Future Sound of Audio

[Purité Audio]

I have had the Kiis here for almost a week now, played everything , I hear the same signature or lack of signature I hear with Bang @ Olufsens Beolab 90 with which the share the same ethos and elements of design.
The Kiis and Beolabs both effectively dismiss any negative impact of the room , they are both completely full range ,they both can be sited anywhere in a room and adjusted to 'work'.
They both use 'spare' drivers to cancel reflected sound creating spectacular polar plots essentially sending the
sound towards the listener rather than all around the room.
I realise there are other speakers that boast cardiod bass response (Geithain) and can vary the amount of bass injected into the room, AJ's Soundfield and Gradient loudspeakers, but as far as I am aware no other loudspeakers do what the Kiis and Beolabs can.
Is this then the future of loudspeakers providing of course manufacturers have the skill set to design and implement .
Keith.

 

[Thomas savage]

The speaker room interaction is the one area that gives scope for large increases in the quality of our audio experience in the home.

The rest of the chain from a reproduction standpoint has been done to death imo.

What audiophiles will make of it is anyone's guess, I would imagen new audiophiles will be open to these kind of products. The old guard maybe too personally invested in all the other nonsense to be able to dump it all and go down this route.

These kind of products also ruin a lot of the industry, there will be a backlash no doubt.

Alas since when did high fidelity have anything much to do with the high end audio industry, you could argue the two things have been separate enterties for over 20 years now.

What these products do is make the best use of digital technology, more to come I would think.

 

[dallasjustice]

It's the present of audio. The kii audio speaker controls lateral off axis less than around 1khz. Whereas better designs control lateral off axis from 20khz down to 1khz. Lateral off axis matters much more at the mid and high frequencies rather than low frequencies.

The claim is perfect bass. Of course that's not possible with two speakers. There will be always ringing notwithstanding the speaker design. There are much better ways for controlling low frequency ringing.

I'm sure these are nice sounding speakers for the price. But they are far from complete. Bruno may be a great switching amp designer but he's yet to show he's a competent speaker designer.

 

[Purité Audio]

Mike you do understand what the Kiis and Beolabs can do, Irealise Bruno isnt your favourite any more .
After listening to the Kiis almost exclusively , I fired up the large horns and they also sounded great, but with help of masses of room treatment and a touch of EQ.
A loudspeaker which doesn't cause these issues in the first place would seem to me to be ideal.

Keith

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Keith, I haven't heard either of those speakers, but I think that kind of nuanced, digital control of the listening space might just be the future of audio. The future of "high end?" No. So it's going to have to get a lot cheaper. And very intuitive. Or it could go the other way. Can you imagine that kind of control over a performance venue? I can, and I like what I imagine.

Tim

 

[Purité Audio]

I am not saying the Kiis or Beolabs are 'perfect' but I do believe that this technology is the way forward, the Kii manual states that the controlled directivity is 4.8dB
( 80Hz-1kHz ) slowly rising thereafter, B&O post the polar plots of the Beolabs three band width options, page 15 here,
http://www.bang-olufsen.com/~/media...90/bang-olufsen-beolab90-whitepaper.pdf#page8
Keith

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Mike you do understand what the Kiis and Beolabs can do, Irealise Bruno isnt your favourite any more .
After listening to the Kiis almost exclusively , I fired up the large horns and they also sounded great, but with help of masses of room treatment and a touch of EQ.
A loudspeaker which doesn't cause these issues in the first place would seem to me to be ideal.

Keith

But, the Beolabs and the Kiis have internal DSP EQ for dealing with room modal and other measured acoustic room issues, don't they? Not sure exactly why it is better to have that type of EQ inside the speaker as opposed to centrally in a preamp/processor. I would think that control of the room acoustics calibration would be simpler if that DSP function is central in the main processor.

I do get it that the DSP in those speakers is also used for active crossovers, dispersion control, etc. which are very custom to those particular models. So, that is an argument for locating all the DSP, including room correction, inside the speaker box. But, with your Illusonic, there is still DSP active in the processor for a number of other things, even if not used for room correction, though it does have that functionality.

Pretty soon, there wil be DSP all over the place, except for DSD playback, of course. Preferably, someday, processors and active speakers could be connected via a digital open standard so that DSPs could be located where they make the most sense, including cascading some DSP functions in the processor to other DSP functions in the active speaker via digital interconnection, eliminating D-A-D-A completely, except for one and only one final D-A, of course.

 

[Purité Audio]

I think it is the idea of using spare drivers to cancel reflected sound that is particularly innovative , but yes the Beolabs also have room correction internally ,the Kiis have boundary filters for placement and 16 'contour' settings to tailor the sound to your preference.
Not spraying sound around in the first place is surely more sensible than trying to ameliorate it later no?
Keith

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I think it is the idea of using spare drivers to cancel reflected sound that is particularly innovative , but yes the Beolabs also have room correction internally ,the Kiis have boundary filters for placement and 16 'contour' settings to tailor the sound to your preference.
Not spraying sound around in the first place is surely more sensible than trying to ameliorate it later no?
Keith

Well, room correction, as I see it, is not about speaker dispersion issues, at least not directly. I am in favor speaker designs that deal intelligently with dispersion. But, depending on the room, dispersion issues can have frequency and time domain indirect side effects, and room correction via treatment and/or DSP may be at least partially useful in taming aspects of that. I think, no matter how intelligently designed, the speaker cannot know what is going to happen with the reflected energy in your specific room by the time it reaches your ears.

 

[dallasjustice]

Acourate can do all the DSP you mentioned. It's all done with all sample rate filters up to 64 bit 384khz. It's not likely to be replicated in an active speaker due to the computing power needed.

But, the Beolabs and the Kiis have internal DSP EQ for dealing with room modal and other measured acoustic room issues, don't they? Not sure exactly why it is better to have that type of EQ inside the speaker as opposed to centrally in a preamp/processor. I would think that control of the room acoustics calibration would be simpler if that DSP function is central in the main processor.

I do get it that the DSP in those speakers is also used for active crossovers, dispersion control, etc. which are very custom to those particular models. So, that is an argument for locating all the DSP, including room correction, inside the speaker box. But, with your Illusonic, there is still DSP active in the processor for a number of other things, even if not used for room correction, though it does have that functionality.

Pretty soon, there wil be DSP all over the place, except for DSD playback, of course. Preferably, someday, processors and active speakers could be connected via a digital open standard so that DSPs could be located where they make the most sense, including cascading some DSP functions in the processor to other DSP functions in the active speaker via digital interconnection, eliminating D-A-D-A completely, except for one and only one final D-A, of course.

 

[Purité Audio]

Well, room correction, as I see it, is not about speaker dispersion issues, at least not directly. I am in favor speaker designs that deal intelligently with dispersion. But, depending on the room, dispersion issues can have frequency and time domain indirect side effects, and room correction via treatment and/or DSP may be at least partially useful in taming aspects of that. I think, no matter how intelligently designed, the speaker cannot know what is going to happen with the reflected energy in your specific room by the time it reaches your ears.

Fitz That is the whole point of these speakers that is why they are unlike everything else, they cancel the off axis sound as it emerges, look at the polar plots of the Beolab, nearly all the sound goes forward not sprayed everywhere.
Keith.

 

[RayDunzl]

Here's an impulse response of Cones and Domes (green) vs Dipole (black) in my room.

I don't guarantee the relative levels on this, but it's my measured example of two different types of dispersion:

The little pink marks are what I'm used to seeing with the dipoles, at 7, 27, and lastly at about 33ms.

Whether the difference is good or bad is debatable. This was posted previously in Perceptual Effects of Room Reflections.

