What budget speakers you like to see reviewed?

[YARE]

Would be nice to see the Focal Alpha 50 Evo. I would like to see how the cheap Focals perform!

 

[Doodski]

Car speakers. Are there good ones that don't cost an arm and a leg?

That sounds like a good thread to create. It will probably get some good responses.

 

[Putter]

The Polk XT20 Bookshelf speaker seems to take a few ideas from the JBL A130 using a similar waveguide. From what I've seen of recent reviews, Polks have measured flatter than they did in the past few years. It's listing at $250, but is on sale for $200 at Best Buy putting it securely in the budget line.

 

[hardisj]

Car speakers. Are there good ones that don't cost an arm and a leg?

What's your budget?

 

[hexinho]

Not in the ultra budget category and not sure if anyone had mentioned this before; but I've always been curious about the soundsticks' performances.

Harman Kardon SoundSticks 4 | Bluetooth Speaker System

Welcome a timeless icon into your home with Harman Kardon SoundSticks 4. Extraordinary sound meets sculptural design in this one-of-a-kind audio masterpiece.

www.harmankardon.com.sg

 

[Marc v E]

What's your budget?

Between 100 and 400 euro for 2 midwoofers and tweeters. 400 if it makes a real difference. Otherwise closer to 100.

 

[hardisj]

I’ve already tested them. Don’t waste your money. I’ll have a review up soon. In the next week or two.

Review is now on my site.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Review is now on my site.

I was expecting a lot worse. It looks like a 2 Ohm resistor inserted right before the tweeter positive terminal would smooth things out quite a bit. What remains is the directivity issue. Do you think that would still make these a non-starter?

 

[adam2434]

I was expecting a lot worse. It looks like a 2 Ohm resistor inserted right before the tweeter positive terminal would smooth things out quite a bit. What remains is the directivity issue. Do you think that would still make these a non-starter?

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing - padding down the tweeter a few dB to eliminate the rising response above around 2000 Hz.

Dayton could have designed the crossover to not have the elevated response above 2000 Hz, right? Wonder why they went for the elevated response?

Also, I noticed that the manual indicates a 2000 Hz crossover, but the webpage says 3300 Hz.

All-in-all, for $150/pair, if they did not have the elevated response above 2000 Hz, they don't look too bad.

 

[dfuller]

Review is now on my site.

Definitely not the worst I've seen. Distortion performance in particular seems surprisingly solid. Directivity is kind of a mess, but I think at least some of that could be mitigated by redesigning the crossover.

Would be nice to see the Focal Alpha 50 Evo. I would like to see how the cheap Focals perform!

I saw some gated in-room measurements from a Korean site that @napilopez digitized. It's overall pretty decent, and if the measurer's distortion measurements are accurate it's very low distortion as well - better IMD performance than even the KH120.

Focal Alpha Evo line - new speakers

Surprised those guys haven't been measured, at least I can't find anything on them.

www.audiosciencereview.com

Focal Alpha50 EVO 측정 및 리뷰 - 스피커 마이너 갤러리

많이들 기다리게 해서 미안.Focal Alpha50 EVO 측정 및 리뷰 들고 왔다.이번 리뷰는 정식 수입처인 BLS에서 체험단 이벤트에 당첨되어 진행할 수 있게 됐고.BLS로부터 스피커를 대여받아 진행했음.업로드 날

gall.dcinside.com

 

[rajas]

Looks like Edifier has launched a studio monitor called the MR4.

From the product page

Based on the accurate analysis of the characteristics of the unit by the German KLIPPEL system, a flatter curve necessary for a monitor is acquired after dozens of professional tunings by Edifier Acoustic Lab

 

[hardisj]

I was expecting a lot worse. It looks like a 2 Ohm resistor inserted right before the tweeter positive terminal would smooth things out quite a bit. What remains is the directivity issue. Do you think that would still make these a non-starter?

Yea, it's not terrible but - being they (Dayton) have access to all the parts they'd need to make this better - I am disappointed. There is no reason for the HF to be lifted +5dB as it is. And then you read this on their site what I've provided below and it's just... well, honestly, annoying. IMHO, it "primes" the customer base to think that artificially lifted treble is "detailed". As someone who is doing their best to provide data and help people understand the importance of a neutral response with good directivity, it makes my job harder (hopefully that doesn't sound like I have an ego about it; that's not my intent). Then there's the "you don't need a sub" bit. Meanwhile, the data shows this isn't the case with an F3 of 72Hz and F10 of 43Hz. Those numbers are indeed good. But is it "subwoofer" territory? Certainly not. I feel like Dayton's marketing department took this speaker and ran with some outrageous claims.

 

[hardisj]

I was expecting a lot worse. It looks like a 2 Ohm resistor inserted right before the tweeter positive terminal would smooth things out quite a bit. What remains is the directivity issue. Do you think that would still make these a non-starter?

Sorry, I didn't answer your question above.

My opinion regarding the directivity error as it relates to the shallow LPF of the midwoofer is it seems like they may have used this slope because of the cabinet resonance(s). If you look at the nearfield responses you can see there is definitely some port leakage and this is most likely the cabinet resonance. I say that from the perspective of having tested a handful of smaller speakers over the past two months and finding similar resonances and confirming they're due to the cabinet resonance via an accelerometer. I can't help but wonder if Dayton said "hey, we can save money on components and use the resonance to flatten out the response". Or... maybe they didn't. I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt. Still, that doesn't fix the directivity error you asked about which, IMHO, is pretty severe as it spans a couple octaves. @pierre's results put the preference score for this speaker goes from 3.2 and with EQ it goes to 6.2. Not that the preference score is something I always go by but in this case, I think it's worthwhile to mention because EQ doesn't account for directivity error. So, it is possible the speaker might benefit from a simple padding of the tweeter *but* I believe that for $2 in parts (Dayton's cost) that this speaker could have been a lot better and I'm surprised they did what they did here. I kind of always held Dayton in a higher regard but I feel like they caved to the marketing side with this speaker; especially considering the above screenshot of their website citing the "detailed highs" and "no subwoofer needed". :/

 

[hardisj]

Oh, and FWIW, I know two others who have this speaker. One received them for review. One bought them. Both said the highs are unbearable.

 

[Pearljam5000]

 

[Chromatischism]

Yea, it's not terrible but - being they (Dayton) have access to all the parts they'd need to make this better - I am disappointed. There is no reason for the HF to be lifted +5dB as it is. And then you read this on their site what I've provided below and it's just... well, honestly, annoying. IMHO, it "primes" the customer base to think that artificially lifted treble is "detailed". As someone who is doing their best to provide data and help people understand the importance of a neutral response with good directivity, it makes my job harder (hopefully that doesn't sound like I have a ego about it; that's not my intent). Then there's the "you don't need a sub" bit. Meanwhile, the data shows this isn't the case with an F3 of 72Hz and F10 of 43Hz. Those numbers are indeed good. But is it "subwoofer" territory? Certainly not. I feel like Dayton's marketing department took this speaker and ran with some outrageous claims.

View attachment 166426

Looks like a speaker that may be good at low volumes, but not high.

 

[spacevector]

Amir, this knock off Genelec from Behringer could be a good one to review.
B2031A - $200 each typical price

Behringer | Product | B2031A

www.behringer.com

You reviewed the discontinued passive version of it (I think): https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...behringer-b2030p-studio-monitor-review.14719/

 

[thewas]

Amir, this knock off Genelec from Behringer could be a good one to review.
B2031A - $200 each typical price

Behringer | Product | B2031A

www.behringer.com

You reviewed the discontinued passive version of it (I think): https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...behringer-b2030p-studio-monitor-review.14719/

View attachment 166697

Not only passive but also smaller, the passive equivalent was B2031P (both passives are discontinued).

I agree that the B2031A should be definetely measured here as other measurements have shown very good perfomance for a very small price and big size (8,75" woofer), it seems copying Genelec worked quite well.

 

[drozdowsky]

Amir, thanks for your work,
Pretty sure some people are already suggested it but...
I would like to see Wharfedale Evo (some 3 ways... - 4.2?) - tested, wonder if its upgrade to Diamond series. Also some listening comparison to revel's would be nice

 

[amirm]

Ayra Pro 5

OK, it is ordered.