Erin's review for the March Audio Sointuva

[BenB]

I thought it was given as 6.7 and over8 with a sub.
While I like my old speakers, these did seem to be sounding better in another’s house.
But I have objective way to compare my old the new speakers now.

Klipsch speakers seem to look nice.



When I heard them about 2 months ago, I was astounded that the bass was as good as it was.
We listened to a lot of music tyjaht I was familiar with, and some I was not too familiar with.

It seemed like it was punching pretty hard down at ~40 Hz.
And I actually opened the iPad NIOSH app to see what the SPL was. (It was difficult to have a conversation.)

In the conext of the speaker size, I think the bass extension and output capabilities are actually rather impressive. It's clear March Audio prioritized extension over flatness, but I can't fault them for that decision. With some room reinfocement, or with EQ that people serious about audio should be using below 200 Hz anyway, the response can be made flat, so they probably did the right thing. If someone uses them far from the front wall, and doesn't use EQ, and if that person is familiar with systems that have no-compromise bass response, then on an absolute scale, I think these would be found a little lacking.... but what do you want for a fairly small bookshelf?

Looking at the product page, the prototype version didn't use a big waveguide, and it appeard to have much wider dispersion. For my preferences, it looks like a better speaker. I wonder why they changed it for something much more narrow.

 

[sigbergaudio]

really nice one but somehow the on axis rise in high frequencies keeps me itchy

That's not much of a rise at all, and doesn't start until beyond 4khz. This will typically sound like added "air", not harshness.

 

[sarumbear]

I'm just speechless over how good the results are, text book perfect response (other than the typical 2-way vertical lobes) and unbelievable compression performance thanks to the Purifi mid-range.

Link: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/march_audio_sointuva/

Interesting that they tuned the passive radiators so low.

This normally should cause high distortion at around 50Hz but it doesn't. Kudos to the drive unit design.

 

[restorer-john]

That's not much of a rise at all, and doesn't start until beyond 4khz. This will typically sound like added "air", not harshness.

An unnecessary rise in HF is now dismissed as "added air" is it? +4dB @16kHz. Try it on your eq and tell me it's just "added air".

 

[tomtoo]

An unnecessary rise in HF is now dismissed as "added air" is it? +4dB @16kHz. Try it on your eq and tell me it's just "added air".

If i Eq at 16khz estimated Q3 4db+ in, to be honest its nothing. Ok iam near 60. But i think even with 20 it would be hard to hear, and far from being harsh or disturbing. I think it looks much more impressive than it realy is. I mean try it but please with a PEQ.
With that i have absolutly the same opinion than @sigbergaudio

 

[sigbergaudio]

An unnecessary rise in HF is now dismissed as "added air" is it? +4dB @16kHz. Try it on your eq and tell me it's just "added air".

I can't really hear much at 16khz, so "added air" would be best case, if I even hear a difference In addition, almost everyone has significant rolloff in-room at 16khz. Tweeters are also highly directive (as I'm sure you know) this high in frequency, which means there will be less energy here even slightly off axis (which the listening window shows).

There's also hardly any lift before 8khz.

 

[tomtoo]

Its nearly perfect from 100hz to 10khz and then sneak some minor errors very gently in. With great thd measurements. Imo this speaker is sota for a passive speaker. Audiophiles with love for all analog and small speakers should fight for them.

 

[dasdoing]

the 16Khz wont make much of a diference, but 3dB around 10Khz will make stuff like high hats and silabance in voice sounding harsh.
btw: there is also a crossover dip

 

[tomtoo]

the 16Khz wont make much of a diference, but 3dB around 10Khz will make stuff like high hats and silabance in voice sounding harsh.
btw: there is also a crossover dip

Toe them in a littel.

 

[Zedly]

I am a little suprised by all the praising because of the HF rise. I have seen other speakers beeing lynched here for less lol

Indeed. When I posted in-room measurements of my Klipsch RP-280Fs, they were criticized for being "very bright", etc. I sometimes wonder if the reaction would have been different if I hadn't mentioned the brand.

