Most, if not, all flagship speakers from B & W, Revel, JBL, Harbeth, Audio Physics, Sonus faber, Kharma, Focal have at their primary goal the best SQ possible. Yet, none of their flagship speakers use dsp or electronic xover. and actualyl most of those companies do not feature dsp or electronic xover.
I totally agree that dsp and electronic xover is likely used nowadays by most companies to try different xo, time alignement, ect. and is amazing tool for diyer!
very interesting indeed! thanks for this test!
Last edited:
I think the trend with professional reference monitors is to go active DSP for crossovers and letting amps direct drive access to speaker drivers. I think the flagship JBL M2 uses their in house crown and DSP xo. Genelec is DSP, so are many others. I think old guard "audiophile" speakers are sticking to passive crossovers. Inherently, good DSP has so many benefits over passive.
ya M2's I think use dsp, but not their everest line though, nor their line arrays, nor their lsr line.
genelec 8351 is still very new and the jury is still out, have heard amazing feedback though!
I just dont think its as easy as what as been offered to diyers and I still believe in the good old analog XO.
As per my experience active speakers run though separate dsp/xo IS FOR DIY, not for everyman.
eg. minidsp gives much more options compared to even pro built-in dsp speakers (eg. delay, free xo config. etc.) The user must learn to use measurement system and must understand how to set up the system, no automation available! I use dsp for main stereo speakers, others in 5.0 are normal passive 2-ways. Works fine for me and the family because the dsp and power amps have power on 24/7 (d-class modules). The end user sees and uses only the HT receiver and sources as they are used to.
eg. minidsp gives much more options compared to even pro built-in dsp speakers (eg. delay, free xo config. etc.) The user must learn to use measurement system and must understand how to set up the system, no automation available! I use dsp for main stereo speakers, others in 5.0 are normal passive 2-ways. Works fine for me and the family because the dsp and power amps have power on 24/7 (d-class modules). The end user sees and uses only the HT receiver and sources as they are used to.
I have the LSR305. I know it definitely uses a combo DSP and class D amp STA350BW chip from ST Micro. Very cost effective way to implement the LR2 XO and EQ in one package. I assume the 308 uses similar chip.
Last edited:
Would you not agree that for anyone so bold enough as to try to design their own passive crossover form scratch, that also requires know how and a mic for measurements, but the miniDSP route is much much easier than designing and optimizing a passive XO from scratch? Not to mention less expensive as you don't need to buy anymore components. A few coils and quality caps will cost as much as a miniDSP.
This is more to do with the industry rather than trying to achieve the best possible sound quality.
Which is exactly the point.
In an industry where everything is segregated into its own camp it is extremely difficult to try and get any momentum going with active or DSP based systems.
The industry has always catered towards the 'mix and match' philosophy, rather than the integrated 'mini system' approach and yet its precisely this type of approach that is required when one talks about DSP and going active.
If you're going to make an a DSP based set of active loudspeakers then by design you're going to need to supply the DSP box itself. This is no doubt going to contain an A/D converter, multichannel D/A converters and then the DSP chip itself. If one were to build this to the same standard that the best digital sources can provide then it'd cost a small fortune in and of itself. No doubt you wouldn't want to build your DSP box to cost what DCS, et al, charge, so that would create a problem in and of itself. Most audiophiles would think, how can their DSP box possibly have a DAC that's as good as my X, Y or Z, so they would be turned off just by that. Then there's the fact that its digital...woe betide the vinyl users.
Naturally the best solution is to provide a complete end system, one with a digital input, that combines DSP/DACs/amplification and the loudspeakers all in one. In fact this is almost necessary to guarantee the end user gets what the engineer/designer has set out to provide, but this is not how most audiophiles like to buy their systems.
I don't think this is how a lot of DIYers like to build they systems either, we enjoy being able to focus on different pieces of equipment at any one time. But because we know what we're doing (supposedly 😉) breaking the system apart isn't too much of a problem, whereas it would be for the everyday audiophile if fully DSP based active systems were to become popular.
Designing an excellent crossover isn't really any different whether you go active or passive. The same skill-set and know-how towards the end goals is required. Active simply gives you more freedom in doing so because you can now apply gain rather than just take things away. Analogue active crossovers also require careful system design to ensure low distortion and high signal to noise ratios are maintained. Simple ones are quite easy to put together, but complex ones are not.
DSP is sort of the holy grail, especially if done right, but where it really shines, imo, is that even if it is done 'wrong', it is still extremely capable. The miniDSP is a good example of this, from a system design point of view it is extremely lacking (in absolute terms), yet it still manages to do a heck of a lot right, so much so that people find it indispensable.
