Dynaudio Core 47 Review (Professional Monitor)

[PeteL]

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?

If it was me I'd buy the Hypex DSP capable ones and call it done.
https://www.hypex.nl/plate-amplifiers/

 

[Deleted member 12642]

Can't say I've ever heard a dynaudio speaker that I liked, they seem to have a following that I've never gotten. Not sure how I feel about controller directivity vs. what the core 47 is doing. I've got some speakers with dayton soft domes and some other speaker with tweeters that aren't wave guide loaded. They seem to honestly provide what to my ears is more obvious placement of elements on the stereo field, while the waveguided stuff I have seems to smear it a little. They still lose out in overall detail to the waveguided speakers.

I wonder how the lyd48 fares, looks like it uses the same drivers at least for the mid and woofer.

 

[3125b]

Better than the Focal Solo6Be I measured recently which has a more pronounced tonal imbalance, even if the horizontals might be a hair better:

Not to defend the Focal, but it's less than half the cost of this (959€ vs. 2225€).
Speaking of Focal, I made another size comparison:
https://www.matheretter.de/geoserva...|0] quader(0|3.5|0 3.55|3.9|2.4)&axesoff&cp=8

 

[tktran303]

This is just a typical measurement of vented box speaker; 3 way.

what people misunderstand (or imply by commentary) that just because it has DSP or high price it supposed to be outstanding.

Unfortunately no, you cannot correct with the crossover, whether it be passive, active, analog or digital the problems first caused by the enclosure shape; the baffle, or the driver positions on the baffle.

To me it’s clear that Dynaudio were contstrained to produce a 3 way in compact size and decided on this W/MT layout and had to go from there. Nor did they decide that it needs large 2” roundouvers around the tweeter, which is very strange because a lot of attention to put into their previous AIR series, Confidence line or the M5P

On the other hand, if you look at brand’s top of the line series etc they have have taken work to optimised enclosure shape and baffle edges driver layout to minimise effects of diffraction and internal reflections and resonances.

 

[dfuller]

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?

It depends. They're usually based on chip amp example circuits, but the crossovers are generally designed to the speaker in question. Some use more expensive modules (this uses Pascal class D modules, Barefoot uses something resembling customized Hypex Fusion plate amps, HEDD uses Icepower modules, focal uses BASH amps on the SM6/SM9) and some use custom designed discrete amps (ATC, in particular, does this).

Not to defend the Focal, but it's less than half the cost of this (959€ vs. 2225€).
Speaking of Focal, I made another size comparison:
https://www.matheretter.de/geoservant/de?draw=text(0|-6.3|3 "Focal Trio 6 Be") [90|0|0] quader(0|-9|0 3.6|5.2|2.78) text(0|0.1|3 "Neumann KH 310 A")[90|0|0] quader(0|-2|0 2.92|3.83|2.53) text(0|5.55|3 "Dynaudio Core 47")[90|0|0] quader(0|3.5|0 3.55|3.9|2.4)&axesoff&cp=8
View attachment 142520

the Focal Twin6 (which is the equivalent price point speaker) is even worse than the Solo6.

 

[YSC]

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:
View attachment 142516

Dynaudio:
View attachment 142517

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:

View attachment 142518

This is kind of sad for me personally as even I purchased and enjoyed Genelec, I am always loving the design and look of the Focal and Dynaudio despite their comparitively much higher price, I am ok for them to not have good directivity as they've not bothered for waveguide, fine for me as my sweet spot can only have one person sitting so it doesn't matter anyway, but hey, as renowned vendor and great driver production capability can you deliver on axis? not to say DSP ones but at least competitive to the lower end analog Neumann and Genelec?

 

[Mudjock]

As I was reading this, I couldn't help seeing similarities to the modified HiVi DIY 3.1A's. Both are 3-way speakers of similar size with 7" woofers. I put the two reviews on separate tabs and toggled back and forth and the data does look quite similar - which isn't great considering the Dynaudios go for an extra $2k+. One really isn't getting better distortion performance, or an exquisitely finished cabinet either.

You could add an NC502MP-based amp to the DIY 3.1A's and still have a lot of cash left over.

 

[Maiky76]

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/

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

These EQ are anechoic EQ to get the speaker right before room integration. If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that usually not optional… see hints there: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 5.1
With Sub: 6.7

Spinorama with no EQ:

• Resonances
• Not flat
• Narrow Directivity

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Better stay in front of the Mid/Tw

EQ design:

I have generated One EQ. The APO config file is attached.

