Many of the cheap microphones show THD at 110-120dBSpl. Useless for nearfield measurements e.g.
Your graph shows up to 5dB differences! I'm probably better in hearing as that 😏
The problem with cheap & uncalibrated measurement mics - you CAN be lucky and get a good one. One of my ECM-8000 was really linear. But it could also be +10dB or -7dB at 20kHz, you don't know.
https://www.hifi-selbstbau.de/index...ik/500-mikrofonkalibrierungen-eine-uebersicht
Your graph shows up to 5dB differences! I'm probably better in hearing as that 😏
The problem with cheap & uncalibrated measurement mics - you CAN be lucky and get a good one. One of my ECM-8000 was really linear. But it could also be +10dB or -7dB at 20kHz, you don't know.
https://www.hifi-selbstbau.de/index...ik/500-mikrofonkalibrierungen-eine-uebersicht
The difference between the Behringer and the Earthworks is much less than 5db difference. Without a reference to say, "here is the scientifically correct reference line", you can only assume one is more right, than the other. Or you could use the magic "use your ears"....Which is something I think I will experiment with, in process of voicing my system....
In regards to THD, All you are suggesting is that my THD readings may truly be lower....how is that losing?
Yeah I see what you are saying here.
Last edited:
Years ago B. Kolbrek already mentioned the low end capabilities of the the Axi (then prototype). He even suggested a 100Hz xo point with the right horn.
It's a matter of loading and desired dispersion/directivity, though Roy Delgado managed 270 Hz in the Jubilee 75th Anniversary Edition.
Has anybody listened to the Jubilees?
The difference betwen THIS Behringer is less. But could also be way more. You don't know how yours performs. You would need a reference mic to be sure your cheap reference mic is working .... you see where that goes to.
Only buy cheap ref mics with calibration sheet or file. Or when you already have a good mic and can sort the bad ones out. And when you don't want to do nearfield measurements at normal level. Or measurements <20Hz. Or >20kHz.
Ears - I'm trained in setting up PA systems by ear if there is no time or possibility to measure. That's far from accurate but get's you at least to a result you can work with. And I will stay in between +-5dB at high frequencies, better as some cheap mic ;-)
THD - it's quite possible that the driver has less THD as shown in your measurement. It's not about loosing - it's about knowing how to interpret the measurement.
I listened to the Klipsch Jubilee not long ago - not sure if there is a difference to the anniversary Edition?
Was a small and loud room with to little room acoustics - so a typical demo room ;-)
The highest octave was lacking in resolution, the lowest was not there. There where some resonances in the lower mid/higher bass area - could have been the room, could be the crossover area of the LF part or both. But the midrange was REALLY good! HF was not unpleasant - I'm just used to more resolution. Could be totally fine for less analytic listening.
And you need an amp with low noise - the McIntosh was propably not the best choice.
These: https://heimkinowelt.at/klipsch-jubilee-standlautsprecher-american-walnut-a33337paar.html
Definitely fun to listen to!
Definitely fun to listen to!
The transfer function of the Heritage Jubilee (i.e., looks just like the "75th Anniversary Edition") in a small room (the drop outs at 81 and 191 Hz are due to microphone placement in-room):
I'm pretty sure you were in a very bad room acoustically in order to make those comments. If anything, with the stock DSP, it has far too much bass below ~60 Hz in a small listening room without being dialed in with custom EQ (or your ears aren't very well calibrated).
Same thing for the highest octave--it actually has a great deal more off-axis output above 7 kHz than probably any 2" compression driver horn you've heard.
If you're going to write a bad review, I'd recommend writing one for the folks demonstrating the loudspeaker instead.
Chris
..have to disagree with that last statement. A bad review is what it is - particular to the time, place, associated equipment listener, listener position, etc., etc., etc.. The same is true if it’s a good review or bad, and it highlights that it’s entirely possible to achieve a bad result at least as often as a good result.
Perhaps look at it from this perspective: how often do most achieve a really good objective result with any given loudspeaker?
Perhaps look at it from this perspective: how often do most achieve a really good objective result with any given loudspeaker?
