- Thread Starter
- #561
Dooooooods. You guys are great. I seriously appreciate it!
I was just trying to do some comparisons between some speakers I have tested and thought I should make it easier on myself by putting some of the basics from the results in to a spreadsheet. It's hard to really capture the overall performance of a speaker with a few metrics but this captures some of the big stats sensitivity, ±1.5dB and ±3dB response region on-axis and max SPL.
Feel free to give it a look. I realize I could add some other factors but I don't want this to become additional work. Besides, you need to look at the data to get the whole story. For example, horizontal and vertical dispersion @ 10kHz is just a snapshot. It could be much worse at the crossover. But defining and assigning a metric to that is kind of odd because it will vary at different frequencies and you can't easily throw that in a single cell or set of cells without the sheet becoming pointless as a "quick look".
And, yea, I would like to add some graphs to these such as on-axis, listening window and other data but honestly, I just don't have the time to do that.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iHiinala9exYa8dv32RoXi2QRqcmUc7troJgCXnrWtM/edit?usp=sharing
View attachment 85588
How much money would we have wasted if not for reputable reviewers like Amir or Erin?
Think of the donations as money that would have otherwise be wasted on awful measuring gear (that's usually overhyped by the so called "gurus" of the audio industry). Instead, the donations are contributing towards a cause that will save us from overspending anyway.
Seriously, if we haven't found a community like ASR, and by the extension Erin as well, how much money would we have wasted towards questionable gear? I'm guessing in the thousands of dollars.
If you understand and appreciate that, I'm sure donations will never stop coming.
-My 2 cents.
Hi Erin, For the dispersion metric, I have a suggestion for you. How about you define it as the angular region where the frequency response remains between, say, +/-3dB of on-axis response. You can eyeball this from the normalized responses you publish.Feel free to give it a look. I realize I could add some other factors but I don't want this to become additional work. Besides, you need to look at the data to get the whole story. For example, horizontal and vertical dispersion @ 10kHz is just a snapshot. It could be much worse at the crossover. But defining and assigning a metric to that is kind of odd because it will vary at different frequencies and you can't easily throw that in a single cell or set of cells without the sheet becoming pointless as a "quick look".
Why did the BMR have less max SPL when a crossover was added? Cool to see a ~10dB increase in some speakers, that’s very substantial.
I would ditch the frequency range a speaker is linear in. I would simply calculate the +/- in a range. I for instance do this on the rated range as well as 80Hz-20kHz.
I have been meaning to do another range, also starting at 80Hz, but limiting the high frequencies, to maybe 16kHz or 18kHz.
I don't want to get too bogged down in having to include a lot of information on a sheet when its intent was really to be a quick look comparison. Mainly, I wanted it for sensitivity, rolloff and dispersion characteristics. The problem with dispersion is binning it in to a single metric. As I mentioned earlier, it may be n degrees at 10kHz but with a poor crossover, it may be much less in the crossover region. So, I like the idea of using ±3dB. I am going to provide that within the range of 1 to 10kHz, though, as I feel that should catch most speakers' crossover region (midrange/tweeter, that is). I have to say, though, that it looks like a hot mess when I start adding all this stuff... so I may not keep it. I don't want 10 different columns... at that point it's easier for someone to just look at the graphs themselves.
I have also added the port location (as I did with my CEA-2010 subwoofer testing) per @MZKM request. I like having F3 and F10 to understand how steep the rolloff if. A single F6 value doesn't characterize the LF slope well enough for what I would want to know.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iHiinala9exYa8dv32RoXi2QRqcmUc7troJgCXnrWtM/edit#gid=0