Mesanovic RTM10 Monitor

[pozz]

Barefoot can't not be the competition. I really was shocked its uncontrolled Directivity plot..

Do you have a link to measurements?

 

[js_k0914]

Do you have a link to measurements?

When I saw them, I thought there is no tonal consistency(Directivity) in the same brand. Some of them just look okay, but others aren't.

 

[pozz]

View attachment 90351View attachment 90352View attachment 90353View attachment 90355

When I saw them, I thought there is no tonal consistency(Directivity) in the same brand. Some of them just look okay, but others aren't.

Thanks. Which site did you get the plots from?

 

[js_k0914]

Thanks. Which site did you get the plots from?

Barefoot Sound!

https://barefootsound.com/

 

[vavan]

According to Floyd Toole "This product and its distorted spectrum became so accepted by recording engineers that at least one modern—fundamentally neutral—monitor loudspeaker has built in a switchable equalization to replicate it (http://barefootsound.com/technology) where they describe: “The ‘Old School’ setting captures the essence of the ubiquitous NS-10M, rolling off the sub-bass and top-end information, and bringing forward mid-range presence.”

 

[napilopez]

View attachment 90351View attachment 90352View attachment 90353View attachment 90355

When I saw them, I thought there is no tonal consistency(Directivity) in the same brand. Some of them just look okay, but others aren't.

As always, please take careful note of scaling on frequency response plots - Barefoot's are extremely tall compared to the typical plots we see around here. Rather than just "okay," barefoot audio's plots show extremely good behavior (although only going out to 30 degress is almost useless in telling us about room interaction).

Nonetheless, the graphs have a 24 dB span, and they extend all the way up to 50kHz, so the aspect ratio from 20 Hz to 20kHz is skewed even more vertical than usual. Barefoot is actually highlighting flaws rather than hiding them.

Nothing meaning to pick on you @js_k0914, but I'm going to use a few comparisons because I keep seeing happening around here -- matching scaling is essential when comparing measurements across different sources. So pardon the rant, I just want to point out that a quick glance at the shape of a few curves isn't enough, and comparing measurements across sources should not just be eyeballed unless very careful.

For comparison, here's how the first plot above posted, for the Micromain27, compares to the Neumann KH80 when scaled to match Amir's third take on that speaker. The KH80 probably has the flattest measurements on-axis Amir has measured.

Now here is the Micromain27 at the same scaling:

Every bit as good, if not better.

Okay, but what about the Micromain 26 in your graph #2? It shows some clear problems at first glance. But looking it up shows it is a speaker with a wide chassis, and center channel driver arrangement. So some discontinuities are expected with this type of design, which is not optimal for the most even horizontal directivity.

Taking the driver arrangement and scaling into account, the measurements are actually quite good:

Okay, but there's a blip around 1K. This will likely flatten out as you move further off-axis, but we don't have that data. What we can do is see how it does against other good center speakers. For comparison and context, lets look at Amir's measurements of the Revel C52 .

This is a center speaker with ansimilar driver arrangement (minus the subs on the top and bottom for the barefoot, irrelevant for this comparison). The C52 is the best center measured by ASR so far(7.6 preference score w/sub). Matching scaling to the above we get.

This looks worse than the barefoot's measurements overall, despite the fact that this was one of Amir's earlier measurements with fewer data points than used in newer measurements, thus making the graphs look a little smoother.

Now to flip things around, here's how it looks if we instead match the C52's measurements to the scaling used by barefoot:

Yikes, what an awful speaker!

For once, a manufacturer actually errs by showing flaws too much. I wish everyone would just use 25 dB/decade scaling as implied by CTA-2034A and the ISO standard where it comes from (including harman, which doesn't use the scaling defined by the spinorama doc either). Just my pet peeve

/endrant

 

[js_k0914]

As always, please take careful note of scaling on frequency response plots - Barefoot's are extremely tall compared to the typical plots we see around here. Rather than just "okay," barefoot audio's plots show extremely good behavior (although only going out to 30 degress is almost useless in telling us about room interaction).