 

[Cosmik]

I have had the Kiis here for almost a week now, played everything , I hear the same signature or lack of signature I hear with Bang @ Olufsens Beolab 90 with which the share the same ethos and elements of design.
The Kiis and Beolabs both effectively dismiss any negative impact of the room , they are both completely full range ,they both can be sited anywhere in a room and adjusted to 'work'.
They both use 'spare' drivers to cancel reflected sound creating spectacular polar plots essentially sending the
sound towards the listener rather than all around the room.
I realise there are other speakers that boast cardiod bass response (Geithain) and can vary the amount of bass injected into the room, AJ's Soundfield and Gradient loudspeakers, but as far as I am aware no other loudspeakers do what the Kiis and Beolabs can.
Is this then the future of loudspeakers providing of course manufacturers have the skill set to design and implement .
Keith.

I can't see how it is possible to get much better than this - I haven't heard them yet, but I know what DSP-based active speakers can sound like. Unfortunately, I have also heard bad and nondescript demonstrations of Meridian and Linn systems as have many other people - those people will be wondering what the fuss is all about. I'm not sure how the demonstrations I heard came to be so bad, but when a DSP system is working properly (and it's not a fragile thing - DSP systems do usually 'just work'), the result compared to a conventional, passive system is like Ektachrome versus a poor photocopy.

The bass directivity and other easy-to-use EQ settings are the icing on the cake. Any other form of room correction, I think, is a red herring in that 99% of potential audiophiles would never want to have anything to do with it.

 

[Purité Audio]

A little EQ is still going to be useful, for standing waves but energy released into the room is much reduced, I still have a bass peak here around 40Hz but it is much reduced compared to the measurements of other speakers we have had in this room.
Keith.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Acourate can do all the DSP you mentioned. It's all done with all sample rate filters up to 64 bit 384khz. It's not likely to be replicated in an active speaker due to the computing power needed.

Agreed, based on closely following your exploits, which you have freely and generously shared with the audiophile community. And, you have sensibly opted for a totally centralized DSP in PC architecture, which offers numerous advantages. I would love to hear your system someday. I am sure that it is quite extraordinary. But, since you must be a Cowboys fan, going to Dallas would be repugnant. Go Eagles!

I think the interconnection architecture question for active DSP enabled speakers is still in a formative state. I like the fact that the Kii3 can connect digitally via a single AES cable to a processor or PC in stereo, with a Cat5 connection between the speakers. This avoids unnecessary D-A and back again for the DSP inside the speaker, and it would allow DSP room correction and bass management upstream centrally in a processor or PC where it belongs, IMHO. And, no separate DAC is needed this way. But, it would not appear to be ideal for Mch, which would seem to require the analog connection to the speakers, therefore D-A in the processor or upstream DAC, A-D in the speaker for DSP, then D-A again. I am not a fan of that idea. Also, AES is not asynchronous, so careful work is necessary to minimize potential jitter issues in the AES digital connection.

I see that the Beolab supports 96k wireless, but not wired, digital signal input, plus analog input, of course. But, presumably you need some sort of analog to wireless digital adapter for that, again triggering D-A-D-A in the signal path. We do not yet have digital processors that do digital output directly to wireless, AFAIK. Don't know if a PC could do that currently without special software. And, again, Mch might be difficult or impossible without reverting to analog input to the speakers.

Maybe someday, if we are lucky, we will see all of this come together in a nice, simple, open industry-wide standard for digital interconnection to active DSP enabled speakers with ultimate performance. I would love to see it, but don't count on it. So, for now, it is a tradeoff of some considerable, unique performance advantages provided by these advanced DSP enabled active speakers, but perhaps with less than ideal digital interconnection architecture, given what we know about optimum digital audio signal distribution.

Maybe my musings are all much ado about nothing very significant in audio quality. I would be interested in at least subjective assessments of sound quality with these two speakers via their digital vs. their analog inputs. I would not expect it to be huge, if any.

 

[FrantzM]

Will try to listen to the Beolab 9o. I was in Paris and tried to perhaps Miami ...

