• 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.

Dynaudio Core 47 Review (Professional Monitor)

Joined
Jul 21, 2021
Messages
6
Likes
3
I asked comment from Dynaudio, actually few times and have posted these and past measurements for them. They got the Jupiter measuring system end of 2016.

" First it is important to understand that loudspeaker measurements are an objective tool to interpret the sound performance of a speaker along with subjective analysis. Measurements do not inform exactly how a speaker sounds. Our engineers use an endless amount of measurements from different measuring tools in their daily work, we even have a Klippel system ourselves which you can see a part of here https://www.hifistatement.net/feuilleton/item/2162-40-jahre-dynaudio?start=7 (3rd image from the top) - but the final decision in a development process will always be based on the most important tool: our ears. This is also the reason why we do not publish measurements of our loudspeakers: we simply do not believe they reveal much about the actual performance of a loudspeaker. "
After reading their comment, I'm actually even more convinced regarding my hypothesis of that they have a senior engineer or engineers that still want to do things their way and tune the sound by ear or however they think it should be. Also, probably, they have the mentality of "we don't care what other companies do".

Seeing that they have Klippel and Jupiter it's clear that at least some people would like to do things differently. Hopefully they will eventually change their mentality and implement a proper engineering process.

I would LOVE to see a Dynaudio speaker with a waveguide, made with the state-of-art knowledge on speaker design.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
34,988
Likes
130,327
Location
Seattle Area
One thing: Klippel makes many products. The one they are showing in that picture is a driver scanner. It has nothing to do with the Klippel Near field scanner I use for measurements. It is used to measure and optimize driver distortion and parameters, not to generate anechoic response. If they had Klippel NFS, they would not need their Jupiter system.
 

thewas

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,073
Likes
6,586
When was the NFS released? I can imagine a bunch of Dynaudio executives not being very happy after all that investment was rendered superfluous.
I doubt so as from their loudspeaker measurements till now it seems its biggest value is the usage in marketing and there the huge Jupiter is far more impressive for the usual audiophile compared to a NFS which some geeks have in their small garages. ;):p
 

maverickronin

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 19, 2018
Messages
1,947
Likes
2,306
Location
Midwest, USA
I doubt so as from their loudspeaker measurements till now it seems its biggest value is the usage in marketing and there the huge Jupiter is far more impressive for the usual audiophile compared to a NFS which some geeks have in their small garages. ;):p

Maybe they should have just built a mockup then. :p

Maybe they did?
 

thewas

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
3,073
Likes
6,586
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
34,988
Likes
130,327
Location
Seattle Area
When was the NFS released? I can imagine a bunch of Dynaudio executives not being very happy after all that investment was rendered superfluous.
I remember seeing NFS I think 3 years ago at an audio show. Or something like that. But yes, my precise thought. What they have built was poor man's anechoic chamber which not only cost more than NFS initially, but they have to keep paying rent on the building, HVAC costs, etc.
 

Spocko

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
852
Likes
1,574
Location
Southern California
The answer's a bit complicated.... however, to your point, in fairness to the KH I didn't try them in combination with help from any subs (it was a relatively quick demo) but they didn't seem happy with the level, regardless of heavy LF.

Basically I need Dolby theatrical level, so 105dB per channel at the mix position from about 40Hz upwards. For the 3m mix position I make that 114.5dB @ 1m with room gain included. Technically this should be without bass management as that's how cinemas run of course. And I do find I get better translation when I follow this "rule" so as a compromise I actually have a sub for each of the screen channels (directly under each of them) and a 4th for the discreet .1 when working theatrically.

(The 4 subs can be combined for nearfield with bass management, but it doesn't seem to make a lot of improvement in FR - I guess the positioning of all of them is rubbish for multi-sub operation.)

It's mostly the 100-200Hz (ish) area I struggle with. Currently the sub positioning isn't really ideal, and I can't lift the crossover high enough without running in to alignment issues which I've yet to find a way of resolving in DSP. I guess I'm "getting away with it" at a lower (80-100Hz) crossover because the [lower *edit typo*] longer wavelengths are less sensitive..

