PreSonus E5 XT Active Speaker Review

[BYRTT]

Well this makes pretty dissapointing reading after just ordering x2 Eris 5XT's

Looking online these seemed to be a really good choice as well.

Sorry for being a newb, but how would I apply these filters that people have posted when my speakers do arrive? They will be used for mixing / mastering. Thanks

If we talk computer you can set them suggested filter strings inside each DAW or player software package but then remember EQ correction is not systemwide for other programs as for example system sounds and webbrowsers, to get systemwide correction on for example MS Windows one can use Equalizer APO or in Jriver software use the "WDM Driver" feature (Virtual soundcard).

 

[clownstyle]

If we talk computer you can set them suggested filter strings inside each DAW or player software package but then remember EQ correction is not systemwide for other programs as for example system sounds and webbrowsers, to get systemwide correction on for example MS Windows one can use Equalizer APO or in Jriver software use the "WDM Driver" feature (Virtual soundcard).

OK that makes sense. I was just wondering what software was being used to import those strings as they seem like small wav files. I could just apply these settings in my DAW but I guess it makes more sense to just have them set system wide.

I've installed Equalizer APO - Do I just pick one of the wav files and import into the graphic EQ section of APO? It seems to want a .csv file but the wav does seem to import some data. Hopefully I'm doing this correctly!

Also unsure on which file to pick, although I don't have a seperate sub so would need to keep those low end frequencies.

 

[BYRTT]

OK that makes sense. I was just wondering what software was being used to import those strings as they seem like small wav files. I could just apply these settings in my DAW but I guess it makes more sense to just have them set system wide.

I've installed Equalizer APO - Do I just pick one of the wav files and import into the graphic EQ section of APO? It seems to want a .csv file but the wav does seem to import some data. Hopefully I'm doing this correctly!

Also unsure on which file to pick, although I don't have a seperate sub so would need to keep those low end frequencies.

Dont know how APO works so cant help there other than suggest read up on APO guides or manuals, software players as Jriver or Roon or Foobar have build in convolution feature and those impulse response wav-files work like a charm there but notice to use the 64bit IEEE files software needs to be 64bit else use those 24bit PCM files that should work whatever software is 32 or 64bit, a alternative is you could set those 5 times PEQ offered into post 77 into APO or use Maiky76 EQ.

Also notice that if you use ASIO driver in your DAW then APO will probably be bypassed, or check it out yourself what wil happen then by running some tests.

 

[clownstyle]

Dont know how APO works so cant help there other than suggest read up on APO guides or manuals, software players as Jriver or Roon or Foobar have build in convolution feature and those impulse response wav-files work like a charm there but notice to use the 64bit IEEE files software needs to be 64bit else use those 24bit PCM files that should work whatever software is 32 or 64bit, a alternative is you could set those 5 times PEQ offered into post 77 into APO or use Maiky76 EQ.

Also notice that if you use ASIO driver in your DAW then APO will probably be bypassed, or check it out yourself what wil happen then by running some tests.

Yes I think you're right. Asio might bypass those settings.

I haven't even got the speakers yet, but I would be interested to hear the difference by using those response files.

I've found the convolver plugin for foobar so will do some further testing when I get the speakers. Thanks for all your work

 

[jbyss]

This a review and detailed measurements of the PreSonus Eris E5 XT powered "studio monitor." I purchased it from Amazon back in January of this year. It currently costs US $150 (each) on Amazon including Prime shipping.

The look and feel of the E5 is quite nice despite its budget price:

View attachment 63840

A fully formed waveguide a very nice touch and should create a proper hand off to the woofer at crossover frequencies, resulting in similar off-axis and on-axis response (measurements to confirm). Amplification is quite anemic at 20/30 (?) watts but that is to be expected in this price range.

Lots of controls are provided which indicated it is using analog active crossover:

View attachment 63842

I tested the E5 as pictured. I rotated the gain settings until they clicked on the detente.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

Spinorama Audio Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker can be used. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws (ignore the absolute SPL level -- they are incorrect):

View attachment 63843

We have very good and very bad news. Good news is that the waveguide is doing its job resulting in very smooth early window directivity graph (dashed blue line at the bottom). So speaker should be very room friendly.

Bad news is obvious: we have two peaks at low and high frequencies with a wide dip overall, and two deeper ones within, with the worst case being the crossover region around 3 kHz. I don't mind the bass boost but like to see flat response otherwise until 10 kHz. We don't have this. The sound then will be bass and maybe high heavy with middle stuff lost.

