You want to say less bass...
No, I meant cleaner. I'd rather have a tiny bit less
clean bass, than "more" distorted bass, in a STUDIO APPLICATION, where reference quality, non-distorted playback is the ultimate goal. Unfortunately, people have stopped dead at frequency response and go no further; the distortion measurements are equally as important, if not moreso, but why bother? People clearly don't care; Amir shouldn't waste his time on them any further.
The logical admission is that it could audible at highish levels, depending on the music material, the distortion measurements started at 85dB which as said translates usually to over 95dB at the bass region at near field monitoring, which is something noone really uses 5" monitors for.
They literally say the bass distortion is audible. I mean, I went and auditioned all these speakers... I heard the distortion. It is good to see charts confirming my ears work just fine. Clearly we are in a range where non-professional listeners simply can't hear the artifacts I'm concerned with.
Which monitors did you use? My experience like Richards
here is that loudspeakers with linear on-axis sound and different directivity sound very differently both tonally (wider dispersion sounds brighter due to the higher sound power at higher frequencies) and also image more diffuse and wide, vs. narrow dispersion which images closer and smaller to the listener, the extreme version of that is listening in an anechoic chamber or to headphones.
Adam A5. AMT tweeter with no waveguide. Each element in the sound field indeed more diffuse - while positioning is still very strong each element is a little fuzzier around the edges, in particular the center. Unfortunately they sound darker, even though response over 12khz is substantially stronger on the Dynaudios. Spectogram reflects less energy in the treble, too.
You're confused here, the measurements were done with the F6 at 60 Hz instead of 50 like the 8030C, so you can't really know if it's much cleaner. Personally, I see that the midbass to midrange distorsion is higher even with that setting, so I can't see where you can claim it to be superior.
Yes, now look at the charts for each... Dynaudio still has plenty of useful output even in this setting. The Genelec is a few dB louder, whilst being more distorted, meaning this output is functionally worthless in a STUDIO APPLICATION. It does this at a very moderate listening level - 85dB is a common working level, because it's perceived as mostly flat while also being safe to listen to for hours at a time. The rest of the range is below the threshold of audibility (and science agrees). I don't even care what a 5" studio monitor is doing at 96dB. Interesting for measurement, I guess, but that's it.
This is just plain wrong. There a lots of big studios which run a pair of small Genelecs or similar on the meter bridge, as addition to the big in-wall speakers.
So you simply admit they are only good as alternates, and nobody can get by with only a pair of 8x3x monitors... obvious to most of us, I think. Even Genelec, seeing as how they don't show a single studio running only 5" monitors. It'd be good marketing for them so I presume there was nobody to showcase.
Too bad - mine (~$2k) has. Anyway you could use a software EQ in the PC.
Good for you. I'm sure you put it to great use. Alright, software EQ, now I have three outputs - two high passed, one low passed. What monitor controller do I run this through?