 

[ex audiophile]

If that's true, I stand corrected. According to this post it's true this is the price per pair, and March never fixed the misleading website as promised I guess.

Anyways that changes my mind, this is definitely in the top 3 2-ways, passive or otherwise, for its size.

View attachment 177348

What makes you believe that "playing louder and cleaner" for a specific size is how you define state of the art? I personally think those things are considerably less important than low frequency CD or perfect directivity in all dimensions.

I mean you're free to prioritize what you want, but it's pretty childish to say people don't know how to read measurements when we know for a fact that distortion measurements are a useless disaster that often don't correlate to anything audible.

I don't know if "distortion measurements are a useless disaster" (as compared with a useful disaster). My first wife, however, was without doubt a useless disaster, lol.

 

[ctrl]

really nice one but somehow the on axis rise in high frequencies keeps me itchy

I am a little suprised by all the praising because of the HF rise. I have seen other speakers beeing lynched here for less lol

The axis frequency response increase above 7kHz is not quite as dramatic as it seems if you don't look at the axis frequency response only - which one should never do.

The Sointuva-WG (SB Acoustics WG) is not designed for constant directivity radiation - whether this is an advantage or disadvantage, is a matter of opinion and taste and must each decide for themselves.

Above about 5kHz the radiation narrows. This can be seen well if you look at the frequency responses normalized to the axial frequency response:

Please ignore, for this analysis, the widening in the horizontal radiation in the range 1.7-3kHz, this is the influence of the speaker cabinet width (edge diffraction).

Very roughly, above 5kHz, at the latest 7kHz, the non-axis frequency responses (>20°) are no longer parallel to the axis frequency response.

For comparison, here is a simulation of an identically sized waveguide (without woofer, WG only) in a loudspeaker cabinet - please ignore everything above 10kHz (from there on the simulation becomes unreliable). The waveguide is designed for constant directivity (and supress of edge diffraction) - for an operating range above 1.3kHz.

Now compare the 60° frequency response of the Sointuva-WG (SB Acoustics WG) and the CD-WG. With the CD Waveguide, the 60° frequency response continues to run parallel to the axial frequency response, quite differently with the SB Acoustics WG, where the FR drops significantly from 4.5kHz and is, at 10kHz, already 7dB below the average sound pressure level.

So what does this mean for "correct" speaker tuning?

This, of course, is for the loudspeaker designer to decide. If you look at the spinorama of the Sointuva with WG, it becomes clear that the speaker was optimized for the most evenly sloping sound power or/and PIR curve possible.


Source

The significant frequency response drop outside the axial frequency response, for frequencies above 5kHz, leads to a drop in the sound power frequency response and must therefore be compensated by increasing the axial frequency response.

A straight axis frequency response above 5kHz would therefore have been the wrong decision for the intended design goal (as uniform SP and PIR as possible).

If you want to do some nitpicking, you might note that 1dB less sound pressure around 15kHz would have been more optimal, but such things should always be decided by a listening test, not by measurement curves - maybe it sounds more airy this way.

With a CD-WG, such a tuning would lead to a significant increase in SP above 7kHz and would most likely sound too bright and obtrusive.

Sorry for the long ramblings, just wanted to make clear again that the sole consideration of the axial frequency response is not sufficient to judge a speaker (except for really significant outliers) and is not able to reveal the design goals - whether you like this tonally, again, everyone must decide for themselves.

 

[Shazb0t]

Indeed. When I posted in-room measurements of my Klipsch RP-280Fs, they were criticized for being "very bright", etc. I sometimes wonder if the reaction would have been different if I hadn't mentioned the brand.

View attachment 177412

These would sound bright because there is no roll off in the frequency response at the listening position which normally results from an anechoically flat speaker and room interaction. A flat frequency response at the listening position is not desirable. It is indicative of a speaker thats anechoic measurement will be a broadly rising frequency response up into a peak in the highs, ie. bright.

