Nubert NuVero 60 Speaker Review

[amirm]

This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Nubert NuVero 60 3-way stand-mount speaker. It was kindly sent by a member from Germany and costs €1,650 (US $1780) a pair.

I had to take my diffuser out of the lightbox to fit the speaker in there so please pardon the non-flattering picture. In reality, the front baffle which extends past the speaker case is quite attractive. Speaker itself is also one of the heaviest I have tested in this size. Some of that may be due to beefy and high excursion woofer which looks more like a small subwoofer than what you see in a typical bookshelf speaker!

The back panel shows a set of sturdy switches to tailor the response of all three drivers:

From a review perspective, I hate these switches! In which setting should I test it? I can't test all as the tweeter has three modes, with midrange and woofer having two. Owner provided a set. Through near-field I developed another set which overlapped with the owners fair bit. Neither was the "neutral" setting though. I decided to use that configuration as I am assuming that is the default the designer has created.

If you are not familiar with the measurements you are about to see, please watch my video tutorial on speaker measurements:

EDIT: just read this from the owner:

"Upon measurement, you'll notice right away that this speaker - as all others in the NuVero series - have a strong accending boost from 2khz to 8khz. Nubert says the speaker is designed to NOT be aimed at listening position but to stand parallel firing frontally left and right from the listener. I am not going to defend this and I don't like it too but it might be worth a mention in the review."

My listening tests and measurements assuming 0 degrees.

Nubert NuVero 60 Speaker Measurements
As usual we start with our series of anechoic frequency response measurements created by Klippel NFS:

We see that some sensitivity is traded for deep bass extension, going beyond most bookshelf speakers. Overall response as noted is flat on axis. A disturbance stands around near 1000 Hz and we have a hump around 5 kHz. That hump can be affected some by the dip switches:

But I was not able to get flat response due to wide bandwidth of such changes.

EDIT: per owner note, here is the response at 30 degrees:

Near-field, non-anechoic measurement of each port/driver shows that woofer may need better out of band truncation:

It resonates some around the very area we see disturbances (700 Hz to 1 kHz). The mid-range response is actually quite smooth and nice.

Early window response has more variations than I expected to see, caused mostly by the vertical axis:

We see that both the resonance and dip are accentuated by the floor and ceiling reflections. Use a thick carpet to absorb the former. For latter, you could use an absorber or place the speaker in a room with high ceilings.

Predicted in-room response as a result looks somewhat worse than on-axis response would predict but still decent:

Speaker has very wide dispersion which should project a larger and more diffused image in your room:

Vertical dispersion shows diffraction effects from top and bottom of the baffle which are larger than the enclosure:

The capable woofer keeps bass distortion closer to tower speakers than bookshelf:

I wish tweeter distortion was lower though.

Owner wanted me to push the speaker hard through my dynamic tests and I did:

Audible distortion was present well before getting to last two measurements. But it went into an entirely different category at 104 and 105 dBSPL. There was massive distortion and crackling at those levels. This adds more evidence to the theory that speaker is designed to play deeper but not necessarily louder.

Impedance is a bit on the lower side which when combined with low sensitivity calls for stout amplification:

Here is the waterfall and step responses:

Nubert NuVero 60 Listening Tests and Equalization
I had measured the speaker over a week ago so they were not top of mind when I started to listen to the speaker. As soon as I hit play, this impressively large image was projected from the speaker which put a smile on my face! Post listening tests I looked at beam width, confirming the reason for that. The first impression of tonality was good but in just a minute or so, I grew tired of the somewhat bright, but albeit, detailed sound. So out came the EQ:

With the filters in place the sound was more balanced. I tried to emulate this with just lowering the response using the treble switch but I thought the sound was more muffled and not as good as Neutral plus EQ. Testing was not comprehensive though as it is a major hassle to keep going behind the speaker to change the switch and then go and listen.

