Sonus Faber Piccolo Solo Spinorama measurements (CTA-2034)

[Ageve]

Here are some measurements of the Sonus Faber Piccolo Solo center speaker.

The MSRP was $595 back in 2000 ($1,084 in 2024).

Specifications:

System: High speed two-way center channel (whatever that means)
Tweeter: 20 mm silk dome ferrofluid
Mid-woofer: 140 mm multicoating paper cone
Crossover: First order attenuated
Sensitivity: 86 dB/1W/1mt
Impedance: 8 ohms nominal
Power handling: 30W-150W without clipping
Frequency response: 50-20000 Hz +/- 3dB
Cabinet: Black leather
Dimensions: 170x485x235 mm (HxWxD) 6 3/4 x 19 x 9 1/4 " (HxWxD)
Weight: 10 kg (22 lbs) packaged


My measurements are quasi-anechoic, with nearfield woofer response, corrected for baffle edge diffraction, combined with gated measurements. This speaker was measured indoors. Unfortunately it's not possible to measure outside in Sweden this time of year.

The only measurement I could find online was from Sound & Vision:

Sonus Faber Concerto Speaker System Page 2

Since these speakers hail from Italy, I thought it might be appropriate to listen to some of my favorite Italian music for my two-channel evaluation. Of course, I listened to Andrea Bocelli's Romanza and Zucchero's Overdose D'Amore. Both recordings are spectacular and will reveal any...

www.soundandvision.com

Here are the results:

Horizontal directivity is poor, as expected (MTM design and no waveguide).

Horizontal directivity:

0-90 deg, for comparison with Stereophile measurements:

0-90 deg:

Vertical directivity:

0-90 deg:

Distortion:

Less than 0.5% distortion > 120 Hz.

The small woofers were moving a lot at 86 dB / 1m, so I didn't measure at higher SPL.


This is a typical MTM center. Horizontal directivity is less than stellar, but the vertical directivity is better than expected, and distortion is quite low as well. No bass below 80 Hz.

It sounds... ok. Quite "boxy" when used as intented (horizontal) and better when used vertical. No soundstage to speak of.

This is how Sound & Vision described the sound:

Dialogue was extremely natural—men sounded like men, and women sounded like . . . you know.

 

[GXAlan]

This era of Sonus Faber is more neutral than the current Sonus Faber.

 

[Matias]

Other than the 1.5 kHz bump and a very small horizontal directivity, it is ok. Could be a lot worst tbh.

 

[alex-z]

For a first order crossover that is shockingly good.

I think with impedance data this review would be ASR homepage worthy. Maybe a picture of the crossover and cabinet interior if you are feeling generous.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Here is an mtm design that was pretty even off axis horizontally.

Hales Audio System Two Signature loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements Starting with the Listening Room Diagnostic Recording (LEDR) test on the Chesky Test CD (JD37), I heard the most accurate spatial positioning of any speakers I've had in my listening room. The "Up," "Over," and "Lateral" tests produced contiguous, stable images throughout...

www.stereophile.com

I seem to recall mtm working better with 3rd order crossovers. I wonder if this Sonus Faber has the tweeter connection in the wrong phase.

 

[thewas]

Thank you for the manifold measurements, such designs can be made to sound quite better if used as standing stereo pair.

 

[Juhazi]

I have three points.
1) SF is far from 1st order acoustically, Nearfield measurement looks like LR4 around 3kHz. Hor. directivity hints to that too and is typical for horizontal mtm with high xo.
2) Vertical response is OK, due to small woofers. Typical for horizontal MTMs
3) Hales speaker is a vertical MTM, that's why hor.resp in Stereophile is ok. JA says that in vertical plane at a woofer's height spl has a notch.

Conclusion: SF is suitable for only a single listener/HT wathcher, sitting at the peak of triangle.

 

[Ageve]

I seem to recall mtm working better with 3rd order crossovers. I wonder if this Sonus Faber has the tweeter connection in the wrong phase.

Here's a new measurement with reversed tweeter polarity:

1) SF is far from 1st order acoustically, Nearfield measurement looks like LR4 around 3kHz. Hor. directivity hints to that too and is typical for horizontal mtm with high xo.

Yeah, I don't really believe the specification. The measurements look too good for a 1st order crossover.

I'll take a few pictures when I restore the tweeter polarity.

edit: Here's a teardown:

Woofer and tweeter crossovers on separate PCBs.

It looks like 2nd order.

They sure like black glue. I've seen it in other SF speakers as well.

No sand cast resistors = GR approved?

 

[gfinlays]

Some of the SF speakers do look very nice, but with prices up to £100,000, the performance falls woefully short of the price tag

 

[Ageve]

Just found an official measurement of this speaker:

100 db scale, and (probably) 1/6 smoothing. Bass response looks like they interpolated it from a gated measurement (very inaccurate).

This is how it looks with a 50 dB scale, compared to my on-axis measurement (with 1/6 smoothing applied):

If this was the only measurement available, you would think that my speaker is down a couple of dB > 2kHz, but that's not the case, as it matches the Sound & Vision measurement from back when it was new: