Invest in better measuring speakers or room equalisation ? When does one or the other make a bigger difference in your experience ?

[Chr1]

It means cutting of your testicles.
Keith

Lol

Wow. Had no idea that using DSP could be so consequential...

Never mind the signal. There's definitely some things that definitely can be considered "precious."

My 2c. YMMV.

 

[Purité Audio]

In most cases, our loudspeakers are already in the ballpark of being good enough.

What makes the biggest impact on sound quality is setting them up properly in the room, and then dealing with the room acoustics to shorten and even out the decay times. After you get those things right, you can then iron out the remaining problems with EQ.

If your speakers have rough off-axis, compared to ‘on’ they are always going to sound coloured.
Keith

 

[goat76]

If your speakers have rough off-axis, compared to ‘on’ they are always going to sound coloured.
Keith

I have loudspeakers with smooth enough off-axis response, and that is probably also true for most other members on this forum.

 

[Marc v E]

Then if I understand correctly, when a speaker has an on axis response that is even and an off axis response that is quite similar to on axis, that speaker is basically good enough to use equalisation.

Preferably acoustics should be made by physical changes in the room, like positioning the speakers and listening position, which can make a big impact ime.

Finally eq should only be used for the bass region (400 hz and lower iirc). Like for subwoofer integration.



After the above has been taken care of, what makes a speaker better than the ones I already have, looking at the measurements? In other words, how can I then objectively compare speakers ?

 

[Mort]

After the above has been taken care of, what makes a speaker better than the ones I already have, looking at the measurements? In other words, how can I then objectively compare speakers ?

There are many characteristics of good speakers for which we do not normally have measurements. Or we have measurements but 'good' is a matter of preference. Clarity, soundstage, early vs late reflection, speaker position are all relevant, but you won't see them measured for every speaker.

'Good' depends on use case - a narrow monitor used nearfield in a philharmonic hall will sound quite different from a wide-directivity speaker with some distance.

 

[90sNintendoKid]

I focus directivity and multiple subwoofers and EQ. In my next place I may also use some acoustic panels.

I've got a 3m by 2m room and I use Kef Q350s for my left and right, Kef Q150s for surrounds and 4 subwoofers (2 SVS 3000 Micros and 2 SVS SB1000S) with a Denon 3800H.

I use Magic Beans True Target to calculate per speaker target curves and I do full range EQ using Dirac ART and A1 Evo Acoustix.

 

[NTK]

Quoting Dr Toole's from many years back. That day is fast approaching, or perhaps is already here for some loudspeakers.

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/b-...toole-sean-olive.2914582/page-3#post-54705092

 

[Hear Here]

Your amp’s frequency response remains the same whether you use EQ or not.

No - the signal that the amp receives after DSP is no longer flat , so the amp's output is also no longer flat after DSP.

 

[pos]

Invest money in speakers and time in room eq and treatment.

 

[Purité Audio]

Parametric EQ doesn’t add anything to the signal, no distortion ( ie something that wasn’t in the original signal), it just removes the gain added by the room, it doesn’t add distortion to the amplifier, if you EQ in the minimal phase region the filter is a perfect inversion, nothing else is affected.
Keith

 

[Leporello]

Of course, no DSP can correct the room – we all know that. All it can do is mess with your amp's nice flat frequency response to pander to the speaker or the room's acoustic failures. That’s undeniably how these DSPs work, isn’t it?

No, your amp is agnostic. It does not know if the incoming signal has been altered by dsp or not.

How many of us have considered what TYPE of speaker would be best installed into our own living room to achieve best sound without electronic jiggery-pokery?

Quite a few of us, I'd say. In many cases DSP actually does help. No need to label it as "electronic jiggery-pokery".

With 2-channel stereo, where audio quality is of paramount importance, we should surely not need to resort to deliberately spoiling of our amp's qualities, just because we have poorly chosen speakers, or rooms where acoustic difficulties are ignored, or we haven’t got our speakers properly set up.

Again, dsp does not have any effect on your amp's qualities. As for the other things you mentioned, it is certainly commendable to try to sort them out. But in many cases it is not practical or possible. Speakers and room acoustics are always a huge compromise. Whatever works.

