test with 800 hz tone to record transients. is the kali LP 6 defect ?. canton look much better

[bennybbbx]

I am not sure what the problem is. i measure both speakers canton plus x.3 and kali lp 6 left and right side. canton measure look simular. but on kali is lots diffrence between left and right side. the kali stand on desktop. the canton stand on top of Kali. later can not see any room influence in the impulse. i also add a impulse of headphone. so i think i have nothing do wrong on measure. i use no EQ and the channel that is record is mute. so no feedback. Order is

kali left
canton left
canton right
kali right

Headphone panasonic RPTH 030

I only hear that the kali sound strange. less lower mid and less stereo width than Canton. when switch to mono all come from mid on Kali. so i try to examine whats wrong. I also put for confirm the right canton on the desktop and measure. result is same as they are on top of Kali. I use on my mixer channel 5 6 for kali(USB out 3/4) and channel 7 8(USB out 1/2) for canton. so i can choose in the track the output canton or Kali. I dont think there is a mistake on my measure.

 

[bennybbbx]

I have also measure left speaker with 1.4 khz. Canton have 4 zoll speaker, Kali 6.5 Zoll speaker. there can see that canton have faster transient on 1.4 khz. kali is right side. canton left side

 

[bennybbbx]

and here are right canton and kali measure. with 1.4 khz result look not strange on kali. only slower transients can see.

 

[pozz]

I think you are measuring FR differences due to room placement and not transient response. Check in REW and compare the ETC for left and right speakers.

 

[bennybbbx]

I now use 100 hz and was 10 cm away from bass speaker to minimize room influence. there can see too, Canton have much faster transients. I think now room influence is not see in result. the later wave cycles look more constant now. But you are right change the position of right kali for measure give simular results as left kali

is it really that 6.5 zoll 2 way speakers are so worse in transient ?. maybe other can do the test with their speakers too and post results. attaxch is a 320kbps mp3 file with sine tone burst at 100hz 400 hz 800 hz 1.4 khz 2 khz 3.5 khz 15 khz. with bpm 120 it is align in bars. so you click easy on a bar and see the result

the Canton bring much more stereo width simular to headphones. I have all speakers measured and correct with EQ. When measure tweeter the kali tweeter is faster. but for room width and reverb the important frequency range is from 200 hz - 4 khz. so for stereo width i think good transients on bass need too.

I thought todays speaker have no problems with frequency upto 4 khz. even the canton have not perfect transients. so maybe other speakers sound even more better

 

[pozz]

Again, you are measuring FR of your room + speakers + microphone and not transient response. FR will affect the shape of your recorded waveform.

100Hz is more subject to the room as it is below Schroeder.

Please use the standard measurements available in REW. They will be much more revealing than this test.

 

[bennybbbx]

ok, i do now measure both. i have attach the measurment. but i can not see anything diffrent that explain wy the canton sound wider(after both frequency correct, with arc 2.5 or mathaudio roomeq or mfreeformeq). with mfreeform eq and mems arc 2.5 microphone and needed correction for microphone and measure with white noise they are from frequency most equal.
maybe you can take a look if you see something in the req files https://easyupload.io/npbmm0

and maybe when you have time please can you do the impulse test from my file with your Neumann KH80 DSP. It is 4 Zoll too. if this have faster transient as kali or canton. i think room influence is not much when 5 cm before bass speaker measure. you can record this with handy so it cost not much time. this is good enough for frequency from 400 to 2 khz.

and btw i have a room that use a foam wallpaper so it is a little damped

 

[andreasmaaan]

It show that small 4 zoll speakers bring much better transients on mid range than bigger Bass speakers.i do compare a 4 Zoll Canton and a 6.5 Zoll kali in this thread . https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...li-lp-6-defect-canton-look-much-better.17854/

There's no connection between woofer diameter and transient response, so if you're measuring differences in transient response between those two speakers, it's not because one is smaller.

I also had a look at the REW measurements you uploaded.

Canton:

Kali:

They both appear to use similar crossover filters (apparently 4th-order), with the main differences being that the Canton's crossover is higher in frequency, and that the Kali's bass rings out for longer (presumably because the enclosure is ported, and probably also because there is a high-pass filter in place to limit the woofer's output below the port resonance).

In any case, none of this is to do with the size of the speakers. And none of it is likely to be audible, either.

By far the best explanation IMO for why the Cantons sound wider and more spacious is that they have wider directivity in the upper midrange and high frequencies, due to having a smaller midwoofer and a direct-radiating tweeter (no waveguide).

As to why the Kali sounds like it has less lower-midrange, that's a mystery to me. The amplitude response measurements show that (in-room) the Canton's lower-midrange is recessed relative to the Kalis.

