Should Audio reviews include DSP?

[Mort]

Erin (Audio Corner) got a lot of flak when he reviewed the Genelec 8361a without GLM, the Genelec bass management, active crossover, and DSP system.

The Genelec army pointed out that GLM is made by the manufacturer and designed only to be used by Genelec SAM products. It should be tested as actually used.

Erin understood those points and responded with good points like doesn't that put passives at a disadvantage? And it takes up a lot more time to test DSP.

There's a lot more to say about it, obviously. I think Erin promised to include GLM if they send him an 8380 to review. I hope they do.

tl:dr When should DSP be a part of an audio measurement review?

 

[BeeKay]

Together with the room plan and furniture list?

 

[amirm]

When should DSP be a part of an audio measurement review?

Only if it comes with DSP always integrated/engaged. If it is an optional module which it clearly is in this case, then no.

When listening, i do apply minimum amount of filtering for room modes but that is it. Without doing this, speakers that have substantial amount of bass are at a disadvantage in the way they active room modes and hence, can sound boomy. This is ad-hoc data though.

 

[amirm]

Erin understood those points and responded with good points like doesn't that put passives at a disadvantage?

This doesn't make sense to me. A number of active speakers have DSP built in that cannot be disabled. What does he do there???

 

[BillG]

When should DSP be a part of an audio measurement review?

I'm curious as to what aspects of it you'd like to see reviewed, as it could potentially be very broad.

 

[darth]

Curious, would it make a difference if the DSP module comes for free? aka added cost for an optional module vs free optional module.
For example, at least some US retailers are giving GLM modules for free. eg: https://www.frontendaudio.com/genel...e-grey/?searchid=3661125&search_query=genelec From a pure consumer perspective, would I ignore this? But to the point above, maybe Genelec should give it away for free, always bundled. But then again, I am also in that category that think that Microsoft should have given VS away for free.

 

[Joachim Herbert]

Erin measured and then listened for an extended period. While measuring without room correction makes perfect sense, it should be enabled for listening in room and compared to the naked speaker.

 

[voodooless]

If it is an optional module which it clearly is in this case, then no.

It might be optional, but basically nobody listens to them without GLM. Usually you even get it for free with the more expensive models.

And no, it’s not enabled by default, because it makes no sense: it has to be tailored to the room.

So, for an anechoic measurement, I think it should be disabled. For a listening test though, it’s really strange to not engage it if that is the mode that most people would use.

Is that an advantage vs passives? Sure! But isn’t that the point?

 

[Sokel]

In case it's a separate module, it should be tested by itself, like what actually does, what messes up, what fixes, etc.

In case it's a selling, advertised point (like "smart" DACs for example), elevating speaker's performance (speaker's, not room's) then yes, it should be tested as a whole.

 

[Mort]

This doesn't make sense to me. A number of active speakers have DSP built in that cannot be disabled. What does he do there???

I don't know! He hasn't reviewed one of those yet. I think his point was that if he does optional DSP like GLM for actives, he should do something for passives as well. That's just an interpretation of his remarks.

I'm curious as to what aspects of it you'd like to see reviewed, as it could potentially be very broad.

I think that's one of the objections. It would take up a lot of reviewer time and still might not be applicable because all our rooms are different. Still, There are probably some baseline things that could be at least subjectively considered.

Curious, would it make a difference if the DSP module comes for free? aka added cost for an optional module vs free optional module.
For example, at least some US retailers are giving GLM modules for free. eg: https://www.frontendaudio.com/genel...e-grey/?searchid=3661125&search_query=genelec From a pure consumer perspective, would I ignore this? But to the point above, maybe Genelec should give it away for free, always bundled. But then again, I am also in that category that think that Microsoft should have given VS away for free.

Yeah, I think a module sold by the company specifically for that model is required. It's doing things right instead of doing the right thing.

 

[Mort]

I think it's a shame that there aren't rigorous consumer reviews of DSP. I know it's complex and difficult but it's also so important, maybe the second most important thing after choosing mains.

 

[Karmacoma]

If dsp is part of the package/price of the speakers, it'd be better if it were reviewed, so you can include that huge factor in your comparison as a customer, this is the main interest of a review.
That said, it's time consuming for the reviewer, and I think the corollary would be to do a dsp systems' comparison as well, not sure how easy all that is.
I really don't understand Erin's argument about puting passives at a disadvantage, following that logic he should add all kinds of counterweights to his evaluations involving speakers whith tech others don't have.
So yes, reviews should incluse dsp imo, but if it's too time consuming, we'll probably get less reviews.
In the end the reviewer is the only one who can judge of that properly.

 

[jhaider]

FWIW, I always used bass correction when reviewing speakers. To do otherwise would put them at such an abject disadvantage to my reference as to be unfair, IMO.

 

[pablolie]

NO. Audio products should be reviewed out of the box. Improvements to the product separately. Cars shouldn't be tested with ECM hacks etc.

 

[darth]

NO. Audio products should be reviewed out of the box. Improvements to the product separately. Cars shouldn't be tested with ECM hacks etc.

Most people don't buy cars to hack them up though. However most people buying Genelec speakers will be using with GLM. Or at least a much much higher probability of using it. Just an uneducated guess. Not the same, but GLM to me is closer to drivers or firmware than physical hacks. I can buy an Nvidia GPU and run it out of the box using windows default drivers, but I sure will install the optional latest game ready driver from Nvidia before I play the game. But yeah ideally one can see pre and post GLM ina review though that adds more to the review process which people may or may not have time for.

 

[Mort]

I do get the difficulty this presents methodologically. But like Darth said, GLM is more like a driver update sometimes.

For instance, until you hear extended phase linearity nearfield, you may not have heard a clear soundstage. It's really remarkable. It's accomplished by GLM not with full spectrum sweeps, but just power and phase bursts at the monitors three crossover points, which it modifies digitally and then stores in the monitor. It's done in 5 minutes and takes no real knowledge of DSP. There is no curve to select, it's just a few buttons.

My biggest frustration with GLM is that it's actually not manually configurable enough. And when it is, it's very clumsy. I have resorted to using my wiim for some basic curve management.

If nothing else, there is almost no consumer review information out there about DSP options. Is GLM worth it? Has Wiim really gotten better? Is DiractART as exciting as it's fans who are trying to reach low orbit.

 

[amirm]

But like Darth said, GLM is more like a driver update sometimes.

I don't see it that way. You can use any EQ system, automatic or manual with Genelecs. And of course the speaker works without GLM.

 

[Mort]

I don't see it that way. You can use any EQ system, automatic or manual with Genelecs. And of course the speaker works without GLM.

Yeah I get that, I'm partly playing devil's advocate. Knowing about relative strengths and weaknesses of the major DSP systems would be a big benefit. It's all anecdotal now, and not even in a useful way. Everyone thinks their DSP is the best!

 

[skankhobag]

If the loudspeaker has DSP as part of its regular operation, it should be used in the review. Sorry that it’s more work.

Don’t half-ass it.

The larger issue is whether the majority of dimwits who write subjective audio reviews should have DSP correction applied to them?

I say, “Absolutely, yes!”

 

[Keith_W]

If DSP is part of the product, then absolutely it should be reviewed. How do we know how sophisticated it is otherwise? Or what its limitations are?