Stereo speaker upgrade advice and Spinorama preference scores

[mahler2]

Hi all,

I've enjoyed reading reviews and discussions on ASR since I discovered the site. As a result I've changed my system, replacing a streaming amplifier with an inexpensive Fosi v3 amp and investing in a miniDsp DDRC24 with Dirac Live. Since I now have some EQ capabilities and room correction, and a degree of bass management, I've decided to try to integrate a subwoofer. Assuming I'm able to source a decent sub and integrate it effectively, what should I be looking for in a standmounted speaker as an upgrade over my B&W 606s, given that Spinorama scores with EQ and Sub vary much less from product to product?

My room is 12x15x9 ft, but is open to the room next door (hence the room correction). It's quite a lively room and space is at a premium so speakers are placed quite close to the front wall and near a chimney breast. I've got some flexibility with sub placement but I can't really move the main speakers very much. FWIW my listening position is about 8 or 9 feet from each speaker and they're maybe 6 feet apart.

 

[staticV3]

Assuming I'm able to source a decent sub and integrate it effectively, what should I be looking for in a standmounted speaker as an upgrade over my B&W 606s

Smooth directivity and low distortion would be my focus.

What's your budget for the stand mount speakers, and which country do you live in?

 

[kemmler3D]

Welcome to ASR!

As usual @staticV3 gets right to the point - what's your budget?

I often recommend the Ascend Sierra line for stand-mounts as they're very good technically and I think most people here that have heard them liked them. They would be a solid upgrade from the B&Ws.

But the Ascilab stuff that's nearing release also looks promising.

There are a lot of good options but it mostly depends on what you'd want to spend.

 

[mahler2]

I'm in the UK so the Ascend stuff isn't readily available unfortunately. I'm looking at £500-700 and prepared to buy second hand. Revel M16s often come up at £400, 105/106 occasionally for a more like 6 or 700. But I had been focussing on FR and now realise that that's not perhaps the primary concern. My experience is that there's more info out there on understanding these curves than the other measurements hence the original question. What characteristics help main speakers integrate with a sub?

 

[Verig]

. What characteristics help main speakers integrate with a sub?

DSP and proper placement of sub(s). Wouldn't worry about the mains as you're looking for normal standmount speakers.

 

[nerdstrike]

Assuming I'm able to source a decent sub and integrate it effectively, what should I be looking for in a standmounted speaker as an upgrade over my B&W 606s, given that Spinorama scores with EQ and Sub vary much less from product to product?

The preference scores are all enhanced by bigger bass, because the vast majority of moderately sized speakers tail off below 100 Hz to some degree. On that basis, and in the absence of improving the room, I suggest that the number one criterion for good sub participation is that the mains reach down to a good cross-over frequency to prevent directional sound from the sub. i.e. tiny bookshelf might demand a very high cross-over. I doubt that would be a big deal with the 606s or any other 6 1/2" woofed bookshelf!

After that directivity, distortion and frequency response have a different effect for different people and rooms, at least compared with the tyranny of quality bass w.r.t. preference.

Supposing you can tame the high peaks of the B&Ws FR with your EQ and bung the ports to mitigate port resonances. Is what's there still worth upgrading if you can get the sub to behave? You're still going to have the directivity errors implied by the rough 607 review here, but is that a deal breaker on its own? My personal take is stick with them while you "practice" integrating a sub, and keep an eye out over time for a nice used bookshelf pair (M16s, non-meta R3 cast-offs etc.). If your sub efforts aren't satisfactory, you might need a new strategy. If you succeed, then yay.

 

[dualazmak]

What characteristics help main speakers integrate with a sub?

