While I agree with what most would call an extreme statement, there is always the problem of integrating the sub(s) response, sub(s) location, WAF and expense among other things.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Emotiva Airmotiv 6s Powered Speaker Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
While I agree with what most would call an extreme statement, there is always the problem of integrating the sub(s) response, sub(s) location, WAF and expense among other things.
As Amir said, they're "very informal listening tests" (at least at the moment). There are so many variables uncontrolled for that you shouldn't draw any big conclusions from them. A high-pass filtered comparison might be interesting, but speaker placement, room modes, acoustics (e.g. desk reflections), listening position and even (post-measurement) expectation and sighted bias could still all influence the perception of sound quality and (upper) bass quantity, which hugely reduces the utility of such a comparison.
@MZKM calculates the predicted performance ratings with a subwoofer (which assumes they're paired with an ideal sub with extension down to 14.5 Hz at -6 dB) from each speaker's measurements precisely for the purpose you're looking for. This will correlate much better with most people's preference (around a 0.86 correlation from Sean Olive's experiments), than informal sighted listening tests with minimal variables controlled for. That's the whole point of these speaker measurements - to provide objective data, which, via solid experimental and psychoacoustic science, will lead to much more accurate predictions of preference and sound quality than the sea of informal listening-only reviews out there riddled with (conscious and unconscious) bias and multiple uncontrolled factors.
Last edited:
Callibrating absolute SPL in speaker measurement indoors is tricky and Amir's graphs for this speaker do not reflect actual testing levels. Some combination of the mic sensitivity, mic preamp gain, speaker output, signal processing and measurement distance created the levels shown in these charts. The shape of the response is accurate but the level is not meaningful (yet.)
OP
- Thread Starter
- #24
As I explained in the review, the levels are not correct. CEA-2034 specifies 79 dB at 2 meters. That is what I set the level to before running the test. But somehow the computed soundfield shows much higher levels. I think it is not correcting for the shorter distance it measures than my calibration point. I have to figure out how to compensate for that.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #25
I do. Enclosed.
Until you're able to figure out why it's reporting an incorrect value, you may want to update your graphs' y-axis because it specifically states "2.83v 1m" and I can easily see where these pictures are going to get around the internet without your explanation above.
You mean this about the very informal listening test, correct?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #28
No, in general. I had heard some of their speakers at CES and didn't walk away with a good impression.
This argument has been made a few times on various threads =]. I personally do not agree that a high-pass listening test should be the priority, if implemented at all. Mind you, I agree in principle about how people should optimize bass performance in their own systems, but I do not think it is a reasonable or fair approach to evaluating and recommending speakers.
Most people do not listen with a good subwoofer. Well, maybe most ASR members do, but not the average audio enthusiast. If they have more than one speaker system, they might use one for their main system but not their secondary one. So my perspective is a bit different: Most audio reviews pay little attention to bass in favor of things like "resolution" or "transparency," so it's refreshing to see bass be given the priority it deserves. If we ignore bass extension, then it seems there's little reason to appreciate speakers that do reach lower.
I also disagree with "any speaker's bass can, and should, be remedied with a subwoofer." Certainly most passive would benefit from it, but every year there are more active designs that can reach deep into the 20s, with enough headroom for many typical listening situations. The tiny Devialet Phantom Reactor, let alone the bigger ones. The B&W Formation Duo as well, and seemingly Buchardt's upcoming A500. For both the Reactor and Formation Duo, I simply was not able to get crossing the speakers with a sub to sound better than a pair of speakers playing full range - despite both of these being compact bookshelf designs (especially the Reactor). I rarely if ever listen above 75 dB at my listening position 10 feet away and in my home both pairs still have a good 20 dB or so of headroom before compression starts to kick in.
Then there's the problem of assuming someone already should have a subwoofer. If not, a decent subwoofer will set you back at least $500, probably more if you want to go all the way to 20Hz or below. But then you should probably have two to deal with room issues, so now you're set back twice the money. Some people don't have space for a sub - this was the case for much of my audiophile journey - let alone two. And then properly implementing crossovers can be a pain, which is why many people end up giving up on subs. In the majority of cases, decisions on aesthetics, practicality, and financial investment are limiting factors.
Then there's the fact that implementing a high-pass filter will alter the balance of frequencies. Consider the two speakers being discussed - the Emotiva reaches lower, but the 305P has better balanced low mids. I would assume that implementing a filter would unfairly benefit the 305P as the Emotiva would sound comparatively anemic without the extension to "fill out" the timbre. It would also depend on what frequency you choose.
So I say look at the data and decide for yourself what's best if you plan on using a subwoofer. I appreciated the insight in this case about how the bass extension made a difference in preference.
That said @MZKM's implementation of Sean Olive's preference score also includes a metric that ignores low frequency extension. I think that number is probably more useful than a quick informal listening test without an optimized subwoofer implementation.
Last edited:
Not to be a grammar nazi, but it's "Airmotiv" not "Airmotive." Not sure if that will affect the SEO, but it might affect perceived credibility with some people new to ASR who look at the review.
infinitesymphony
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2018
- Messages
- 1,072
- Likes
- 1,809
Curious to see how the Adam A7, which this monitor appears to be based on, compares. At that point perhaps we can arrive at some conclusions about the importance of tweeter design vs. waveguide design. Is it even possible for a non-spherical tweeter to have directivity performance that compares with a dome?
Sure, it's just different. Ribbons and AMTs are almost always taller and narrow, which means they will have wider horizontal directivity than vertical directivity. That's often part of the appeal. We are far more sensitive to horizontal directivity, for one, as it's what defines spatial qualities. Vertical reflections affect timbre, but the lower in level they are, the less audible their anomalies will be, so non-spherical designs can help in this regard too.
Updated; this time your listening preference matches the score
Updated; this time your listening preference matches the score
This is pretty much what I expected - we should start taking bets on preference scores before you show up
Leaving aside issues with the speaker in general, it looks to me like the 'Airmotiv folded ribbon'/Heil tweeter does a great job as far as dispersion. The high frequency curves parallel each other. This seems to be a better performance than found on conventional tweeters albeit at least in this case with an uneven frequency response.
You are absolutely right which is why I suggesting adding a "bassless" test and not entirely eliminating the full range test. Most people do just plop speakers down and even for the few that get subs, most of them do not know how to integrate them properly so I get your point.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #37
Thanks. Yes it is important to get it right. Corrected.
That's very surprising to me. I would not expect an AMT or any HF transducer of this size to have such good dispersion up top. The one Emotiva is using doesn't appear to be that small either. I think AMTs are mostly used because they're marketable; they always have more linear and nonlinear distortion than a dome at the same pricepoint, but this one seems to work well enough.
Honestly I thought this speaker would have major directivity issues around the crossover, but the relatively small woofer, relatively big tweeter and sort of high crossover point have worked together to make a pretty good result. It's a shame that the midbass is so messed up.
Another point I'd like to add - it is very curious to me as a diy speaker guy that so many speakers have issues in the 80-200hz area. When you design a speaker this is the reference for all other parts of the frequency band, and with passive speakers it is pretty rare to have narrow band resonances here. Typically this is the comfort zone of the woofer, well before breakup, and it is normally equalized by gently tilting the entire response with an inductor. It's really curious to see high resolution measurements of this region which actually show problems here - in all my speaker measurement I can never remember seeing any narrow band issues in this region even when measured at high resolution near field. @napilopez I suspect you know what I mean.
Yes, you sometimes see a boost or a little shelf before the bass rolls off, but we're seeing some serious issues here, I suspect in many cases caused by the need for smaller than ideal enclosures. But again, these issues are gently sloping, first order kind of effects.
Yes, you sometimes see a boost or a little shelf before the bass rolls off, but we're seeing some serious issues here, I suspect in many cases caused by the need for smaller than ideal enclosures. But again, these issues are gently sloping, first order kind of effects.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2016
- Messages
- 2,874
- Likes
- 4,674
First thought: best measurement report yet, in terms of what is included and what isn't. That balloon graph at the crossover is so cool!
What really surprised me is the nearly perfect vertical directivity match between AMT and midwoofer, as well as the symmetry along the vertical axis. Any thoughts?
What really surprised me is the nearly perfect vertical directivity match between AMT and midwoofer, as well as the symmetry along the vertical axis. Any thoughts?
Similar threads
