Dynaudio X14 Speaker Review

[Steve Dallas]

Thanks for the data.
I plotted the comparison between the correct PIR calculated from the NFS data and your In-room measurements.
The agreement is rather decent given the sample are different and we have no information on your room...
I had to eyeball the SPL offset...

I wonder how the EQ I designed would perform/measure in your room
EQs: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ynaudio-x14-speaker-review.17569/#post-570023

View attachment 94208

Thanks Maiky76 as far i understand @Steve Dallas in room measurement is a stereo set and one of them is the sample Amir measured and room dimensions is listed below, funny enough myself sat investigating those in room curves..


View attachment 94220

Their site appears to be down, but here is Amroc's model of my room:

https://amcoustics.com/tools/amroc?l=12.25&w=12.33&h=10.5&ft=true&re=DIN 18041 - Music

The room suffers from bad flutter echo and room modes under around 275Hz IIRC. I have applied enough broadband absorption and diffusion to tame the flutter echo, but trapping the bass modes would require too much intervention, so I use EQ as to fix as much as I can.

I am pretty good with PEQ, having worked in a project studio for a decade, and I have created my own filters for each channel. It appears I have never measured the corrected response in the room. I should get around to doing that.

If I can manage to achieve a low noise floor in the house (family and dogs out somewhere), I can measure my filters vs. your filters just for giggles and update. That may be a while, though.

Waterfall of room after broadband treatment as described above:

 

[Steve Dallas]

@amirm , EQ

with which program do you make settings (Name, Brand,Hardware.. etc)

He uses Roon software.

 

[Maz1]

Both x38 and 896.2 were on my short list among few others but couldn't resist f208

F208 is great as well from what I hear. I'm happy with the X38 (so cheap used) and 896 but would like to get a confidence 50 or reference k3 at some point.

 

[amirm]

@amirm , EQ

with which program do you make settings (Name, Brand,Hardware.. etc)

I use the parametric EQ built into my everyday player, Roon. That way the path stays fully digital and transparent.

 

[welder911]

I use the parametric EQ built into my everyday player, Roon. That way the path stays fully digital and transparent.

I guess it's one of the situations that was necessary for me to switch to ROON. Why isn't there such detailed stuff in ropieee or moode either ...

 

[BYRTT]

I guess it's one of the situations that was necessary for me to switch to ROON. Why isn't there such detailed stuff in ropieee or moode either ...

Know its not freeware other than for thirty days but Jriver had all the clever dial in tools for many years as the many features get suggested down the line to be handy to have inside DSP engine of Jriver.

 

[Count Arthur]

JRiver does have a Parametric Equalizer as well as a whole bunch of other DSP features, like Crossfeed:

As well as a whole bunch of other DSP features, like Crossfeed. I use REW with a UMIK-1 to measure and generate the EQ settings, then plumb them all into JRiver. The process is a little clunky, but the effects can be quite dramatic.

It would be nice if JRiver incorporated REW type measuring directly within the program, or at least allowed the import of the text files generated by REW, so that you didn't need to copy and paste all the settings in manually.

 

[Steve Dallas]

hmm, Guero sounded slightly dull on some tracks but not especially problematic

I am going to take all those comments back. I finally had some time to listen to both systems, and discovered COVID is still affecting my hearing. Nothing sounds right on either system or on headphones at the moment. I knew tinnitus was one of my side effects (obviously), but I did not know it is still affecting my hearing to this extent. Really hope it goes away and soon.

[Edit] What I meant to say, is I was relying to memory for which albums sound "polished" vs. rough on Dyns vs. other speakers. I then "verified" this by listening to them through the Revels but did not perform the other half of the test by also listening through the Dyns. It was more of a, "Yep! These sound terrible. These must be the ones!" kind of thing. Now I have performed the other half of the test and discovered everything sounds terrible everywhere due to changes in my hearing. Therefore, I cannot currently provide any information that might validate my opinion of the Dyn's tendency to "polish" flawed programs.[/Edit]

 

[Steve Dallas]

Hi,

Here are some thoughts on the EQ.
Score no EQ: 4.73; With Sub: 6.98
Spinorama with no EQ:
View attachment 93828
Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Better stay near on axis +/-10deg
View attachment 93820View attachment 93830
EQ design:
I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one LW is targeted at making the LW flat.
• The second, Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.
• The deviation from flat looks very significant (BBC deep?) and is related to the directivity error between the LF andHF unit and is very typical of speakers with no directivity control (i.e. waveguide) implemented.
• It looks like a good candidate to compare the LW EQ vs the Score based EQ as the directivity error yields deviation for the flatness.