Anyway, that's all irrelevant waffle from me, and all that really matters here is headroom is a bigger selling point to me than directivity or even FR to some extent. Even if the KH310 could *just* do what I need when combined with a sub, I'd still prefer something more substantial.
Got it! I went through something similar but I'm not mixing and thankfully reviewing.
 

Spocko

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
852
Likes
1,574
Location
Southern California
After reading their comment, I'm actually even more convinced regarding my hypothesis of that they have a senior engineer or engineers that still want to do things their way and tune the sound by ear or however they think it should be. Also, probably, they have the mentality of "we don't care what other companies do".

Seeing that they have Klippel and Jupiter it's clear that at least some people would like to do things differently. Hopefully they will eventually change their mentality and implement a proper engineering process.

I would LOVE to see a Dynaudio speaker with a waveguide, made with the state-of-art knowledge on speaker design.
LOL in other words if we were to personally visit D's facilities, we'd see cobwebs inside Jupiter and the Klippel gathering dust and sharing space with dot matrix printers.
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,258
Likes
1,049
Location
Southampton, UK
The answer's a bit complicated.... however, to your point, in fairness to the KH I didn't try them in combination with help from any subs (it was a relatively quick demo) but they didn't seem happy with the level, regardless of heavy LF.

Basically I need Dolby theatrical level, so 105dB per channel at the mix position from about 40Hz upwards. For the 3m mix position I make that 114.5dB @ 1m with room gain included. Technically this should be without bass management as that's how cinemas run of course. And I do find I get better translation when I follow this "rule" so as a compromise I actually have a sub for each of the screen channels (directly under each of them) and a 4th for the discreet .1 when working theatrically.

(The 4 subs can be combined for nearfield with bass management, but it doesn't seem to make a lot of improvement in FR - I guess the positioning of all of them is rubbish for multi-sub operation.)

It's mostly the 100-200Hz (ish) area I struggle with. Currently the sub positioning isn't really ideal, and I can't lift the crossover high enough without running in to alignment issues which I've yet to find a way of resolving in DSP. I guess I'm "getting away with it" at a lower (80-100Hz) crossover because the [lower *edit typo*] longer wavelengths are less sensitive..

Anyway, that's all irrelevant waffle from me, and all that really matters here is headroom is a bigger selling point to me than directivity or even FR to some extent. Even if the KH310 could *just* do what I need when combined with a sub, I'd still prefer something more substantial.
The dynamic range requirement of a theatre sound system is much larger than music production monitoring in a studio. Very few monitors or big Hi-Fi speakers are suitable.
 

audio2920

Member
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
63
Likes
92
The dynamic range requirement of a theatre sound system is much larger than music production monitoring in a studio. Very few monitors or big Hi-Fi speakers are suitable.

Absolutely my point. Unless they're using custom or some fairly esoteric monitors, most people I know are running JBL, Dynaudio or Genelec. I find the 708i is about the most capable in that list, but still not quite enough for louder movies. The music lot sometimes are on KH series in small cutting rooms, but they don't have to play FX at a million dB.

Based on recent experience the [budget/remote working] drive for doing more & more film work in small rooms (prep, tracklay, premix, deliverables etc) means I just think there's greater demand than ever for "small" midfield monitors that can do big SPL. I'm not saying the Cores are the answer as I've still not tried them, just that every extra dB is helpful for this use case.
 

soundwave

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
17
Likes
20
After reading their comment, I'm actually even more convinced regarding my hypothesis of that they have a senior engineer or engineers that still want to do things their way and tune the sound by ear or however they think it should be. Also, probably, they have the mentality of "we don't care what other companies do".

Seeing that they have Klippel and Jupiter it's clear that at least some people would like to do things differently. Hopefully they will eventually change their mentality and implement a proper engineering process.

I would LOVE to see a Dynaudio speaker with a waveguide, made with the state-of-art knowledge on speaker design.
Did you listen the Core series or axed it after seeing measurements?

I asked comment from Dynaudio, actually few times and have posted these and past measurements for them. They got the Jupiter measuring system end of 2016.


" First it is important to understand that loudspeaker measurements are an objective tool to interpret the sound performance of a speaker along with subjective analysis. Measurements do not inform exactly how a speaker sounds. Our engineers use an endless amount of measurements from different measuring tools in their daily work, we even have a Klippel system ourselves which you can see a part of here https://www.hifistatement.net/feuilleton/item/2162-40-jahre-dynaudio?start=7 (3rd image from the top) - but the final decision in a development process will always be based on the most important tool: our ears. This is also the reason why we do not publish measurements of our loudspeakers: we simply do not believe they reveal much about the actual performance of a loudspeaker. "

I got the same answer from them, when I asked for measurments of my Focus XD 600 speakers. I also asked them for measurements of the Core series. They do not publish them, but they do publish measurements from the Lyd series. Now that is not consistent.

Funny thing is that the Lyd 5 actually measures flatter then the Core 47.

1627379553902.png

1627379486590.png
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,258
Likes
1,049
Location
Southampton, UK
Based on recent experience the [budget/remote working] drive for doing more & more film work in small rooms (prep, tracklay, premix, deliverables etc)...
Interesting. A theatrical film (not a TV production) costs upwards of a Million of Dollars as a starter. Why would anyone do the sound in a bedroom studio?
 

audio2920

Member
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
63
Likes
92
Interesting. A theatrical film (not a TV production) costs upwards of a Million of Dollars as a starter. Why would anyone do the sound in a bedroom studio?

Not for the final mix, and probably not literally a bedroom studio, no. But, the editorial part of the process, which now is expected to include an element of balancing / mixing is almost exclusively done in small rooms. And unless it's a high budget feature some, if not all, of the pre-mixing and deliverables (which ideally needs to be done at reference level where possible of course) is quite likely to be done in small rooms. When I say small, I mean too small and/or too short a throw for JBL ScreenArray or equivalent type monitoring.

Obviously if it's a $250m production the budgetary necessity to pre-mix in a non-theatrical room is less than on a $25m feature... But even at $250m (a) you're not going to be doing the whole tracklay on a mix stage and (b) budget aside, there may be other logistical reasons for having some of the work done outside the main mix stage.
 

sarumbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
1,258
Likes
1,049
Location
Southampton, UK
the editorial part of the process...
How can there be an editorial process on a scripted film???
...even at $250m (a) you're not going to be doing the whole tracklay on a mix stage and (b) budget aside, there may be other logistical reasons for having some of the work done outside the main mix stage.
Track laying can be done in mono even, nor it requires Dolby reference levels, which this sub thread is about. I am talking about mixing the final sound-track of a theatrical release film. That is the only time you need to monitor at Dolby reference levels.

Besides, there is the ultimate gotcha: you cannot put the Dolby logo on your film unless the soundtrack is mixed at a Dolby certified room. That fact makes all other arguments mute.
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,011
Likes
5,768
JBL 708P:

SCORE: 5.0
SCORE w/ sub: 6.8


Almost the same, but Amir said this about the 708P: . That was for far-field listening though. Is far-field listening more forgiving or is this rating not aligning with Amir's impressions?

Many speakers measure better than the 708p, as the measurements aren't 100% stellar, but I believe Amir has said that it is his favorite studio monitor to date. Erin also reviewed it, and his measurements were near identical, as were his subjective impressions. The 708p is just a speaker that seems to significantly outperform its measurements. It's (imo) a good example of why measurements aren't everything.

Also, I think the 708p's main downfall with the OS is the slightly up tilted and constant directivity treble/upper mid. If EQ is available, that's a flaw that is easily fixed.
 

infinitesymphony

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
1,039
Likes
1,672
...the editorial part of the process, which now is expected to include an element of balancing / mixing is almost exclusively done in small rooms. And unless it's a high budget feature some, if not all, of the pre-mixing and deliverables (which ideally needs to be done at reference level where possible of course) is quite likely to be done in small rooms. When I say small, I mean too small and/or too short a throw for JBL ScreenArray or equivalent type monitoring.
Especially when there's a travel element, it's live, or there's a need for quick turnaround on-site. I've heard the Genelec 8030.LSE surround bundle used in a 6' x 6' production truck room and it worked as well as anything else.
 
Top Bottom