expensive and cheap(er) speakers after correction

[dasdoing]

If I take two sets of speakers, same size, same configuration (let's say 2-way and 10 inch woofer); one costs $600, the other $6000.
now I digitaly correct them so both have the same frequencie response. let's say I manage to correct even phase issues and both meassure the same. distorsion shouldn't be an issue nowadays on $600 speakers.
would the $6000 speaker still sound way better? If so, why?

 

[fredoamigo]

I don't know what you're asking, but I don't think you can turn a donkey into a racehorse with EQ even if the donkey has good skills

 

[detlev24]

The donkey might sound better in an acoustically proper treated room, though, vs. the racehorse in an untreated room.

Depending on the target group, the donkey might also be hiding behind the higher price tag.

 

[GelbeMusik]

If I take two sets of speakers, same size, same configuration (let's say 2-way and 10 inch woofer); one costs $600, the other $6000.
now I digitaly correct them so both have the same frequencie response. let's say I manage to correct even phase issues and both meassure the same. distorsion shouldn't be an issue nowadays on $600 speakers.
would the $6000 speaker still sound way better? If so, why?

The comparison isn't fair.
- First, the list of topics to be matched isn't complete. Do You ask for relevant parameters?
- Second, design and more generally the expectation of the naive end costumer!

 

[hardisj]

You're also assuming that cost is a direct correlation to performance.

The better question is:
If I take two like speakers: one with a poor frequency response and match it to a good one, will they sound the same.

But, I think the comparison falls flat immediately. First, there is more to the result than just a single axis response. You would need all responses (on/off vertical and horiztonal) to match. Thus, the "two like speakers", meaning same design, same speakers. If the two speakers are indeed similar enough (i.e., the same) that you can even match not just the on-axis response but off-axis as well then the only way to make them different is to purposely alter one by adding notches, peaks, different crossover, etc. And in doing so, sure, you could EQ back down the peaks and dips you purposely made but the one you can't simply EQ is the crossover. Maybe with the right all-pass filter you could change the phase but you can't just add 10dB of boost to 2kHz caused by an out-of-phase result due to the crossover.

IOW, you'll never have the same FR in all axes. Not unless it is the exact same speaker (and even some speakers have been shown to differ due to QC or components). Therefore, you will never be able to do a comparison like this.

That's just my $0.02.

 

[No. 5]

I digitaly correct them so both have the same frequencie response... would the $6000 speaker still sound way better?

Consider that a loudspeaker is radiating sound in three dimensions, EQing these two speakers to have the same frequency response is only making it the same on one axis. The directivity, or how it's radiating in three dimensions, is completely unaffected.

So if both speakers were being compared in an anechoic chamber, they could sound the same. But in any kind of normal room, it's unlikely they would sound the same.

(Edit: hardisj beat me to it)

 

[dasdoing]

let's take KRK monitors as an example. ok, the price diference wont be that huge, but there is one.
KRK Rokit 8: bad reputation, cheap
KRK V8: good reputation, more expensive
what will be left in diference after correction?

EDIT: let's limit the question to a one person sweet spot listening position

 

[No. 5]

What will be left in diference after correction?

EDIT: let's limit the question to a one person sweet spot listening position

All of the room reflections. Really any surface around the sweet spot will make the "non corrected" sound coming out of the speaker audible and prevent them from sounding the same.

 

[fredoamigo]

The donkey might sound better in an acoustically proper treated room, though, vs. the racehorse in an untreated room.

Depending on the target group, the donkey might also be hiding behind the higher price tag.

Take a concrete example Not to mention the acoustics of the room; here you have the Genelec 8341A at 6000 and the Elac DBR 62 at 600 do you think you can compete with an EQ ?

 

[Mudjock]

I think the $6,000 speaker could still sound way better for at least a couple of reasons, but it depends on where the $5,400 difference is spent.

Drivers - At the $6k price point, you could afford drivers with advanced low inductance motors, rigid cast frames that are well ventilated, cones that support pistonic motion without excessive flexing or ringing, and a little engineering time spent on optimizing soft parts. At the $600 price point, you are probably looking at simple motors, stamped frames, and basic cones. There are some surprisingly good performers within that realm, but there is a ceiling. For a 10" woofer, you would likely hear differences below 100 Hz and above 500 Hz (in the 10" two way example). For the tweeter, crossing to the 10" woofer would require a very low crossover point and two meet that challenge in a $600 price point would probably require giving up quite a bit of high frequency dispersion, crossing the woofer too high, or leaving a region in the midrange where neither driver is performing well. All of these will show up as distortion and dispersion issues, which will not just go away with eq. You can de-emphasize frequencies affected by these issues, but then you will lose detail.

Cabinet - It is relatively easy to construct a mini monitor with a solid cabinet, but much more difficult once the panels get larger (i.e. your 10" two-way example). With a $6,000 speaker, you would have ample budget for advanced construction techniques and materials to stiffen the cabinet and damp any remaining vibrations. Your $600 speaker set cabinet might have a brace if you are lucky and will probably be using particle board with a little polyfill for stuffing/damping. Resonances can be helped by eq'ing the frequencies that excite them, but you are still losing musical information around the frequencies that needed to be eq'ed.

 

[dasdoing]

I think the $6,000 speaker could still sound way better for at least a couple of reasons, but it depends on where the $5,400 difference is spent.

Drivers - At the $6k price point, you could afford drivers with advanced low inductance motors, rigid cast frames that are well ventilated, cones that support pistonic motion without excessive flexing or ringing, and a little engineering time spent on optimizing soft parts. At the $600 price point, you are probably looking at simple motors, stamped frames, and basic cones. There are some surprisingly good performers within that realm, but there is a ceiling. For a 10" woofer, you would likely hear differences below 100 Hz and above 500 Hz (in the 10" two way example). For the tweeter, crossing to the 10" woofer would require a very low crossover point and two meet that challenge in a $600 price point would probably require giving up quite a bit of high frequency dispersion, crossing the woofer too high, or leaving a region in the midrange where neither driver is performing well. All of these will show up as distortion and dispersion issues, which will not just go away with eq. You can de-emphasize frequencies affected by these issues, but then you will lose detail.

Cabinet - It is relatively easy to construct a mini monitor with a solid cabinet, but much more difficult once the panels get larger (i.e. your 10" two-way example). With a $6,000 speaker, you would have ample budget for advanced construction techniques and materials to stiffen the cabinet and damp any remaining vibrations. Your $600 speaker set cabinet might have a brace if you are lucky and will probably be using particle board with a little polyfill for stuffing/damping. Resonances can be helped by eq'ing the frequencies that excite them, but you are still losing musical information around the frequencies that needed to be eq'ed.

I like this answer. But there will probably be a price point where the diferences are only audible if you are concentrating on identifying them, right?
I am asking all this because to personaly justify an upgrade I need an "ahaa" diference, not a "hey, if I listen carefully" diference

 

[detlev24]

Take a concrete example Not to mention the acoustics of the room; here you have the Genelec 8341A at 6000 and the Elac DBR 62 at 600 do you think you can compete with an EQ ?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/zu-audio-what-is-going-on.1105/#post-29111

Just another example, vice versa.

 

[QMuse]

If I take two sets of speakers, same size, same configuration (let's say 2-way and 10 inch woofer); one costs $600, the other $6000.
now I digitaly correct them so both have the same frequencie response. let's say I manage to correct even phase issues and both meassure the same. distorsion shouldn't be an issue nowadays on $600 speakers.
would the $6000 speaker still sound way better? If so, why?

You may want to check this great example by @mitchco . It will answer most of your questions.