EDIT: added amplitude response

 

[bennybbbx]

maybe it is

There's no connection between woofer diameter and transient response, so if you're measuring differences in transient response between those two speakers, it's not because one is smaller.

thanks for your feedback. the kali have 1.5 khz crossover. Canton 4.5 khz. wy do you think have kali less transient ?. is it maybe then possible because of polypropylen speaker ?. i read about polypropylen on some places that it sound "less live". the funny thing on Kali is, when i close the bass port with foam the Kali get very much distortion then in bass even on very low volume. the canton is closed and have no bass reflex. or maybe closed speakers have better transients in mid ?

it is very much hearable that the stereo width is lots reduce in kali in compare to the Canton.

here is a impulse of the 10 cm measure distance. so can see the reflections are less than -18 db. so the large diffrence between kali and canton seem not possible because of room influence. headphone have perfect transients, and look how i measure. it is very near the desktop and i make the headphones loud.

I have done many measurments in diffrent positions, also rotate the speaker so they point to ceiling . but results always the same. Canton have much faster transients at 100, 400, 800 hz 1.4 khz. . at 15 khz Kali is better. but reverb and stereo width is a midrange thing from 200 to 4 khz mostly

 

[andreasmaaan]

I have done many measurments in diffrent positions, also rotate the speaker so they point to ceiling . but results always the same. Canton have much faster transients at 100, 400, 800 hz 1.4 khz. . at 15 khz Kali is better. but reverb and stereo width is a midrange thing from 200 to 4 khz mostly

But that's what I'm saying. Stereo width has nothing to do with transient response and everything to do with off-axis radiation. Although you haven't taken gated off-axis measurements, it's very obvious from the designs of the two speakers that the Canton has much wider off-axis radiation. This is the most likely reason it sounds wider to you. The reflections create a sense of spaciousness that is lacking in the Kalis because their dispersion is more focused.

Why do you think this has anything to do with transient response in the first place?

 

[bennybbbx]

before i notice that big speaker have slower transient and have less stereo width i thought too, only reason is wide directivity or not. but now that i see that there is so much diffrence in mid transients i think worse transients is the main reason when loose stereo width. of course a wide directivity help to bring back the room sound but, what i notice in my tests. when i hear silent, the canton sound still wider and when hear silent room influence is more less. but the kali get only wider and sound not muddy when i make them loud. I found something about transient from Bruel and Kjar. this look as good transient can see in the phase diagram. https://www.bksv.com/media/doc/17-198.pdf

but i did not see anything usefull in the phase diagram. in the rew file can look for phase too. my english is also not so good to understand right.

I read in pdf that. but for what should i look ?

Phase measurements are made primarily to obtain information about the transient response.

does it mean a high phase level in diagram on this frequency is worse transient ?.

 

[andreasmaaan]

before i notice that big speaker have slower transient and have less stereo width i thought too, only reason is wide directivity or not. but now that i see that there is so much diffrence in mid transients i think worse transients is the main reason when loose stereo width. of course a wide directivity help to bring back the room sound but, what i notice in my tests. when i hear silent, the canton sound still wider and when hear silent room influence is more less. but the kali get only wider and sound not muddy when i make them loud. I found something about transient from Bruel and Kjar. this look as good transient can see in the phase diagram. https://www.bksv.com/media/doc/17-198.pdf

but i did not see anything usefull in the phase diagram. in the rew file can look for phase too. my english is also not so good to understand right.

I read in pdf that. but for what should i look ?


does it mean a high phase level in diagram on this frequency is worse transient ?.

That article is technically 100% correct, but it leaves out one very important detail: dozens of studies over many decades have never established that the degree of phase shift visible in the measurements of your speakers is audible.

Even where (much larger) phase shifts have been found to be audible, listeners have not reported the effect to be a narrowing of stereo image.

In other words, I think you’re looking in the wrong place to explain what you’re hearing

 

[bennybbbx]

(EDIT ) Here i have phase of canton and kali and panasonic headphone with loopback now and calibrate sound card. the old results are remove. there are many cycles delay in transients can see when wrap around from lower to higher happen. this can only loopback detect. n this test headphone is clear best, and canton 2. kali last.

 

[bennybbbx]

now i have measure my marshall combo tube guitar box with Celestion G10 speaker. it is a big 10 Zoll speaker, but it is no bass. resonance frequency is 97 hz. celestion list it from 100 hz to 5500 hz. and there can see it have much better transients and phase diagram as kali and canton. you can see the 1. cycle very good and it reach near same level as the continous cycles. i connect it with fx return from mixer, so it use the tube power amp in the combo. i test in diffrent positions. phase diagram stay same, only in the record waveform can see diffrence in 2 or 3 cycle. 1. cycle is always much higher as on kali.

 

[AnalogSteph]

All I can see is that your delay is not correctly nulled out. If you ever see phase taking an exponential nosedive like this, that's a time delay.