The transfer function plot for the Heritage Jubilee is without any additional dialing-in, i.e., straight from the DSP, but with the loudspeakers in eighth space boundary loading. The only DSP adjustment to the user is setting the relative gain control of its high frequency channels relative to its low frequency channels--to get flat response both above and below its electronic crossover frequency (340 Hz).
My guess is that the people demonstrating the loudspeakers must have placed them too close to the room's walls, and then turned the bass channel gain down in order to tame their response below 60 Hz...instead of properly EQing its deep bass response down correctly...and thus completely robbing the loudspeakers of their mid-bass and lower midrange response. Of course, doing this would make any audition of the loudspeakers invalid.
According to the loudspeaker's designer (Roy Delgado), the Heritage Jubilee DSP is set up for flat response down to 17 Hz--but only in half space. If the loudspeakers are closer than perhaps 8-10 feet from any of the room's walls and played without any compensating (attenuating) EQ, the deep bass will be overwhelming.
Chris
My guess is that the people demonstrating the loudspeakers must have placed them too close to the room's walls, and then turned the bass channel gain down in order to tame their response below 60 Hz...instead of properly EQing its deep bass response down correctly...and thus completely robbing the loudspeakers of their mid-bass and lower midrange response. Of course, doing this would make any audition of the loudspeakers invalid.
According to the loudspeaker's designer (Roy Delgado), the Heritage Jubilee DSP is set up for flat response down to 17 Hz--but only in half space. If the loudspeakers are closer than perhaps 8-10 feet from any of the room's walls and played without any compensating (attenuating) EQ, the deep bass will be overwhelming.
Chris
Last edited:
I don't want to offend anyone - it's just how they where sounding in that not optimal room. What's your listening impression?
There is no lack in level at high frequencies - compared to my Beryllium tweeters with hypex amps there could be more resolution and "naturalness". But that's for most tweeters and after all it's a 2" compression driver.
I'm also used to a flat system down to 20Hz - in this room it was not. There was to much bass over all but hey - it's Klipsch, so it is. Still the lowest tones where missing there. Maybe the rest was exaggerated with the modes ... I couldn't change that.
The midrange was really good, listening to music was fine!
But they are also cooking with water ... no "miraclespeaker" there, every concept has it's shortcommings.
There is no lack in level at high frequencies - compared to my Beryllium tweeters with hypex amps there could be more resolution and "naturalness". But that's for most tweeters and after all it's a 2" compression driver.
I'm also used to a flat system down to 20Hz - in this room it was not. There was to much bass over all but hey - it's Klipsch, so it is. Still the lowest tones where missing there. Maybe the rest was exaggerated with the modes ... I couldn't change that.
The midrange was really good, listening to music was fine!
But they are also cooking with water ... no "miraclespeaker" there, every concept has it's shortcommings.
A bit of mild disagreement:
My focus begins with the mechanism of distortion, you know what causes it.
single tones are often equal or better to the full on multi-ton.
My preference is 2 or 3 selected two-tone tests. two-tone test results show HD's and side band IMD's
I have a sequence that steppes through single tone, two tone tests.
Thanks DT
Saw the Celestion video when it was released on youtube.
Now where in that post did I in any way dismiss or talk down on new technology?
I just pointed out some of the design choices in the driver and what it results in, that's also visible in different third-party measurements, as for the top end dropping like a rock, is even visible in smoothed factory measurements and is a natural result of the design.
And that the laws of physics still apply as it does for every design.
It is more interesting that people take every new product advertisement as the truth.
There are plenty of modern, good quality compression drivers.
Look at the impedance curves, response, Impulse response, CSD/sonograms, IMD etc.
And it is clear there is a lot, that have not really been improved in terms of fidelity over the last 50 years+.
And i am not of the belief of many that a 50$ mini dsp can fix everything, as it certainly cant.
Instead we got robustness, high power handling, very good modelling tools for phase plugs and horns, and very cheap manufacturing in China.
Take the nice little Faital HF108 and R version.
Neither is perfect, they both have they're small drawbacks.