Normal bass response was excellent, often making you think you are listening to a tower speaker. I then pushed it by playing my sub-bass track. Here, speaker attempted to play them full range which is something bookshelves don't do. I could hear distortion even at moderate levels and cranking up resulted in fair bit of distortion. Still, what was there was impressive for a speaker this size.

I then played through a few of my reference tracks and thoroughly enjoyed the sound.

Conclusions
As a reviewer, it is nice to see and test unusual designs and the Nuvero 60 definitely falls in that category. Inclusion of a hefty woofer and 3-way design makes the speaker pretty unique. Built quality is excellent and justifies the high cost. The overall package comes close to excellence but doesn't quite get there. That resonance around 900 Hz and lack of flat treble response take away from it. The switches while useful, can't deal with these but fortunately electronic EQ does.

Overall, I am going to recommend the Nubert NuVero 60 speaker. Special thanks to the owner and others who helped getting this speaker to me. It is giving us coverage of speakers that are popular in EU.
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

 

[amirm]

Reserved for @AdamG to kindly post the specs.

Manufacturer Specifications: (As posted on their website)

Technical information​

---

Device type:	Compact loudspeaker
Width:	20,0 cm
Height:	48,5 cm
Depth:	35,5 cm
Width (additional information):	23,4 cm (with sound sail)
Height (additional information):	49,5 cm (with feet)
Depth (additional information):	37,5 cm (with front cover)
Weight:	16,0 kg
Packaging dimensions (W x H x D):	46,0 cm x 31,0 cm x 62,0 cm
Shipping weight:	18,8 kg
Standard colour:	Black
Color:	Diamond Black
Scope of delivery:	nuVero 60, metal cover, height-adjustable disc feet for a secure stand, speaker cable 2x 0.75 mm² 4 m, operating instructions in German
EAN / GTIN:	4260166752458
Country of origin:	Germany
WEEE-Reg. No.:	DE 48888173
Construction Method:	Bass reflex
Construction:	Direct radiator
System:	3-way
Tweeter:	1x 26 mm
Tweeter material:	Silk fabric
Tweeter crossover frequency:	2.100 Hz
Midrange speaker:	1x 52 / 112 mm
Midrange crossover frequency:	420 Hz
Woofer:	1x 180 mm
Woofer material:	Glass fibre composite
Lower cut-off frequency (-3 dB):	36 Hz
Upper cut-off frequency (-3 dB):	25.000 Hz
Efficiency (2.83V/1m):	86,0 dB
Efficiency (1W/1m):	83,0 dB
Continuous load capacity:	180 W
Pulse load capacity:	250 W
Impedance:	4 Ohm
Protection:	Self-resetting fuses
Tone selector switch Treble:	Yes
Mid tone selector switch:	Yes
Tone selector Low:	Yes
Loudspeaker inputs:	2

 

[Postkrunk]

Whoa, that's a three-way speaker with two BMR drivers. Very interesting. Edit: my bad, the woofer is a traditional driver, but the middle one sure is BMR.

 

[MZKM]

Preference Rating
SCORE: 5.2
SCORE w/ sub:6.8

Sensitivity: 84.2dB (300Hz-3kHz ; spec: 86dB)
Frequency response: +/- 2.8dB 80Hz-20kHz

​

Link to all graphs/data

 

[staticV3]

Here is Amir's compression measurement, but digitized then converted to a relative graph, for those that prefer this version (I do! It gets rid of the sine illusion):



(1/24 Oct Smoothing was applied not to "game the system", but to remove quantization noise that was added when the Klippel software rasterized the data for PNG export)

If you're confused:
We take Amir's quietest sweep (96dB) as a baseline, then show the difference in response at higher levels, when we remove the step in volume.
This shows purely what happens to the frequency response, as we increase the volume in 1dB steps.

A perfect speaker with unlimited headroom would look like this:

Identical frequency response no matter how hard you push the volume.

The zoomed-in y-axis also gives us a closer look at the compression behavior.

For example, while Amir noted severe woofer distortion at 104 and 105dB, we can see that at 103dB, things already take a turn for the worse:


Where before we had a relatively smooth and predictable compression behavior at 300-400Hz, when pushed to 103dB and beyond, a new "peak" forms, indicating an additional mode of nonlinearity.


Lastly, a request for @amirm:

It would be nice if you could capture one additional sweep as a baseline, at a volume where the speaker is likely to still be within its linear operating range.
From what we know, the Nubert may already be slightly compressing at 96dB, and so plotting the higher volumes relative to this already "tainted" sweep as baseline is a bit dissatisfying

 

[Beave]

Related thread here on ASR: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...w-suggestion-nubert-bookshelf-speakers.40296/

Company website with pictures of drivers and crossovers: https://www.nubert.de/en/nuvero-60/a042685

It has some similarities to the Philharmonic Audio BMR (both three ways with the BMR acting as the midrange), but the Philharmonic version seems a little smoother. If I remember correctly, Dennis uses denim stuffing tightly packed around the BMR in a small sealed enclosure to smooth out its response. I wonder if nuVero does anything similar? If not, that could explain the rough response in the BMR range around 1kHz.

 

[kemmler3D]

Cool to see new brands represented in the reviews. For me I don't see this as flat-out beating most other speakers in a similar price range, but I could see this speaker being the best option for certain preferences and situations. Would definitely keep me eyes out for these second-hand if I was in the EU...

 

[Ron Texas]

This speaker is kind of in the BMR category, a three way stand mount. My read is it's OK but not great. Dispersion is wide for anyone who loves that. Thank you @amirm for another informative review and set of measurements. The Klippel is a great tool which will result in many improved speaker designs over time.

 

[restorer-john]

I like the look of them. I really like this red:

Very interesting speaker.

Thanks to the member for shipping them to the US and Amir for reviewing them.

 

[Mikig]

good speaker, good construction and good performance.
I didn't know the brand and this review is useful for giving a peek at the manufacturer's catalogue.
I'm not a fan of customizations switches. I would also go for neutral or standard, as I do for DACs, sound filters and "magic" buttons on amps and various devices.....
Thanks Amirm for the review!!

 

[Prana Ferox]

Baffle being wider than the cabinet is an odd look

 

[phoenixdogfan]

The lesson of all these reviews is that the bookshelf that can be cranked up without distorting is truly rare. As far as I can tell that subset includes the Neuman KH 150's, the Genelec 8351's, the March Audio Sointuva, and possibly the Kef Reference One Meta, and that's about it.

The Nubert NuVero 60's seem like they're for someone in Europe wanting the wide dispersion of the Philharmonics, Revels, and Ascends, but not wanting the hassle of dealing with a trans-Atlantic vendor. Seem like a reasonable choice provided the buyer is willing to EQ.

 

[sam_adams]

I like the look of them. I really like this red:

View attachment 369171
Very interesting speaker.

Thanks to the member for shipping them to the US and Amir for reviewing them.

Interesting choice in the offset tweeter and midrange. I wonder what would happen to the response if one were to rotate those drivers to change their position in relation to one another.

 

[Maiky76]

Here is my take on the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!

For the score rational your journey starts here
Explanation for the sub score
The following EQs are “anechoic” EQs to get the speaker right before room integration.
If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that is usually not optional… see hints there.

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 5.2
With Sub: 6.8


Spinorama with no EQ:

• Could be smoother
• 1k range with resonances
• HF directivity is not great
• Nice LF extension

Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/15deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.

