In room measurements of Beolab 50?

[thewas]

I had measured a cardioid vs a monopole loudspeaker and the first didn't show the typical SBIR of the second:

Wilson Audio Speakers: Why do people like them?

I have my audiophile ‘bingo’ card. Keith Didn’t think so. Buhbye. (I really should expand my ignore list). Maybe Blockader will be more forthcoming.

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Bjorn]

I had measured a cardioid vs a monopole loudspeaker and the first didn't show the typical SBIR of the second:

Wilson Audio Speakers: Why do people like them?

I have my audiophile ‘bingo’ card. Keith Didn’t think so. Buhbye. (I really should expand my ignore list). Maybe Blockader will be more forthcoming.

www.audiosciencereview.com

Thanks for sharing. As long as it was without a subwoofer and identical positions, we can say that there's no winner here and they measure very similar.

Above 150 Hz the KH310 doesn't have the dip at 180 Hz but a slight peak at 250 Hz. The D&D 8C doesn't not have the dip around 110 Hz but has a similar dip at 65 Hz which the KH310 doesn't have. Peaks and dips are quite narrow.

Overall, the general response is the same for both speakers, and we don't see any evidence of less room modes with the carioid. Biggest deviation is the 400 Hz peak and too much low frequency gain but the latter can obviously easily be reduced. The 400 Hz peak should be solved acoustically for a good result.

 

[thewas]

Thanks for sharing. As long as it was without a subwoofer and identical positions, we can say that there's no winner here and they measure very similar.
View attachment 483707

Above 150 Hz the KH310 doesn't have the dip at 180 Hz but a slight peak at 250 Hz. The D&D 8C doesn't not have the dip around 110 Hz but has a similar dip at 65 Hz which the KH310 doesn't have. Peaks and dips are quite narrow.

Overall, the general response is the same for both speakers, and we don't see any evidence of less room modes with the carioid. Biggest deviation is the 400 Hz peak and too much low frequency gain but the latter can obviously easily be reduced. The 400 Hz peak should be solved acoustically for a good result.

I disagree, the cardioid of the 8C eliminates the typical wide and most detrimental (midbass) dip around 100 Hz, below that it isn't cardioid anymore which proves it makes a clearly measurable difference at the LP.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Again I don't think we can assume that the full effect of cardioid is seen (or not) in a single measurement from the listening position, just like we can't tell everything about a speaker from an anechoic on-axis response.

 

[thewas]

Again I don't think we can assume that the full effect of cardioid is seen (or not) in a single measurement from the listening position, just like we can't tell everything about a speaker from an anechoic on-axis response.

In my opinion it can be clearly seen and by the way it wasn't a single measurement but a MMM around the LP.

 

[Bjorn]

I disagree, the cardioid of the 8C eliminates the typical wide and most detrimental (midbass) dip around 100 Hz, below that it isn't cardioid anymore which proves it makes a clearly measurable difference at the LP.

And the cardioid has a dip at 180 Hz which the KH310 doesn't suffer from..... So overall, quite equal. Most importanly though, the overall response is very similar with only differences in narrow regions. The result also speaks for itself: "there was no clear preference of either so he kept his Neumann setup"

 

[sigbergaudio]

In my opinion it can be clearly seen and by the way it wasn't a single measurement but a MMM around the LP.

Sure, but it doesn't always show up as a clear dip being missing like this, it depends on the room. But that doesn't mean it doesn't affect the sound positively despite the response looking fairly similar.

 

[sigbergaudio]

What I am more curious about is why it is important to you to discredit cardioid as a design, @Bjorn.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Most importanly though, the overall response is very similar with only differences in narrow regions.

There's nothing weird about two well designed speakers having the same overall tonality, despite one being cardioid and the other not.

 

[thewas]

And the cardioid has a dip at 180 Hz which the KH310 doesn't suffer from..... So overall, quite equal. Most importanly though, the overall response is very similar with only differences in narrow regions. The result also speaks for itself: "there was no clear preference of either so he kept his Neumann setup"

The dip at 180 Hz is higher in frequency and quite more narrow which makes it significantly less problematic.

Also the listening tests where done with EQ on both and with subwoofers for the KH310 so not relevant for the initial statement if cardioid measurably improves the response at the LP.

 

[Vuki]

And bass drivers of d&d and neumann were not in the same position, or midbass/tw were not...

 

[Bjorn]

What I am more curious about is why it is important to you to discredit cardioid as a design, @Bjorn.

What is this nonsense Sigberg?
We are discussing speaker designs on a forum which is what is commonly done here. And I have said the following about cardoid: "I haven't seen any clear indications that a cardioid dispersion improves the frequency response. "
Both the measurement of the Beolab 50 and other posted measurements backs this up. The studies we have are also inclined to agree.

You need to accept that we are on a forum for discussion and tolerate other opinions.

 

[Bjorn]

The dip at 180 Hz is higher in frequency and quite more narrow which makes it significantly less problematic.

Also the listening tests where done with EQ on both and with subwoofers for the KH310 so not relevant for the initial statement if cardioid measurably improves the response at the LP.

There are no major benefit with the cardioid here. One could also discuss that the cardioid suffers from a 62 Hz dip and that the KH310 is flatter at 130 Hz where the D&D 8C has a dip.

We basically see the same overall response here. Only minor differences and both with a wrong tonality even when the deep bass is lowered.

 

[sigbergaudio]

What is this nonsense Sigberg?
We are discussing speaker designs on a forum which is what is commonly done here. And I have said the following about cardoid: "I haven't seen any clear indications that a cardioid dispersion improves the frequency response. "
Both the measurement of the Beolab 50 and other posted measurements backs this up. The studies we have are also inclined to agree.

You need to accept that we are on a forum for discussion and tolerate other opinions.

I am happy to discuss, but you have on several occasions (not just in this thread, as you said yourself) talked about cardioid in a negative way without anything substantial to back it up with. I don't make horn systems, so I don't talk negatively about horn systems, it is of no relevance to me. The same with panel speakers, etc.

But here you are actively creating a dedicated thread explicitly about a speaker with a cardioid design, explaining how your own design is superior. It is peculiar.

 

[sigbergaudio]

The studies we have are also inclined to agree.

Which studies are those?

 

[thewas]

There are no major benefit with the cardioid here. One could also discuss that the cardioid suffers from a 62 Hz dip and that the KH310 is flatter at 130 Hz where the D&D 8C has a dip.

That's your interpretation, I see the avoidance of a wide dip in the midbass as a significant advantage as its the most detrimental issue at typical 2.0 home setups.

We basically see the same overall response here. Only minor differences and both with a wrong tonality even when the deep bass is lowered.

The Kii has less deep dips between 200 and 500 Hz, peaks and general levels of bass, mids and treble can be easily corrected and adjusted per taste with EQ, dips not.

 

[TimVG]

We are discussing speaker designs on a forum which is what is commonly done here. And I have said the following about cardoid: "I haven't seen any clear indications that a cardioid dispersion improves the frequency response. "

Another consideration is that "cardioid' speakers usually approach the ideal cardioid pattern only within select bands.

The real advantage, in my opinion, in that a well designed controlled directivity loudspeaker does so down to the modal region of the room in which it is being used. And to me this is audible when the first lateral reflection matches the direct sound as close as possible within a certain passband. I'm not sure it is measurable, in my room at least I don't believe it is, though I'd have to verify. My subjective feeling is that there is a more 3 dimensional aspect (depth) to the presentation when this is the case, but you can blame my imagination of course.

You can achieve the same thing with a well designed wide baffle of course.

The R2 project for instance, the goal for me was always a non-collapsing polar, not cardioid response in itself. Once we achieve that, then we simply calculate where the floor bounce will occur, and solve that through means of a seperate bass module. The only thing not addressed is further vertical directivity control.

 

[Sancus]

I recall @napilopez posting in-room measurements of the D&D 8C a few years back compared to the Kef R3 and B&W something, and the frequency response was much better. Of course, it's hard to isolate the effect of cardioid dispersion specifically against the effect of all the other differences...

 

[sigbergaudio]

I recall @napilopez posting in-room measurements of the D&D 8C a few years back compared to the Kef R3 and B&W something, and the frequency response was much better. Of course, it's hard to isolate the effect of cardioid dispersion specifically against the effect of all the other differences...

The difference in radiation of cardioid speakers is well documented. So what remains is what actual perceived differences this translates to for the listeners in any given room. That is a pretty complicated question.

In my designs I try to amplify the effect by also designing the speakers to be placed close to the wall, which further reduce the SBIR effects.

I also think cardioid is beneficial in higher frequencies, and here we typically actually see smoother in-room response in the higher frequencies with the Manta than for instance the SBS, which is a bit interesting since the SBS is more tidy anechoically.

 

[Bjorn]

That's your interpretation, I see the avoidance of a wide dip in the midbass as a significant advantage as its the most detrimental issue at typical 2.0 home setups.

It's not a wide dip, it's quite narrow. Overall the response is very similar.

The Kii has less deep dips between 200 and 500 Hz, peaks and general levels of bass, mids and treble can be easily corrected and adjusted per taste with EQ, dips not.

Only minor narrow differences and which may not be audible at all. We need to look at the general response.

While you can EQ peaks, the result is withour compromise when it's not minimum phase and the time domain isn't improved and actually made worse by phase distortion.