Because the directivity is good, room reflections mimic the direct sound which in this case is not a good thing since they accentuate the problem:

View attachment 63846

The dip is deeper here. No surprise then that the predicted in-room response in a simulated listening room is anything but smooth:

View attachment 63848

When performing distortion tests, I could hear nasty distortions in low frequencies which showed up in a bad way in my reference 96 dB SPL @ 1 meter (room reflections filtered):

View attachment 63849

For best speakers, there should only be a a few peaks below a few hundred hertz. Here distortion spans far and wide. Zooming in with percentage distortion we see even a nastier presentation:

View attachment 63850

That woofer or its amplifier is really struggling to produce clean sound.

Reducing levels to 86 dB @ 1 meter cleans up the situation a lot:

View attachment 63852

View attachment 63853

Still, the woofer or its amp continue to be the weak link.

Horizontal directivity plot shows the smooth envelop that we like to see as we move off-axis but of course the level varies as we saw in the spinorama:

View attachment 63854

We want that smooth envelop with similar colors so they are not separated from each other. Half the problem is solved but not the other.

Vertical is bad but it is in many designs:

View attachment 63855

Finally, here is our obligatory CSD/waterfall, again room compensated:

View attachment 63856


Speaker Listening Tests
Being a near-filed monitor, I decided to test it at my workstation. The E5 was placed on the left of my monitor with a 5 inch or so stand pointed up. First impression wasn't bad with noticeable amount of bass but then brightness come in and it wasn't so pleasant. By itself, I thought "this is not as bad sounding as the measurements indicate."

Then I turned on the JBL LSR305P on the right and compared one channel at a time, levels matched. Now the game was afoot! The LSR305P wiped the floor with the E5. While the female voices would get lost in the PresSonus, the LSR305 provided superb, clear reproduction. Even male vocals had clarity that simply was not there with the E5.

Now, the E5 has plenty of bass. Turn up the level though and you hear gurgling sound which seemed to be an amplifier overload condition rather than the driver bottoming out. Here is the problem: once you hear the drivers distorting, you can't unhear them when you lower the level! The bass while pronounced and at much higher levels than the 305P, it just doesn't sound clean.

When you turn up the volume on the LSR 305, a nice limited simply stops it from playing too loud and distorted. This seems to be a better approach than letting the speaker beat its brains out as the E5 XT does.

Overall, I stopped listening to the PreSonus E5 XT and continued playing the LSR 305P!

Conclusions
PreSonus nails the look and feel of the E5 XT. It has a higher end feel than many budget speakers. The waveguide is effective in providing even response side to side which is nice. The boosted lows and highs though seems to have been aimed at selling the speaker in a showroom. It does impress at first. And especially so if you don't compare it to another speaker, level matched. When you do that though, the shortcomings of the E5 XT come to surface with uneven tonality and tons of distortion from its bass driver.

The JBL LSR305P is going for just US $109 which is $50 cheaper than the E5 XT. It sounds hi-fi in the way that E5 XT simply doesn't. It lacks a bit of bass but I think you could boost its response there and maybe get the same thing as E5 has.

Overall, despite the online buzz that PreSonus E5 XT has, I cannot recommend it. I am here to guide you to proper sound and that calls for flat or flattish frequency response. You are not going to get that E5.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

I am thinking every time I review a product that doesn't perform, I should get hazard pay. How do you all feel about 2X of the normal compensation? If you agree, please up your donations using : https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Between the Presonus Eris E5xt and the M-Audio Bx5 D3 which active monitor is better?

 

[audiomaestro]

I feel vindicated reading Amir's review on this speaker. I own the previous gen model, the Eris E5 (non XT model) and was utterly disappointed after a few days of casual listening. It has such a gritty, hollow, and annoying tonality... even at low to moderate volume levels. I read so many positive reviews before buying them. Reviewers stated it sounds clean and neutral, but that is not at all what I am hearing. This is my first post here, but I have been lurking for a month. It's nice to cut through the marketing BS and find some real data. While I wish I saw this review before I purchased mine, I'm at least thankful to have found this community so I can make a better decision on what I will replace them with.

 

[anmpr1]

I feel vindicated reading Amir's review on this speaker. I own the previous gen model, the Eris E5 (non XT model) and was utterly disappointed...

A monitor loudspeaker is (should be?) a tool. If you don't like its sound, that's fine, but I'm guessing there are a lot of great recordings you own and enjoy that were mixed using loudspeakers you would not personally like to own in your living room.

 

[audiomaestro]

A monitor loudspeaker is (should be?) a tool. If you don't like its sound, that's fine, but I'm guessing there are a lot of great recordings you own and enjoy that were mixed using loudspeakers you would not personally like to own in your living room.

I would be inclined to think a monitor full of gritty audible distortion (as shown in Amir's measurements) is a poor tool. There are far better options out there. I know what a flat, clean, and neutral sound is, and the Eris 5 is far from. I am a musician and do not use these monitors in my living room. The sheer amount of positive reviews for them makes me realize many so called pros have ears no better than your average Bose customer. It was refreshing to see Amir's measurements vindicate what I am hearing. I need something clean without coloration. These belong in the landfill, not in any home or studio.

 

[Archon43]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this review, it's all wrong IMO.

With Two Eris E5 XT, the Presonus Tremblor T8 subwoofer, and a MOTU M2 audio interface, placed 30" apart in the middle of my room, toed in 10 degrees and the sub under my table.

This blows away my Yamaha TSR-700 with Polk audio signature S55 fronts, the S50 center, S15 surrounds, and S15 ATMOS with a RSL Speedwoofer 10s and audio out of a Topping E50 DAC! That is a $500 receiver, a $250 DAC (+$50 for the upgraded power supply), $1500+ worth of speakers, and a $400 subwoofer WITH YPAO multi-point room correction! Great highs, great mids, and the sub and speakers handle the lows way more than I thought it would, due to the size. My wife, parents, and friends agree they like the sound better now.

I have owned the JBL 305p Mark II (had them setup identical to this room) with the matching subwoofer LSR-310s. The sub is bigger with the JBL (10" vs 8"), but the Presonus is more powerful.

E5 XT vs JBL 305p Mark II: The JBL do not put out as full of a sound, especially noticeable in the low end. I like the sound of both, but I find the E5 XT are more accurate to the source.

Tremblor T8 vs JBL LSR-310S: The Tremblor is definitely more powerful, both sound really good and fill in the lows.

In other words, I can understand testing and attempting to make conclusions about the sound based on that, but that is not have speakers work. Any issues with the response can be ironed out on settings, you can get these dead flat I am sure. They are still doing their job, pointing out good recordings as well as bad ones. With good recordings, the sound is unreal and much better than stereo or surround with my Topping/Yamaha/Polk/RSL Speedwoofer 10s.

I am 100% happy, it should be noted I tried the Adam T5V and the matching sub before this and the Presonus 2.1 setup sounds much better. If you want truly flat monitors, you would need a treated room and to pay a LOT more money. The entry levels from each brand all have their pros and cons, strong points and weak points. For example, people like the Yamaha monitors and I have never liked them.

As an aside, another thing I see wrong is people commenting about woofer size. Woofer size should be determined by the size of the room, not "well, an 8" is better than a 5" for bass". For my room, a 5" to 6" woofer is perfect. Anything bigger tends to sound boomy. I bought Kali Audio 8" LP8 and they sounded dreadful in my room, but good in a larger room.

 

[Vergilius100]

I feel vindicated reading Amir's review on this speaker. I own the previous gen model, the Eris E5 (non XT model) and was utterly disappointed after a few days of casual listening. It has such a gritty, hollow, and annoying tonality... even at low to moderate volume levels. I read so many positive reviews before buying them. Reviewers stated it sounds clean and neutral, but that is not at all what I am hearing. This is my first post here, but I have been lurking for a month. It's nice to cut through the marketing BS and find some real data. While I wish I saw this review before I purchased mine, I'm at least thankful to have found this community so I can make a better decision on what I will replace them with.

Hello! I'm not going to recommend a different monitor speaker to you since I didn't have the chance to listen to many of them, but I could give you some hints in order to make you get a desirable sound out of your Presonus Eris E5. I have the same speakers and I also felt like the speakers weren't really "right" at a first listening: upper treble was harsh and the mids sounded somewhat uneven to my ears. What I found out later was that boosting the mids and lowering the highs by 3db in the Acoustic controls on the rear part of the speaker improved the overall sound by not a thin margin. Recently I also applied some EQ by lowering 114, 140 and 190 Hz by around 10 db as I noticed that these frequencies caused nasty reflections in my small room; this furtherly improved my experience as I feel like the mids in the speakers are much clearer now. I compared the result with my Sennheiser HD600 and I was pleased to notice that the speakers sounded fine now. As some users already wrote, the upper mids would require some extra tuning as they might sound too weak for some people; as for myself, they sound pleasant, in fact I never really loved the HD600 emphasis on high mids since it made my listening experience really fatiguing after a long time.

 

[raif71]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this review, it's all wrong IMO.

With Two Eris E5 XT, the Presonus Tremblor T8 subwoofer, and a MOTU M2 audio interface, placed 30" apart in the middle of my room, toed in 10 degrees and the sub under my table.

This blows away my Yamaha TSR-700 with Polk audio signature S55 fronts, the S50 center, S15 surrounds, and S15 ATMOS with a RSL Speedwoofer 10s and audio out of a Topping E50 DAC! That is a $500 receiver, a $250 DAC (+$50 for the upgraded power supply), $1500+ worth of speakers, and a $400 subwoofer WITH YPAO multi-point room correction! Great highs, great mids, and the sub and speakers handle the lows way more than I thought it would, due to the size. My wife, parents, and friends agree they like the sound better now.

I have owned the JBL 305p Mark II (had them setup identical to this room) with the matching subwoofer LSR-310s. The sub is bigger with the JBL (10" vs 8"), but the Presonus is more powerful.

E5 XT vs JBL 305p Mark II: The JBL do not put out as full of a sound, especially noticeable in the low end. I like the sound of both, but I find the E5 XT are more accurate to the source.

Tremblor T8 vs JBL LSR-310S: The Tremblor is definitely more powerful, both sound really good and fill in the lows.

In other words, I can understand testing and attempting to make conclusions about the sound based on that, but that is not have speakers work. Any issues with the response can be ironed out on settings, you can get these dead flat I am sure. They are still doing their job, pointing out good recordings as well as bad ones. With good recordings, the sound is unreal and much better than stereo or surround with my Topping/Yamaha/Polk/RSL Speedwoofer 10s.

I am 100% happy, it should be noted I tried the Adam T5V and the matching sub before this and the Presonus 2.1 setup sounds much better. If you want truly flat monitors, you would need a treated room and to pay a LOT more money. The entry levels from each brand all have their pros and cons, strong points and weak points. For example, people like the Yamaha monitors and I have never liked them.

As an aside, another thing I see wrong is people commenting about woofer size. Woofer size should be determined by the size of the room, not "well, an 8" is better than a 5" for bass". For my room, a 5" to 6" woofer is perfect. Anything bigger tends to sound boomy. I bought Kali Audio 8" LP8 and they sounded dreadful in my room, but good in a larger room.

I'm quite happy with my eris e5 xt as well.

 

[Sezgin]

Hi,

Based on the info from post #58, I created an EqualizerAPO configuration file, which is;


Filter: ON LSC Fc 91.5 Hz Gain -4.6 dB Q 0.98
Filter: ON PK Fc 438 Hz Gain -1.32 dB Q 3.35
Filter: ON PK Fc 552 Hz Gain 1.13 dB Q 5.5
Filter: ON PK Fc 647 Hz Gain -2.65 dB Q 2.55
Filter: ON PK Fc 2132 Hz Gain -0.8 dB Q 0.48
Filter: ON PK Fc 1630 Hz Gain -0.87 dB Q 4.15
Filter: ON PK Fc 2590 Hz Gain -1.44 dB Q 1
Filter: ON PK Fc 3479 Hz Gain 3.65 dB Q 1.96
Filter: ON PK Fc 4310 Hz Gain -1.15 dB Q 5.45
Filter: ON HSC Fc 16436 Hz Gain -6.9 dB Q 0.71
Preamp: -1.8 dB


Enter these to config.txt file which is in C:\Program Files\EqualizerAPO\config

Program link:

Equalizer APO

Download Equalizer APO for free. A system-wide equalizer for Windows 7 / 8 / 8.1 / 10 / 11. Equalizer APO is a parametric / graphic equalizer for Windows. It is implemented as an Audio Processing Object (APO) for the system effect infrastructure introduced with Windows Vista.

sourceforge.net

All speaker knob settings should be flat.
You can change hertz or bit rate on the fly with this method.
Have fun.

Wav file importing provides much better correction though. If you want to try, clear the config.txt and enter "configuration editor" from windows start menu, then plus sign>advanced filters>convolution.
Add the correct hz (44100 to 192k) , correct subwoofer hz (57 or 100) 64 bit file from post #13.
Then go to plus sign>basic filters>preamp and enter -10.6 db.
Save the file from file>save. Then exit and re enter to configuration editor and make sure the 2 power switches are on.
Have more fun.

