RSL Outsider II Outdoor Speaker Review

[Chromatischism]

Stupid question: actually what makes it an outdoor speaker vs indoor? shouldn't all speakers targeted at a flat on axis frequency response?

Weather and bug-proofing. That means a sealed plastic box, metal grille, and components that can withstand large temperature and humidity swings.

Also there could be different design decisions if it is assumed the listening distance will be greater. Just me thinking out loud.

 

[YSC]

Weather and bug-proofing. That means a sealed plastic box, metal grille, and components that can withstand large temperature and humidity swings.

Also there could be different design decisions if it is assumed the listening distance will be greater. Just me thinking out loud.

Right, didn't think of the sealing part, that makes sense as the speaker don't allow porting it would be more challenging for bass response also

 

[Koeitje]

Stupid question: actually what makes it an outdoor speaker vs indoor? shouldn't all speakers targeted at a flat on axis frequency response?

Outdoor you don't have to deal with reflections etc. Indoors the frequency response at the listening position is also determined by what reaches you by means of reflections. Speakers will sound completely different indoors versus outdoors.

 

[tuga]

I'm assuming the same user sent them in.
_____

$200/pair for those wondering.

With grille off:
View attachment 87397

This explains the unsymmetrical horizontal response.
And might have affected on-axis response as well.

They should be remeasured but is worth it?

 

[restorer-john]

Weather and bug-proofing. That means a sealed plastic box, metal grille, and components that can withstand large temperature and humidity swings.

Usually polypropylene woofers, UV treated surround material and absolutely bug proofing with covered/meshed ports and perforated powder coated metal grilles. Stainless steel screws and fittings, UV treated finish and cabinet materials not affected by rain/moisture. Strong captive nuts for brackets etc.

No reason they can't sound good though.

 

[Juhazi]

This kind of small outdoor speakers are typically wall-mounted below the lid of the roof. Some bass boost as benefit, but not much expected below 100Hz by this speaker. Elevataed and tilted highs is good for the long off-axis listening distance.

Didn't you guys notice that vertically +10/20deg ( is it up or down from measurement axis - my guess is actually down?) gives very smooth response in midrange - this comes from typical timing error between mid and tweeter using 1st order slopes (electric).

Surprising quality and value for 200$/pair! I have never heard about the company https://rslspeakers.com/our-story/

 

[MZKM]

Surprising quality and value for 200$/pair! I have never heard about the company https://rslspeakers.com/our-story/

Their 10” subwoofer is decently popular. It is stated online as being pretty much the only quality option that’s more expensive than say a BIC F12/PL-200, but not as expensive as the offerings from SVS/Rythmik/HSU/etc.

 

[MediumRare]

My non-audio-engineer, hobbyist, uneducated takeaway is that it looks pretty nice from 200hz-1000hz and that where it really counts when it comes to enjoyment. The fundamental frequencies of most music happens between those frequencies.

That may be true - but that's not the methodology and it ignores a lot of things that ARE in the methodology.

 

[JohnBooty]

That may be true - but that's not the methodology and it ignores a lot of things that ARE in the methodology.

I don't disagree, but what specifically are you referring to?

 

[Here2Learn]

Stupid question: actually what makes it an outdoor speaker vs indoor? shouldn't all speakers targeted at a flat on axis frequency response?

Not a stupid question, but I note nobody answered.

When you listen to a speaker, there is the direct sound that reaches your ears and the indirect sound from reflections. Outdoors is mostly direct sound as there aren't walls, or they're too far away or a hedge etc to make indirect sound usable in sim as with direct sound.

Indoors, the wall/ceiling/floor reflections will reach your ear, albeit with a subtle delay. Floyd Toole's work suggests that the energy expended by a speaker in producing direct and indirect (reflected) sound should broadly re-sum at the ears, such that SPL levels are broadly smooth and even at the listener position - as much like the input signal as possible. This is made easier when a speaker radiates all frequencies as evenly as possible over a similar arc in what's called constant directivity, although controlled directivity is probably a better term, since I don't think there is a speaker exhibiting true constant directivity, but some come close.

Since a room contains the expended energy and reflects much of it (frequency dependent of course, and dependent on absorptive vs reflective furnishings in a room), then what is heard is a summed response of direct and indirect sound.

Outside is a different affair. Since SPL drops off over distance, and since all frequencies, but especially bass won't be reinforced in the outdoor scenario, then having some surplus output helps maintain the SPL travelling towards the listener. This is especially true if the speaker is intended to be used away from walls on a tripod mount or similar.

This is why I object to measuring an outdoor speaker by indoor sim models. Their response was designed for outdoor use and not to make use of indoor reflections. Although, if they have been reviewed because 'objective' audio-buffs want to use a speaker indoors when it was designed to have a response for outdoors, then what can we do?

 

[bobbooo]

That we can predict loudspeaker performance but not listener's preferences. Also, because of that, that we cannot trust anyone's listening review.

That inference contains the implicit assumption that a not fully-controlled, sighted listening review correlates well with the listener's actual sound preference under controlled, blind conditions in which nuisance variables and unconscious bias have been removed. That correlation is generally a poor one.

 

[Vuki]

That inference contains the implicit assumption that a not fully-controlled sighted listening review correlates well with the listener's actual sound preference under controlled, blind conditions in which nuisance variables and unconscious bias have been removed. That correlation is generally a poor one.

It took me a while to deciphre what you wanted to say that I wanted to say but I actually didn't want to say what you ment I wanted to say.
I really don't know anyone is doing controlled blind listening reviews of hifi speakers and I also don't know what a fully controlled sighted listening review is.

 

[bobbooo]

It took me a while to deciphre what you wanted to say that I wanted to say but I actually didn't want to say what you ment I wanted to say.
I really don't know anyone is doing controlled blind listening reviews of hifi speakers and I also don't know what a fully controlled sighted listening review is.

I added a comma to my post, maybe it's a bit clearer now

 

[amirm]

Surprising quality and value for 200$/pair!

Guys, these are $200 each. Not a pair. A pair would cost $400.

 

[amirm]

I clarified in the review as well.

 

[amirm]

If we focus on the objective and believe in the work of Toole, then the one with the better preference score is the better speaker - or so the science suggests. Saying otherwise is to not believe the science behind the preference score.

So translating, if I take some pictures of the speaker and post the preference score for it, that is all you like to see in the review. Correct?

 

[MediumRare]

I don't disagree, but what specifically are you referring to?

Here's a good start to what is important beyond to 100-1000 FR. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-on-harman-blind-speaker-testing-system.33/ Poke around here. Also, @MZKM, where's a good link to how the scores are generated?

 

[MZKM]

Here's a good start to what is important beyond to 100-1000 FR. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ew-on-harman-blind-speaker-testing-system.33/ Poke around here. Also, @MZKM, where's a good link to how the scores are generated?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/speaker-equivalent-sinad-discussion.10818/

 

[napilopez]

Not a stupid question, but I note nobody answered.

When you listen to a speaker, there is the direct sound that reaches your ears and the indirect sound from reflections. Outdoors is mostly direct sound as there aren't walls, or they're too far away or a hedge etc to make indirect sound usable in sim as with direct sound.

Indoors, the wall/ceiling/floor reflections will reach your ear, albeit with a subtle delay. Floyd Toole's work suggests that the energy expended by a speaker in producing direct and indirect (reflected) sound should broadly re-sum at the ears, such that SPL levels are broadly smooth and even at the listener position - as much like the input signal as possible. This is made easier when a speaker radiates all frequencies as evenly as possible over a similar arc in what's called constant directivity, although controlled directivity is probably a better term, since I don't think there is a speaker exhibiting true constant directivity, but some come close.

Since a room contains the expended energy and reflects much of it (frequency dependent of course, and dependent on absorptive vs reflective furnishings in a room), then what is heard is a summed response of direct and indirect sound.

Outside is a different affair. Since SPL drops off over distance, and since all frequencies, but especially bass won't be reinforced in the outdoor scenario, then having some surplus output helps maintain the SPL travelling towards the listener. This is especially true if the speaker is intended to be used away from walls on a tripod mount or similar.

This is why I object to measuring an outdoor speaker by indoor sim models. Their response was designed for outdoor use and not to make use of indoor reflections. Although, if they have been reviewed because 'objective' audio-buffs want to use a speaker indoors when it was designed to have a response for outdoors, then what can we do?

I'm confused. I'd get if you don't agree with the review's conclusions -- this speaker's treble seems like it would toast my ears off -- but I'm not really sure what what part of the measurements you're objecting to.

As you said yourself, outdoors you hear more of the direct sound. So then, why not just look at the data for the direct sound? Amir hasn't removed that from the spin or anything. I can look at the spinorama and still get an idea of how it might sound outdoors. I focus more on the listening window, and take the off axis data to get an idea of how the speaker might sound if I move off axis. Moreover the 70 angles comprising the spinorama data is available for download and you can use that to more reasonably estimate how it might sound in a particular setup.

So what's the problem? The only data that are a 'sim' of indoor conditions are the early reflections and predicted in-room response curves. Feel free to ignore those if you'd like. The rest of the info, even the early reflections components, are still useful.

It's also worth remembering that our hearing to a significant degree adjusts for the space we are in. The research shows that to best speakers are generally preferred regardless of the room they are placed in - large, small asymmetrical, whathaveyou. Speakers sound different outdoors than indoors, yes, but not that different considering the direct sound is already perceptually dominant. It's kind of like hearing a speaker nearfield vs farfield.

And yes, some might still want to use an outdoor speakers indoors, like some might want to use a studio monitor in their living room. If it's good, it's good!

 

[Here2Learn]

So translating, if I take some pictures of the speaker and post the preference score for it, that is all you like to see in the review. Correct?

I clarified earlier that expressing a personal opinion is fine and warranted. Selecting the panther by it, since it is subjective is another matter. Yes, I'd like to see the panther somewhat reflect the preference score in terms of VFM, similar to MKZM's charts on his website that can show this. Points of performance score per buck is totally objective. You can still give an opinion, but I'd prefer it didn't influence the panther selected.