Dynaudio Core 47 Review (Professional Monitor)

[amirm]

I just realized the front layout is horizontal and the back layout is vertical.

Yes, it is a bit of a pain to adjust the switches with them being side ways. Hard to read the label that way.

 

[Koeitje]

Well, that's the thing - the on-axis isn't really that bad! Other than the peak at 3k, it's +/-2dB or less. Is it as good as the KH310, no not at all, but it's also not terrible.

It is that bad, my M106 are better and those don't have a DSP to correct the response. Its like there is no DSP in this speaker at all.

 

[Thomas_A]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Dynaudio Core 47 professional DSP monitor (powered speaker). It was kindly purchased by a member new and drop shipped to me and costs US $ 2,499.

The Core 47 (4 inch mid-range and 7 inch woofer) comes in a PA style cabinet that is a dens as you could get:

View attachment 142479

During playback, I could barely detect any vibrations though the cabinet. The back side though -- as I have seen in other amps -- does resonate more:

View attachment 142480

Despite being DSP based, the controls are all mechanical which I like. Navigating tiny crappy menus on a lot of pro speakers can be a pain. That said, the switches don't have a good feel to them.

There are a set of switches to set the input levels and output gain. With the latter, there is some hiss in all settings and becomes especially loud at the highest setting. It was too much for me in my near-field listening (1 meter/3 to 4 feet).

The woofer and midrange have 500 watts of class D pascal amplification each which is nice. Many pro speakers run out of amplification before they run out of excursion in their drivers.

Even though the back is in vertical configuration, the front is horizontal and that is how I tested it. Acoustic center is stated to be the line between mid-range and tweeter and that is what I used. This forced me to heavily offset the speaker on my measurement stand, necessitating a secondary platform. A bit of diffraction on that side may have been created as a result.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate of about 1%.

Dynaudio Core 47 Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:

View attachment 142484

I expected ruler flat response given the DSP and professional market but that is not what we have. Total variation is not high but what is there is spread across a wide range of critical frequencies. There are also directivity errors which I will show better in later graphs. For now, here is the near-field response of the drivers and port:

View attachment 142485

Front ports always cause more grief than rear ones in speakers and here is no exception. It is transmitting multiple resonances which while controlled, still serve to mess things up (relatively speaker). Strange to see that notch taken out of the mid-range. Wonder if it is to counteract the resonance from the port? If so, they don't quite match in frequency. Anyway, if you examine these measurements, you can see their impact on the spin graph shown first.

Early window response shows a step drop in highs and other irregularities due to less than perfect directivity:

View attachment 142486

As such, predicted in-room response for far field listening is not nearly as smooth as in well designed professional speakers:

View attachment 142487

The bad news on directivity starts with very uneven beam width (-6 dB red line):

View attachment 142488

There seems to be no attempt at getting even off-axis response. There is beaming of the tweeter which we see as its response narrowing. Then there is that big notch between 1 and 1.5 kHz. Response therefore will be very variable based on room, location and listening position.

We see the same in horizontal directivity plot:

View attachment 142489

Vertical directivity is as bad as 2-way speakers which is strange as well:

View attachment 142490

Stay at reference axis or a bit above. If you go too far up or down, you fall in those ditches (the "eyes" around 5 kHz), creating a hole in response.

I have a new presentation for you to better visualize the directivity of the speaker:

View attachment 142492

I am sampling the entire 3-D sound field at three frequencies. An idea speaker would have a single color balloon that would become more oval in shape as frequencies go up (allow for directivity decrease). That is hard to do for any practical speaker. Here we see better approximation of that at 1000 Hz. As we climb up, response gets more complex and variable. Will be interesting to see how we do with other speakers moving forward as I plot this. Let me know what you think of this.

Our waterfall measurement shows ample resonances which are more internal ones than cabinet:

View attachment 142494

Extra amplification power is really helping at lower playback levels:

View attachment 142495

View attachment 142496

The midrange though seems unhappy and starts to complain at 96 dBSPL.

