

They do, they just don't use it for anything constructive. Like producing a cardioid radiation pattern, for instance.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

They do, they just don't use it for anything constructive. Like producing a cardioid radiation pattern, for instance.

No. Did you know most speakers use a port ?

 

[abdo123]

They do, they just don't use it for anything constructive. Like producing a cardioid radiation pattern, for instance.

Do you mean bass reflex / ported speakers? they're very 'constructive'.

 

[jhaider]

I was browsing preference ratings yesterday (here: https://pierreaubert.github.io/spinorama/) and noticed something odd. If you use a subwoofer, apparently you are better off spending a fraction of the price getting a pair of KEF R3s (rating of 8.2 w/sub) or Polk R200s (rating of 8.3 w/sub) rather than the 8Cs, which score 8.0 for the same.

Not exactly. The “preference scores” are different, but not enough to be significant. At any rate, preference scores are a rough guide at best. I mean, chances are most people will prefer a speaker that’s rated a 3 to one about the same size rated an 8, but I’m not sure I’m willing to generalize much beyond that.

I own the D&D 8Cs so not trying to dismiss their full range achievement here, it just made me wonder what could have been possible at a lower price with excellent satellite speakers and a well integrated sub.

There are many approaches. One that’s not really discussed here is Steinway-Lyngdorf’s concept of small bass-managed satellites on the wall with “boundary woofers” in the front corners or thereabouts crossed over much higher than normal subs.

 

[Massimo]

No. But thanks for clarify the r3 it's passive.

Can you clarify specific, which ''trade off around styling and fitting'' the R/Reference have and the D&D 8c have fixed ?

Talking about the '' higher quality drivers '', yes the kef R3 have higher quality drivers. In fact the 8c's drivers have a lot of distortion at this price.

No. But thanks for clarify the r3 it's passive.

Hence the price difference.