 

[Nutul]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this review, it's all wrong IMO.

With Two Eris E5 XT, the Presonus Tremblor T8 subwoofer, and a MOTU M2 audio interface, placed 30" apart in the middle of my room, toed in 10 degrees and the sub under my table.

This blows away my Yamaha TSR-700 with Polk audio signature S55 fronts, the S50 center, S15 surrounds, and S15 ATMOS with a RSL Speedwoofer 10s and audio out of a Topping E50 DAC! That is a $500 receiver, a $250 DAC (+$50 for the upgraded power supply), $1500+ worth of speakers, and a $400 subwoofer WITH YPAO multi-point room correction! Great highs, great mids, and the sub and speakers handle the lows way more than I thought it would, due to the size. My wife, parents, and friends agree they like the sound better now.

I have owned the JBL 305p Mark II (had them setup identical to this room) with the matching subwoofer LSR-310s. The sub is bigger with the JBL (10" vs 8"), but the Presonus is more powerful.

E5 XT vs JBL 305p Mark II: The JBL do not put out as full of a sound, especially noticeable in the low end. I like the sound of both, but I find the E5 XT are more accurate to the source.

Tremblor T8 vs JBL LSR-310S: The Tremblor is definitely more powerful, both sound really good and fill in the lows.

In other words, I can understand testing and attempting to make conclusions about the sound based on that, but that is not have speakers work. Any issues with the response can be ironed out on settings, you can get these dead flat I am sure. They are still doing their job, pointing out good recordings as well as bad ones. With good recordings, the sound is unreal and much better than stereo or surround with my Topping/Yamaha/Polk/RSL Speedwoofer 10s.

I am 100% happy, it should be noted I tried the Adam T5V and the matching sub before this and the Presonus 2.1 setup sounds much better. If you want truly flat monitors, you would need a treated room and to pay a LOT more money. The entry levels from each brand all have their pros and cons, strong points and weak points. For example, people like the Yamaha monitors and I have never liked them.

As an aside, another thing I see wrong is people commenting about woofer size. Woofer size should be determined by the size of the room, not "well, an 8" is better than a 5" for bass". For my room, a 5" to 6" woofer is perfect. Anything bigger tends to sound boomy. I bought Kali Audio 8" LP8 and they sounded dreadful in my room, but good in a larger room.

I have the very same speakers as you, and used them with a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (the MOTU is a better interface, I know...) for about a year; they sounded amazingly good in my small room.
A couple of months ago I just started using them for listening to music more consistently, and added a EverSolo Z8 DAC to them... well, now everything is a little bit more crisp in the highs, and more delimited in the lows. I love these speakers, especially considering their price.
I never listen to high volumes (about 50/60db, probably 70 while washing dishes...), so maybe this helps a lot mitigate the "tons of distortion" Amir is pointing out... I also never aim any speaker directly at my ears orizontally, I always tow them out a bit, and this appears to help with the highs in this case.
Then they are AB amplified, and for me this is a plus...
They sound very good to me. I wanted to replace them with a pair of Adams, as everybody seems to agree they are far superior, but I won't.

Cheers everybody, and enjoy the music.

 

[jcmos]

I don't get it!, these pair of reference monitors, the Presonus Eris 5 XT are pretty good. I can't barely hear the bass. Sounds a bit boxy but that can be fixed with EQ too, highs are pretty good. Not sure how you guys are meassuring all this with.
What audio interface are you using? how close to the wall the speakers are? what speaker stands did you perform the test with? how big is your room? did you play with the buttons at the back to make it sound properly?
The audio interface output can make reference monitors get wrong meassurements.
To make are proper test you should try all possible combinations and environments, which you didn't. Start with plugin them to the big list of audio interfaces, one by one! then come back to us with that test. Thank you

 

[jcmos]

I'm quite happy with my eris e5 xt as well.

I also disagree with the review because the test is incomplete. It has to be tested with all possible audio interfaces and scenarios. An audio interface can change values. If you have a washing machine as an audio interface don't expect it to have a good DA convertor. The sound coming out will be blamed on the speakers of course.
I had a motu m2 too, and now I have a 2i2 Scarlett 4th gen. The sound coming out through to the Eris 5 Xts is jsut amazing. It's flat response and clarity gives me the chance of making good mixing decisions. Fantastic pair of speakers!, if you thought of buying them and after reading the test and you changed mind, dont worry I can assure you you will be happy as.