• LW and Score are very close
• A lot to EQ
• Not sure how it would translate

Score EQ Score: 6.6
with sub: 8.2

Dynaudio Core 47 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
July212021-103817

Preamp: -1.2 dB

Filter 1: ON PK HPQ 40.09,    0.00,    1.17
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 89.43,    -2.96,    0.68
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 590.21,    -2.19,    2.99
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 939.18,    -1.37,    5.86
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1394.21,    -1.74,    8.98
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1751.02,    -2.02,    9.37
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2018.41,    1.95,    7.37
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 2590.30,    -1.94,    9.81
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 3361.24,    -3.53,    2.93
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 5287.51,    1.38,    4.58

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal ascending balance

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Nice improvements

The rest of the plots is attached.

 

[whazzup]

Extra amplification power is really helping at lower playback levels:

Can I ask what's the relationship between higher amplification power and quality of lower playback levels? Need help understanding this in layman's terms.
I understand that lower playback = lower voltage input, but that's it.

 

[617]

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?

Many use the icePower modules, a few use Hypex or even Pascal. Some use other chip amps. Some use A/B.

This model uses high power Pascal modules, which would seem to be one of its main selling points. Kh310 uses class AB. JBL 708 uses proprietary class D. Genelec is all AB.

I think the dsp modules and input circuitry are more ubiquitous but I'll leave that to someone more knowledgeable.

 

[hex168]

I totally agree, but considering some of the utter dreck out there (looking at you, PMC...) it's pretty good. +/-2dB is quite flat. But, I think the midrange they're using was a poor choice as that's where most of the issues are. Seems to not be the first time a smallish cone midrange has presented issues (see: Barefoot FP01). I think ATC, Neumann and others were onto something with the dome mid.

Sad thing is Dynaudio made an excellent soft dome mid. D52AF, if I remember correctly.

 

[Erizo]

Hello all.

I am the one that sent Amir the unit. I actually have the right side speaker and have to review the speaker from another point of view.

One of the many reasons I went with Dynaudio is that it does not use a metallic tweeter or a AMT tweeter as both those styles of tweeters give me ear fatigue. This is due to the many years I didn't use ear plugs while djing I developed some sensitivity. I have had the chance to go into studios an listen to many monitors. Genelecs, Adams, Tannoy(also own a pair of gold 8's), jbl, nuemanns and the list goes on. Genelecs and Adams have always gave me problems with my ears so when I was shopping for speakers I already ruled them out. The nuemanns were simply too big (8.25 inch sub) for my space.

Now after reading some of the posts here maybe my perception is different because my room is highly treated. Maybe DynAudio expected most people that buy a 2,500$ near field to have some amazing acoustic treatment. Anyway, I have spent a great deal of money on acoustic treatment in my studio.

Furthermore, it has been stated on their website and in the user manual that there is a burn in period. I noticed some changes in sound after I left my speaker playing a full day. Here is a quote from their manual. "The transducers of your Dynaudio Core monitor will achieve a better sound quality after a break-in period. Especially after the first hours of use, you may notice a significant increase in sound quality, and further subtle improvements in subsequent hours of use. "

Additionally, I have not noticed any hiss. I am running a Motu M4 sound card with Mogami gold cables. I am interested to see if I can recreate the issue amir is getting when I get the left side speaker from him. I also have a power conditioner and run my studio pc and the rest of the audio equipment into separate power outlets.

I haven't noticed any distortion at higher listening levels. Then again I don't produce at loud levels and I am usually at most listening at 75-80db.

I have an ARC 2 system (similar to sonarworks) and will try that with the speaker to see what results I get. I purchased the ARC 2 but never used it with my previous setup. I guess its time to try it out and see what changes it makes

I have sent an email to dynaudio to this thread to see if they can comment on any of the findings. I think it will be interesting to see what they have to say. Hopefully they have alot to say

 

[YSC]

Hello all.

I am the one that sent Amir the unit. I actually have the right side speaker and have to review the speaker from another point of view.

One of the many reasons I went with Dynaudio is that it does not use a metallic tweeter or a AMT tweeter as both those styles of tweeters give me ear fatigue. This is due to the many years I didn't use ear plugs while djing I developed some sensitivity. I have had the chance to go into studios an listen to many monitors. Genelecs, Adams, Tannoy(also own a pair of gold 8's), jbl, nuemanns and the list goes on. Genelecs and Adams have always gave me problems with my ears so when I was shopping for speakers I already ruled them out. The nuemanns were simply too big (8.25 inch sub) for my space.