Score EQ LW: 5.85 with sub: 7.80
Score EQ Score: 6.44 with sub: 8.32

Dynaudio X14 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
November162020-111317

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 51 Hz Gain 3 dB Q 1.17
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 123.7 Hz Gain -2.17 dB Q 1.26
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 434 Hz Gain 0.45 dB Q 1.45
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 651.3 Hz Gain -1.54 dB Q 2.58
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 816.8 Hz Gain -1.42 dB Q 4.03
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1199 Hz Gain -1.04 dB Q 7.22
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1911 Hz Gain 1.74 dB Q 6
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3094 Hz Gain -1.11 dB Q 4.79
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8488 Hz Gain -1.82 dB Q 2.4

Dynaudio X14 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
November162020-110319

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 48.4 Hz Gain 3 dB Q 1.16
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 124 Hz Gain -2.09 dB Q 1.16
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 444 Hz Gain 0.55 dB Q 2.01
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 641.5 Hz Gain -1.83 dB Q 2.08
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 810 Hz Gain -1.47 dB Q 5.03
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1210 Hz Gain -1.63 dB Q 8.22
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1902 Hz Gain 1.74 dB Q 3.85
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3372 Hz Gain -1.51 dB Q 2.3
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 7568 Hz Gain -2.54 dB Q 1.08

View attachment 93826
Spinorama EQ LW
View attachment 93825
Spinorama EQ Score
View attachment 93829
Zoom PIR-LW-ON
View attachment 93823
Regression - Tonal
View attachment 93824
Radar no EQ vs EQ score
View attachment 93822

The rest of the plots are attached.

Edit:
For those interested here is the spinorama with @amirm EQ
View attachment 93841
Changed the first Biquad to a High Pass for safety:
Score: 6.45; with sub: 8.33

Dynaudio X14 APO EQ Score HPQ 96000Hz
November162020-141915

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 39.6 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.32
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 119.3 Hz Gain -2.36 dB Q 1.09
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 444 Hz Gain 0.55 dB Q 2.01
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 641.5 Hz Gain -1.83 dB Q 2.08
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 810 Hz Gain -1.47 dB Q 5.03
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1210 Hz Gain -1.63 dB Q 8.22
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1902 Hz Gain 1.74 dB Q 3.85
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3372 Hz Gain -1.51 dB Q 2.3
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 7568 Hz Gain -2.54 dB Q 1.08

View attachment 93852

Sorry it took so long to get around to this. I finally got the house to myself, while at the same time, the nearby construction was not too loud, so I shot some in-room measurements (including noise floor for perspective) to test your EQ filters.

THERE IS ONE GLARING PROBLEM: I measured my X18s, as I sold the X14s. This can still be useful, as the previous in-room measurements I posted show the speakers are similar above 500Hz, below which we should ignore anyway due to room modes. And, I would not have been able to do a perfect like-for-like test, as the speakers would not have been in the same location after a round trip to and from Amir.

[I need to go back and label the X18 graphs for clarity.]

Or are they similar enough to be meaningful at all? You decide:

Here is the uncorrected X18 baseline (from last August, unfortunately, because I forgot to measure it this time):

Here is the X18 EQ I have been using in EQ APO, which includes different filters for left and right speakers measured in stereo:
(My filters are heavily focused on taming the room modes.)

Here is your listening window EQ applied to both X18 speakers and measured in stereo:

Here is your score-based EQ applied to both X18 speakers and measured in stereo:

And here is an overlay of all the EQ'd X18 measurements, plus the noise floor:

Finally, here is my X18 EQ against my target curve. It appears I still have some work to do:

Nah. Probably not useful.

 

[MDAguy]

Yeh, I should have commented on how insensitive it was. Had to pump a lot of watts into it in both measurements and listening.

I suspect marketing department does not let any company publish sensitivity below 85 db!

My XR50's which I personally love (at least my ears do)... have an crazy low 81dB sensitivity ... I am told (by McIntosh of all people) that they did this on purpose to push a ton of bass out of them due to them being a 3-way speaker rated at 300W, they had all sorts of difficulties optimizing the crossover..

You ever get your hands on a pair, I'd love to hear (and read) your critiques of them..

 

[AnalogSteph]

My XR50's which I personally love (at least my ears do)... have an crazy low 81dB sensitivity ... I am told (by McIntosh of all people) that they did this on purpose to push a ton of bass out of them due to them being a 3-way speaker rated at 300W, they had all sorts of difficulties optimizing the crossover..

Checks out. For a driver to naturally go as deep as possible, you must push fundamental resonance (Thiele/Small parameter fs) as low as possible. At the same time, radiation efficiency scales heavily with fs (there's like an fs³ term in there). Hence why small wideband drivers universally are quite inefficient.

For an alternative view, there's a limit to efficiency given by driver size (effective radiating area Sd) and drive strength (e.g. BxL) that results in a typical rise with frequency. Lower-tuned drivers are merely intercepting and flattening that out earlier, while in higher-tuned drivers the response continues to climb for a while longer. That's rather simplified, of course, as the transition will be affected by driver Qts for example.

(Level handling is a slightly different kettle of fish, it's limited by displacement Sd * Xlin on the low end and efficiency + power handling higher up.)

 

[howard416]

I suppose it does narrow the directivity a bit but clearly not enough.

If anything, the sharp edges would increase off-axis response. See faceplate on Seas DXT tweeter.