The HF108 is one of those drivers that would benefit nicely of a dash aquaplas or similar on the diaphragm to kill the resonances at 10-20k, instead they made the R that resulted in it's own drawbacks. Coating a diaphragm is another chain in the process, also requires drying, temp, dust control etc, so not cheap on a large scale even. And the intended buyers are not us DIYers it is PA use, where other priorities comes first.
After all it retails for 105-115$ several places, and that is after the retailer, importer, Faital and China got it's money. So realistically it is a 20-35$ driver. absolutely excellent performance for that money, and one could not get such performance made from pocket change in the past.🙂
I've heard the Jubilee at the last Montreal audio show and was really impressed by the axi2050 combined with the K402 horns.
I use the BMS 4596 on my horns and after 7-8 khz there is nothing left on my 340hz jmlc horns, my JBL 2440 with radian diaphragm get to 12-15khz but it's too directional. Since I'm on a 3 ways it's much of a problem but getting the axi2050 I would have more play with where I need to put the crossover.
For me the axi2050 on a 2 way like the Jubiliee sounded better than anything at the snow, relax and sense of scale and never aggressive. I'm not a fan of the amplifiers they were using on them and the room was too long and narrow yet it still was the star of the show for me. The bass in the room was very good and impactful and properly integrated with the horns.
If I compare to my faital hf10ak and hf108r, the axi2050 once EQued (I'm pretty sure the crossover is used to compensate the HF output) sounded more natural and easier to lister to. The faital do get high in the frequency easily (no eq needed on my 1100hz azura horns) but I always get the feeling it's not very natural and lack resolution. Neither the axi2050 or the hf108 hf10ak are champion of resolution in HF but it can work in a 2 way setup and the axi2050 can be used on large horns really well where the faital can't. They are, in my opinion, better in the mid than berelium TADs (never liked the mids on those) while similar in the HF.
I need to find a pair of those celestion to test on my horns.
I use the BMS 4596 on my horns and after 7-8 khz there is nothing left on my 340hz jmlc horns, my JBL 2440 with radian diaphragm get to 12-15khz but it's too directional. Since I'm on a 3 ways it's much of a problem but getting the axi2050 I would have more play with where I need to put the crossover.
For me the axi2050 on a 2 way like the Jubiliee sounded better than anything at the snow, relax and sense of scale and never aggressive. I'm not a fan of the amplifiers they were using on them and the room was too long and narrow yet it still was the star of the show for me. The bass in the room was very good and impactful and properly integrated with the horns.
If I compare to my faital hf10ak and hf108r, the axi2050 once EQued (I'm pretty sure the crossover is used to compensate the HF output) sounded more natural and easier to lister to. The faital do get high in the frequency easily (no eq needed on my 1100hz azura horns) but I always get the feeling it's not very natural and lack resolution. Neither the axi2050 or the hf108 hf10ak are champion of resolution in HF but it can work in a 2 way setup and the axi2050 can be used on large horns really well where the faital can't. They are, in my opinion, better in the mid than berelium TADs (never liked the mids on those) while similar in the HF.
I need to find a pair of those celestion to test on my horns.
Last edited:
Well they have the same use area both of them more or less.
The 108 R has a higher FS so prefers to be crossed a little higher then the 108.
It has a different/modified diaphragm, and clamping method, designed to reduce the high frequency resonances that the 108 shows.
Which it does fairly well, lower distortion and less anomalies in the upper range. But it has a more pronounced bump at 8-10 k, and the impedance seems to have more pronounced "spikes", pointing to a less damped diaphragm.
The measurements tells the story quite well.
Pick your preferred poison 🙂
Voice coil test bench have measured them both on the LTH102, same with the other page i linked (only the 108), which are all in quite good agreement.
Dibirama shows the response anomalies and resonances better, with the sonogram and 50db scale CSD.
After all when one tries to measure distortion at -40- 70db, and cut everything else at 25db you do not get the whole story on how the driver actually behaves.
https://www.dibirama.altervista.org...faital-hf108-driver-1-3-4-8-ohm-120-wmax.html
https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-faital-pro-hf108r-compression-driver
https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-faital-pro-hf108r-compression-driver