EQ design:
I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.
• Biquad #5 optional if the EQ is to be limited to 5 Biquads

Nubert Nuvero 60 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
May132024-111622

Preamp: -1.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 26.56,    0.00,    0.86
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 82.93,    1.29,    2.45
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 348.63,    -1.05,    4.09
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 765.53,    -1.58,    1.92
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2531.40,    0.83,    4.81
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5603.54,    -2.14,    2.05

Nubert Nuvero 60 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
May132024-111622

Preamp: -1.6 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 26.56,    0.00,    0.86
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 83.43,    1.33,    2.33
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 343.17,    -1.12,    2.60
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 829.47,    -1.90,    1.92
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2371.59,    0.67,    4.74
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5444.33,    -3.14,    1.25

Score EQ LW: 6.1
with sub: 7.7

Score EQ Score: 6.6
with sub: 8.2

Spinorama EQ LW

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Nice improvements

EDIT: @amirm EQ

 

[GWolfman]

Nice to see another brand represented. Props to the EU member for sending in the sample!

Thanks Amir!

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

why the mid range and the tweeter is more to the left/right instead of the center?
isn't for make the graph looks wider or something?

 

[Grotti]

why the mid range and the tweeter is more to the left/right instead of the center?
isn't for make the graph looks wider or something?

It's a usual way to spread corner diffraction over a wider spectrum to reduce their contribution to the signal.

 

[Vuki]

Why going for EQ without trying the effect of the switches first? If Klippel is too time consuming, simple Rew measurement would be fine.

 

[capslock]

That company has an interesting history, a little like Apple. Günther Nubert was a child prodigy in radio electronics. He dropped out of college (electrical engineering) but AFIK completed his apprenticeship as a radio & TV service tech, went on to complete his master craftsman certificate and founded the company in 1975 to give a legal framework to his hobby. He is still president and CTO at age 71 or 72. The company was and still is direct distribution only, so you'd have to go to one of his two stores (one now only) or mail order and have an extended return period. These days, direct included selling through Amazon.

It should be noted that the price of € 1,650 per pair includes 19% VAT, so that is more like $ 1,490 pre tax.

He wants his loudspeakers to sound "honest". Through all these years, when reviewed in magazines, they tended to measure well. I had the chance to listen to some of his speakers casually at several friends who are not hifi enthusiasts and from what I remember, they sounded bland but that could be due to the setting (background music for a gettogether).

The problem with doing an elaborate enclosure and a passive three-way at this price point is that, even when there is no dealer to take his cut, one still has to cut corners somewhere. From Amir's measurements, the woofer XO should really have dealt with the cone modes higher up. It is also unnecessary these days to have a dome tweeter that distorts significantly.

Interesting to see the BMR, working from 400 Hz to 2 kHz, holding up so well distortionwise. When the popular TEBM46C20N was tested in HobbyHifi magazine, it was lowish distortion at best.

 

[pierre]

Hello,

I have generated a few EQs, some with 3 filters and up to 7 filters. You will see that in this case 3 are enough.
First set of eqs optimise to get a listening window as flat as possible, the second set optimise for a high score (and/or a flat PIR).

Note that you still need to EQ the bass in your room so you can remove the first filter in practice.

Algorithm	# filters	Score
Flat LW	3	6.11
Flat LW	4	6.07
Flat LW	5	6.22
Flat LW	6	6.16
Flat LW	7	6.15
Score	3	6.69
Score	4	6.73
Score	5	6.80
Score	6	6.72
Score	7	6.87

Flat LW

Preamp: -1.8 dB


Filter  1: ON PK Fc    74 Hz Gain +1.84 dB Q 0.96
Filter  2: ON PK Fc  2491 Hz Gain +0.94 dB Q 2.98
Filter  3: ON PK Fc  5732 Hz Gain -1.97 dB Q 2.22

Highest score:

Preamp: -1.9 dB

Filter  1: ON PK Fc    67 Hz Gain +1.88 dB Q 0.63
Filter  2: ON PK Fc   849 Hz Gain -1.74 dB Q 3.00
Filter  3: ON PK Fc  5536 Hz Gain -3.47 dB Q 1.32