New Buchardt S400 MKIII

[Matt_Holland]

I wonder if 1st order crossover can include a notch filter. Would need to be a broad one looking at the Satori frequency response. The e50 supposedly used 1st order on the woofer right?

It will need baffle step correction and possibly other response shaping components.

 

[Chromatischism]

Mads says the choice made here with the crossover is simply due to them preferring that sound, and that everything sums together fine from the proper listening distance, while acknowledging it won't measure perfectly in the near field.

 

[BeeKay]

while acknowledging it won't measure perfectly in the near field

Ok, as far I am concerned. I wouldn’t bother. Also, S400 never was a typical NF speaker. There are others serving this use case perfectly.

 

[eddy_cubed]

Mads says the choice made here with the crossover is simply due to them preferring that sound, and that everything sums together fine from the proper listening distance, while acknowledging it won't measure perfectly in the near field.

Well, this is heartbreaking. Literally made an account because I felt the need to reply and say something given how excited I initially was for the announcement.

I've lurked for awhile, saw the Mk3 get announced and immediately thought this would be my dream speaker if it measured as well as the Mk2 (but also had my own concerns given the crossover and bass reflex port). I'm looking to buy my end-game speakers for my budget and specific needs / use case by EOY and thought these could be them.

Curious how much more poorly this will measure compared to the Mk2, I imagine they could absolutely get dragged through the mud by reviewers / the community if this ends up being a substantial departure. I'll never get companies that mess / make substantial changes to well reviewed and loved product lines, it's often rarely a risk that pays off.

 

[Matt_Holland]

Well, this is heartbreaking. Literally made an account because I felt the need to reply and say something given how excited I initially was for the announcement.

I've lurked for awhile, saw the Mk3 get announced and immediately thought this would be my dream speaker if it measured as well as the Mk2 (but also had my own concerns given the crossover and bass reflex port). I'm looking to buy my end-game speakers for my budget and specific needs / use case by EOY and thought these could be them.

Curious how much more poorly this will measure compared to the Mk2, I imagine they could absolutely get dragged through the mud by reviewers / the community if this ends up being a substantial departure. I'll never get companies that mess / make substantial changes to well reviewed and loved product lines, it's often rarely a risk that pays off.

My guess is that they have a large proportion of customers who think a simple crossover gets them closer to the music. The mk2 was a technological and musical high achiever. Its crossover was quite large and used expensive components and I have no doubt cost a lot.

So it’s a win-win for Buchardt. Lower costs and grow their subjectivist audiophile customer base.

A second hand S400mk2 would make a great purchase.

 

[eddy_cubed]

My guess is that they have a large proportion of customers who think a simple crossover gets them closer to the music. The mk2 was a technological and musical high achiever. Its crossover was quite large and used expensive components and I have no doubt cost a lot.

So it’s a win-win for Buchardt. Lower costs and grow their subjectivist audiophile customer base.

A second hand S400mk2 would make a great purchase.

You'd think the smart play would be to introduce that speaker as a new product line then... as the Mk3 is now inevitably going to be compared and measured against the Mk2.

The Mk3 appealed to me for the additional treble clarity + detail and bass response that it's promising, but I wouldn't want those things in exchange for it measuring worse than the Mk2. That's a less-than-ideal tradeoff.

For added context I have pretty specific requirements, I live in a condo so I can't have a subwoofer... but I want something with decent bass extension into the low 30's (high 20's would be perfect but not necessary) with good treble clarity / detail and neutrality. I also need a constant directivity speaker as I'm looking to build a 4.0 system as well for both music + movies and I want to use extreme toe-in to widen my sweet spot to the whole couch via time-intensity trading.

Not a TON of speakers that meet that criteria, as far as I know.

I'm trying to keep my budget to ~2500 euros max as well.

 

[Chromatischism]

I trust Buchardt won't completely mess it up. The E50, while using state of the art drivers, put a 1st order crossover on the Purifi bass driver. Although, that was centered at 2000 Hz using a 6.5", so directivity will be better than the S400 MK3.

This time, they have a 1st order on the tweeter as well, so it will play significantly lower than in the past.

We'll have to wait and see.

 

[eddy_cubed]

I trust Buchardt won't completely mess it up. The E50, while using start of the art drivers, put a 1st order crossover on the Purifi bass driver. Although, that was centered at 2000 Hz using a 6.5", so directivity will be better than the S400 MK3.

This time, they have a 1st order on the tweeter as well, so it will play significantly lower than in the past.

We'll have to wait and see.

Yeah, I'm not 100% counting it out yet. But, I'm hoping we'll at least get measurements sooner rather than later. It's still a bummer though, feels like 1 step forward and 1 step back. It's such a beautiful speaker too, LOVE the design with the no-screws, sans-logo waveguide. It's so clean, and design is important to me as well, has to look good in my living room! haha

The cost-cutting measures just seem like a weird choice, especially since they already have the P300 undercutting the S400 as a more "budget" offering. They could have slotted this in at 2500-2800 euros retail (compared with it's 2300 retail) with no compromises and captured a similar market. Just seems like such an unnecessary tradeoff.

 

[Matt_Holland]

I trust Buchardt won't completely mess it up. The E50, while using start of the art drivers, put a 1st order crossover on the Purifi bass driver. Although, that was centered at 2000 Hz using a 6.5", so directivity will be better than the S400 MK3.

This time, they have a 1st order on the tweeter as well, so it will play significantly lower than in the past.

We'll have to wait and see.

For sure It won’t be bad. Likely a missed opportunity to promote technical excellence.

 

[Chromatischism]

The cost-cutting measures

To be clear, what cost-cutting measures? The 7.5" Satori and the tweeter are both more expensive. The port is likely cheaper than the PR used in the past, but now they have a metal backplate on the speaker, and that isn't free.

 

[BeeKay]

Hey, don’t you complain! This is ASR. And this is how we roll until there are measurements


Edit: and for those unhappy with a 1st order XO, there is GR-Research

 

[Mnyb]

Hmm you realy need good drivers to even use a first order filter ? Especially the tweeter ?
And a paper cone is smart then as metal one would probably needed notch filters for the breakups ( if used with a low order filter ) ?

Putting the cart before the horse we will see if it gets properly measured by someone

 

[Matt_Holland]

To be clear, what cost-cutting measures? The 7.5" Satori and the tweeter are both more expensive. The port is likely cheaper than the PR used in the past, but now they have a metal backplate on the speaker, and that isn't free.

The mk3’s port, plate and crossover will almost certainly be lower cost than the mk2’s PR and crossover. And mk2’s drivers weren’t cheap either.

I know we need to wait for the data, but it’s impossible to get a great FR and directivity using 1st order filters. E50 shows that, although they did a pretty good job considering the limitations.

 

[eddy_cubed]

To be clear, what cost-cutting measures? The 7.5" Satori and the tweeter are both more expensive. The port is likely cheaper than the PR used in the past, but now they have a metal backplate on the speaker, and that isn't free.

Matt beat me to the punch with the answer, considering everything I'd be shocked if the production cost on these is more expensive than the Mk2.

Combine that with the fact that they're also increasing the retail price by 200 euros and well... yeah.

Sure, the drivers are nicer, but everything else about the speaker appears to be a step backwards.

Ultimately we'll have to wait for the measurements, but it's hard not to be disappointed with the announcement when they decided to make this the next step in the S400 line instead of it's own new thing. I said it before above, but it just feels like they're making objectively unnecessary tradeoffs for a product line that's so beloved by the community. Companies do this kind of stuff all the time and it's almost always frustrating to see.

 

[jean-benoit]

for me, the only "weakness" of the s400mk2 is the tweeter. a little bit more "clarity" / "sharpness" in the top end would have done it for me.
i dont think they needed to change anything else, as its a fantastic speaker.

if i would have to take a guess; they are going for a different sound. like they did with the E50. taking a different approach with their passive speaker line-up. less neutral, more "hi-fi".

going for measurements only, the real successor (although not by much) to the s400mk2 is the ascilab c6b.
would love to hear these two speakers side by side.

 

[Chromatischism]

And mk2’s drivers weren’t cheap either.

They proved that you did not need expensive drivers to make a great sounding speaker.

The SB19 is around $20 and the SB17 NRX2 is around $75. The PR is around $35 from what I can see. That totals around $130 retail.

The Satori 7.5" looks to be around $200/ea, but it must be a custom version without the speckled look. So you're already looking at a higher BOM on the MK3.

The tweeter is upsized as is the waveguide, which isn't free. The tweeter is around $50 retail but we don't know what Buchardt is paying.

I don't see how you can cut enough to make up for that.

 

[Chromatischism]

for me, the only "weakness" of the s400mk2 is the tweeter. a little bit more "clarity" / "sharpness" in the top end would have done it for me.

I liked that it was just neutral straight across the board and didn't have the excess bite that other speakers had. You could really listen in to and be enveloped by the music without distractions. It is a speaker that you can keep turning up louder and louder and it keeps giving more, instead of telling you to back off.

 

[Matt_Holland]

for me, the only "weakness" of the s400mk2 is the tweeter. a little bit more "clarity" / "sharpness" in the top end would have done it for me.
i dont think they needed to change anything else, as its a fantastic speaker.

if i would have to take a guess; they are going for a different sound. like they did with the E50. taking a different approach with their passive speaker line-up. less neutral, more "hi-fi".

going for measurements only, the real successor (although not by much) to the s400mk2 is the ascilab c6b.
would love to hear these two speakers side by side.

I love that tweeter because it doesn't seek attention. Very smooth. Lovely midrange on that speaker.