 

[tuga]

Sorry if derailing a little, but I just noticed: is this a multiple entry horn mated to that compression driver? That'd be quite cool.

Looks like a waveguide to me.
Interesting nonethless.

 

[xaviescacs]

This makes the active version, the X14a seem more interesting.
I'd be very curious how differently it measures and performed.
It was on sale/clearance for the longest time for very reasonable $ (relatively to the passive )
View attachment 93932
View attachment 93933
View attachment 93936

Still available in black for $799 a pair.
Might be worth it and better due to the active tech and DSP paired with the nice drivers.
https://www.safeandsoundhq.com/products/dynaudio-excite-x14a-high-end-powered-bookshelf-speakers-pair?variant=19809269841974&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=Google Shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQiA48j9BRC-ARIsAMQu3WQARVsArBpL2UmLaP0RgT5ruffx3gsLtadahP8NVDiGWh8Mk50UJZwaAgD3EALw_wcB

I have those, bough them new for 1000 €. Love them, but haven't heard anything theoretically better.

 

[xaviescacs]

For the sake of not digressing in another thread, I post this here.

@Tangband just posted this in the thread of the Wilson Audio TuneTot.

I wanted to note that this X14, and by extension the X14A (active) I own, have also this boost on the 4.5 kHz - 8 kHz region he mentions, but a bit extended on both sides. Following the criteria to make it flat, I was using the DSP EQ (three band) of the speaker to low down the highs by 1dB, but I'm going to try without it for a while following @Tangband's observation. I'll only EQ the dip at 1.9 kHz.

 

[Postlan]

My X18 is also corrected with EQ, [email protected]. It seems all Dynaudio 6.5" woofers have a dip around 1.5K-2K. Low frequency is also corrected by -1.0dB with a very gentle slope. X18 is a very clean / flat sounding small monitor after correction.

The worst issue of the X18 is rear port noise. Check it with low frequency sine wave or 808 kick, you'll clearly hear it. I temporary corrected it with an extended soft enclosure made with Amazon cardboard box filled with absorption material. It works perfectly as an acoustic low pass filter while it looks horrible. I don't understand why Dynaudio put the rear port at this unreasonable location.

 

[xaviescacs]

The worst issue of the X18 is rear port noise. Check it with low frequency sine wave or 808 kick, you'll clearly hear it. I temporary corrected it with an extended soft enclosure made with Amazon cardboard box filled with absorption material. It works perfectly as an acoustic low pass filter while it looks horrible. I don't understand why Dynaudio put the rear port at this unreasonable location.

Does the distance from the rear wall matters? I have the X14A at 80 cm or so, and the bass is quite nice to my ears, very dry.

 

[Postlan]

Does the distance from the rear wall matters? I have the X14A at 80 cm or so, and the bass is quite nice to my ears, very dry.

If you're asking about port noise, Yes but the difference should be a just little. Higher frequency (port noise) is cardioid, but the reflection from the wall still can't be unavoidable. If you can hear it, better to place some kind of absorption material behind the speaker to filter high frequency noise from the port.

 

[xaviescacs]

If you're asking about port noise, Yes but the difference should be a just little. Higher frequency (port noise) is cardioid, but the reflection from the wall still can't be unavoidable. If you can hear it, better to place some kind of absorption material behind the speaker to filter high frequency noise from the port.

Does this correspond to the port ressonance Amir pointed out between 500 Hz and 1kHz?

 

[IRG]

Hi,
New guy here, been reading a lot, and realize on the technical front of things I know very little. Finished reading two reviews of gear I own, that didn’t get necessarily bad reviews but not recommended; the Musical Fidelity M2Si integrated amp and these Dynaudio speakers. Been thinking of upgrading both for various reasons. Together, they can be a bit on the bright side, except for jazz, I feel here they are a good match. But I tend to listen to more rock, Classic, hard rock, some metal too, but lately more lower key stuff. Don’t listen to many female vocalists for some unknown reason, I need to change that,

Anyways, the speakers I’ve been thinking about are the Elac Debut Reference DBR6.2, which I see gets very good reviews here. Worth the upgrade over my Dynaudio ’s? In general, I seem to prefer the larger 6.5” speaker especially for rock over the 5” speaker in my Excites. I do use A subwoofer, nothing fancy, a Dayton Audio Parts Express 15” sub. Overkill for my small room perhaps, 10’ x 9’ maybe. Sources are a Pioneer PLX1000 turntable with an AT540ML cart, and a Yamaha dvd/sacd player into a Musical Fidelity V90 Dac. I’ll use the Dac’s USB input with an Audioquest cable into my iPad streaming Spotify. I’ll work on my digital front end at some point. I’m mostly analog right now, but steering back into the digital end, maybe.

So the Elac‘s are likely my next upgrade, then the amp. Was thinking of a Yamaha AS-801. Class D amps haven’t been on my radar until I started coming here. What else should I be looking at that is similar to the Yamaha, performance and price wise? Thanks a lot to Amir and others. Lots to learn here…