Look at the EIR for the Sointuva:

That's the equivalent of your in-room response. Its ideal downward slope is why it shouldn't sound bright. Ideally you would EQ your Kilpsche so that your in-room would slope down similarly. That's what the research has shown to be preferred.

 

[Zedly]

But that is exactly the point. The "Estimated In-Room Response" of the Sointuva is just as flat from 1K to 10K as the Klipsch (and the anechoic measurements of the Sointuva indeed show a rising frequency response at the high end, yet people are excusing the Sointuva from these criticisms.

 

[Shazb0t]

But that is exactly the point. The "Estimated In-Room Response" of the Sointuva is just as flat from 1K to 10K as the Klipsch (and the anechoic measurements of the Sointuva indeed show a rising frequency response at the high end, yet people are excusing the Sointuva from these criticisms.

I don't agree that the posted EIR for the Sointuva and your posted in-room response are "just as flat".

Am I misunderstanding you? The in-room measurement you posted is at the listening position, correct?

 

[ctrl]

But that is exactly the point. The "Estimated In-Room Response" of the Sointuva is just as flat from 1K to 10K as the Klipsch (and the anechoic measurements of the Sointuva indeed show a rising frequency response at the high end, yet people are excusing the Sointuva from these criticisms.

Your measured IR, if averaged, increases about 1-2dB from 200Hz to 10kHz.

The PIR of the Sointuva, on the other hand, drops from 200Hz to 10kHz about 2-3dB.
That might still sound too bright for some, but 1-2dB increase, like your Klipsch, should definitely sound too bright for most people under 50.

 

[hardisj]

That said, this is a passive speaker that costs $3500-$4000 each.

That is incorrect. The price I posted is indeed for a pair of speakers.

I verified with March Audio this morning and this is what I was told:

Hi, Erin
I will be updating the Web page tomorrow as it still shows the old design. Pricing is changing for the painted versions. This will rise $3995 USD a pair, same as for the wood finish.

A patron had mentioned this to me a few days ago (before the results were released) just in case anyone thinks Alan jacked the prices up as soon as he saw the review after I posted it yesterday. I know how conspiracies go.

 

[hardisj]

A few things.

Color/Finish:
As I said in the review, these come in different flavors. I'm not sure how I feel about the wood finish. I wouldn't own it myself. But I think it's unique. I have a buddy who saw them and loved them. Same for my dad. Wife said they'd be a no-go. So, that's why you have options.



HF Tilt:
Alan and I went back and forth on this a bit. His measurements weren't showing as much of a lift as mine. I think we were about 2dB apart. You can look back in the Sointuva thread where someone posted his data and see his measurements don't show this lift. I verified my measurements with a different mic. Alan did some digging on his end and tracked down the reason(s) for the difference. Based on his findings and mine, he said he is going to update his measurement rig and also tweak the HF. He also noted a couple other things he is considering to perfect the design based on the measurement differences. I've pasted his reply about those potential tweaks below in the spoiler. And I told him I'd be willing to re-test. This is the same as I have done with other manufacturers/designers when unintended differences were discovered between measurement systems (DIYSG HTM-12 and Neumi BS5P, for example).

Spoiler

I'm building the new test rig tomorrow to improve the microphone alignment. I think with the other corrections that will bring my measurements very close to yours at HF.

As mentioned previously I will tweak the tweeter XO to bring the HF down. Also I have made another value tweak to one of the inductors on the woofer XO which will flatten further the slight hump centred around 700Hz. It will also change to an air core as the reduced value makes it smaller and possible to fit it on the board. This may provide a small reduction in distortion at very high signal levels.

One other change I'm considering is to very slightly increase the box volume. This will flatten out the slight bass hump at 150Hz and provide slightly more LF extension.

If you are up for it I will send a production unit with these final mods through in a month or so.