 

[eddy_cubed]

They proved that you did not need expensive drivers to make a great sounding speaker.

The SB19 is around $20 and the SB17 NRX2 is around $75. The PR is around $35 from what I can see. That totals around $130 retail.

The Satori 7.5" looks to be around $200/ea, but it must be a custom version without the speckled look. So you're already looking at a higher BOM on the MK3.

The tweeter is upsized as is the waveguide, which isn't free. The tweeter is around $50 retail but we don't know what Buchardt is paying.

I don't see how you can cut enough to make up for that.

The retail price of the Mk3 is already 200 euros higher than the Mk2.

2300 vs 2100.

Also, just because they're using more expensive drivers doesn't negate the fact that they're cutting costs everywhere else, especially with the crossover.

They're 100% compromising when they didn't need to, they could have set the price to 2500 retail and had a no compromise true successor to the Mk2.

 

[Mads Buchardt]

As always, I’m honored to see this much speculation about our products. I’m happy that we can spark some interest in such an extremely crowded market! So let me try to clear up a few things here.


Firstly, the idea that this is a speaker we earn more money on is not true. We have had to cut into our margins to offer it at this price point compared to the Mk2. The Satori 7.5" woofer is multiple times more expensive than the SB17NRX2 we used in the Mk2. The tweeter in the Mk2 was a custom version of the SB19ST, and the new tweeter here is also a completely custom design made by SB for us. It’s around three times the cost of the old tweeter. While it does use the same dome as the 26ADC, it is otherwise a completely different design, featuring what the engineers at SB (who are located just 35 km from us, so we work very closely with them) call a “Matrix Neo motor structure.” It’s a really nice-sounding tweeter, with breakups around 25,000 Hz.


Now, I know this might not be the place to get into the objective vs. subjective discussion, but despite not measuring as well as the older, cheaper tweeter, it does sound significantly better ;-) The treble performance of the S400 has always been what most people gave negative feedback on, despite that being arguably the strongest objective aspect of the S400.


So just to clarify: the cost of building the Mk3 is significantly higher than the Mk2 because of this, and it’s not like parts have become cheaper since 2021, quite the opposite, sadly.


We had to find some savings in order to keep the price as close as possible to the Mk2, and moving from passive radiators to bass reflex is one place where we could save money. However, passive radiators were not really needed here, due to the larger cabinet, as we aimed for the same low-end extension as the Mk2, just with much more authority and headroom thanks to the new woofer. It’s quite crazy how much larger the Mk3 sounds in direct comparison, and how much louder and dynamically capable it plays.


With these new, better drivers, we were able to take advantage of a simpler crossover using a 1st-order design. After the extremely long development of the E50, this has become something we really love the sound of. It does hurt vertical measurements for sure, and it wouldn’t be a speaker I would recommend for nearfield listening. At 2 meters and beyond, however, we do not notice any shift in tonality when moving around, standing, or sitting it remains well-behaved still.


The crossover is also an area where we save some money due to its simplicity compared to the Mk2. That said, we are still nowhere near the budget-quality component choices of many competitors in this price range. We’re using Jantzen Cross Caps, SuperRes resistors (ceramic for notch filters), as well as even thicker air-core coils (1.6 mm) compared to the Mk2 (1.4 mm). No iron-core coils here.


In terms of sound, the tonal balance is very close to the S400 Mk2, so customers who like that sound should feel right at home, but they should also notice significant improvements across the board (bass, midrange, and treble), as well as the obvious increase in headroom.


It’s true that we are slowly moving in a different direction with our passive speakers, where measurements are not the sole factor dictating how a speaker is tuned. Of course, we still rely on measurements, it’s not like we are working blind, but we are making deliberate choices to achieve what we believe is better sound, even if that goes against theoretical standards. The E50 was a project where we had prototypes that measured much better than the final version, and we’ve documented this thoroughly on the product page for those interested in the development process and design decisions.


The S400 Mk3 still measures very respectably. It could have looked better with higher-order filters, of course, and with this tweeter, we could also have pushed the crossover point lower than in the Mk2 to further improve vertical performance. But who knows, if ASR users push us hard enough, we might do a batch fully optimized for objective performance ;D


We are not fully finished with measurements yet, but of course we will have them on the site once ready. For now, here is a draft of the prototype CEA plot from the NFS. We’ve made some small crossover adjustments since then. This measurement extends to 40,000 Hz on the Mk3 (not the Mk2), so you can clearly see the tweeter breakup as well.


I have attached both the S400 Mk2 and the S400 Mk3 CEA for comparison. Keep in mind that they tend to come out cleaner in Erin’s reviews (you can compare his Mk2 data to ours), so when he tests the Mk3, it will likely look a bit cleaner than what you see here. We do plan for Erin to be one of the first to receive it, if he has the time.