If you have the option to easily switch between No DSP and DSP Filter, try this. Assuming your DSP is only applied to bass frequencies (typically sub-500 Hz), choose a piece of music that is bass light (or even disconnect your speakers’ bass terminal straps if they have them), but with a high degree of top-end delicacy and detail that gets your goosebumps rising and generates a high excitement factor. [You need good speakers for this of course]. Play this piece while comfortably sat in the sweet spot, relaxed and with your eyes closed. Listen to the top end detail and switch between No Fiter and DSP and you’ll notice a slight but significant reduction in the top-end sparkle factor. Although the top end is not adjusted by the processor, the entire signal has to pass through this circuit, and it suffers as a result – as you’d expect if you consider the situation from the signal’s point of view! OK, that’s a simplification, but it can easily be demonstrated on a high-quality system.

Not my experience at all. What's more, you have not provided any evidence to support your claims. The signal has no point of view of its own. It is not a living thing. You will not hurt its feelings by using DSP.

 

[Mort]

Invest money in speakers and time in room eq and treatment.

Yes. I kept re-reading the question to figure out the exact intent of the OP. I think is a mistaken comparison between investing in time and money.

 

[DVDdoug]

Invest in better measuring speakers or room equalisation ?

Diagnosis before treatment...

Ideally, I'd "start with" good speakers. If you don't have good sound coming-out of the speakers there's only so-much you can do.

A speaker can't fix room modes. (Except a speaker with limited bass will minimize the bumps in bass response. )

EQ/DSP can help a lot with bumps caused by standing waves but it can only help a little with dips where standing waves cancel. (It takes "infinite" power and "infinitely large" woofers to overcome cancelation.) But the good news is that the dips are less annoying than the "boomy bumps".

EQ/DSP also can't help if you have small woofers that can't put-out enough bass... You just end-up pushing the speaker (and maybe the amplifier) into distortion.

Bass traps can smooth both the bumps and dips by absorbing the waves that would otherwise be reflected. But they need to cover a significant amount of wall area. "Regular" acoustic treatment doesn't do much for the bass.

Multiple subwoofers can also smooth then dips and bumps by "randomizing" the waves in the room. (But some room modes are usually higher in frequency than the subwoofer range.)

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

The level of disinformation from the HEA, and it has migrated into Hi-Fi in general, is almost criminal. DSP properly applied can transform a system. And it has become downright cheap.
Here is an incontrovertible truth:. Take the most perfect anechoically speaker, your money can buy.. Say Some of the better ones measured by ASR or Erin (Not pleased by the last stunt of an erstaz paywall. Erin but ...)... Say a Neuman KH 420, Genelec 8361 or 8381 or Kef Blade Meta 2 or .. whatever, and, in most rooms on the planet.. the bass will be not linear or smooth. Yes, you can treat the room to your heart content, but in the bass such treatments are yuuuuge, unpractical, and in most situations downright impossible to implement.. Only way to correct this is DSP and this can be dome cheaply.
e.g

Dedicated modestly treated for reflections but no bass treatment, Listening Room: 8 x 5 x 3 meters:
In one corner: you get yourself a High End Audio System: (almost) Ultimate preamp ($20,000) + (almost)Ultimate DAC ($15,000) + (almost)Ultimate cables ($50,000 totla)+ (almost)Ultimate Streamer ($10,000) + (almost) Ultimate monoblock Amps ($40,000/pair) + A pair of Kef Blades meta 1 ($35.000) ... You don't touch the signal in any way: Purity, from DAC to speakers..
In the other corner: Denon AVR-X4800 + Dirac + Purifi 500 wpc monoblock amps for a total of 5 to $6,000 ... the amps are to make sure you drive the Kef Blade Meta , add to this system Dirac full Suite (D-S-P software) or Audyssey MutQ-X or in my case being a cheapskate and a happy user, , @OCA Acoustix FREE scripts and

Listen , measure and ...

Everyone knows which one would sound and measure better
spoiler: not the almost $250,000 system

 

[Dj7675]

Of course, no DSP can correct the room – we all know that. All it can do is mess with your amp's nice flat frequency response to pander to the speaker or the room's acoustic failures. That’s undeniably how these DSPs work, isn’t it?

No, we don’t all know that. For many the biggest leap in fidelity is room correction… and by that I mean under 300hz. Above that we are really talking about speaker correction. And room correction can also include manual correction in addition to the usual suspects you mentioned. Something as simple as a a few eq filters reducing peaks under 200hz can make a very big difference.

