Markaudio MAOP 11.2 in my sphere speaker cabinets

[ppataki]

After doing two very successful projects with the Markaudio CHN110 and the Markaudio Pluvia 11 I have decided to try the MAOP 11.2 in my front spheres in the living room
I am interested if there is going to be any audible difference compared to the much cheaper CHN110 model, especially given the fact that I apply heavy DSP with Dirac Live 3 and various VST plugins
And also just for fun since I love experimenting with various full range drivers

The drivers shall arrive early next week. I will need to make some small adjustments to the sphere cabinets so that the MAOPs could fit (since they are a bit bigger than the CHN110s).
I will post pictures next week and once the drivers are fitted I will post the usual measurements too to compare apples to apples in the main listening position.

If they sound 'better' (?) I will replace my rear spheres too - at least that's the plan

 

[ppataki]

The MAOPs have just arrived:

To me they are simply gorgeous; they will look really great in the white sphere cabinets
Unfortunately they are a bit bigger than the CHN110s so I will first need to adjust the spheres to fit them

Stay tuned!

 

[ppataki]

The spheres have been modified accordingly and the MAOPs are now in place:

I must say I really love the looks. The matte white cones are matching perfectly with the matte white finish of the cabinets

Now let's see the measurements!

Frequency response of the CHN110 vs the MAOP 11.2

Left channel, the MAOP is the one highlighted. Both measurements were taken at the MLP (at around 250cm from the speakers), no DSP whatsoever, just the pure response
Actually there is not much of a difference between the two, except for maybe around the 1kHz region and a slight difference btw. 3500 and 7500Hz

And when EQ-d to flat, basically all the difference is gone:
(this is just the predicted flat EQ in REW for both)

I am attaching the mdat file, so that those who are interested in the other graphs can take a look

Subjective comparison:
The difference is very subtle, I am 100% sure I would not be able to tell the difference in a blind test...
I think I hear the vocals and the treble being 'softer' and 'silkier'. Somehow easier to listen

I am planning to replace the rear speakers too, just to have the same look for all four

 

[ppataki]

In the meantime a better picture:

 

[HalasKYO]

May I ask what is your source ? And with what did you reach this level of flatness ? Amp ? Maybe something about the sub ?
You are runnign 4.1 (or Quad stereo). I like your setup.
Greetings from Germany, a fellow Hungarian

 

[ppataki]

May I ask what is your source ? And with what did you reach this level of flatness ? Amp ? Maybe something about the sub ?
You are runnign 4.1 (or Quad stereo). I like your setup.
Greetings from Germany, a fellow Hungarian

Happy to hear that there is more of us here!

The source is a PC (Windows 11), using Jriver Media Center to play audio/video and also running Dirac Live 3 that makes the response flat (it has nothing to do with the amp/sub, etc.)
This is how the signal chain looks like: PC --> miniDSP U-DIO8* via USB --> three Sabaj A30A FDAs (full digital amp) via digit coax (SPDIF)
* this is not a DSP unit, this is just a multichannel DDC (digital-digital converter) to convert USB to multiple SPDIF outputs
All the DSP is done in the PC in Jriver (channel mapping, crossover, delay, Dirac Live, etc.)

I am running 4.1 with this sub and very soon this second sub will be engaged too, so it will be 4.2 then
Sub integration is done manually based on acoustic reference measurements

 

[lucian]

Nice project.

Can you tell a little more about the spheres? I mean the housing.

 

[ppataki]

Nice project.

Can you tell a little more about the spheres? I mean the housing.

Thank you

Please read the first post, you will see some links there that will show you the details of the sphere projects (build, measurements, etc.)

 

[lucian]

Ah found it. Already had those bowls in my hand thinking about to do the same. Thanks for proof of concept.

How did you get those perfect cut outs? Looks like you have access to a milling machine?

 

[ppataki]

My neighbor is a carpenter
He is the BCoTW (Best Carpenter of the World)

 

[norman bates]

Most excellent having the sub between the speakers............

Please post your project with pictures over on diyaudio.com
The full range forum.



It seems there is not much love here on this website for wide bands.........

 

[john11]

The spheres have been modified accordingly and the MAOPs are now in place:

View attachment 400707

View attachment 400708

I must say I really love the looks. The matte white cones are matching perfectly with the matte white finish of the cabinets

Now let's see the measurements!

Frequency response of the CHN110 vs the MAOP 11.2

View attachment 400709

Left channel, the MAOP is the one highlighted. Both measurements were taken at the MLP (at around 250cm from the speakers), no DSP whatsoever, just the pure response
Actually there is not much of a difference between the two, except for maybe around the 1kHz region and a slight difference btw. 3500 and 7500Hz

And when EQ-d to flat, basically all the difference is gone:
(this is just the predicted flat EQ in REW for both)
View attachment 400710

I am attaching the mdat file, so that those who are interested in the other graphs can take a look

Subjective comparison:
The difference is very subtle, I am 100% sure I would not be able to tell the difference in a blind test...
I think I hear the vocals and the treble being 'softer' and 'silkier'. Somehow easier to listen

I am planning to replace the rear speakers too, just to have the same look for all four

What do you think of using full range speakers, i always saw them as a compromise, wondering if one drive unit can handle the full bandwidth of sounds the human ear can hear and do it well

 

[ppataki]

What do you think of using full range speakers, i always saw them as a compromise, wondering if one drive unit can handle the full bandwidth of sounds the human ear can hear and do it well

They cannot
When using full range speakers you need to:
- apply full-spectrum (up to 20kHz), heavy DSP (either manually with a PEQ or use room correction like Dirac or both)
- have a subwoofer to cover the low end
- listen to the highs to decide if those are detailed enough for your taste (some people find them either not detailed enough or too harsh)

Why bother with all the above?
Well, subjectively they have a totally different way of 'projecting' the sound stage, you feel that you are on stage with the musicians and the lead vocal will literally sound like being <50cm in front of you, in your room. Some people call this 'holography' or 'live sound feeling'
I cannot prove this with any of my measurements, but this is what I hear (and everybody else too that ever came to my home to listen to my systems)

 

[john11]

Good points. I have tried a few full range drive units, including the famous visaton b200 and find full rangers sound thin and boring. They do have the advantage that full rangers do not need crossovers so avoid the problem of crossover distortion, phase problems, ringing etc so can give a different kind of sound, i usually build 3-way or 4-way speakers and love that extra hit in the bass and the soaring highs that full rangers cannot produce
Seeing how full rangers usually need help from other drive units to reproduce low bass notes, and also help producing good quality highs, i would rather think of them as wide rangers rather than full rangers
Full rangers sound good when drive by current drive amps, unfortunatly most amps nowadays are voltage drive. Nelson Pass made a few good current drive amps like the F1 and some people love combining the F1 with wide band drivers, reporting spectacular results. Unfortunatly the F1 turned out to be a class-A amp with a 30ohm resistor in series with the output, so not really a current drive amp