Passive Speaker That Is Most Revealing Under 1000 USD

[Wolf]

If you would be open to DIY, there might be some that qualify as well.

 

[Wolf]

Why does revealing = not neutral? There is a huge difference between how a speaker, especially the tweeter, resolves a sound/frequency while being neutral and bright / top end boosted speakers. A boost from 5khz doesnt mean it will be more revealing than a good neutral speaker. If you think a boosted top end will be more revealing, think lower end B&Ws. Those 600 series are boosted till kingdom come but they do not reveal intricate details of a track like some other less bright/neutral speaker does. Revealing does not equate to boosted treble.

I agree with you. There are these points of tonality:
Sterile
Neutral
Realistic/Lively
Bright
Hot

I believe Realistic/Lively is where I prefer, and usually is akin to flat on axis response.
Neutral tends to either favor a downward tilt, maybe a warmer tonality, or BBC dip.
Bright is not always bad, as it can enhance home theater or dialog for the aging. It also can be instituted in the top octave alone for impact from the strings and flutes in an orchestral recording.
Hot is just bad all around, but could be room interference if off axis isn't great and the room is untreated.

 

[VINT]

Monitor audio silver 300

 

[Chromatischism]

Why does revealing = not neutral? There is a huge difference between how a speaker, especially the tweeter, resolves a sound/frequency while being neutral and bright / top end boosted speakers. A boost from 5khz doesnt mean it will be more revealing than a good neutral speaker. If you think a boosted top end will be more revealing, think lower end B&Ws. Those 600 series are boosted till kingdom come but they do not reveal intricate details of a track like some other less bright/neutral speakers do. Revealing does not equate to boosted treble and vice versa.

It depends what frequencies are boosted, but yeah that is usually what "revealing" means. Conversely, "neutral" literally means non-exaggerated, but also note what Jim Taylor said. The room can cause issues that obscure details.

 

[Chromatischism]

For over 50 years, I have used nearfield positioning, narrow dispersion patterns and room treatment to extract information that I found desirable from recordings. These three implementations have made more difference than the choices between generally-similar loudspeakers. Jim

Great point. Just look at how Genelec designs speakers if you want an idea of what you need in the near field.

 

[MarkWinston]

It depends what frequencies are boosted, but yeah that is usually what "revealing" means. Conversely, "neutral" literally means non-exaggerated, but also note what Jim Taylor said. The room can cause issues that obscure details.

If you insist that revealing means certain boosted top end frequencies, I cant change your mind. Thats not what I meant or what Im after. Im after revealing yet neutral, something that is usually hardware dependant.

 

[dc655321]

@OP:
A flat frequency response (anechoic) means, "output = input":
i.e. gems, warts, and everything in between are reproduced faithfully.

Since we don't typically listen in anechoic conditions, a near-field configuration with some minor room treatment will maximize signal to (room-) noise, and represents a path of least compromise (IMO). In other words, what @Jim Taylor said.

I'm not sure how it would be possible to get more "revealing" than that.

 

[napilopez]

@MarkWinston. At some point, it very likely does come down to a boosted frequency response, where within the listening window or in directivity. I think the way you're defining 'revealing' might be the way people refer to 'transparency' or a speaker that is 'detailed' in some way, assuming that it's independent of frequency response. But in most cases, it's not. So I think you're potentially underestimating the power of some small changes in frequency response and directivity.

There is an infinite amount of ways speakers can sound roughly 'neutral' while still having some frequencies boosted over others. A speaker being neutral just means it's in the ballpark of flattish frequency response and smooth directivity. But within those constraints speakers can still sound very different.

In any case these are very subjective terms. You could argue a flattish speaker is not very revealing compared to other neutral speakers, but if you're coming from something that's all bass and no treble, it'll sound like a revelation.

Likewise, some speakers have peaks in some frequencies and dips in others. Instruments and sounds that excite those peaks will be 'revealed' more compared to speakers that don't have peaks in those regions, while areas with dips will be obscured. Moreover, having a dip right before a peak can fit her accentuate that peak too.