 

[hardisj]

For a bit of context, here is my takeaway from my review:

• Nice extension with an F3 of 47Hz. In-room bass response should be adequate for most 2-channel enthusiasts, though, I would still use a subwoofer as I listen to a lot of content with lower bass.
• This speaker has one of the best overall responses that I’ve seen to date with great directivity.
• While the on-axis response shows a rising treble, I didn’t hear this as offensive. I think this is due, at least partly, to the rather narrow horizontal dispersion. The lateral reflections aren’t strong and therefore the estimated in-room response doesn’t exhibit the kind of pronounced treble a speaker with a rising treble response and wide radiation would.
• The narrow radiation - while helping to keep the treble from sounding bright in-room - is the only underwhelming part about this speaker on paper to me. I generally prefer a speaker with a wider radiation pattern. However, when listening, I didn’t find myself having any issues with this. In fact, in many tracks, I felt the soundstage was wider than the data would have me believe. I’m not sure what the driving factor here is. Could it be the extremely smooth horizontal off-axis response? I noticed that on-axis, the soundstage didn’t seem that wide but when turning the speakers off-axis to tame the highs, the soundstage actually broadened more than I would have expected. Could this be due low crosstalk from speaker to the opposite side when listening in stereo?
• Imaging also seemed quite good on this speaker and didn’t suffer when turning the speaker off-axis.
• In terms of output levels, due to the average sensitivity of about 83dB @ 2.83v/1m, this speaker needs power. I am using a Parasound HINT-6 which has about 220wpc @ 4ohm and was close to maxing it out. When talking about driving a speaker like this hard you often have to worry about mechanical issues. I am happy to say that for most of my listening I had no issues with any pops or woofers bottoming out. In some instances when I would listen to rap music with bass heavy notes, I engaged the Parasound’s internal crossover and used a filter of 30Hz/24dB to limit the low bass excursion of the Sointuvas.
• Distortion and Compression: The distortion is shockingly low. Especially for a 2-way bookshelf sized speaker with a sensitivity of 83dB. At 86dB the THD is under 0.30% down to about 50Hz. For reference, this is actually even lower than or at least on par with the JBL M2 which uses a 15-inch high-sensitivity midwoofer. At 96dB the THD rises but remains low at under 1% down to about 50Hz. This is a class leading design by distortion metrics. Additionally, the compression testing shows very good performance as well with only about 0.50dB deviation from 76dB to 102dB (above 50Hz). Again, incredibly good performance here.

When I have a speaker with so few flaws, it’s hard to talk about it. This speaker - the same as the Dutch & Dutch 8c and Kii THREE (and some others I forget at this moment) - is such a speaker. Suffice it to say, the Sointuva is a fantastic speaker with excellent directivity, incredible distortion and great linearity. The lower sensitivity might cause one to forgo them in lieu of another speaker if you are expecting to listen louder but to that I will remind you that you are most likely not going to find another speaker this size that has more output capability in the lower bass and would still likely need to purchase a subwoofer for very low bass content. If listening at modest levels and/or close to the speakers, I expect most 2-channel enthusiasts would be satisfied with the extension and output of this speaker. The Purifi midwoofer and the Satori tweeter are obviously the stars here but the integration March Audio has done with these components in a relatively small cabinet, achieving textbook directivity and class-leading distortion/compression metrics should be lauded.

 

[hardisj]

But that is exactly the point. The "Estimated In-Room Response" of the Sointuva is just as flat from 1K to 10K as the Klipsch (and the anechoic measurements of the Sointuva indeed show a rising frequency response at the high end, yet people are excusing the Sointuva from these criticisms.

As has been pointed out, your In-room response is flat. That is not ideal and would - almost certainly - sound "bright". I know it would based on my experience measuring and listening to various speakers. The speaker measured here is not flat in-room; it has a decreasing SPL over frequency. The intricacies and level of tilt... that could be discussed ... but you have to understand that you are comparing 0dB delta from 300Hz to 10kHz in-seat with the Klipsch vs 3dB* delta in-seat with the March from 300Hz to 10kHz (even with the plateu in the treble (3kHz-10kHz)). Apples/Oranges.

* 300Hz = 81.83dB, 10kHz = 78.5dB