• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

RCF AYRA PRO5 Review (Powered Monitor)

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 13 6.5%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 89 44.7%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 90 45.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 7 3.5%

  • Total voters
    199

Nick2D

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2022
Messages
22
Likes
4
RCF Ayra Pro 5/6 or Kali Audio IN 5 to listen to music and movies?
 

dfuller

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
3,321
Likes
5,014

OK1

Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
68
Likes
21
If people think some monitors have bad hiss, wait till they hear some active pa speakers lol.
I own one - an Alto TS 310 - I sit with ears about 5 feet away from the tweeter, when I practice on my stage piano, in a quiet lounge at home, and every time I switch it on, I wince at the noise. Can imagine that in a live scenario where I'd be at least 6 feet from the speaker, with the higher room ambience, the noise would be comparatively inaudible.
 

lewdish

Active Member
Joined
May 29, 2021
Messages
243
Likes
177
Hi,

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

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: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 3.7
With Sub: 6.0

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • lots of resonances
  • LF seems good
View attachment 192992


Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
View attachment 192994View attachment 192998

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.
Code:
RCF AYRA PRO 5 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
March172022-161333

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 182.92,    0.98,    2.35
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 323.38,    -1.55,    3.88
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 541.20,    -3.41,    2.07
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 749.49,    -1.40,    4.95
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 964.42,    -1.81,    4.96
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1369.21,    -4.65,    4.85
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1614.30,    3.97,    1.74
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3191.71,    -1.20,    2.51
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 10821.22,    -1.88,    1.17

RCF AYRA PRO 5 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
March172022-160731

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 175.60,    1.47,    3.49
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 327.14,    -1.55,    2.88
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 540.20,    -3.26,    2.07
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 763.12,    -1.90,    4.95
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 967.42,    -1.81,    4.96
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1385.91,    -4.53,    4.60
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1699.91,    3.97,    1.74
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3185.01,    -1.78,    2.26
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 10852.06,    -2.81,    0.84

View attachment 192991
Score EQ LW: 5.2
with sub: 7.6

Score EQ Score: 5.7
with sub: 7.9

Spinorama EQ LW
View attachment 192990

Spinorama EQ Score
View attachment 192989

Zoom PIR-LW-ON
View attachment 192988

Regression - Tonal
View attachment 192987

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Great improvements
View attachment 192986

The rest of the plots is attached.
Should get it up on spinorama.org
 

pokey

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2023
Messages
1
Likes
2
Hi,

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

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: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 3.7
With Sub: 6.0

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • lots of resonances
  • LF seems good
View attachment 192992


Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
View attachment 192994View attachment 192998

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.
Code:
RCF AYRA PRO 5 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
March172022-161333

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 182.92,    0.98,    2.35
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 323.38,    -1.55,    3.88
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 541.20,    -3.41,    2.07
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 749.49,    -1.40,    4.95
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 964.42,    -1.81,    4.96
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1369.21,    -4.65,    4.85
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1614.30,    3.97,    1.74
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3191.71,    -1.20,    2.51
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 10821.22,    -1.88,    1.17

RCF AYRA PRO 5 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
March172022-160731

Preamp: -2.7 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 175.60,    1.47,    3.49
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 327.14,    -1.55,    2.88
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 540.20,    -3.26,    2.07
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 763.12,    -1.90,    4.95
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 967.42,    -1.81,    4.96
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1385.91,    -4.53,    4.60
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1699.91,    3.97,    1.74
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3185.01,    -1.78,    2.26
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 10852.06,    -2.81,    0.84

View attachment 192991
Score EQ LW: 5.2
with sub: 7.6

Score EQ Score: 5.7
with sub: 7.9

Spinorama EQ LW
View attachment 192990

Spinorama EQ Score
View attachment 192989

Zoom PIR-LW-ON
View attachment 192988

Regression - Tonal
View attachment 192987

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Great improvements
View attachment 192986

The rest of the plots is attached.
Thank you for putting together this info! I created an account to say thanks. I've been using these monitors for over two years at my desk for casual listening, video editing, and lately music mixing. First they were on Isoacoustics stands on the desk, then on floor stands. Initially I used my own EQ correction; for the past year I've used your LW curve, and few days ago I decided to try the Score curve. This combined with experiment of moving them very close to the back wall (!) in a 5.5 foot isosceles triangle with the listening position has given me the best sound. Drums are snappier, acoustic guitar attack is more lifelike, vocals are balanced, the top end is less sibilant, and everything is clearer. Well suited for picking things apart, and I can always switch between this and the other EQ in Equalizer APO and in Reaper. Overall they sound more engaging and make a better complement to the headphones I use. I will most likely get some Kali IN-8's when I can afford them but I'm certainly getting my 300 bucks worth out of these!

Edit: The difference between the LW and Score curves is subtle, while there is a huge difference between either of them and no EQ. Out of the box these are very, uh, boxy. The bigger change came from placing them a few inches from the wall. Still, for the purpose of editing audio the Score curve seems a little better (in my room, in my chair).
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom