Triangle Borea BR03 Review (bookshelf speaker)

[krott5333]

I had these for awhile. I ended up replacing them with the dbr62, but I thought the br03 was a pretty good speaker. To me it sounded like there was a slight dip in the upper midrange, and a slight boost somewhere in the treble that gave it a crisp sound without being fatiguing. That slight dip in the midrange is why I ultimately decided to go with the dbr62. The Elac just felt warmer, fuller and more neutral. That being said, it was not an easy decision to make, and I did a lot of back and forth before finally settling on the dbr62.

I think at $349, the br03 is a great buy and would HIGHLY recommend it over the more expensive and harsh sounding RP600.

 

[Spocko]

Thank you very much, Amir for the great measurements and review. I have a pair of these paired with IOTAVX sa3. They were my entry to this fascinating music listening hobby. The whole system sounds muffled and lack of clarity for my untrained ears. I have no idea what's going on. I think your measurements shed light on it.
Since I move on to Gustard X16/Genelec 8030C as my main setup for desktop, Triangle/IOTAVX were moved to my bedroom for casual listening which serves well.

OMG the 8030C clarity and neutrality above 120Hz must have been quite a revelation.

 

[BWard]

Triangle must have a whole $50 invested in a pair of these. Cheap labor, cheap parts and greed=globalization. Amazing what you can accomplish when you decide people don't matter.

 

[Spocko]

The problem here is that the beginner audiophile will buy these speakers for the budget without knowing that it holds well the road but some time later he will want "to go up in range" with B&W 607 S2 Anniversary Edition

Or better still, they wait for the Special Edition because Limited Edition sold out.

 

[Spocko]

Triangle must have a whole $50 invested in a pair of these. Cheap labor, cheap parts and greed=globalization. Amazing what you can accomplish when you decide people don't matter.

It would have cost them the same had they designed it differently - it's not so much the cost per se of the parts but the design of the crossover, driver placement, box interior dimensions and port implementation which normally happens at HQ far away from cheap labor and cheap parts - it's during this early design stage in France that Triangle didn't put enough time to properly model and beta test this design.

 

[Reed]

I started the shelving at 8 kHz actually but it would still sound bright to me. So I knocked it lower.

Regarding eq, have you ever just let Dirac do a correct for you using a Harman curve? I thought you had Dirac available or am I wrong. Doing a Dirac vs hand crafted correction might be a good test some day. Especially on a head scratcher speaker like this.

 

[amirm]

Regarding eq, have you ever just let Dirac do a correct for you using a Harman curve?

No because that is not the intent of my listening tests. I listen because I want to see if the areas identified by measurement to be wrong, are subjectively so. A full transformation of the sound using Dirac doesn't answer that question. It simply says if Dirac+this speaker, subjectively sounds good in uncontrolled listening. Not sure of the value of this.

 

[panther]

LOL did you love the headaches or the speakers?

Definitely the speakers lol, I was really enjoying them but nearfield was a bit much. Not even kidding trying to work the next day I just had a pounding headache and the speakers were not played loud. Just something about them did not agree with me sadly!

 

[Maiky76]

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 4.24
With Sub: 6.50

Spinorama with no EQ:

• Lots of resonances
• port issue
• fairly well controlled beam-width

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.

EQ design:
I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.
• One could add two -3dB sharp notches (q=10) at 1367Hz and 1803Hz to try to tackle the two main resonances but careful listening would be required as it might vary unit to unit. The score would be 5.5/7.55

Score EQ LW: 5.38
with sub: 7.52

Score EQ Score: 5.74
with sub: 7.88

Triangle Borea BR3 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
March262021-101912

Preamp: -1.1 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 40.4 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.06
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 106 Hz Gain -2.15 dB Q 1.16
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 421.5 Hz Gain 1.22 dB Q 1.05
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 662 Hz Gain -2.32 dB Q 5.56
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 837 Hz Gain -2.23 dB Q 3.77
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 11558 Hz Gain -2.38 dB Q 1.39

Triangle Borea BR3 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
March262021-101650

Preamp: -1.1 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 40.4 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.06
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 107 Hz Gain -2.15 dB Q 1.16
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 431 Hz Gain 1 dB Q 1.05
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 659 Hz Gain -2.32 dB Q 5.56
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 832 Hz Gain -2.16 dB Q 3.27
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5870 Hz Gain -1.75 dB Q 2
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 11559 Hz Gain -2.95 dB Q 1.39

Spinorama EQ LW

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Nice improvements

The rest of the plots is attached.

 

[FeddyLost]

I find it interesting that EQ did not improve these speakers during Amir's listening review

You can't EQ properly wide band with all that distortion of uncoated paper if you still need ESPECIALLY CLEAN midrange.
As we can see from graphs, if designers deliberately choose slow woofer roll-off, all the sawtooth between 300 and 3,5-4k is just zonal radiation. It's a muddy mess with some screaming tones, and we can't get rid of it by EQ.
I mean it sounds absolutely OK if one is get used to old school soft paper cones, but otherwise (like if one's fan of monitor sound) it's "just something wrong trough most critical range".
The one way i can imagine is to use amp with high euphonic harmonics like 3+% and use low spl. So, in this case mellow tubey sound will cut through woofer distortion...

 

[Robbo99999]

You can't EQ properly wide band with all that distortion of uncoated paper if you still need ESPECIALLY CLEAN midrange.
As we can see from graphs, if designers deliberately choose slow woofer roll-off, all the sawtooth between 300 and 3,5-4k is just zonal radiation. It's a muddy mess with some screaming tones, and we can't get rid of it by EQ.
I mean it sounds absolutely OK if one is get used to old school soft paper cones, but otherwise (like if one's fan of monitor sound) it's "just something wrong trough most critical range".
The one way i can imagine is to use amp with high euphonic harmonics like 3+% and use low spl. So, in this case mellow tubey sound will cut through woofer distortion...

hmmm

 

[FeddyLost]

hmmm

Just check out Revel M106 measurements.
It's the comparison that was done by tester.
I think, there must be some difference ...

 

[joentell]

Well, it's not.
You can confirm by cutting them away.

Regarding the 16khz dip and the phase plug, it's an assumption I made and I could be totally wrong about that. It's just the first thing I would think it is since I've not seen that in other speakers I've measured, but I've also never seen that type of phase plug used. What do you think it is?

 

[Arc Acoustics]

What do you think it is?

Well, I am not assuming, I know it, it's the waveguide itself.

There is some trade-off so I don't say it is a bodge job, some waveguide has the same problem, including my very first (failed) prototype.
I knew it will occur and I've tried to tame it, so the problem was a lot lighter, but not invisible as well.
(Around 17kHz. I've done a whole complete redesign and hopefully, problems 9-22kHz should be fixed and a bit smoother in the current design.)

And if you saw both horizontal and vertical response, you should have noticed something a vertical bar-like shape will not cause the same effect on both planes.
It should be caused by something symmetric to the axis.

 

[richard12511]

Well, I am not assuming, I know it, it's the waveguide itself.

There is some trade-off so I don't say it is a bodge job, some waveguide has the same problem, including my very first (failed) prototype.
I knew it will occur and I've tried to tame it, so the problem was a lot lighter, but not invisible as well.
(Around 17kHz. I've done a whole complete redesign and hopefully, problems 9-22kHz should be fixed and a bit smoother in the current design.)

And if you saw both horizontal and vertical response, you should have noticed something a vertical bar-like shape will not cause the same effect on both planes.
It should be caused by something symmetric to the axis.

View attachment 120575

Damn! You've got some good looking spins for your speakers.

Do you sell any of these designs? Or just DIY?

 

[Arc Acoustics]

Damn! You've got some good looking spins for your speakers.

Thank you for your kind word, it's very encouraging especially I do not have solid confidence in my design.

Actually, it's for a friend of mine who planned to make his own loudspeaker named Ekta (which originally designed by Troels Gravesen) with a waveguide, and another friend of mine and I decided to take over and realize it.

And now, I'm earnestly hoping that my design works and he will have a good time with some nice sound.
Probably some would not like my slope (politically incorrect joke coming thru~ ) of DI and horizontal directivity.
Actually, I would have more directivity down to the mid-frequency as well, but this loudspeaker is too sleek (narrow baffle).

Do you sell any of these designs? Or just DIY?

Well, this is my first time so currently, I don't have plural , and I believe this particular design should be only for him.
I'm interested in manufacturing as well, I may have some ability, I hope if I could, Maybe someday.

P.S.
Note that the prototype does not have a real woofer because of the budget for 5 axes machining, instead, I placed the same midrange with a hell of a low boost in the simulation.
And I do not use near field measurement merging so much less DI credibility below 500Hz.
This is a DSP active loudspeaker so ON flatness does mean virtually nothing.
(But these are irrelevant to my failed prototype waveguide)

 

[Coffee_fan]

Hey Amir, thanks for the review. I don't know about these Triangles, but they sure look nice aesthetically. I know you have some other Triangle material around!!

 

[amirm]

Hehe. I do. That one would be coming very soon now.

 

[TheBatsEar]

Also not a bad choice for a very budget system, though the Focal Chorus at A4L would be my first choice at this street price.

BTW, the focal Chorus 706 can be had for 270€ THE PAIR in Germany right now. I own a pair for my surround setup and can recommend them. They are getting old now, i think they came out in 2012, but for that money you can't go wrong.

 

[Helicopter]

BTW, the focal Chorus 706 can be had for 270€ THE PAIR in Germany right now. I own a pair for my surround setup and can recommend them. They are getting old now, i think they came out in 2012, but for that money you can't go wrong.

Yup. $349 now at Upscale Audio too.