The practice of choosing speakers: an interview with an expert Pult.ru
A few days ago I had a chance to visit the northern capital, where I spoke with the experts of our store on Liteiny Prospect. Specialist from St. Petersburg, drummer cap. Labor Andrei Rozov, told in detail about what to pay attention to when choosing speakers, how easy it is to conduct comparative tests of acoustics in the showroom, he touched upon a number of interesting technical features of some speakers that are now presented in St. Petersburg.
It was interesting for me to talk with a man who is on the “front line”, he directly consults clients in the salon. From our conversation we got an interview that will be useful for everyone who chooses the acoustics. The expert answered a number of questions arising from our readers, drew attention to several important aspects when choosing speakers.
There is an opinion that the sound quality does not directly depend on the technical characteristics of the speaker system, that not everything has been studied and everything is not measurable, is it?
')
Quality depends directly, subjective perception does not. Over the years of work in pult.ru, I can note that only a few buyers pay attention to the passport characteristics, ask about the frequency response, nonlinear distortion or filter design. As a rule, first they watch, then they listen in the showroom, but they are evaluated according to the principle “sounds / does not sound”. In this case, very rarely interested in technical details.
If necessary, we can always provide comprehensive information about the materials and technologies used, but most buyers are interested in the result, not the means to achieve it. This result is evaluated, in the overwhelming majority of cases, subjectively. I think the point here is that people are used to trusting their ears more than the device’s passport data. This situation is not only in St. Petersburg, as far as I know, and in other regions subjectivity in the assessment of the trend.
Technically savvy people often write about the need to test the equipment themselves, but no one is lucky with the oscilloscope. Are there ways to accurately determine the characteristics of the equipment without stands and laboratory equipment prior to purchase?
It is worth saying that many not only do not try to evaluate technically, but use their own lossy formats with a low bit rate to listen to the speakers. There are not rare cases when a customer asks to connect a smartphone to the system and listen to Internet radio with a bit rate of 128 Kb / s or 96 Kb / c, where quality problems are noticeable even to a not too demanding listener. It is clear that it is rather difficult to evaluate high-quality hardware and fidelity with this source code.
Lossless is also not a panacea, because it is not clear what was the source, for example, flac file, laid out in the network. It's one thing when a user independently converts tracks from a CD - everything is clear and everything is cool, another situation when the source is unknown is a “tin can” into which it is unknown what they put.
There is a fairly simple way to assess the acoustic systems in the showroom, which allows you to compare several systems without the use of additional equipment. Use a disk with a sinusoidal signal of 315 Hz (level 0 dB), the volume is displayed to a minimum. After starting the “sinus” the volume gradually increases until the sound begins to distort (hum, etc.). The volume level at which the distortion began is recorded, then the second, third systems are tested, and so on. The highest rate indicates higher quality and fidelity playback.
Also for the control tests of the AU you can effectively use the sweep tone, as a rule, use the spectrum from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. When running in a given frequency range, it is possible to detect the appearance of various resonances, chattering of speaker components, and overtones. If it is necessary to compare the subjective sensations of music reproduced by different speakers, the most correct way is to conduct blind testing, preferably with previously known musical material.
People who place high demands on sound quality often have questions about speakers and the materials from which the diffusers are made. Online discussions of this kind sometimes come to fierce battles. Is it possible to unequivocally say that one or another driver is objectively better (better)?
An unambiguous recommendation cannot be given, since people perceive the sound of acoustic systems very subjectively. Different emitters have different advantages. I will not talk about some exotic things like electrostatic acoustics or ionophones. If we exclude this exotic, we can conditionally divide the addictions of buyers into two categories.
Some people prefer systems that minimally distort the sound, do not allow even minimal coloring in the sound, such people buy acoustics with speakers equipped with classic paper cones, high-frequency emitters, often use studio monitors as home audio. For them, the most important criteria: flat frequency response, no distortion, the dynamic capabilities of the system.
Another category is people who prefer the particular sound of a particular system or brand, they are important accents on low, medium or high, the characteristic color of the sound, they operate on such a concept as the musicality of the system. Such people have fewer requirements and questions for materials or technologies, they pay more attention to subjective perception.
There are quite specific differences in the drivers of systems that are in different price categories. This is especially noticeable in the case of RF emitters. Tape in more expensive systems, dome in a relatively budget. For speakers, the characteristics and material of the speaker diffusers are of great importance, but at the same time, the acoustic design, the material of the housing, and even more the acoustics of the room in which the speakers are installed are very important factors.
You mentioned tape emitters. What are the characteristics of ribbon twitter qualitatively superior dome tweeters?
First of all, it is a radiation pattern. Speakers with dome diffusers have a rather narrow one, respectively, there may be problems with the placement of speakers, which is important for apartments where it is not possible to organize a special listening room. With tape loudspeakers, it is much wider, in addition, the use of (10 -20 microns) film makes it possible to reduce any distortion to a minimum. The membrane of most domed emitters is thicker, even when silk is used.
In the older lines it is quite actively used tape twitter, which is justified by both higher fidelity of reproduction of high frequencies, and a wide radiation pattern. At the same time, the technology is more expensive, which, accordingly, affects the cost.
Is there a technology that allows to achieve such characteristics without using tape emitters?
There are original solutions, for example, the company Klipsch and several other manufacturers. There, the diagram has been expanded by using a horn acoustic tweeting. In this case, a speaker, which is cheaper and simpler than a lentochnik in production, was used as a radiator. Horn systems have another advantage - this is a relatively high level of sensitivity, and, accordingly, excellent dynamic performance. The level of sensitivity of such tweeters can reach 93 - 95 dB.
There are original models in which horn and ribbon tweeters are combined, these systems are more expensive. The essence of this combination is to combine the wide radiation pattern and dynamic capabilities of high-frequency dome emitters.
Today there is a lot of talk about the return of manufacturers' interest to isodynamic emitters, how relevant is this for our Russian clients and for Peter in particular?
This almost does not apply to floor or shelf acoustics, mainly isodynamics are in demand by users of headphones, sometimes portable acoustics. When it comes to something impressive, buyers are more likely to opt for systems with classic speakers and lentochnikami, large "planars" still remain as exotic as electrostatics. If it is simpler, there is no rush in St. Petersburg.
What could be the reason for this lack of interest in these technologies?
First of all cost. Other things being equal, the classic floor AC can be purchased, say, for 90,000 rubles, and the exotic will cost a million. In the case of headphones, this difference is not so noticeable, especially if we are talking about the Russian middle class. When it comes to such a difference, people with limited resources often forget about the uncompromising attitude to sound and become very pragmatic.
Another reason is that headphones are more often used by young people who are interested in innovation - this is a flexible market. Large speakers, especially outdoor ones, are a slightly different segment, there are more traditionalists aged, they perceive innovations harder and are more cautious about advanced ideas.
There are different opinions on how this or that component can affect the tract as a whole. In your opinion (as a percentage), how much does the AU determine the quality of the path?
If we exclude the influence of the room and the quality of the recording, the speakers are about 50% of the result. Of course, both the source and the gain affect the quality, but less of the speaker system. If we talk about budget kits and receivers, then, in my opinion, the AU is generally 80%, since receivers, whatever they are, sound almost equally mediocre.
Many of our customers do not live in ideal conditions, and not everyone has a listening room. Are there any ways to solve the problem without repairs and acoustic preparation of the room?
DSP-processors help in such situations, but not many decide to spend 30 thousand rubles for this device, when the problem can be solved by placing the sound-absorbing surface in the projection of direct reflection.
There are nuances associated with the acoustic design of the speakers themselves, for example, the location of the phase inverter hole on the front of the column solves the problem of placing closely against the walls. Closed cases may solve this problem, but they are rare now; several mastodon companies use this type of decoration, but one cannot say that a “closed box” is very popular.