We can talk about what being revealing means in broad terms, but it's more useful to talk in terms of direct comparisons from speaker to speaker. If you have a certain speaker that is roughly neutral but would like it to sound more detailed, it only takes a very small change in FR or a different directivity pattern to make that happen. Almost by definition, a speaker sounding more 'detailed' just means it's giving you some small acoustic insight that the other speaker did not provide.

Again, small changes can make noticeable differences. Just a 1dB boost in frequency response spread over a wide range of frequencies will be very audible. This is especially true as peaks are more audible than dips.

From Toole's book chapter 4, minimum audibility threshold for resonances:

Look at that third graph in particular. A 0.5dB, broad boost in frequencies like the one at 5kHz would take a careful eye to spot in a frequency response graph, yet it is just as audible as the 4dB narrow peak at 200Hz.

Somewhat counterintuitively, it is the subtle, broad changes that are more audible than the much more visible smaller peaks and dips. But all should be taken into account, which is why high quality measurements are important.

 

[MarkWinston]

@MarkWinston. At some point, it very likely does come down to a boosted frequency response, where within the listening window or in directivity. I think the way you're defining 'revealing' might be the way people refer to 'transparency' or a speaker that is 'detailed' in some way, assuming that it's independent of frequency response. But in most cases, it's not. So I think you're potentially underestimating the power of some small changes in frequency response and directivity.

There is an infinite amount of ways speakers can sound roughly 'neutral' while still having some frequencies boosted over others. A speaker being neutral just means it's in the ballpark of flattish frequency response and smooth directivity. But within those constraints speakers can still sound very different.

In any case these are very subjective terms. You could argue a flattish speaker is not very revealing compared to other neutral speakers, but if you're coming from something that's all bass and no treble, it'll sound like a revelation.

Likewise, some speakers have peaks in some frequencies and dips in others. Instruments and sounds that excite those peaks will be 'revealed' more compared to speakers that don't have peaks in those regions, while areas with dips will be obscured. Moreover, having a dip right before a peak can fit her accentuate that peak too.

We can talk about what being revealing means in broad terms, but it's more useful to talk in terms of direct comparisons from speaker to speaker. If you have a certain speaker that is roughly neutral but would like it to sound more detailed, it only takes a very small change in FR or a different directivity pattern to make that happen. Almost by definition, a speaker sounding more 'detailed' just means it's giving you some small acoustic insight that the other speaker did not provide.

Again, small changes can make noticeable differences. Just a 1dB boost in frequency response spread over a wide range of frequencies will be very audible. This is especially true as peaks are more audible than dips.

From Toole's book chapter 4, minimum audibility threshold for resonances:

View attachment 152955
Look at that third graph in particular. A 0.5dB, broad boost in frequencies like the one at 5kHz would take a careful eye to spot in a frequency response graph, yet it is just as audible as the 4dB narrow peak at 200Hz.

Somewhat counterintuitively, it is the subtle, broad changes that are more audible than the much more visible smaller peaks and dips. But all should be taken into account, which is why high quality measurements are important.

Humour me for a sec here but lets take this scenario : A Genelac that measures 100% flat from 20hz - 20khz, I mean 100% flat vs an ABC speaker that measures 100% flat from 20hz - 5khz then start gradually and linearly rising to 20khz. The Genelac will still be more detailed, revealing and transparent, which ever way you may call it.

Are you saying that this scenario is impossible given the same listening conditions?

 

[zeppzeppzepp]

Why does revealing = not neutral? There is a huge difference between how a speaker, especially the tweeter, resolves a sound/frequency while being neutral and bright / top end boosted speakers. A boost from 5khz doesnt mean it will be more revealing than a good neutral speaker. If you think a boosted top end will be more revealing, think lower end B&Ws. Those 600 series are boosted till kingdom come but they do not reveal intricate details of a track like some other less bright/neutral speakers do. Revealing does not equate to boosted treble and vice versa.

Try think about a loudspeaker giving very flat frequency above 500 hz and with no sufficient lower mid and bass response.
That may be quite revealing for "specific some aspects" of audio.
Flat response is not totally straight, it's about balance and often there's masking effect.
If using loudspeakers as tools, neutral is not a must, different types can be chosen for different purposes.

 

[Chromatischism]

What you're describing is a change in balance. Since we hear tonal balance and since an overabundance of some sounds can mask our perception of others, what you describe will sound much more detailed from 5 kHz and up and depending on content, could mask mid range detail.

In an opposite scenario, a speaker that gradually rolls off starting at 5 kHz will sound much less detailed from that point on up and will sound like it has an overabundance of midrange detail because that is what your brain will focus its processing on.

So when you say "detailed" – it depends.

 

[MarkWinston]

What you're describing is a change in balance. Since we hear tonal balance and since an overabundance of some sounds can mask our perception of others, what you describe will sound much more detailed from 5 kHz and up and depending on content, could mask mid range detail.

In an opposite scenario, a speaker that gradually rolls off starting at 5 kHz will sound much less detailed from that point on up and will sound like it has an overabundance of midrange detail because that is what your brain will focus its processing on.

So when you say "detailed" – it depends.

What about the scenario I gave above? Will that be impossible?

 

[jae]

SVS Ultra Bookshelf
Revel M16
Elac DBR62

 

[richard12511]

Humour me for a sec here but lets take this scenario : A Genelac that measures 100% flat from 20hz - 20khz, I mean 100% flat vs an ABC speaker that measures 100% flat from 20hz - 5khz then start gradually and linearly rising to 20khz. The Genelac will still be more detailed, revealing and transparent, which ever way you may call it.

Are you saying that this scenario is impossible given the same listening conditions?

I think it's likely just a difference in what interpret "revealing" or "detailed" to mean. I tend to agree that neutral is likely to be the most revealing on average, but I'm not at all sure of that.

In your scenario, I would say the Genelec is more revealing of sounds below 5kHz, while the ABC is more revealing of sounds above 5kHz.

 

[MarkWinston]

I think it's likely just a difference in what interpret "revealing" or "detailed" to mean. I tend to agree that neutral is likely to be the most revealing on average, but I'm not at all sure of that.

In your scenario, I would say the Genelec is more revealing of sounds below 5kHz, while the ABC is more revealing of sounds above 5kHz.

Would a certain tweeter type be more detailed than another type of tweeter even if they measure exactly the same?

 

[Wolf]

Given the FR is the same, they still could sound drastically different if the HD of the tweeters is different. This is where the lower HD drivers can shine and be more revealing without the added HD some add to the sound.

 

[Chromatischism]

Would a certain tweeter type be more detailed than another type of tweeter even if they measure exactly the same?

Outside of dispersion pattern which affects reflections, frequency response, distortion, and power handling, I do not believe there is anything else about tweeter type or material that I need to consider.

 

[MarkWinston]

Given the FR is the same, they still could sound drastically different if the HD of the tweeters is different. This is where the lower HD drivers can shine and be more revealing without the added HD some add to the sound.

Thats the point Im trying to get at, a neutral measuring speaker may be more revealing than a treble boosted one. It doesnt necessarily mean a bright measured speaker would be more revealing than a neutral one. Blanket statements like these are just not true, there are other factors at play besides the fr. I would like to know what other factors affect transparency and detail, hence my initial question because Ive come across many bright speakers that are not as revealing.

 

[Chromatischism]

So when you say "detailed" – it depends.

Depends what part of the spectrum you want to "reveal".

Most of the time when you see someone say that a speaker or headphone is "revealing", they are talking about mids and/or treble being boosted a bit. It can even be just a little boost over a broad range, as mentioned here. We've seen it on speakers like the KEF R3 as well which look close enough to be called "neutral" yet on closer examination you see why they can highlight recording flaws (or enhance very clean music). Make sure you aren't just looking at the on-axis frequency response as that isn't the best measurement.

Also dispersion pattern matters a lot. A tight beam of sound will be very clear when it reaches you due to a lack of reflections, for example. The same is true in the nearfield.

 

[thewas]

Boosting a frequency region is like reading something through a magnifying glass, you hear and see more in that region but at the cost of the other regions which get more masked, so it is a compromise, therefore better to use a neutral basis and a switchable EQ on demand.