 

[jcmos]

I also disagree with the review because the test is incomplete. It has to be tested with all possible audio interfaces and scenarios. An audio interface can change values. If you have a washing machine as an audio interface don't expect it to have a good DA convertor. The sound coming out will be blamed on the speakers of course.
I had a motu m2 too, and now I have a 2i2 Scarlett 4th gen. The sound coming out through to the Eris 5 Xts is jsut amazing. It's flat response and clarity gives me the chance of making good mixing decisions. Fantastic pair of speakers!, if you thought of buying them and after reading the test and you changed mind, dont worry I can assure you you will be happy as.

I would be inclined to think a monitor full of gritty audible distortion (as shown in Amir's measurements) is a poor tool. There are far better options out there. I know what a flat, clean, and neutral sound is, and the Eris 5 is far from. I am a musician and do not use these monitors in my living room. The sheer amount of positive reviews for them makes me realize many so called pros have ears no better than your average Bose customer. It was refreshing to see Amir's measurements vindicate what I am hearing. I need something clean without coloration. These belong in the landfill, not in any home or studio.

Eris 5 XT has a flat, clean and neutral sound.

 

[dominikz]

Hi there, welcome!

Not sure how you guys are meassuring all this with.

It was measured using state-of-the-art Klippel Near Field Scanner (NFS) loudspeaker measurement system.
I suggest to have a look at this thread for an explanation of how the measurement system works: link
In short, NFS removes the room from the equation.

The audio interface output can make reference monitors get wrong meassurements.
To make are proper test you should try all possible combinations and environments, which you didn't. Start with plugin them to the big list of audio interfaces, one by one! then come back to us with that test. Thank you

The correct way to test loudspeakers in general is to measure their complete anechoic response (which is what the Klippel NFS does) and evaluate it based on the collective knowledge gathered over the last several decades by the scientific community. If you're interested in the science behind loudspeakers and quality sound reproduction I can highly recommend the amazing book by dr. Toole "Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms", 3rd edition.

Any sensible audio interface (with flat frequency response and solid THD/IMD figures) will not influence the result of these tests - this is also something that has been well-established.

These measurements show that PreSonus Eris E5 XT has relatively poor on-axis response (raised mid-bass and highs and a dip between 3 and 4kHz), but good directivity so EQ can be used to correct the default response to a much more neutral shape. Distortion at higher listening levels is also pretty high, but that doesn't matter so much if you listen in the nearfield at reasonable levels (which is the expected use-case for these).

I suggest to try one of the many available EQ profiles that linearize the response based on these measurements and see if you like the corrected sound better: link1, link2 and link3.
Good luck and enjoy!

 

[jcmos]

Hi there, welcome!

It was measured using state-of-the-art Klippel Near Field Scanner (NFS) loudspeaker measurement system.
I suggest to have a look at this thread for an explanation of how the measurement system works: link
In short, NFS removes the room from the equation.


The correct way to test loudspeakers in general is to measure their complete anechoic response (which is what the Klippel NFS does) and evaluate it based on the collective knowledge gathered over the last several decades by the scientific community. If you're interested in the science behind loudspeakers and quality sound reproduction I can highly recommend the amazing book by dr. Toole "Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms", 3rd edition.

Any sensible audio interface (with flat frequency response and solid THD/IMD figures) will not influence the result of these tests - this is also something that has been well-established.

These measurements show that PreSonus Eris E5 XT has relatively poor on-axis response (raised mid-bass and highs and a dip between 3 and 4kHz), but good directivity so EQ can be used to correct the default response to a much more neutral shape. Distortion at higher listening levels is also pretty high, but that doesn't matter so much if you listen in the nearfield at reasonable levels (which is the expected use-case for these).

I suggest to try one of the many available EQ profiles that linearize the response based on these measurements and see if you like the corrected sound better: link1, link2 and link3.
Good luck and enjoy!

I still believe this test is not done correctly. It is incomplete, cheers

 

[Beave]

You read his helpful post and the links he provided in nine minutes, then came to the conclusion that this test is not done correctly?

Please tell us HOW it was done incorrectly.

Cheers.

 

[jcmos]

You read his helpful post and the links he provided in nine minutes, then came to the conclusion that this test is not done correctly?

Please tell us HOW it was done incorrectly.

Cheers.

How many audio interfaces did you use for the test? What were the scenarios?