Major factors would be;

1. transient characteristics/behaviors of your sub(s) (SWs) and main woofer(s) (WOs) around the crossover frequency (XO Fq),
2. determination of XO Fq,
3. lower-side filter (low-pass = high-cut) selection and slope (can be done in upstream DSP as well as in sub's built-in filter),
4. higher-side filter (high-pass = low-cut) selection and slope,
5. polarity (phase) continuity selection (to be optimized at your listening position),
6. time alignment (partly phase continuity) between SWs and WOs (in mSec level precision),
7. optimization of relative gains for SWs and WOs,

of course, all of them should be hopefully measured and tuned with your own SWs and WOs in your home acoustic environments including your actual room modes.

Using 8-wave and/or 3-wave rectangular sine tone burst signal of Fq around the XO, and simple recording of the tone burst sound at your listening position, then analysis of the recorded tone burst sound by suitable audio software like Adobe Audition and Audacity, you can visually observe the transient behavior (tightness/compactness of the sound) of your SWs and WOs at your listening position, especially by 3D (Fq-Gain-Time) color spectrum of Adobe Audition (I use Adobe Audition 3.0.1). I believe this would be very reliable and reproducible semi-objective tuning method which you may easily perform/repeat using suitable single measurement microphone set at your listening position.

Such provisionally determined sub and woofer configurations should be subjectively checked and further optimized using your preferable music playlist.


As I recently wrote here...,
My simple suggestion for your first step is to prepare two 8-sine-wave rectangular tone-burst signals of about -15 dB gain, one is 40 Hz, another one is 90 Hz. Using typical measurement microphone set at your listening position, you would first record SWs-only sound of 40 Hz tone-burst and 90 Hz tone-burst by using suitable audio-interface connected to your PC or Mac in 96 kHz 24 bit PCM format; no low-pass (LP) (high-cut) filter should be used.

Next, you would record WOs-only sound of 40 Hz tone-burst and 90 Hz tone-burst, with no high-pass (HP) (low-cut) filter at all.

Then, you would record SWs+WOs (singing together) sound of 40 Hz tone-burst and 90 Hz tone-burst, with no LP nor HP filter at all.

Such recorded three PCM tracks should be loaded to e.g. Adobe Audition (ver.3.0.1 in my case) for 3D time-gain-Fq color spectrum analysis which gives visual representation of sound energy distribution in 3D (time-gain-Fq) space; you can see/observe tightness of the tone-burst air sound, yes, it represents "transient behavior" of your SWs and WOs as well as SWs+WOs for 40 Hz and 90 Hz tone-burst. Of course, you can see/observe the actual air sound wave shapes given by SWs, WOs and SWs+WOs.

Generally speaking, HiFi 30 cm WOs in excellent cabinet driven by high-damping-factor amp has better transient behavior than any SWs around 50 Hz - 120 Hz zone, and the Adobe Audition 3D color spectrum will give you visual observation/confirmation for selection of rather lower XO Fq, say XO at around 55 Hz, in this example case.

Now you can easily understand what would/should be the subsequent tests and measurements.

You may now apply LP filter for SWs, e.g. -24 dB/Oct Linkwitz-Riley (LR) at 60 Hz, HP filter for WOs e.g. -24 dB LR at 50 Hz, and record the room air sound of SWs-only, WOs-only, SWs+WOs, analyze them by Adobe Audition's wave spectrum and 3D-color spectrum. The wave-shape spectrum will give you visual info on phase continuity (for time-alignment), 3D-color spectrum will give you transient behaviors/characteristics (tightness/compactness of low-Fq sound energy distribution).

In this way, you can semi-objectively optimize (or best tune) XO-Fq, filter slopes, polarity, relative gains, time-alignment, etc. between your own specific SWs and WOs in your own acoustic environment. (Of course, final decision should be done by subjective listening to various tracks of your preferred music!)

If you would be interested in such approach, you can find some example cases of spectrum analyses using Adobe Audition 3.0.1 on my project thread as follows;
- Measurement of transient characteristics of Yamaha 30 cm woofer JA-3058 in sealed cabinet and Yamaha active sub-woofer YST-SW1000: #495, #497, #503, #507

- Precision measurement and adjustment of time alignment for speaker (SP) units:
Part-1_ Precision pulse wave matching method: #493
Part-2_ Energy peak matching method: #494
Part-3_ Precision single sine wave matching method in 0.1 msec accuracy: #504, #507

**************
Edit: If you would be seriously interested in these measurements and tunings, I will be happy to share the test tone signals I prepared for the measurements. If this would be the case, please simply PM me writing your wish.
**************


These posts would be also of your reference and interests;

- Perfect (0.1 msec precision) time alignment of all the SP drivers greatly contributes to amazing disappearance of SPs, tightness and cleanliness of the sound, and superior 3D sound stage: #520

- Not only the precision (0.1 msec level) time alignment over all the SP drivers but also SP facing directions and sound-deadening space behind the SPs plus behind our listening position would be critically important for effective (perfect?) disappearance of speakers: #687

- Reproduction and listening/hearing/feeling sensations to 16 Hz (organ) sound with my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active stereo audio system having big-heavy active L&R sub-woofers: #782

Finally, just for your possible reference, you would please find post #931, on my project thread, the latest total system setup of my PC-DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier stereo audio rig with large and heavy L&R SWs (YAMAHA YST-SW1000).

 

[Verig]

My personal take is stick with them while you "practice" integrating a sub, and keep an eye out over time for a nice used bookshelf pair (M16s, non-meta R3 cast-offs etc.). If your sub efforts aren't satisfactory, you might need a new strategy. If you succeed, then yay.

I agree. The experience with 606 + dsp + sub will be markedly different than now. It's much easier to hear what you want from a speaker when the bass is taken care of first.
This is a bit simplistic but I'd say that after bass is dsp managed up to 300-500Hz you have taken care of most of room related problems and what remains is the main speaker FR and dispersion matters.

 

[mahler2]

Thanks for all the above responses. This is all really useful information.

 

[mahler2]

The preference scores are all enhanced by bigger bass, because the vast majority of moderately sized speakers tail off below 100 Hz to some degree. On that basis, and in the absence of improving the room, I suggest that the number one criterion for good sub participation is that the mains reach down to a good cross-over frequency to prevent directional sound from the sub. i.e. tiny bookshelf might demand a very high cross-over. I doubt that would be a big deal with the 606s or any other 6 1/2" woofed bookshelf!

After that directivity, distortion and frequency response have a different effect for different people and rooms, at least compared with the tyranny of quality bass w.r.t. preference.

Supposing you can tame the high peaks of the B&Ws FR with your EQ and bung the ports to mitigate port resonances. Is what's there still worth upgrading if you can get the sub to behave? You're still going to have the directivity errors implied by the rough 607 review here, but is that a deal breaker on its own? My personal take is stick with them while you "practice" integrating a sub, and keep an eye out over time for a nice used bookshelf pair (M16s, non-meta R3 cast-offs etc.). If your sub efforts aren't satisfactory, you might need a new strategy. If you succeed, then yay.

Thanks for this. I think this makes a great deal of sense. I'll get the sub and play around, maybe dipping into researching some of the topics summarised by @dualazmak above.

 

[dualazmak]

Thanks for this. I think this makes a great deal of sense. I'll get the sub and play around, maybe dipping into researching some of the topics summarised by @dualazmak above.

I do hope much good luck for you in your subwoofer exploration.

Let me share with you additional three links for your possible reference and interest;
- An Attempt Sharing Reference Quality Music Playlist: at least a portion and/or whole track being analyzed by 3D color spectrum of Adobe Audition
- https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...by-3d-color-spectrum-of-adobe-audition.47103/

- A nice smooth-jazz album for bass (low Fq) and higher Fq tonality check and tuning
- https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/music-for-testing-bass.50075/post-1928462

- Music for Testing Treble (High Frequency) Sound
- https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...or-testing-treble-high-frequency-sound.50690/

with my best regards.