This is a review and detailed measurements of the Swan Hivi 3.1A DIY Speaker kit with modified crossover by Sehlin Sound Solutions. It was kindly sent to me by @Mudjock as tested. The kit by itself goes for US $300 including Prime shipping. Unusual for a speaker kit, it comes with everything you need including the speaker box. As built the response is too hot in the tweeter (I think) and hence the mod: https://sites.google.com/view/sehlin-sound-solutions/hivi-diy-3-1-modifications
I must say I like the white finish on a DIY speaker better than black:
Please don't mind the little nicks. The crossover had come loose in shipping and I had to take the speaker apart to affix it.
The mid-range throw me off as I first thought those two little wires are debris so I proceed to try to grab then with my needle nose pliers! Fortunately I realized in time and didn't try to pull them off. So if you have grabby hands around your household, you better make a grill or buy a different speaker.
While I was in there, I took pictures of the drivers and crossover:
The tweeter wires had come off also. I thought I tighten the clips before sliding them on and was disappointed by how soft the tabs on the tweeters were. They started to bend and felt like they would fall off you did that once or twice.
FYI despite my addition of double sided tape (admittedly low quality ones), the crossover came loose again. So best to think of a more solid way to mount them.
Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.
I used over 800 measurement point which was enough to compute the sound field of the speaker within 1% error except region above 12 kHz or so. This may have caused a bit more of a steep drop off in that region than reality.
Temperature was 75 degrees. Measurement location is at sea level so you compute the pressure.
Measurements are compliant with latest speaker research into what can predict the speaker preference and is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 ANSI specifications. Likewise listening tests are performed per research that shows mono listening is much more revealing of differences between speakers than stereo or multichannel.
Spinorama Audio Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:
On-axis response is not ruler flat but not too bad either. I tend to like areas I can pull down in upper bass than needing to push them up.
Off-axis response shows more clearly a dip in mid-range response:
You can see this more clearly in near-field response of all the drivers/port:
Low response of the midrange between 1 and 2 kHz has an unwanted shelf causing lower energy there.
Predicted in-room response is one that we could guess:
I was impressed by low levels of distortion:
Distortion in bass usually goes off scale but here is very well managed until we drop to below 40 Hz.
Beamwidth is typical but somewhat uneven:
Here are the directivity measurements:
EDIT: here is the impedance graph:
Speaker Listening Tests
Out of the box, the speaker sounded very good but with tonality that is a bit on the bright side. Upper bass can also be a bit tubby just like the measurements indicate.
I usually have an EQ at 100 hz for a room mode but here, it actually helped the response so I turned that off. I then put in a dip at 700 and 3000 Hz (1 and 2 dB respectively with Q of 2). The latter was effective across all content. The 700 Hz was a matter of taste.
I was most impressed by how clean the Hivi 3.1 could play. I could push it up to reference levels without a hint of distortion with body sensations to boot! My "speaker killer" tests nearly did not impact the Hivi. It did not try to reproduce the deep bass too much and this was its savior. No bottoming out. No static. Most excellent.
Helped with my room mode at 100 Hz and tiny bit of EQ, this speaker produced delightful sound, albeit with still some slant toward highs. The subjective performance pushed my my preference one notch relative to measurements.
Conclusions
I had low expectations going into this review and boy, was I surprised. No, there is no perfection here and without EQ, you may find the sound a bit annoying. But small amount of EQ fixes most of that and delivers a speaker with impressive dynamics and very balanced design. It is able to outperform many budget speakers in its ability to play loud and not bottom out/distort.
Assuming you do use EQ and want the sanctification of building a DIY speaker, the Hivi 3.1 with Sehlin gets my strong recommendation!
Note that if your room doesn't provide the bass enhancement that mine did, your experience may not quite match mine. I can only report on what I hear in the same setting as other speakers which happened to help this speaker.
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
$440. That was the cost of my helper pulling weeds in the garden which I would normally do but did not have time due to testing audio gear. I know most of you are as cheap as me but come on, I can't shoulder all of this cost so please donate what you can using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
I must say I like the white finish on a DIY speaker better than black:
Please don't mind the little nicks. The crossover had come loose in shipping and I had to take the speaker apart to affix it.
The mid-range throw me off as I first thought those two little wires are debris so I proceed to try to grab then with my needle nose pliers! Fortunately I realized in time and didn't try to pull them off. So if you have grabby hands around your household, you better make a grill or buy a different speaker.
While I was in there, I took pictures of the drivers and crossover:
The tweeter wires had come off also. I thought I tighten the clips before sliding them on and was disappointed by how soft the tabs on the tweeters were. They started to bend and felt like they would fall off you did that once or twice.
FYI despite my addition of double sided tape (admittedly low quality ones), the crossover came loose again. So best to think of a more solid way to mount them.
Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.
I used over 800 measurement point which was enough to compute the sound field of the speaker within 1% error except region above 12 kHz or so. This may have caused a bit more of a steep drop off in that region than reality.
Temperature was 75 degrees. Measurement location is at sea level so you compute the pressure.
Measurements are compliant with latest speaker research into what can predict the speaker preference and is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 ANSI specifications. Likewise listening tests are performed per research that shows mono listening is much more revealing of differences between speakers than stereo or multichannel.
Spinorama Audio Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:
On-axis response is not ruler flat but not too bad either. I tend to like areas I can pull down in upper bass than needing to push them up.
Off-axis response shows more clearly a dip in mid-range response:
You can see this more clearly in near-field response of all the drivers/port:
Low response of the midrange between 1 and 2 kHz has an unwanted shelf causing lower energy there.
Predicted in-room response is one that we could guess:
I was impressed by low levels of distortion:
Distortion in bass usually goes off scale but here is very well managed until we drop to below 40 Hz.
Beamwidth is typical but somewhat uneven:
Here are the directivity measurements:
EDIT: here is the impedance graph:
Speaker Listening Tests
Out of the box, the speaker sounded very good but with tonality that is a bit on the bright side. Upper bass can also be a bit tubby just like the measurements indicate.
I usually have an EQ at 100 hz for a room mode but here, it actually helped the response so I turned that off. I then put in a dip at 700 and 3000 Hz (1 and 2 dB respectively with Q of 2). The latter was effective across all content. The 700 Hz was a matter of taste.
I was most impressed by how clean the Hivi 3.1 could play. I could push it up to reference levels without a hint of distortion with body sensations to boot! My "speaker killer" tests nearly did not impact the Hivi. It did not try to reproduce the deep bass too much and this was its savior. No bottoming out. No static. Most excellent.
Helped with my room mode at 100 Hz and tiny bit of EQ, this speaker produced delightful sound, albeit with still some slant toward highs. The subjective performance pushed my my preference one notch relative to measurements.
Conclusions
I had low expectations going into this review and boy, was I surprised. No, there is no perfection here and without EQ, you may find the sound a bit annoying. But small amount of EQ fixes most of that and delivers a speaker with impressive dynamics and very balanced design. It is able to outperform many budget speakers in its ability to play loud and not bottom out/distort.
Assuming you do use EQ and want the sanctification of building a DIY speaker, the Hivi 3.1 with Sehlin gets my strong recommendation!
Note that if your room doesn't provide the bass enhancement that mine did, your experience may not quite match mine. I can only report on what I hear in the same setting as other speakers which happened to help this speaker.
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
$440. That was the cost of my helper pulling weeds in the garden which I would normally do but did not have time due to testing audio gear. I know most of you are as cheap as me but come on, I can't shoulder all of this cost so please donate what you can using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Attachments
Last edited: