Markaudio CHN 110 building and comparisons with Genelec 8340 SAM monitors

[Tangband]

Yes. They do feel nice in hand. They are 10x overpriced, but not 100x or more like some of the competition.

Im no friend of very expensive cables and most of those , if one can hear a real difference , are mostly worse sounding than an ordinary 1,5 mm ofc cable . But in this case, in my opinion the k20 makes a difference soundwise for the better, just like the Rega dac does, clearly better sounding than the Yamaha dac .

Something thats hard to explain when looking at the measurements

 

[Tangband]

Comparison with a very expensive speaker today ( at a different location ) shows that for similar sound with chn110, one will need the passive line bafflestep correction , 3 dB at at about 600 Hz shown at page 5. This is also ofcourse very room and loudspeaker placement dependent. If the DIY speaker had been 30 cm wide at the front baffle , any baffle step correction would be much lower in frequency and maybe not needed.

This is the price to pay for building a slim, narrow speaker that is 19.5 cm wide.

Ofcourse one could use a good digital eq to get the same result as a passive line correction.

 

[Tangband]

…. And a WiiM pro can be used to do that baffle step correction, together with some mild peq . No need for a passive one.. My Yamaha wxc50 is sold.

Im happy to discover that the WiiM pro with the peq funktion on, is fully transparent for the ear. No worsening of the sound, no digital glare, no resampling going on. No lost transparency to the sound , like it was with the Dbx pa2 I used with the hybrid project when using the peq function.

 

[Tangband]

The sound is optimised now , and the peq is slightly changed . With good recordings everything sounds wonderful.
Using the WiiM pro PEQ does not worsening the transparency of the sound, and this is highly unusual.

 

[nowonas]

Thank you for a very interesting thread! I have also built a few fulltone speakers, and your approach and findings is aligned with mine. I find a fulltone using DSP has a superior sound compared to conventional passive speakers. I do not think most people understand how much a passive crossover is affecting the sound negatively. And as you say, it is affecting the sound in the most sensitive part of your ear.

The Mark Audio drivers are great, but I have also built a pair of speakers using the Seas fulltone speakers.. They are a bit harder to get right (needs more dsp), but they sound amazing and in my opinion far better than the Mark Audios.

 

[Tangband]

Thank you for a very interesting thread! I have also built a few fulltone speakers, and your approach and findings is aligned with mine. I find a fulltone using DSP has a superior sound compared to conventional passive speakers. I do not think most people understand how much a passive crossover is affecting the sound negatively. And as you say, it is affecting the sound in the most sensitive part of your ear.

The Mark Audio drivers are great, but I have also built a pair of speakers using the Seas fulltone speakers.. They are a bit harder to get right (needs more dsp), but they sound amazing and in my opinion far better than the Mark Audios.

Thanks !
yes, - I will probably never go back to a passive or active multiway loudspeakers . I also share your experience with passive and also active crossovers - they are never perfect.

 

[Tangband]

Comparison with the good sounding Genelec 8030C .
The sound quality with the chn110 loudspeaker with Hypex ncore and WiiM pro with PEQ is clearly superior, big difference. Much better bass, dynamics and spatial details with the chn110.
The Genelec 8030 is really good, and its in direct comparison they fall short.

Here is the latest inroom frequency response from the chn110 with 4 PEQ . Line audio om1 mic with audiotools, 1/6 oct smoothing, 1 meter away from one speaker, 15 degrees off axis.

 

[Tangband]

I have changed my speaker position in the room . Using the average fuction in audiotools, the measurements done with line audio om1 between 200-20000 Hz is 1 meter from one speaker, on axis and 15 degrees off axis . This resulted in slightly different corrections in the midrange and a better sound from listeningposition.

In the bass, learning about dsp extension has made me use a shelving filter with a Q higher than 1 at the tuning frequency to both gain bass output and lowering cone movement below the fB frequency, for this speaker at 36 Hz .

https://audioxpress.com/files/attachment/2721

 

[Ktacos]

I've been curious about this thread and drivers in question for some time, especially since I owned the 8030. I gave it a shot and I'm sorry, the CHN110 does not really come close to the genelec to me. Frankly this thread was just full of red flags but I wanted to hear things for myself. I write music and have mixed a lot of it, some of that time being done professionally in studio and live areas so I feel I have a good sense of how things are supposed to sound. I have toyed with full range drivers, made a few small speakers for friends and families with some TC9fd and BMR's and they work great for that scenario but not for any sort of critical listening. This mark audio would be the largest full range I've tried.

I gotta say I've never encountered a driver with such intense beaming before. You really have to have your ears dead center to the drivers cone or else you just kind of lose the imaging and major tonal changes occur. I find the HF reproduction of the driver is just, not correct in any sense. The speaker really calls attention to itself in that regard as the dispersion is so narrow the HF content tends to stick to the speaker and sounds really tiny. Cymbals for example just sound super small. Turning the speaker up results in what I assume is IMD, things just become very muddy. I was surprised how early this became apparent. From my point of view I didn't really hear any of the supposed benefits that people claim full range drivers have.

Comparatively, the 8030c create a wonderful soundstage and offer a far more convincing illusion of imaging. They simply sound far more "correct" and lets be honest, the data and physics make this hard to argue with. Full range drivers IME really just fall into the category of "Sounds cool for a little bit" but after the initial neat factor wears off, I just want to hear my good speakers again. I found the full range driver did pretty well with certain types of music which is not really what I'm after. A speaker IMO should really excel at reproducing pretty much any genre.

All in all, not the speaker for me and I really don't see how one would feel they are better than what genelec is offering as they were just kind of worse in every objective metric and subjectively that translated to a sound that was difficult to appreciate most of the time.

 

[montyliam]

I've been curious about this thread and drivers in question for some time, especially since I owned the 8030. I gave it a shot and I'm sorry, the CHN110 does not really come close to the genelec to me. Frankly this thread was just full of red flags but I wanted to hear things for myself. I write music and have mixed a lot of it, some of that time being done professionally in studio and live areas so I feel I have a good sense of how things are supposed to sound. I have toyed with full range drivers, made a few small speakers for friends and families with some TC9fd and BMR's and they work great for that scenario but not for any sort of critical listening. This mark audio would be the largest full range I've tried.

I gotta say I've never encountered a driver with such intense beaming before. You really have to have your ears dead center to the drivers cone or else you just kind of lose the imaging and major tonal changes occur. I find the HF reproduction of the driver is just, not correct in any sense. The speaker really calls attention to itself in that regard as the dispersion is so narrow the HF content tends to stick to the speaker and sounds really tiny. Cymbals for example just sound super small. Turning the speaker up results in what I assume is IMD, things just become very muddy. I was surprised how early this became apparent. From my point of view I didn't really hear any of the supposed benefits that people claim full range drivers have.

Comparatively, the 8030c create a wonderful soundstage and offer a far more convincing illusion of imaging. They simply sound far more "correct" and lets be honest, the data and physics make this hard to argue with. Full range drivers IME really just fall into the category of "Sounds cool for a little bit" but after the initial neat factor wears off, I just want to hear my good speakers again. I found the full range driver did pretty well with certain types of music which is not really what I'm after. A speaker IMO should really excel at reproducing pretty much any genre.

All in all, not the speaker for me and I really don't see how one would feel they are better than what genelec is offering as they were just kind of worse in every objective metric and subjectively that translated to a sound that was difficult to appreciate most of the time.

Not to mention that the Mark Audio driver + cabinet + Hypex amplifier is probably close in price to an 8030c.

 

[a4eaudio]

Not to mention that the Mark Audio driver + cabinet + Hypex amplifier is probably close in price to an 8030c.

While there are pros and cons of active vs passive speakers, that is one of the biggest advantages of passive...you don't count the cost of the amplifier!! You can use a different (less expensive) amp with the Markaudio speakers or even change speakers and keep the amp. They aren't inegrated!!

 

[Behrelec 37]

When talking about SAM digital/analog monitors, no child hifi enthusiast really realizes that they are not used with any EQ adjustments first, but rather with the GLM software's room calibration adjustments, which are the highest pro-level sound reproduction output level, which is used to modify the room's highlights and implant a better correction into the speakers, first by measuring in your room, i.e. with a Genelec microphone with automatic measurement, and then the sound structure is massaged to suit your own preferences using GLM by comparing different music with each other.

So you go with your eyes to different HZ readings on your screen and modify the Q and Gain levels so that the rhythmic expression of the sound corresponds to the desired variable compared to the previous variable starting point, of course there are millions of variables. This GLM way of editing makes the sound higher quality, even smoother in music playback, if your room is really bad.

EQ is not the first tool of SAM monitors. So it is completely the wrong tool. And 8030 C, not a. not b. and nothing else but only this 8030 C latest version, it is already a very high quality stupid speaker in the sense that it really does NOT even need equalization or room correction, because it is already a high quality built and balanced speaker. Of course, even dirac room correction or peq can be used if your room is a real monster cave. But it is not necessary. Acoustics would already be a better solution.

 

[Waxx]

comparing this CHN110 driver with a Genelec SAM monitor is like comparing a tractor with a porche, they both drive and have 4 wheels, but are build for very different purposes. In it's genre (single driver fulllrange speakers) the CHN110 is a gem. But that kind of speakers are not neutral, not low distortion, they do other things right and are a niche product for diy purpose, not a high end studio monitor. So don't compare them as if they are of the same league, they are not.

 

[Behrelec 37]

Waxx

They are definitely not similar. DIY speakers excite their owner for a while, until they learn to hear and interpret various genres of music. This is how the differences easily begin to emerge and your own DIY speakers are still very well limited to a good and final solution.

Eventually, when wisdom and reason meet at the crossroads of understanding in your own brain, you give it up and buy commercial products, unless you are really really poor and your skills and your own path are the only right way to go, but you never commercialize them.

I myself have made DIY speakers a long time ago.

 

[Ktacos]

not a high end studio monitor

The CHN110 sounded worse than a cheap c-note kit though, it's not like you need to jump to an expensive monitor to get something better.

I just do not buy into the fullrange thing at all and I really don't get why there are so many proponents of them. Well I can speculate two reasons, being a poor speaker designer and hearing loss that masks the intense beaming. I don't think it's coincidence that full range fans tend to skew to older.

I don't really get the cost of most full ranges either, a lot of them are pretty expensive, which is hilarious to me given their performance. It really feels like an audiophool tax.

These things cost about $200 for both in parts and wood. They sound just as coherent as the CHN110. Covers a considerably larger listening area.

My dispersion graph is not great as I only measured out to 90 degrees, but this-

Looks (and sounds) a hell of a lot better than whatever is going on here (CHR120)

You know what the most telling behavior from OP is, it's that he sold his genelecs after hearing the mark audio, and presumably after the honeymoon phase of something sounding "different", he got genelecs again lol. How many posts have they made about trying to EQ the thing? Doesn't sound like a speaker that is consistently good to me.

 

[Waxx]

I know both the CHN110 and the Genelec 8030C quiet well, so i know the differences and where they shine and not. So no need to start another bashing tread. If you don't get single driver fulllrange drivers, that is ok. It's a niche like there are many. Genelec are technically a lot better, that is true, but there is something about single driver fullrange speakers also, that appeals to way more people, even experienced speaker designers, that a multiway can't. It's not objective pure sound, it's something else. And if you don't get it, don't bother... Get the Genelec or whatever float your boat.

 

[Ktacos]

So no need to start another bashing tread.

You think posts with objective information and subjective impression is bashing? Perhaps you've forgotten that you're not on diyaudio.com where people argue in favor of $9,000 full range towers with $100 drivers or put little dots on the cones.

A recurring theme in this thread was that the CHN110 was comparable to a genelec monitor and I was curious, but found that to kind of be a load of BS. My hope is that my information helps people avoid wasting time and money on misrepresented expectations.

but there is something about single driver fullrange speakers also, that appeals to way more people, even experienced speaker designers, that a multiway can't.

Is there though? I don't see many experienced designers (who can actually make a good speaker) using full range drivers at all. IME they just sound kind of different which is probably enough to entice a listener for awhile but I personally wanted to return to multiways for that accurate HF reproduction fairly quickly.

 

[MAB]

You think posts with objective information and subjective impression is bashing? Perhaps you've forgotten that you're not on diyaudio.com where people argue in favor of $9,000 full range towers with $100 drivers or put little dots on the cones.

All your comments are very fair. Like you said, the thread is full of red flags, and some very incomplete measurements. In one post you provided more data than OP did in 9 pages.

A recurring theme in this thread was that the CHN110 was comparable to a genelec monitor and I was curious, but found that to kind of be a load of BS. My hope is that my information helps people avoid wasting time and money on misrepresented expectations.

Yes, the odd comparisons between the CHN110 and a 2-way DSP monitor were quite hyperbolic and misleading. The fact that speaker cables were presented as sonic improvements pushed this into the land of fairy tales. This thread was never about reasonable tradeoffs.

Is there though? I don't see many experienced designers (who can actually make a good speaker) using full range drivers at all. IME they just sound kind of different which is probably enough to entice a listener for awhile but I personally wanted to return to multiways for that accurate HF reproduction fairly quickly.

Some members have done a great job of building, measuring, and documenting these and other fullrange drivers. Including good discussions of use of DSP, tradeoffs, various cabinet designs, and things that actually make a sonic difference.

 

[Ktacos]

Some members have done a great job of building, measuring, and documenting these and other fullrange drivers. Including good discussions of use of DSP, tradeoffs, various cabinet designs, and things that actually make a sonic difference.

I've seen those threads, and I myself did the same thing, linearized the full range driver with DSP. Unfortunately you still have the intense beaming to deal with. That was really the most frustrating part about the speakers, sweet spot was like the size of a toothpick.