Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions.
Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
I just posted this in the “Dipole vs box speakers” thread, so figured I should add here in the Omni thread too:
Ok—here is my first in room response curve sweep for the Enterprise Omnis. I used the mic in my iPhone for the test. I took the measurement from the centered listening position:
Distances:
Front wall: 6 feet
Side wall: 4.5 feet
Speaker separation: 6.5 feet
Speaker To listener: 6.5 feet
Height to mic: 43”
Drum roll please….
This seems pretty consistent with my “ears” test,
specifically the high end bump, noticing a little brightness in the upper treble, most noticeable on songs that have a lot of high volume level content in that frequency range. On most program material, it was not very noticeable, not impacting the overall tonal balance all that much.
So, is this response curve more or less ragged than you guys were expecting from a Omni? It should be interesting to see what the response looks like for the other speakers in the mix.
Good on you for taking the time and trouble to check the frequency response I should point out that even uncalibrated measurement microphones tend to have most deviation in both extremes (bass and top end), let alone a phone mic where the design intentions were elsewhere (size, power consumption, cost, etc). May I suggest that you treat yourself to a measurement mic? This was one of the best investments I ever made.
Good on you for taking the time and trouble to check the frequency response I should point out that even uncalibrated measurement microphones tend to have most deviation in both extremes (bass and top end), let alone a phone mic where the design intentions were elsewhere (size, power consumption, cost, etc). May I suggest that you treat yourself to a measurement mic? This was one of the best investments I ever made.
A better mic will be coming, but the forum feedback on HouseCurve using the phone mic is pretty good. Even if it’s off some, the relative comparison to the other speakers here should still be useful. I just want a quick check for starters.
I may try a few more speakers yet tonight. I’m also going to run the test on the Omnis well off axis from inside the kitchen that has an opening into the living room. I think this is where the Omni will really shine in comparison to a forward firing “box” speaker. That relates back to earlier thread comments that Omni was a good “party” speaker in providing consistent sound across a wide area. I still think it is a lot more than that.
I did more response sweeps from in the kitchen standing and living room very close to the right speaker seated. This is a very rough (and lousy) diagram of the measurement positions:
Note that my distance from front wall of 6’ in prior test was actually from the plane of a whole wall of tall gear and large TV—actual front wall was about 2’ behind that.
The off axis living room position was seated on a wide ledge surrounding my large fireplace jut-out, about 3.5’ to the right speaker. Response from there:
The kitchen test position was where I barely had a line of sight to the right speaker 11’ away, at standing height since one would be in that position there. Response:
The seated very near the right speaker was the smoothest response of all, better than the earlier “sweet spot” listening position.
I'm through here. Things are too abrasive. Sorry you feel that way, no offence was intended.
audiosciencereview.com
I’ll add those here I suppose, just sticking to only dipole vs box comparisons on that thread going forward:
I’m going to do a proper drawing of my listening (living) room with furnishings and such, then start working through a grid of different speaker locations for response curves. Once I have the speaker locations tested and optimized for the smoothest in room response for each of the Omni/dipole/bipole/unipole, I’ll make a report. I’m going to comment subjectively if there is an audible difference in the soundstage noticed for each type if any of the sub-optimal frequency response curve locations have a “better” soundstage.
This turned into a bigger project than envisioned…
It was an eye opener how much difference speaker placement made on the response curve for the Omni and bipole. I’m thinking the difference will not be as pronounced on the placement variations for the forward firing only box speakers, but not knowledgeable enough to know that is a valid statement.
Ok—here is my first in room response curve sweep for the Enterprise Omnis. I used the mic in my iPhone for the test. I took the measurement from the centered listening position: Distances: Front wall: 6 feet Side wall: 4.5 feet Speaker separation: 6.5 feet Speaker To listener: 6.5 feet...
audiosciencereview.com
I wanted to mention this because my earlier box speaker soundstage comparison to Omnis in this thread was flawed—did not take enough care to try and optimize the box speaker placement for best soundstage. The race tightened some after I did that.
I still believe the Omnis (and to a lesser extent the dipoles) create a totally different soundstage sound, more spacious, 3-D, atmospheric, immersive, or whatever the right term is. The box is more clinical for lack of a better term. The litmus test will be some instantaneous A/B comparisons.
Ok—here is my first in room response curve sweep for the Enterprise Omnis. I used the mic in my iPhone for the test. I took the measurement from the centered listening position: Distances: Front wall: 6 feet Side wall: 4.5 feet Speaker separation: 6.5 feet Speaker To listener: 6.5 feet...
audiosciencereview.com
I wanted to mention this because my earlier box speaker soundstage comparison to Omnis in this thread was flawed—did not take enough care to try and optimize the box speaker placement for best soundstage. The race tightened some after I did that.
I still believe the Omnis (and to a lesser extent the dipoles) create a totally different soundstage sound, more spacious, 3-D, atmospheric, immersive, or whatever the right term is. The box is more clinical for lack of a better term. The litmus test will be some instantaneous A/B comparisons.
Seems I’m replying to myself again, but thought worthwhile to comment after finally doing a proper A/B comparison in real time, box vs Omni in this instance, primarily for soundstage comparison purposes.
I just posted this in another related thread:
“It’s really hard to compare without switching back and forth in real time. The difference in sound stage is pronounced when compared directly. When switching from Omni to box, the soundstage collapses by comparison, most notable in depth and also in height. The performers seem to occupy a much larger area with the Omnis. The box speakers never seem to completely disappear like the Omnis do, becoming more pronounced quickly as one moves off the dead center sweet spot. The increase in reflections from behind and to the side of the Omnis has a whole different character than the reduced reflected sound from a forward firing box speaker and an entirely different character, in a good way IMHO. The only other set of ears available is the wife, so I said nothing and just asked for impression and comment after
going back and forth on a few songs she knows well. She said the the Omnis sounded more like a real band in the room or some
Such and added that they sounded very different.”
I think the soundstage gap will narrow when compared to the AMT dipoles, up next on deck before too long.
For the heck of it, I pulled several Duevel Enterprise reviews and read again to compare my impressions (now with a lot of listening hours under my belt) to what others found when auditioning the Enterprise. Yeah, I know, I know…subjective reviews are to be taken with a grain of salt and carefully scrutinized. That said, the immersive sound does not seem to be captured in traditional speaker measurement methods. Common to all reviewers were things like “integrated and cohesive”, “seductive”, “holographic”, “total musical immmersion”, “euphonic”, “idea of real natural music event”, and such.
Ok, I can see eyeballs rolling, but the Omnis create a sound unlike any box speaker. As one reviewer put it well, “Sonically, I definitely felt the Enterprise delivered results that were greater than the sum of its parts”, if that makes any sense.
“Why disperse sound in a 360 degree pattern? According to this smallish German firm, the human brain has difficulty in differentiating between direct and indirect sound of the more common forward-firing speakers thus causing listener fatigue over time. With Duevel's omnidirectional designs, the listener's room boundaries are deliberately energized to produce a more reverberant field not unlike what one would experience in a concert hall. Duevel believes this radiation pattern is more natural and therefore more easily processed by our brains. This goes against pretty much all conventional thinking about proper loudspeaker design. Screw conventional thinking. Where would we be as a species if we relied solely on conventional thinking? Probably still living in caves. Duevel speakers are certainly different maybe even radical and they sure as hell don't sound at all like any other speaker brand I have heard.”
The word “reverberant” seems apt and key in describing the sound.
Anyway, here are the other 2 reviews I read again and seem to be spot on with my experience now after at least a couple hundred hours of listening.
Now, here’s something you don’t see too often; an omni-directional loudspeaker. The Duevel Enterprise features two drive units that point upwards, with
Listening test of the Duevel Enterprise omnidirectional two-way floorstanding, an article by Lucio Cadeddu on TNT-Audio, Internet HiFi magazine - www.tnt-audio.com
www.tnt-audio.com
Ok, go ahead and punch away and let me have it with both barrels, but still say the omnis have a sound that is not captured in the common standard box speaker tests.
Well, I now have the AMT dipoles and Duevel Enterprise Omnis connected to the A/B speaker switch—things got a lot more interesting. Doing an instantaneous switch between speakers is an absolute must for comparison. This was a little trickier than the “box” vs Onmi comparison due to greater variance in speaker efficiency of the AMTs. The onmi and box sensitivity were very close, giving me a pretty darn close volume match, plenty good enough for just the soundstage comparison evaluation. The AMT dipoles are quite a bit more efficient, so now need to quickly adjust volume when A/B with the Omnis. I got it down to a second or so to volume balance, not perfect, but worked well enough. Anyway…
First off, in terms of soundstage size and immersion effect, the box speakers lag well behind both the dipole and Omni. Not even close. The AMT and Enterprise soundstage had a lot in common, but definitely had notable differences. The AMT dipoles actually fared better than I was expecting, better in some aspects and lesser in other ways. This is all still VERY preliminary, but after maybe 6 hours of back and forth, a few things stand out:
The AMT dipoles have a little better image localization, more pronounced and notable on some songs. It’s not that at Omnis don’t have image localization, just not as much spread across the soundstage. The AMTs had a bit wider soundstage with instruments spread wider on most songs tested. The Omnis seemed to have more soundstage depth, but there was a tendency to locate the “band” more toward the center with less horizontal spread but notably deeper front to back. So, which one is “better”? Well, it all depends. If one highly values image localization, they might prefer to trade-off some immersion/spaciousnes that the Omni has in spades. After to listening to maybe 100 songs, I’d be hard pressed to pick one or the other speaker as preferable. It really is song dependent, more than I was expecting. I did notice a pattern in the songs the onmis did not handle well, showing other sonic flaws not related to soundstage. On songs that have a lot of reverb effect in the master recording, the added reflected energy of the Omni degrades the sound, most noticeable in vocals—kinda like a “double reverb” or some such. I noticed it right away when Pink Floyd “Time” came up in the speaker test playlist rotation. On songs with a “drier” mix, the added reflective energy was more an enhancement than a negative. Does this make sense or am I using the wrong terms?
