Should Audio reviews include DSP?

[ShadowBoxer]

We might learn some interesting things about how various room correct

Using whose room?

 

[Mort]

Using whose room?

Yours! Thanks for volunteering!

 

[ShadowBoxer]

Yours! Thanks for volunteering

This would be like the clothes reviews that say "fits great"!

 

[Mort]

What we really need is someone that loves DSP to start their own channel and review them for advantages and challenges.

My personal experience is
GLM >>DiracLive>Audyssey >>Wiim based on final results.

 

[Chrispy]

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?

Ideally I'd generally like to see a lot more info on multich performance as well as particular dsp applications, but can be very time consuming and relevant mostly to the room it was performed in so wouldn't think it would be very attractive here.

 

[Naqus]

What we really need is someone that loves DSP to start their own channel and review them for advantages and challenges.

My personal experience is
GLM >>DiracLive>Audyssey >>Wiim based on final results.

Totally agree. Most reviews barely scratch the surface when it comes to DSP.

 

[Arindal]

My personal experience is
GLM >>DiracLive>Audyssey >>Wiim based on final results.

Would personally put Trinnov first, and with some respectful distance, YPAO and GLM.

 

[Honken]

In this case, DSP is used for what is commonly labelled "room correction" which is always an optional task for speaker operation (I'm not aware of any speaker that cannot be operated without prior measurement to fit any processing to the true circumstances).

They are rare, but they do exist. The Apple Homepod is such a speaker, it'll try to correct for the room (in unknown ways) from the moment you power it.

IMO, if a speaker offers different tunings via DSP it'd be nice to test them, but otherwise the recommended/default configuration is enough to test IMO. Where I personally get interested in different DSP modes is with speakers that offer various cardiod presets. Measuring the effect of such presets are a lot more meaningful to me than different EQs (since I could easily add that to taste if I knew the response of the speaker itself with even the most basic of DSP offerings).

Testing room correction is something different entirely, but sure, it'd be nice to compare some of the main competing technologies with the same setup. But I see this as something entirely different from testing a speaker itself.

 

[KSTR]

They are rare, but they do exist. The Apple Homepod is such a speaker, it'll try to correct for the room (in unknown ways) from the moment you power it.

Fair enough. For me there is the question if this kind of loudspeakers, dubbed smart speakers, do really count as HiFi speakers. I think those are lifestyle gimmick products where true HiFi sound is not a priority at all. You can't outsmart physics.

 

[Naqus]

That’s a fair skepticism