Nonetheless, the graphs have a 24 dB span, and they extend all the way up to 50kHz, so the aspect ratio from 20 Hz to 20kHz is skewed even more vertical than usual. Barefoot is actually highlighting flaws rather than hiding them.

Nothing meaning to pick on you @js_k0914, but I'm going to use a few comparisons because I keep seeing happening around here -- matching scaling is essential when comparing measurements across different sources. So pardon the rant, I just want to point out that a quick glance at the shape of a few curves isn't enough, and comparing measurements across sources should not just be eyeballed unless very careful.

For comparison, here's how the first plot above posted, for the Micromain27, compares to the Neumann KH80 when scaled to match Amir's third take on that speaker. The KH80 probably has the flattest measurements on-axis Amir has measured.

View attachment 90526

Now here is the Micromain27 at the same scaling:

View attachment 90527

Every bit as good, if not better.

Okay, but what about the Micromain 26 in your graph #2? It shows some clear problems at first glance. But looking it up shows it is a speaker with a wide chassis, and center channel driver arrangement. So some discontinuities are expected with this type of design, which is not optimal for the most even horizontal directivity.

View attachment 90530
Taking the driver arrangement and scaling into account, the measurements are actually quite good:

View attachment 90529

Okay, but there's a blip around 1K. This will likely flatten out as you move further off-axis, but we don't have that data. What we can do is see how it does against other good center speakers. For comparison and context, lets look at Amir's measurements of the Revel C52 .

This is a center speaker with ansimilar driver arrangement (minus the subs on the top and bottom for the barefoot, irrelevant for this comparison). The C52 is the best center measured by ASR so far(7.6 preference score w/sub). Matching scaling to the above we get.

View attachment 90532

This looks worse than the barefoot's measurements overall, despite the fact that this was one of Amir's earlier measurements with fewer data points than used in newer measurements, thus making the graphs look a little smoother.

Now to flip things around, here's how it looks if we instead match the C52's measurements to the scaling used by barefoot:

View attachment 90540

Yikes, what an awful speaker!

For once, a manufacturer actually errs by showing flaws too much. I wish everyone would just use 25 dB/decade scaling as implied by CTA-2034A and the ISO standard where it comes from (including harman, which doesn't use the scaling defined by the spinorama doc either). Just my pet peeve

/endrant

Thanks for taking time to write this.
I’m little embarrassing now for my uncareful thoughts. Forgive my hasty judgement.
But thanks to you, I learned more. I hope to see a whole spinorama data of Barefoot someday.

 

[napilopez]

Thanks for taking time to write this.
I’m little embarrassing now for my uncareful thoughts. Forgive my hasty judgement.
But thanks to you, I learned more. I hope to see a whole spinorama data of Barefoot someday.

I'd never seen any barefoot audio measurements until today, so I learned as well! Had no idea they'd be this good, as I just kind of assumed they were one of those studio brands that doesn't take measured performance too seriously. I'm glad I was able to help though!

 

[Scholl]

Our corrugation is not a traditional "zigzag" one, but rather a unique angled approach that significantly reduces harmonic distortion (especially 3rd harmonic) at lower frequencies that allows us to maintain low distortion at the crossover point where as other ribbons would have greatly increased distortion in this area.

First, thank you for those detailed measurements. Manufacturers rarely give those even for monitoring speakers.

That being said, and I am sorry to sound negative, but your HD graph shows a mean level of -47dB of 3rd HD above 4Khz (so essentially the ribbon tweeter) which is actually quite bad, even at 95 dB SPL. Most dome tweeters (even inexpensive ones) are at -70dB H3 or lower at these FR and SPL. The ribbon Viawave SRT-7's 3rd HD is at around -70dB too. And since we have the SB15NBAC distortion below 3.5K, which seems normal for this (excellent) driver, we know it doesn't come from the measurement's idiosyncrasies.

Viawave SRT-7 measurements
35€ aluminium dome tweeter measurements (SB26 ADC)

I know there is more to sound quality than HD, but it seems incongruous to me to describe this tweeter as having low H3 while your very HD graph shows the contrary.