 

[Leporello]

Hi

THe level of disinformation from the HEA and it has migrated into Hi-Fi in general is almost criminal. DSP properly applied can transform a system. And it has become downright cheap.
Here is an incotrovertible truth. Take the most perfect speake anechoically your money can but.. Say Some of the better one measured by ASR or Erin (Not pleased by the last stunt of an estaz paywall. Erin but ...)... Say A Neuman KH 420, Gnelec 8361 or 8381 or Kef Blade Meta 2 or .. whatever and in most rooms on the planet.. The bass will be not linear or smooth. Yes you can treat the room to your heart content but in the bass such treatments are yuge and unpractical, and in most situation impossible.. Only way to correct this is DSP and this can be dome cheaply.
e.g

Dedicated modestly treated for reflections but no bass treatment, Listening Room: 8 x 5 x 3 meters:
In one corner: you get yourself a High End Audio System: (almost) Ultimate preamp ($20,000) + (almost)Ultimate DAC ($15,000) + (almost)Ultimate cables ($50,000 totla)+ (almost)Ultimate Streamer ($10,000) + (almost) Ultimate monoblock Amps ($40,000/pair) + A pair of Kef Blades meta 1 ($35.000) ... You don't touch the signal in any way purity from DAC to the speakers..
In the other corner: A Denon AVR-X4800 + Dirac + Purifi 500 wpc monoblock amps for a total of 5 to $6,000 ... the amps are to make sure you drive the Kef Blade Meta , add to this system Dirac full Suite (D-S-P software) or Audyssey MutQ-X or in my case being a cheapskate and a happy user, , @OCA Acoustix FREE scripts and

Listen , measure and ...

Everyone knows which one would sound and measure better
spoiler: not the almost $250,000 system

Sensible analysis. But there is the possibility that many seasoned audiophiles have learned to love room modes and bass bumps. Take those away and they will tell you how dsp sucks the soul from music.

 

[mcochris]

My experience is that room treatments (absorption and diffusion) provide the most bang for your buck. You can get free acoustical treatment advice from GIK and Music City acoustics. I'd start there before buying speakers and/or equalization hardware.

 

[Marc v E]

Yes. I kept re-reading the question to figure out the exact intent of the OP. I think is a mistaken comparison between investing in time and money.

Maybe I can clarify my intend.
I struggled with trying to phrase the question...

I am familiar with high end sound, as in coaxial, low coloration.
However the direct sound of a cheap speaker from genelec ime sounds quite similar in tonality.
The main difference being the 3d sound due to the coaxial setup. And perceived clarity which is probably due to using a dedicated driver for bass.

Having said that, in room bass is obviously a problem for a stereo system too. Then wouldn't it be better to use only the highs and mids to the speakers and leave the bass to subs and an avr?

What gains can then still be made by upgrading speakers?
Is it only imaging and perceived clarity ?

It just makes no sense to me to chase the best speaker when in room sound makes such a big difference. Surely, it's a choice we all have to make for ourselves.
But is this how other members perceive this and thus a silent wisdom lingering here? Or is it just a few, like me?

 

[Mort]

Then wouldn't it be better to use only the highs and mids to the speakers and leave the bass to subs and an avr?

Its not worth investing in bass drivers one doesn't use. This is why many recommend the smaller 8351b genelec coaxial used with a sub over the larger 8361a with a sub. But there is more to it than just that. For instance, one needs overlap of drivers to get good crossovers.

What gains can then still be made by upgrading speakers?
Is it only imaging and perceived clarity ?

There are lots of things that can be measured. Directivity, sensitivity, max SPL, better crossovers. Yes also imaging and clarity and soundstage characteristics. I'm sure there are more.

It just makes no sense to me to chase the best speaker when in room sound makes such a big difference.

This is still too hypothetical. What's the best speaker? It's arbitrary based on preference. My wish would be a $30k pair and I'm sure they would sound better than my $10k pair blind ABX. Is that the best?

 

[Marc v E]

(...)



This is still too hypothetical. What's the best speaker? It's arbitrary based on preference. My wish would be a $30k pair and I'm sure they would sound better than my $10k pair blind ABX. Is that the best?

I don't mean to be hypothetical.
What I experience is that a low cost speaker that is well designed sounds in tonality much like its state of the art brothers. Certainly when using with an avr and subwoofer.

But ymmv, I accept that.