Dynaudio Core 47 Listening Tests and Equalization
With most powered professional monitors, I only have to play a few seconds to know the sound is "right." That did not happen here. No matter what I played, I could not get enjoyable sound out of the Core 47. The frequency response variations are not high enough to explain this so it may be me. I did attempt to improve things using a bit of EQ:

View attachment 142497

Subjectively, this made things a bit better sometimes, but not other times. So more care needs to go into creating such precise filters. When it did work, it definitely brought out what I though was missing in the sound.

On good news front, playback limit does not exist. I could crank up the Core 47 as much as I could tolerate (in near-field listening) and it kept getting louder and louder. I was however disappointed that it simply filtered out sub-bass so you need a sub to go with it.

Conclusions
At $2,500 I expect perfection in a professional powered monitor with DSP. I did not get that, objectively or subjectively. It is very strange but it seems that Dynaudio just doesn't believe in directivity control. Have they gone to a different school of speaker design that says off-axis response doesn't need to be similar in tonality to on-axis? How about lack of flatness of the frequency response despite having DSP for at least some correction?

Really, this thing feels like someone took a high powered engine and stuck it in a poor handling car. It has the dynamics but none of the perfect tonality you want out of a powered speaker.

Maybe I am wrong in which case I let you judge the measurements.

I can't recommend the Dynaudio Core 47. There are plenty of better sounding powered monitors which almost deliver perfection. Yes, they don't get as loud so you get to decide which is important to you.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Appreciate any donations using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

I think the problem is the 1-4 kHz region and that a broader lift 1-2 khz and similar reduction of 2-4 kHz is needed.

 

[LTig]

Yes, it is a bit of a pain to adjust the switches with them being side ways. Hard to read the label that way.

My main critic regarding the back plane is that the profile of the heat sink is wrong for horizontal placement. The air cannot flow freely from bottom to top through the heat sink.

 

[heraldo_jones]

It is that bad, my M106 are better and those don't have a DSP to correct the response. Its like there is no DSP in this speaker at all.

I think most of the hifi users or consumers confuse measurements with detail retrieval. I can assure you that this Dynaudio destroys your Revel speakers in every aspect. One clear example of my words are the B&W 802 S2 ... they measure awful, but the micro-detail they can show to the listener is stunning. On the other hand, you have the Behringer B2031A which measures almost ruler flat but is like you're listening to a 2D source with no deepness and very poor detail.
Also in the studio world, most of the people will have treated rooms to avoid some of the "mistakes" showed here or, as in my case, room correction systems (Dirac lover here). I use PMC IB2 tri-amped with custom Hypex NC500 + PMC SB100 subwoofer powered by a custom Hypex NC2000 in my well treated room and, although the natural measurements are not flat the detail is from another world, and thanks to Dirac they measure ruler flat from 12hz to the top.

 

[3125b]

I think ATC, Neumann and others were onto something with the dome mid.

That might be true. I won't pretend to know the first thing about speaker design, but my old Elac EL140 from '89 had a dome midrange.

My main critic regarding the back plane is that the profile of the heat sink is wrong for horizontal placement.

Right, the front is layed out for horizontal, the rear for vertical placement. Why would that be, doesn't make any sense to me.
You'd think they'd bother to design something properly at this price point and not just reuse whatever parts they had lying around or whatever, but apparently not.

 

[Koeitje]

I think most of the hifi users or consumers confuse measurements with detail retrieval. I can assure you that this Dynaudio destroys your Revel speakers in every aspect. One clear example of my words are the B&W 802 S2 ... they measure awful, but the micro-detail they can show to the listener is stunning. On the other hand, you have the Behringer B2031A which measures almost ruler flat but is like you're listening to a 2D source with no deepness and very poor detail.
Also in the studio world, most of the people will have treated rooms to avoid some of the "mistakes" showed here or, as in my case, room correction systems (Dirac lover here). I use PMC IB2 tri-amped with custom Hypex NC500 + PMC SB100 subwoofer powered by a custom Hypex NC2000 in my well treated room and, although the natural measurements are not flat the detail is from another world, and thanks to Dirac they measure ruler flat from 12hz to the top.

I think you are confusing exaggerated treble with detail.

 

[enricoclaudio]

I love Dynaudio (I own a pair of BM5 mkIII) but can't just justify these poor measurements on their so "acclaimed" Core 47 speaker. I was between the Dynaudio Core 47 and Genelec 8351B, glad you did the job for me. Now I need to save just a couple of $$$ to get the 8351s

 

[temps]

I think most of the hifi users or consumers confuse measurements with detail retrieval. I can assure you that this Dynaudio destroys your Revel speakers in every aspect. One clear example of my words are the B&W 802 S2 ... they measure awful, but the micro-detail they can show to the listener is stunning.

What about "detail retrieval" is measurable? If it's audible, it's measurable. Is it from lacking distortion, phase coherence, clean impulse response? B&W "micro-detail" is mostly just a high shelf which, I think, many people would find obnoxious in the long term but has its uses in a mastering setting. A good sound on a 802 will translate very well even to shrill, crappy speakers like so many people use as their primary listening sources these days. Too fatiguing for regular studio use though.

Also I find my Dyns and Martin Logan electrostats (which would undoubtedly get slaughtered in measurements here) are equally revealing.. the masked frequencies just change a bit from room to room but I make fairly good decisions, in a reasonable amount of time, on both setups. Correction goes a very, very long way. The more time goes on, the more I think a good sound is 75% good correction.

 

[napilopez]

Not state of the art but doesn't look too bad to me. Listening window is reasonably flat. and thought there are some peaks and dips the overall trend is flattish, which I prefer to speakers that look flatter but have large regions of the FR emphasized or underemphasized.

Also, as usual, I'm just here to chime in that I think there's a place for speakers like this as long as they're not totally broken. I really don't think all studio monitors should be waveguidey designs with similarly narrowish directivity, like most of the best monitors are. I can see someone enjoying these in the right room, and the overall response is balanced enough I don't think they would lead to bad mixes, except for maybe the treble shelf in the PIR.

That said, I do expect better from a DSP speaker at this price. Now all I want is for someone to make a really pristine wide directivity studio monitor. The Mesanovic RTM10 looks like a good candidate.

I think most of the hifi users or consumers confuse measurements with detail retrieval. I can assure you that this Dynaudio destroys your Revel speakers in every aspect. One clear example of my words are the B&W 802 S2 ... they measure awful, but the micro-detail they can show to the listener is stunning. On the other hand, you have the Behringer B2031A which measures almost ruler flat but is like you're listening to a 2D source with no deepness and very poor detail.
Also in the studio world, most of the people will have treated rooms to avoid some of the "mistakes" showed here or, as in my case, room correction systems (Dirac lover here). I use PMC IB2 tri-amped with custom Hypex NC500 + PMC SB100 subwoofer powered by a custom Hypex NC2000 in my well treated room and, although the natural measurements are not flat the detail is from another world, and thanks to Dirac they measure ruler flat from 12hz to the top.

You.... seem to be in the wrong place. You probably know what I'm going to say, but if you give any speaker the high frequency boosts present in the 802 series, they will sound more detailed. In any case, I'm not sure why you'd want that on speakers meant for music creation. Bring it out in the mix and master.

I'm also not sure where you're getting that the Behringer measured ruler flat. I have not seen measurements to indicate that. The manufacturer shows a flattish frequency response but they have been known to... exaggerate without third party testing.

 

[dfuller]

That might be true. I won't pretend to know the first thing about speaker design, but my old Elac EL140 from '89 had a dome midrange.

Here's the reason I think that:
Check out the KH310 here. No midrange misbehavior at all (700hz-2k)

As for the ATC, I'll refer to Troel's measurement of the SM75-150 on its own here: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/ATC-SM75-150.htm

ATC uses 24dB/oct crossovers at 380Hz and 3.5KHz, and in that range it's completely innocuous. Very few cone midranges measure as well as either of these, though they can make use of a lower crossover point.

I think you are confusing exaggerated treble with detail.

I'm not sure if we're talking about the same speaker, but the one in review here doesn't exactly have exaggerated treble.

Also, as usual, I'm just here to chime in that I think there's a place for speakers like this as long as they're not totally broken. I really don't think all studio monitors should be waveguidey designs with similarly narrowish directivity, like most of the best monitors are. I can see someone enjoying these in the right room, and the overall response is balanced enough I don't think they would lead to bad mixes, except for maybe the treble shelf in the PIR.

That said, I do expect better from a DSP speaker at this price.

Like I said earlier in the thread, Dynaudio apparently doesn't consider dispersion control as particularly important for speakers meant for use in very well-damped control rooms (which I don't necessarily agree with, but...). But I agree, this is very okay. It's not broken by any stretch, but it's also not good enough for the price point.

 

[thewas]

Ok, that the directivity of such loudspeakers without waveguides won't be great is to be expected.
What surprises me though is that the Dynaudio loudspeakers measured here perform also not so great in disciplines which are mainly driver related like distortion and decay/resonances where I would have expected the opposite compared their history and hype.
I remember measurements of some 90s Dynaudio loudspeakers which were quite on the upper places in their classes, seems they didn't keep up with the rising competition later like also their big British competitor, but thanks to the degenerated audio market they are both still extremely successful.

 

[617]

Putting aside the possibility that this product has an outstanding warranty or something, the Neumann appears to beat it in every category. Sealed, bigger woofer, some directivity management.

I think in this segment I would go for the JBL 7 series but this appears to be a big oops from Dynaudio. Maybe if they sold it for significantly less.

This is the unfortunate side effect of trying to deliver objective performance. If your product isn't as good...there's no reason to buy it.

Frankly when I see how JBl and Kali dominate performance at low price points, and how JBL, Genelec and Neumann dominate at higher price points, I don't see how other manufacturers can thrive.

Compared to the class leading products this thing is almost retro.

 

[PeteL]

My main critic regarding the back plane is that the profile of the heat sink is wrong for horizontal placement. The air cannot flow freely from bottom to top through the heat sink.

Probably OEM amp... And too costly to redo the design.

 

[McFly]

Is that 1900-2000hz a surround edge cancelation in the midwoofer? Would explain the NF dip that sort of improves at 1m and the distortion spike there. Common at 1khz in 6.5-7" midwoofers

 

[napilopez]

Like I said earlier in the thread, Dynaudio apparently doesn't consider dispersion control as particularly important for speakers meant for use in very well-damped control rooms (which I don't necessarily agree with, but...). But I agree, this is very okay. It's not broken by any stretch, but it's also not good enough for the price point.

Yeah, and I mean, the disperson isn't that much worse than the Neumann KH310 when normalized to the on-axis (which can be problematic, but I think is useful for evaluation in this case):

Neumann:

Dynaudio:

Then again, it's not that hard to control most dispersion in a 3-way speaker.

Still, for a treated room, that's good enough imo. Better than the Focal Solo6Be I measured recently which has a more pronounced tonal imbalance, even if the horizontals might be a hair better:

 

[LTig]

Probably OEM amp... And too costly to redo the design.

For that amount of money it should be possible to mount the PCB on a better suited heat sink.

 

[heraldo_jones]

You.... seem to be in the wrong place. You probably know what I'm going to say, but if you give any speaker the high frequency boosts present in the 802 series, they will sound more detailed.

Nop, it will just sound brighter, not detailed.

 

[b4nt]

I don't have any directivity issue with a pair of passive Dynaudio used as monitors.

I added shoes to orient them. By the way, they got uncoupled from my desk.

 

[TimF]

Question: how similar are the amplifier electronics among the major manufacturers of active speakers? Are there common circuit boards or amplifier modules made by certain companies that are almost standard between active speakers of certain types? Or alternatively, is each manufacturer of active speakers designing their own amplifier modules?