On another subject, I agree that high vertical directivity is beneficial in most situations (especially studio use with a desk). Such reflections are always going to colour the sound since there are slightly delayed in time, whatever the off-axis response of the speaker looks like. Better to have them lower in volume in the first place.

 

[deni]

First, thank you for those detailed measurements. Manufacturers rarely give those even for monitoring speakers.

That being said, and I am sorry to sound negative, but your HD graph shows a mean level of -47dB of 3rd HD above 4Khz (so essentially the ribbon tweeter) which is actually quite bad, even at 95 dB SPL. Most dome tweeters (even inexpensive ones) are at -70dB H3 or lower at these FR and SPL. The ribbon Viawave SRT-7's 3rd HD is at around -70dB too. And since we have the SB15NBAC distortion below 3.5K, which seems normal for this (excellent) driver, we know it doesn't come from the measurement's idiosyncrasies.

Viawave SRT-7 measurements
35€ aluminium dome tweeter measurements (SB26 ADC)

I know there is more to sound quality than HD, but it seems incongruous to me to describe this tweeter as having low H3 while your very HD graph shows the contrary.

On another subject, I agree that high vertical directivity is beneficial in most situations (especially studio use with a desk). Such reflections are always going to colour the sound since there are slightly delayed in time, whatever the off-axis response of the speaker looks like. Better to have them lower in volume in the first place.

Thank you for the analysis. I can't comment on the Viawave since I've never used one or heard one. As far as other well known true ribbon tweeters are concerned, some of which have been tested on this forum, you'll see their distortion peaks in the 2-8% range. Even distortion levels this high in the 5-10k frequency range are inaudible even to the most trained ears in playback of music. I've listened to most of these ribbon tweeters extensively and will say that they all sound excellent. The most differentiating characteristic between them that I can hear (and that avid true ribbon users can attest to) is their thickness. 4 micron vs 8 micron vs 15 micron sound very different. As for the SB26ADC, it is a great tweeter with exceptionally low distortion (used in Harman products). I've used this tweeter before and it performs very well, but it displays very different tonal characteristics than true ribbons. I guess it's a matter of taste, some prefer domes over ribbons. I find true ribbons to have unrivaled detail and transient response. This can be party attributed to their mass. Our ribbon weighing in at 0.01 grams vs a SB Acoustics Beryllium dome weight of 0.46 grams. I could have easily just used the SB26ADC in the RTM10 which would have saved greatly on material and labor cost, but in the end after hundreds of hours of auditioning that tweeter and dozens of others in critical listening and blind listening tests with several engineers the decision was clear to go with the ribbon.

I see that you've also posted on the RTM10 thread over at Gearslutz. If you're interesting in a demo please feel free to shoot me an email and I'd be happy to set it up for you. We have a listening room at our shop in metro Detroit. There are several dealers in the US and international ones that would be happy to do so as well.

 

[Zvu]

First, thank you for those detailed measurements. Manufacturers rarely give those even for monitoring speakers.

That being said, and I am sorry to sound negative, but your HD graph shows a mean level of -47dB of 3rd HD above 4Khz (so essentially the ribbon tweeter) which is actually quite bad, even at 95 dB SPL. Most dome tweeters (even inexpensive ones) are at -70dB H3 or lower at these FR and SPL. The ribbon Viawave SRT-7's 3rd HD is at around -70dB too. And since we have the SB15NBAC distortion below 3.5K, which seems normal for this (excellent) driver, we know it doesn't come from the measurement's idiosyncrasies.

I know there is more to sound quality than HD, but it seems incongruous to me to...

When did distortion under 0.5% at 95dB/1m became "quite bad"? When did listening preference in double blind test depended on tweeter distortion over 3.5kHz being 0.4% instead 0.1% ?

Dmitry Malinovsky (Viawave) is great engineer - his ribbon has lower distortion but it is somewhat different principle since it has mylar foil suspension on his tweeters. That helps to lower the distortion.

 

[q3cpma]

When did distortion under 0.5% at 95dB/1m became "quite bad"? When did listening preference in double blind test depended on tweeter distortion over 3.5kHz being 0.4% instead 0.1% ?

Dmitry Malinovsky (Viawave) is great engineer - his ribbon has lower distortion but it is somewhat different principle since it has mylar foil suspension on his tweeters. That helps to lower the distortion.

I agree, it's certainly not bad. Still, expensive ribbons are supposedly all about low distorsion; if I use the 8341A's small and probably cheap 3/4" Al dome, it gets a maximum of 0.2% H3 at 93 dB/1 m while crossing 500 Hz lower. If we say it's all about dispersion width, the 8341A is actually as wide if not wider as well (in addition to being smoother).

I rest my case, ribbons are a marketing gimmick unless they're used to reduce price. Which would explain why the manufacturers who have maximum performance as their selling point don't use them (Neumann, JBL, Dynaudio) or stopped using them (Genelec).
Please don't take it as something against this specific brand or monitor, as it's really not what this is about.

 

[Zvu]

@q3cpma I don't know what is marketing behind ribbons but it certainly isn't low distortion for reasons you've mentioned. They are only good in that field but not great.

Their advantages, in my opinion, go in other direction. Large surface area with very low mass in strong magnetic field makes it more transparent than any dome tweeter i listened so far - when implemented properly. It is not just ribbon based tweeters i like but amt also.

As for price reducing, i couldn't agree less. Dome tweeters are so cheap these days it's crazy. It is much more expensive to make ribbon's and much more time consuming. When working with thin foils as that, consistency can become an issue so you have to know what to do to fix it.

 

[pierre]

Using the data provided (and not digitizing the graph), I find a score of 7.6 which is best in class. I guess the score would drop a bit with NFS measurement due to less smoothing in the bass. Impressive speaker.

I would be interested in seeing the measurements with and without the springs system.

 

[q3cpma]

@q3cpmaTheir advantages, in my opinion, go in other direction. Large surface area with very low mass in strong mannetic field makes it more transparent than any dome tweeter i listened so far - when implemented properly. It is not just ribbon based tweeters i like but amt also.

How would that translate into measurements?

As for price reducing, i couldn't agree less. Dome tweeters are so cheap these days it's crazy. It is much more expensive to make ribbon's and much more time consuming. When working with thin foils as that, consistency can become an issue so you have to know what to do to fix it.

I wasn't implying that ribbons were less expensive, quite the contrary actually. Meant AMTs when mentioning the price reduction possibility, otherwise, ribbons are too big of a burden on the BOM for no reason.

 

[Zvu]

How would that translate into measurements?

Not any measurement of today i am aware of - not saying that it will not become a metric as we see great progress in that field these days.

If we could measure everything we hear, double blind tests would be a thing of past.

I wasn't implying that ribbons were less expensive, quite the contrary actually. Meant AMTs when mentioning the price reduction possibility, otherwise, ribbons are too big of a burden on the BOM for no reason.

Same goes for AMT. Check out how simple and cheap is making of AMT tweeters.

 

[js_k0914]

Using the data provided (and not digitizing the graph), I find a score of 7.6 which is best in class. I guess the score would drop a bit with NFS measurement due to less smoothing in the bass. Impressive speaker.

View attachment 90615

I would be interested in seeing the measurements with and without the springs system.

With provided data by Deni? I wonder how w/sub score is. Can you show us them too?

 

[q3cpma]

Same goes for AMT. Check out how simple and cheap is making of AMT tweeters.

That's what I meant. AMTs are generally cheap, but true ribbons rarely.

 

[Zvu]

@q3cpma I thought it was obvious i was joking. There is nothing simple or cheap in making of ribbon or AMT tweeters. That video shows it rather clear.

 

[q3cpma]

@q3cpma I thought it was obvious i was joking. There is nothing simple or cheap in making of ribbon or AMT tweeters. That video shows it rather clear.

Sorry, didn't watch as youtube-dl is having problems.