 

[dasdoing]

You may want to check this great example by @mitchco . It will answer most of your questions.

yea. looks very intresting. will study this later. thanks

 

[fredoamigo]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/zu-audio-what-is-going-on.1105/#post-29111

Just another example, vice versa.

you're using shortcuts that are too coarse. the starting point for this discussion is equalisation with properly constructed speakers, not audio scams.

 

[Hiten]

Since many speakers are tested here and some may be still with amirm, wouldn't it be interesting to measure not so good measuring speaker with DSPd/equalized (that mimics another speaker) and see room response, other responses, directivity etc. again ?
Regards

 

[Mudjock]

I like this answer. But there will probably be a price point where the diferences are only audible if you are concentrating on identifying them, right?
I am asking all this because to personaly justify an upgrade I need an "ahaa" diference, not a "hey, if I listen carefully" diference

That's a tough question to answer. In general, it's easier to get a good low cost speaker now because accurate measurement and modeling tools are much more accessible than they were even 10 years ago. There's no guarantee however that the manufacturer or designer has taken advantage of that. There are $600 speakers for which it's hard to find much to complain about and $6,000 speakers for which it's hard to figure out what the manufacturer or designer was thinking and that no amount of eq will fix.

I think the key to answering your personal question will come down to understanding what is lacking in what you have and how the upgrade will improve upon those shortcomings (assuming it doesn't introduce others).

 

[kevinh]

I think the $6,000 speaker could still sound way better for at least a couple of reasons, but it depends on where the $5,400 difference is spent.

Drivers - At the $6k price point, you could afford drivers with advanced low inductance motors, rigid cast frames that are well ventilated, cones that support pistonic motion without excessive flexing or ringing, and a little engineering time spent on optimizing soft parts. At the $600 price point, you are probably looking at simple motors, stamped frames, and basic cones. There are some surprisingly good performers within that realm, but there is a ceiling. For a 10" woofer, you would likely hear differences below 100 Hz and above 500 Hz (in the 10" two way example). For the tweeter, crossing to the 10" woofer would require a very low crossover point and two meet that challenge in a $600 price point would probably require giving up quite a bit of high frequency dispersion, crossing the woofer too high, or leaving a region in the midrange where neither driver is performing well. All of these will show up as distortion and dispersion issues, which will not just go away with eq. You can de-emphasize frequencies affected by these issues, but then you will lose detail.

Cabinet - It is relatively easy to construct a mini monitor with a solid cabinet, but much more difficult once the panels get larger (i.e. your 10" two-way example). With a $6,000 speaker, you would have ample budget for advanced construction techniques and materials to stiffen the cabinet and damp any remaining vibrations. Your $600 speaker set cabinet might have a brace if you are lucky and will probably be using particle board with a little polyfill for stuffing/damping. Resonances can be helped by eq'ing the frequencies that excite them, but you are still losing musical information around the frequencies that needed to be eq'ed.

This, plus the design of the cabinet can matter diffraction, how well is the cabinet braced, ported vs no ported, how much voice coil travel in the woofer, under hung vs over hung, effficency of drivers, how much amplifier power available. Unlike the electronics a lot of mechanical issues to deal with, that may not show up in measurements

 

[tomtoo]

10 inch woofer with a dome tweeter 2 way is hard to integrade well. 5400 Dollar were only needed for Aspirin. ; )

 

[TurtlePaul]

I think that the original poster has to come to the realization that $600 speakers or $6000 speakers are well past the point of diminishing returns. As far as sound quality goes, you are paying for flat response (which can be corrected with EQ) and low distortion. Lowering distortion is costly but is the primary goal of audiophile speakers as it is relatively easy to make a speaker to play pretty flat from 100 Hz to 15 Khz. Expensive price also pays for other things: higher SPL, further bass and treble extension, and a whole lot of build quality.

Of course, Amir's pet-peeve seems to be the Harmon sound dispersion principals, and you cannot correct for that with a DSP, but I guess you are assuming an infinitesimally small listening sweet spot. Also agree with others that a 10" two-way is a poor example because the woofer will be beaming badly at any reasonable crossover frequency.