Now after reading some of the posts here maybe my perception is different because my room is highly treated. Maybe DynAudio expected most people that buy a 2,500$ near field to have some amazing acoustic treatment. Anyway, I have spent a great deal of money on acoustic treatment in my studio.

Furthermore, it has been stated on their website and in the user manual that there is a burn in period. I noticed some changes in sound after I left my speaker playing a full day. Here is a quote from their manual. "The transducers of your Dynaudio Core monitor will achieve a better sound quality after a break-in period. Especially after the first hours of use, you may notice a significant increase in sound quality, and further subtle improvements in subsequent hours of use. "

Additionally, I have not noticed any hiss. I am running a Motu M4 sound card with Mogami gold cables. I am interested to see if I can recreate the issue amir is getting when I get the left side speaker from him. I also have a power conditioner and run my studio pc and the rest of the audio equipment into separate power outlets.

I haven't noticed any distortion at higher listening levels. Then again I don't produce at loud levels and I am usually at most listening at 75-80db.

I have an ARC 2 system (similar to sonarworks) and will try that with the speaker to see what results I get. I purchased the ARC 2 but never used it with my previous setup. I guess its time to try it out and see what changes it makes

I have sent an email to dynaudio to this thread to see if they can comment on any of the findings. I think it will be interesting to see what they have to say. Hopefully they have alot to say

I think for the Klippel it measures the speaker in a duration of hours, so it should have been at least been through initial run in before Amirm have listening test to him.

I understand your choice of not wanting specific type of tweeter as human to human variation is big and that even is psychological effect (which I believe you are not) can justify your decision of purchase. and frankly speaking this one don't really measures very bad in FR, as previously someone pointed out it's still within +/- 2.5db which is in my own classification very good, and in room various reflections will make the deviation much more than it originally have. Just kind of disappointing for something at this price point and uses DSP in a pure subjective term

 

[Erizo]

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.

Hit the nail on the head here. I heard some speakers test amazing but don't have the detail and depth for some reason. Hearing speakers from a production/studio point of view is always going to generate different opinions.

 

[GWolfman]

Why have a house sound for professional monitoring speakers?

Well said, bravo!

 

[dfuller]

Can I ask what's the relationship between higher amplification power and quality of lower playback levels? Need help understanding this in layman's terms.
I understand that lower playback = lower voltage input, but that's it.

Not stressing the amps = no noteworthy distortion present from them, more or less.

Sad thing is Dynaudio made an excellent soft dome mid. D52AF, if I remember correctly.

Yes, I believe K&H used it in the O300 and O410, the direct predecessors to the KH310/KH420.

 

[whazzup]

Not stressing the amps = no noteworthy distortion present from them, more or less.

But at lower playback levels, wouldn't most amps be capable of distortion free performance?

 

[amirm]

Can I ask what's the relationship between higher amplification power and quality of lower playback levels?

You have too dominant distortion factors:
1. When the amplifier runs out of power or soft clipping/electronic compression sets in.

2. When the woofer runs out of excursion.

With many powered monitors, #1 kicks in first. Likely they are trying to protect the rest of the system. Result is clicks, buzzing sounds, etc. Very distinct than mechanical excursion limits. Extra amplification removes this barrier and then the woofer becomes the limit. That doesn't make audible noises as early in my experience. Its distortions are limited to lower frequencies so not as audible.

 

[dfuller]

You have too dominant distortion factors:
1. When the amplifier runs out of power or soft clipping/electronic compression sets in.

2. When the woofer runs out of excursion.

With many powered monitors, #1 kicks in first. Likely they are trying to protect the rest of the system. Result is clicks, buzzing sounds, etc. Very distinct than mechanical excursion limits. Extra amplification removes this barrier and then the woofer becomes the limit. That doesn't make audible noises as early in my experience. Its distortions are limited to lower frequencies so not as audible.

Bingo. With a well designed monitor (i.e., one with enough power and a limiter that is more concerned with making sure the drivers don't blow up than anything else) they will get chest shaking ear shattering loud (especially in a pair) before the drivers start complaining too too bad.

This one mostly succeeds at that. Not completely, because the midrange starts misbehaving where it shouldn't (albeit at 96dB for one speaker anechoic which is very loud in-room with a pair, if I'm doing the math right it's well over 100dB/1m which you really shouldn't be listening at). At some level I expect bass distortion just from the excursion of the driver, especially from a poly cone, and to its credit it doesn't even come close to 100% THD at 96dB even in very low bass.

 

[preload]

Boohoo. I remember when Dynaudio used to sell just raw drivers, then they stopped and only made their drivers available through complete loudspeaker systems. Maybe they should go back to selling their raw drivers.