U
I don't know if it is the same skill set. I am pretty handy with electronics but ask me to design a passive 4th order Butterworth low pass and 2nd order Bessel high pass with precise time delay to implement a Harsch XO? I would be hopelessly lost and if I made it, it probably won't work right 😱
But back in miniDSP land, it takes me 15 minutes. 😀
I don't know if it is the same skill set. I am pretty handy with electronics but ask me to design a passive 4th order Butterworth low pass and 2nd order Bessel high pass with precise time delay to implement a Harsch XO? I would be hopelessly lost and if I made it, it probably won't work right 😱
But back in miniDSP land, it takes me 15 minutes. 😀
I'm being asked about the horn used with the Radian PB950 Be:
Q-Components
Didnt test it at all.
Will need EQing anyway and if it can't be pushed as low as the other drivers, we will keep it with -XdB in the lower frequencies.
The beauty of it now is we don't care anymore. 😉
Q-Components
Didnt test it at all.
Will need EQing anyway and if it can't be pushed as low as the other drivers, we will keep it with -XdB in the lower frequencies.
The beauty of it now is we don't care anymore. 😉
but the lsr305 its far from their flagship offering, its some of their cheapest speaker.
fact is, most flagship offerings from most companies DO NOT use DSP.
I specifically mentioned the FLAGSHIP offerings of the biggest companies and Id include most high end speakers do not use DSP in their speakers. as can be seen by many cheap speakers that use DSP, I doubt that the flagship speakers by REvel, JBL, B&W, Wilson audio ect do not use DSP because of the cost since many of the cheap offerings in studio monitors use DSP.
do you pretend that the flagship offerings from the biggest companies is not concern about sound quality? All the good hi-fi companies has a lot of competition and they do try to make the best speaker available in their price market (5k, 10k, 20k). so yes, most serious companies try to make the best speaker possible within the budget restraint and it seems that DSP is not the preferred method to achieve best SQ in their opinion.
I do think DSP has lot of promises, just find it weird that even the 25k speakers by the biggest companies still dont use dsp. the jbl m2 is one of the few example that use dsp as their reference speakers, but jbl also has the everest line that do not use dsp.
Last edited:
I'd say their primary goal is to satisfy their customers in order to generate sales.
And that implies a lot of compromises, including WAF... Just to mention the most obvious. 😉
From a commercial point of view, it's a HUGE risk to launch on this conservative market (high-end audiophile) such disruptive innovation. For many reasons...
In fact, it could be almost commercially suicidal to do so. Even if the end result would be vastly superior...
anyway, my opinion on the topic is: the (commercial) high-end hi-fi market is corrupted for so many years that it might not change before it slowly dies.
This is not how it works.
Buying flagship speakers is not like buying sports car. You cannot rely on objective numbers or even subjective comparisons stats, and it's not even as easy to evaluate when you try it in person.
From a consumer point of view (rich but newbie), buying flagship speakers can be a pain in the ***. Surely not as exciting as shopping for Ferrari, Porsche and Lamborghini...
So the big companies must bet A LOT on aesthetic and home decor considerations. While keeping decent profit margin for everybody in the chain distributorship/retailers and shipping costs as low as possible while the speakers travels...
It's about good sound, yes, but it's a lot about business as well. Much more than you might think.
Also, i don't know about you but i'm in DIY not only because i'd like to save money but even more importantly because i was not satisfied by any Flagship speakers i ever heard in my life.
Didnt happen a SINGLE TIME where at some point i said to myself: ''Wow, these speakers are so amazing i should buy it even if they are expensive.''
I lost interest in going to HiFi shows because of that.
There is no Lamborghini in these shows. Nothing that makes you dream about.
Didnt happen a SINGLE TIME where at some point i said to myself: ''Wow, these speakers are so amazing i should buy it even if they are expensive.''
I lost interest in going to HiFi shows because of that.
There is no Lamborghini in these shows. Nothing that makes you dream about.
One of my ideas is to, someday, make a blind comparisons test with DIY speakers V.S. B&W, Sonus Faber and the like.
And you can be assured the DIY speakers would be DSP-driven. 😎
Few years back, i built 3 identical listening rooms with that idea in mind. I still have those rooms.
And you can be assured the DIY speakers would be DSP-driven. 😎
Few years back, i built 3 identical listening rooms with that idea in mind. I still have those rooms.
you have never heard a flagship speaker that you liked! wow men, im coming to your place right now, please show me what can blow away jbl everest!!!!!
wtf, people who buy 20k speakers, most of them audition many speakers n the same price braket, and SQ, if most often then not, the most important aspect.
Well, it's a matter of taste i guess...
I DID like some of them. But enough to buy it ? Hell, no. Not even close.
My Top commercial speakers, which i could live with it, for some time, if someone gave it to me:
1. Ampeggio - Voxativ Loudspeakers (small room only)
2. Verity audio Lohengrin
3. Sonus Faber Stradivari
Never heard the Avant garde yet, but i might like them. The new DSP-driven Zero 1 is very intriguing: Hornlautsprecher - Avantgarde Acoustic? Hornloudspeaker GMBH
.
.
I would use B&W 800's or Focal's in case of emergency only.
Agreed.
20k buys you an entry-level wannabe-sport-car, not the real thing.
Most ''serious'' Speakers costs 40k+
and that doesnt include the exotic cables the vendors will try to push down your throat.