This said I can see a Future where some information about the venue is embedded in the recording as metadata for the speaker to perform digital signal processing. I believe the technology is there. The will perhaps not. DSP is the future of speakers design. I am certain DSP will come to have the requisite power for Acourate or similar.
The thing is that audiophile as we are are a dying species. The millenia simply do not get us. We will always be a minority; coupled to that the High End Audio industry in its struggle for survival has veered toward being a Luxury market. Products are variations of the same ol' same ol'...
I frankly question B&O pricing for the Beo 90.. It places it in another stratum, that of High End Audio. I doubt it will make a dent in High End speakers sales of , it goes against everything High Enders go for: It is digital, Class D, has DSP and is the entire system.. No Garden Hose PC and IC, no Silver wiring nor Mundorf caps .. a pair of speakers with run of the mill power cords ... In my mind the Beolab 5 @ $25 K or less already trounce many audiophiles darling ..yet has not been adopted : do you know many audiophiles who would ditch their audiophile speakers for it? .. Not too many.
AS for the Kii it could strive at its (Hate to use this expression but here it goes ) "Price Point", it could attract quite a few audiophiles that are tired of the constant tweaking, changing and not getting any worthwhile results.. Their numbers could be quite significant ..Or I could be dreaming

 

[Purité Audio]

Agreed, based on closely following your exploits, which you have freely and generously shared with the audiophile community. And, you have sensibly opted for a totally centralized DSP in PC architecture, which offers numerous advantages. I would love to hear your system someday. I am sure that it is quite extraordinary. But, since you must be a Cowboys fan, going to Dallas would be repugnant. Go Eagles!

I think the interconnection architecture question for active DSP enabled speakers is still in a formative state. I like the fact that the Kii3 can connect digitally via a single AES cable to a processor or PC in stereo, with a Cat5 connection between the speakers. This avoids unnecessary D-A and back again for the DSP inside the speaker, and it would allow DSP room correction and bass management upstream centrally in a processor or PC where it belongs, IMHO. And, no separate DAC is needed this way. But, it would not appear to be ideal for Mch, which would seem to require the analog connection to the speakers, therefore D-A in the processor or upstream DAC, A-D in the speaker for DSP, then D-A again. I am not a fan of that idea. Also, AES is not asynchronous, so careful work is necessary to minimize potential jitter issues in the AES digital connection.

I see that the Beolab supports 96k wireless, but not wired, digital signal input, plus analog input, of course. But, presumably you need some sort of analog to wireless digital adapter for that, again triggering D-A-D-A in the signal path. We do not yet have digital processors that do digital output directly to wireless, AFAIK. Don't know if a PC could do that currently without special software. And, again, Mch might be difficult or impossible without reverting to analog input to the speakers.

Maybe someday, if we are lucky, we will see all of this come together in a nice, simple, open industry-wide standard for digital interconnection to active DSP enabled speakers with ultimate performance. I would love to see it, but don't count on it. So, for now, it is a tradeoff of some considerable, unique performance advantages provided by these advanced DSP enabled active speakers, but perhaps with less than ideal digital interconnection architecture, given what we know about optimum digital audio signal distribution.

Maybe my musings are all much ado about nothing very significant in audio quality. I would be interested in at least subjective assessments of sound quality with these two speakers via their digital vs. their analog inputs. I would not expect it to be huge, if any.

I have compared analogue in A/D D/A to digital in,D/A I cannot hear any difference whatsoever.
The Kiis are really aimed at mastering/pro recording and younger guys who do not aspire to the HiFi 'shrine'.
Why spew bass into the room and then try to ameliorate it with more bass doesn't make sense.
Keith.

 

[RayDunzl]

Why spew bass into the room and then try to ameliorate it with more bass doesn't make sense.

Isn't that how the Kii works?

"The THREE has a total of 6 (six) ways, front, side and rear, working together to throw the sound in one direction only without relying on a baffle."

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I see that the Beolab supports 96k wireless, but not wired, digital signal input, plus analog input, of course.

The Beolab 90 supports coax and optical S/PDIF and, shortly, will support USB.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

The Beolab 90 supports coax and optical S/PDIF and, shortly, will support USB.

Thanks, Kal. I had difficulty finding specs for it. But, I will get out my checkbook. Asynch USB would be cool.