If you look up the properties of the Fourier transform, you will find that a constant time delay of t_0 shifts phase by -ωt_0 = -2 π f t_0. (Thanks, online lecture materials, it's been a while!) IOW, it's a straight line proportional to frequency. It completes a 2π (360°) cycle in Δf = 1 / t_0.

You should see that once you
a) switch to a linear frequency axis (Freq. Axis) and
b) Controls --> Unwrap Phase

Obviously, a linear function looks exponential with half-logarithmic axes, and default phase view is mod 360°, so it gets chopped up whenever it has completed a full cycle.

In your latest Kali measurement, t_0 comes out to about 1.35 ms.

You will probably find the Controls --> Estimate IR delay button as well as the Controls in Impulse view quite interesting. Not sure how to manually tweak t=0 and recalculate phase after the fact though. REW likes to place t=0 on the first peak, which is generally OK but may not be 100% dead on.

 

[bennybbbx]

All I can see is that your delay is not correctly nulled out. If you ever see phase taking an exponential nosedive like this, that's a time delay.

If you look up the properties of the Fourier transform, you will find that a constant time delay of t_0 shifts phase by -ωt_0 = -2 π f t_0. (Thanks, online lecture materials, it's been a while!) IOW, it's a straight line proportional to frequency. It completes a 2π (360°) cycle in Δf = 1 / t_0.

You should see that once you
a) switch to a linear frequency axis (Freq. Axis) and
b) Controls --> Unwrap Phase

Obviously, a linear function looks exponential with half-logarithmic axes, and default phase view is mod 360°, so it gets chopped up whenever it has completed a full cycle.

In your latest Kali measurement, t_0 comes out to about 1.35 ms.

You will probably find the Controls --> Estimate IR delay button as well as the Controls in Impulse view quite interesting. Not sure how to manually tweak t=0 and recalculate phase after the fact though. REW likes to place t=0 on the first peak, which is generally OK but may not be 100% dead on.

I find the unwrap button now and do the step with unwrap and estimate IR Delay. the order stay in speakers same. celestion is best. 2. canton 3. kali. only the headphone get in this values worse results but the curve look better.

excess phase
kali -274
Canton -205
Celestion -186
Headphone -358

in excess phase Celestion is not much better as Canton but in phase

Kali -640
Canton -574
Celestion -209
Headphone -691

I think rew have a problem with set 0 for phase. or how can this set. canton is even more better as kali as the above values show, because kali phase begin at +60 and canton phase begin at -90. so canton reach more - as it really is. kali reach less - as it is. I use measure beginning at 40 hz, because then the speaker output something to measure and sync more easy. I also upload the mdat. so you can take a look and tell which values need set too. here the mdats with loopback. i do loopback the way that i plug the right XLR main output to channel 1 XLR input. https://easyupload.io/afw9v7

 

[hmt]

As you have been told before. All you see is that the kali have a slight delay. That is why they start later and you see a slight phase offset. It has nothing to do with transients.

 

[Juhazi]

No comments aout these strange measurements, but actually 800-1500Hz sound comes also from the port with some delay. For sure this will make some strange measurements compared to eg. Canton or any rear-ported or closed box speaker.

 

[bennybbbx]

As you have been told before. All you see is that the kali have a slight delay. That is why they start later and you see a slight phase offset. It has nothing to do with transients.

but in the tone burst screenshots can see. the 1. cycle of the sine wave is much lower on kali as on other speakers. so less transient speed. I can also do test burst that have only 1 cycle. So it is logical. when the recorded levels of this 1 cycle is higher transients are better. to see how much level can get i can do a longer burst. so test sound is 1 cycle burst then after some time the longer burst

@Juhazi thats worth to test. i close the bassport and measure what happen then later. but for the sine test wav the microphone was 10 cm near bassspeaker. i can also do the test 1 cm near bassspeaker or measure phase 1 cm near bassspeaker. then of course phase of tweeter is wrong and bass port have no influence. Slow transient is on bass. the tweeter on kali is faster as Canton.

 

[hyperplanar]

Slow transient is on bass. the tweeter on kali is faster as Canton.

Ahh, so you're talking about the bass...

Well, based on your measurements, the Kalis seem to have significantly more and more extended bass than your Cantons. Having more of that <80 Hz bass can subjectively lead to an impression of "slower" bass (when audiophiles talk about "quick" and "dry" bass, it's very often due to a bass deficient frequency response). So all else being equal, a speaker with more extended bass can be interpreted by some as having a slower transient response, simply because the cycle speed of those low frequencies puts a limit on how quickly they can "turn on".

The second issue is the room-induced peak around 80 Hz in the frequency response of the Kalis. If you correct this through EQ, the transient response of your speakers will improve in the proximity of that peak's frequency.