I’ve been mostly focusing on soundstage in this comparison of box/dipole/omni, but clearly that is only a part of the “sound quality” equation. The Enterprise did not seem to have any significant sonic flaws in other areas, things like timbe, coloration, dynamics, transient detail and such, nothing really standing out after close to 200 hours of play—Never fatiguing and always enjoyable. However, when doing direct comparison to the AMT, it was obvious there were some differences. The Enterprise never sounded bright, harsh, fatiguing, or colored, but the sound signature was audible different than the AMTs. That is to be expected given their planar ribbon design is known for things like detail, transparency and fast transient response.
I’m rambling now, just noting thoughts from my very preliminary direct A/B comparison.
At some point, I’ll need to make a comparison/evaluation of all aspects for overall “sound quality” of the three speaker types, at least the ones on hand and in my particular room acoustical environment. Nothing so far has made me want to go back to a box speaker, but the race has tightened in the dipole vs Omni shootout.
The increase in reflections from behind and to the side of the Omnis has a whole different character than the reduced reflected sound from a forward firing box speaker and an entirely different character, in a good way IMHO.
As I've mentioned, I owned the MBL Radialstrahler omnis for about 10 years, and I had numerous other speakers while I had those omnis. And since I love soundstaging and imaging and a "disappearing speaker" act, many of the speakers I've owned have been excellent in that regard. Even while I had the MBLs I also had speakers from Audio Physic, Thiel, Waveform (all of which disappeared and imaged like mad!).....Spendor S3/5s, Hales, and others. So I had quite a bit to compare to the MBLs.
As I've said, there is just something different about the sense of imaging with the omnis. I'd have a pair of speakers running and think "boy do these disappear, soundstage and image amazing!" But it just took putting the MBLs back in the system to put them in their place .
I found that sonic images took on just that much more 3D effect, like I could sense the space all around each image, even behind the image, if that makes any sense, vs the slightly more "flat image pasted in to the soundstage" effect of regular box speakers in comparison.
Jim, I've been following your posts on your experiments. Good stuff!
Indeed.
As I've mentioned, I owned the MBL Radialstrahler omnis for about 10 years, and I had numerous other speakers while I had those omnis. And since I love soundstaging and imaging and a "disappearing speaker" act, many of the speakers I've owned have been excellent in that regard. Even while I had the MBLs I also had speakers from Audio Physic, Thiel, Waveform (all of which disappeared and imaged like mad!).....Spendor S3/5s, Hales, and others. So I had quite a bit to compare to the MBLs.
Well, you have done plenty of comparisons, giving a clear picture of what Omnis do, unmatched by even the finest unipolar front firing speakers can do on soundstage character. It’s one of those things that seems not fully captured by conventional speaker testing methods and plots/graphs.
As I've said, there is just something different about the sense of imaging with the omnis. I'd have a pair of speakers running and think "boy do these disappear, soundstage and image amazing!" But it just took putting the MBLs back in the system to put them in their place .
Exactly the same here. When the Omnis go back in the rotation, always glad I switched to them. The difference compared to box speakers is not subtle, so no direct A/B needed to instantly hear the difference. The current A/B in play now with the Omnis and dipoles is another story, the dipoles creating a good portion of the Omni soundstage immersive effect.
I found that sonic images took on just that much more 3D effect, like I could sense the space all around each image, even behind the image, if that makes any sense, vs the slightly more "flat image pasted in to the soundstage" effect of regular box speakers in comparison.
Well, I certainly wouldn't call the imaging I'm getting currently from my Joseph speakers flat and sterile...but then, I got rid of the Omnis so I don't have them to compare and spoil the fun ;-)
Well, I certainly wouldn't call the imaging I'm getting currently from my Joseph speakers flat and sterile...but then, I got rid of the Omnis so I don't have them to compare and spoil the fun ;-)
Well, that was a poor choice of words on my part, an overstatement and too critical. My plan, after some more soundstage characteristic comparisons, is to evaluate other sonic characteristics of box speakers vs the Omni and dipoles. I just this evening pulled out some proper stands for my BMR Monitors to use as my “box” speaker comparison candidate, the closest thing I have to a “monitor” type box speaker. I’m sure some nice ones from Joseph Audio would be even better, but using what is on hand. I know of Joseph in their prior incarnation as JSE, running a pair of JSE 0.6 here for my deck/pool area speakers for many years—I’m sure the Joseph designs are even better in modern iterations.
Jim, I've been following your posts on your experiments. Good stuff!
Indeed.
As I've mentioned, I owned the MBL Radialstrahler omnis for about 10 years, and I had numerous other speakers while I had those omnis. And since I love soundstaging and imaging and a "disappearing speaker" act, many of the speakers I've owned have been excellent in that regard. Even while I had the MBLs I also had speakers from Audio Physic, Thiel, Waveform (all of which disappeared and imaged like mad!).....Spendor S3/5s, Hales, and others. So I had quite a bit to compare to the MBLs.
As I've said, there is just something different about the sense of imaging with the omnis. I'd have a pair of speakers running and think "boy do these disappear, soundstage and image amazing!" But it just took putting the MBLs back in the system to put them in their place .
I found that sonic images took on just that much more 3D effect, like I could sense the space all around each image, even behind the image, if that makes any sense, vs the slightly more "flat image pasted in to the soundstage" effect of regular box speakers in comparison.
Like you I am a big fan of MBL, I think it is a misleading and dis-serving to the brand to even qualify them as omnis . They are as precise as most so called point source with much less distortion at high SPL.
MBL, even their flagship, is probably one of the least pleasant speakers I have ever listened to. And I've heard them numerous times. Even in large rooms, the sound stage is messy with extreme inaccuracy to me. The vocal is generally tiny in the center and is sort of like everywhere instead. I personally cannot relax when listening to them and find it confusing. Same goes for Bose omnis that I've heard.
The MBL 101E does have an even horizontal directivity but only at a certain height.
I do however, like a speaker with wide 180° and broadband uniform dispersion combined with broadband absorption of the nearest side wall reflection and temporal diffusion of the lateral reflections if it arrives later than around 7 ms. That can sound great where you avoid the detrimental early reflections combined with a very spacious and enveloping sound.
MBL seem to think they are omnis,
Quote,
’ Most stereo speakers are simply boxes that push sound waves into a room using decades-old technology. At MBL, our proprietary Radialstrahlers flood your spaces with exquisite omnidirectional sound that envelops the senses with toe-curling pleasure.’
Keith
MBL, even their flagship, is probably one of the least pleasant speakers I have ever listened to. And I've heard them numerous times. Even in large rooms, the sound stage is messy with extreme inaccuracy to me. The vocal is generally tiny in the center and is sort of like everywhere instead. I personally cannot relax when listening to them and find it confusing. Same goes for Bose omnis that I've heard.
Omnis seem to be the most polarizing speaker type out there. I try to avoid controversial and hotly contested subjects, but wonder about the room acoustics/shape/size and placement aspects where you found them so unpleasant? I’m not challenging your assessment in any way, but definitely could see how even the finest Omni could be less than pleasing in some rooms and placement positions. My room is much less reflective than most, which I think is a large part of why they sound the way they do, at least after finding the best placement position option. I tried them in my kitchen which is long, narrow, and extremely reflective—sounded maybe worse than any speaker I’ve ever heard in any acoustic environment.
But do get your point about “messy” soundstage. My experience has been that while certainly lacking pinpoint image localization, the Omnis never sounded notably “messy” and vocals never had a “thin” aspect in any way. On some recordings, the instrument spread converged more to the center, like the band was closer together as opposed to spread wider across the stage. It will be interesting to make a direct comparison to a box speaker on the image localization and stability on different recordings.
Or maybe the MBL and my Duevels are not even a proper comparison being slightly different Omni designs?
The MBL 101E does have an even horizontal directivity but only at a certain height.
I do however, like a speaker with wide 180° and broadband uniform dispersion combined with broadband absorption of the nearest side wall reflection and temporal diffusion of the lateral reflections if it arrives later than around 7 ms. That can sound great where you avoid the detrimental early reflections combined with a very spacious and enveloping sound.
Omnis seem to be the most polarizing speaker type out there. I try to avoid controversial and hotly contested subjects, but wonder about the room acoustics/shape/size and placement aspects where you found them so unpleasant?
I find some of the anti-omni comments to be something from the Twilight zone in their characterizations of the sound. I suppose it's possible they heard something that "messy" but...I dunno.
It's not for nothing the MBLs are always one of the biggest attractions at shows, and they wow many audiophiles (though not everyone likes them).
In general I find the sound of a good omni like the MBL more "natural" in some ways, especially losing the head-in-a-vice vibe that often comes with regular stereo speakers, where imaging/tonal quality shift with head or listener movement and you have to sit just right to make things sound correct. It was always fascinating listening to the MBLs and getting off the sofa and the sound didn't just immediately collapse in terms of imaging and tonality like so many speakers.
I find some of the anti-omni comments to be something from the Twilight zone in their characterizations of the sound. I suppose it's possible they heard something that "messy" but...I dunno.
I do concede that Omnis do not do well on some recordings, particularly ones with a lot of reverb effects in the original master. I would not call that “messy” though.
I can’t imagine that MBL in a show setting is not set-up optimally in terms of room acoustics and speaker placement, showing them in at their best. I’ve never been to a show, so have no clue—are rooms just typical drywall with highly reflective qualities? I learned long ago, bad room acoustics can turn the best speaker in the world into a bad sounding mess.
In general I find the sound of a good omni like the MBL more "natural" in some ways, especially losing the head-in-a-vice vibe that often comes with regular stereo speakers, where imaging/tonal quality shift with head or listener movement and you have to sit just right to make things sound correct. It was always fascinating listening to the MBLs and getting off the sofa and the sound didn't just immediately collapse in terms of imaging and tonality like so many speakers.
Natural is an apt description from my Omni listening experience, assuming proper placement and good suitable room acoustic properties. While the sound changes dramatically as one moves further away from the sweet spot on box speakers, onmis have at least a “pretty sweet” spot from just about any listening position in the 360 degree arc. Whether that even matters depends on the listener, irrelevant if one just listens from the central sweet spot on the couch or easy chair. One of the first thing I noticed was how good the Omnis sounded even in the next room without the speakers in the line of sight.
Actually, MBL at least used to have a well-earned reputation for playing their speakers too loud. That was typically the case when I encountered them at a couple of shows, though many years ago. I don't know if that has changed, but I've noticed lots of positive comments about MBLs at shows over the last several years.
Natural is an apt description from my Omni listening experience, assuming proper placement and good suitable room acoustic properties. While the sound changes dramatically as one moves further away from the sweet spot on box speakers, onmis have at least a “pretty sweet” spot from just about any listening position in the 360 degree arc. Whether that even matters depends on the listener, irrelevant if one just listens from the central sweet spot on the couch or easy chair. One of the first thing I noticed was how good the Omnis sounded even in the next room without the speakers in the line of sight.
I made a recording of my son practising sax when took music in high school. The MBL omnis reproduced that more realistically than any other speaker and that was especially true of the "outside the room" test where the omni sounded startlingly real, like someone was playing sax in there. Using that recording, I fooled a couple guests that my son was playing sax just down the hall in that room.
Actually, MBL at least used to have a well-earned reputation for playing their speakers too loud. That was typically the case when I encountered them at a couple of shows, though many years ago. I don't know if that has changed, but I've noticed lots of positive comments about MBLs at shows over the last several years.
Just curious, did Duevel or Morrison have rooms at the shows you attended? Duevel footprint in the US is so small, I’m thinking likely not. I’ll have to ask Pascal, the sole North American distributor—it would have been him doing it if at all.
The biggest downside of MBL, no matter how good they are, is the price. Not that Duevel top models aren’t quite expensive too, but at least they offer more modest priced models.
I made a recording of my son practising sax when took music in high school. The MBL omnis reproduced that more realistically than any other speaker and that was especially true of the "outside the room" test where the omni sounded startlingly real, like someone was playing sax in there. Using that recording, I fooled a couple guests that my son was playing sax just down the hall in that room.
I’ve been solely relying on test tracks available to stream on Tidal or Qobuz, but fixing that tonight by loading up some other music on a USB drive to insert in my new Roon server, including a live recording done by a friend to try out.
The Omnis playing from the living room sound much better in the kitchen than when the Omnis were physically located in the kitchen and playing. When I’m cooking, now just crank up the living room Omnis for my “kitchen tunes”
I should point out that even uncalibrated measurement microphones tend to have most deviation in both extremes (bass and top end), let alone a phone mic where the design intentions were elsewhere (size, power consumption, cost, etc). May I suggest that you treat yourself to a measurement mic? This was one of the best investments I ever made.
. 
