This is a review, listening tests and detailed measurements of the Palmer Orbit 11 Cardioid coaxial professional monitor (powered speaker). It was sent to me by the company and costs US $899 each.
This is a cute but super dense and have little thing!
I don't think filling it with lead would make it any heavier. Construction feels like inch think metal. The shiny woofer takes away a bit from the look but for professional market, I don't think it is a big deal. Dual opposing woofers are located on each side. Back side shows the nice analog and digital connectivity:
There is a modern and nicely looking/easy to use display that puts every other studio monitor to shame. It allows limited adjustments for location and sensitivity. On the latter, I tested the unit at -12 dB sensitivity. I will test for this more later but audible hiss was quite acceptable to me and faded out at 1 meter/3 feet.
Palmer Orbit 11 Monitor Measurements
As usual we start with our anechoic speaker frequency response and directivity measurements courtesy of Klippel Near-Field Scanner:
The most striking thing is seeing a speaker, of almost any size, being flat to 30 Hz and having extension down to 20 Hz!!! On-axis response is mostly flat with some low level undulations especially around 6 kHz.
Directivity however, seems uneven to me. There is some attempt at constant level but as you see in the blue dashed line, spacing between it and on-axis is not constant. That results in early window frequency response that is uneven and hence, room dependent:
The predicted in-room response, while being a simulation for far-field listening, shows a strong bass step response:
Speaker is likely to sound boomy. We will listen for this later.
Back to directivity, we can see that more clearly in our beam width response:
It is challenging to get a coaxial driver to have smooth response across full range.
The benefit of coaxial comes to play in vertical response which is far more even than any 2-way non-coaxial:
When I first started to test the speaker, I thought something was broken as the speaker clipping indicator would keep coming on. I realized after some testing that it does so at any level above 86 dBSPL. So no wonder distortion shoots way up at 96 dBSPL:
In addition to that, electronic limiting is provided which reduces bass response:
That's actually nice in the way sub-bass response just becomes distorted instead of severely bottoming out.
We can see the limitation much more clearly if we focus on bass:
We have exponential rise in distortion below 100 Hz even at 81 dBSPL. This would predict that you really need to listen at low levels if you want to enjoy full range response. Or else deploy a subwoofer.
Here is our waterfall:
And step response:
I wonder if that odd wiggle is power limiting even at this 86 dBSPL measurement.
Palmer Orbit 11 Listening Tests (Near-field)
First impression was that of warmth and deep bass -- something that just doesn't come for the ride in this size and price category. Alas, on sub-bass heavy tracks, I could barely turn up the volume, lest I wanted distortion and limited output. With bass that was not so deep, response was pretty good and speaker could get pretty loud before clipping indicator came on.
Listening more, what I heard was variable. At times, the response was very nice and full range, putting a smile on my face. But on other tracks, I would find the bass unwieldly. I applied some EQ and this helped a bit:
But the real solution likely requires fair bit of experimentation, measurement and fine tuning. Interactions with the room likely is another factor, making such tuning more difficult (with just the anechoic response).
Conclusions
The Orbit 11 is the third speaker in a row I have tested which extends the low end well below any prediction one would have. I kind of like this in that you have potential that you then get to optimize. A full-range response is something to be treasured. Alas, the tuning of the Orbit 11 is rough as predicted in the measurements and my listening tests. Bass either overwhelms or gets limited. The former can be managed I think, just not in quick manner. At the end of the day, the low cost and very small enclosure bring limitations here.
I would like to see one size larger version of Orbit 11 with more amplification power. And better tuning of the off-axis response as to provide a better in-room response.
As is, there is a lot of potential here so I am going to recommend the Palmer Orbit 11. Just be prepared to either use auto-EQ or fair bit of manual tuning. This is not a plug and play solution.
-----------
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/
This is a cute but super dense and have little thing!
I don't think filling it with lead would make it any heavier. Construction feels like inch think metal. The shiny woofer takes away a bit from the look but for professional market, I don't think it is a big deal. Dual opposing woofers are located on each side. Back side shows the nice analog and digital connectivity:There is a modern and nicely looking/easy to use display that puts every other studio monitor to shame. It allows limited adjustments for location and sensitivity. On the latter, I tested the unit at -12 dB sensitivity. I will test for this more later but audible hiss was quite acceptable to me and faded out at 1 meter/3 feet.
Palmer Orbit 11 Monitor Measurements
As usual we start with our anechoic speaker frequency response and directivity measurements courtesy of Klippel Near-Field Scanner:
The most striking thing is seeing a speaker, of almost any size, being flat to 30 Hz and having extension down to 20 Hz!!! On-axis response is mostly flat with some low level undulations especially around 6 kHz.
Directivity however, seems uneven to me. There is some attempt at constant level but as you see in the blue dashed line, spacing between it and on-axis is not constant. That results in early window frequency response that is uneven and hence, room dependent:
The predicted in-room response, while being a simulation for far-field listening, shows a strong bass step response:
Speaker is likely to sound boomy. We will listen for this later.
Back to directivity, we can see that more clearly in our beam width response:
It is challenging to get a coaxial driver to have smooth response across full range.
The benefit of coaxial comes to play in vertical response which is far more even than any 2-way non-coaxial:
When I first started to test the speaker, I thought something was broken as the speaker clipping indicator would keep coming on. I realized after some testing that it does so at any level above 86 dBSPL. So no wonder distortion shoots way up at 96 dBSPL:
In addition to that, electronic limiting is provided which reduces bass response:
That's actually nice in the way sub-bass response just becomes distorted instead of severely bottoming out.
We can see the limitation much more clearly if we focus on bass:
We have exponential rise in distortion below 100 Hz even at 81 dBSPL. This would predict that you really need to listen at low levels if you want to enjoy full range response. Or else deploy a subwoofer.
Here is our waterfall:
And step response:
I wonder if that odd wiggle is power limiting even at this 86 dBSPL measurement.
Palmer Orbit 11 Listening Tests (Near-field)
First impression was that of warmth and deep bass -- something that just doesn't come for the ride in this size and price category. Alas, on sub-bass heavy tracks, I could barely turn up the volume, lest I wanted distortion and limited output. With bass that was not so deep, response was pretty good and speaker could get pretty loud before clipping indicator came on.
Listening more, what I heard was variable. At times, the response was very nice and full range, putting a smile on my face. But on other tracks, I would find the bass unwieldly. I applied some EQ and this helped a bit:
But the real solution likely requires fair bit of experimentation, measurement and fine tuning. Interactions with the room likely is another factor, making such tuning more difficult (with just the anechoic response).
Conclusions
The Orbit 11 is the third speaker in a row I have tested which extends the low end well below any prediction one would have. I kind of like this in that you have potential that you then get to optimize. A full-range response is something to be treasured. Alas, the tuning of the Orbit 11 is rough as predicted in the measurements and my listening tests. Bass either overwhelms or gets limited. The former can be managed I think, just not in quick manner. At the end of the day, the low cost and very small enclosure bring limitations here.
I would like to see one size larger version of Orbit 11 with more amplification power. And better tuning of the off-axis response as to provide a better in-room response.
As is, there is a lot of potential here so I am going to recommend the Palmer Orbit 11. Just be prepared to either use auto-EQ or fair bit of manual tuning. This is not a plug and play solution.
-----------
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/