It should be understood that the DSP-processor is not a panacea, it can solve a number of problems, but there are rooms that can not be helped by repairs with the use of acoustic materials worth hundreds of thousands.
Do you, as an expert, have personal preferences regarding the manufacturers of speaker systems?
Among what we have here, I can single out Heco, Jbl, Focal, but it's difficult for me to say that something is definitely better. There are a lot of people and opinions. If we talk about the combination of price / quality, then in my opinion the best speakers of Heco.
I sincerely hope that the recommendations of our expert will help you in choosing. Due to the lack of time, we unfortunately did not discuss everything. If necessary, our competent specialists will help you make a choice and are always ready to give useful recommendations.
It was interesting for me to talk with a man who is on the “front line”, he directly consults clients in the salon. From our conversation we got an interview that will be useful for everyone who chooses the acoustics. The expert answered a number of questions arising from our readers, drew attention to several important aspects when choosing speakers.
There is an opinion that the sound quality does not directly depend on the technical characteristics of the speaker system, that not everything has been studied and everything is not measurable, is it?
')
Quality depends directly, subjective perception does not. Over the years of work in pult.ru, I can note that only a few buyers pay attention to the passport characteristics, ask about the frequency response, nonlinear distortion or filter design. As a rule, first they watch, then they listen in the showroom, but they are evaluated according to the principle “sounds / does not sound”. In this case, very rarely interested in technical details.
If necessary, we can always provide comprehensive information about the materials and technologies used, but most buyers are interested in the result, not the means to achieve it. This result is evaluated, in the overwhelming majority of cases, subjectively. I think the point here is that people are used to trusting their ears more than the device’s passport data. This situation is not only in St. Petersburg, as far as I know, and in other regions subjectivity in the assessment of the trend.
Technically savvy people often write about the need to test the equipment themselves, but no one is lucky with the oscilloscope. Are there ways to accurately determine the characteristics of the equipment without stands and laboratory equipment prior to purchase?
It is worth saying that many not only do not try to evaluate technically, but use their own lossy formats with a low bit rate to listen to the speakers. There are not rare cases when a customer asks to connect a smartphone to the system and listen to Internet radio with a bit rate of 128 Kb / s or 96 Kb / c, where quality problems are noticeable even to a not too demanding listener. It is clear that it is rather difficult to evaluate high-quality hardware and fidelity with this source code.
Lossless is also not a panacea, because it is not clear what was the source, for example, flac file, laid out in the network. It's one thing when a user independently converts tracks from a CD - everything is clear and everything is cool, another situation when the source is unknown is a “tin can” into which it is unknown what they put.
There is a fairly simple way to assess the acoustic systems in the showroom, which allows you to compare several systems without the use of additional equipment. Use a disk with a sinusoidal signal of 315 Hz (level 0 dB), the volume is displayed to a minimum. After starting the “sinus” the volume gradually increases until the sound begins to distort (hum, etc.). The volume level at which the distortion began is recorded, then the second, third systems are tested, and so on. The highest rate indicates higher quality and fidelity playback.
Also for the control tests of the AU you can effectively use the sweep tone, as a rule, use the spectrum from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. When running in a given frequency range, it is possible to detect the appearance of various resonances, chattering of speaker components, and overtones. If it is necessary to compare the subjective sensations of music reproduced by different speakers, the most correct way is to conduct blind testing, preferably with previously known musical material.
People who place high demands on sound quality often have questions about speakers and the materials from which the diffusers are made. Online discussions of this kind sometimes come to fierce battles. Is it possible to unequivocally say that one or another driver is objectively better (better)?
An unambiguous recommendation cannot be given, since people perceive the sound of acoustic systems very subjectively. Different emitters have different advantages. I will not talk about some exotic things like electrostatic acoustics or ionophones. If we exclude this exotic, we can conditionally divide the addictions of buyers into two categories.
Some people prefer systems that minimally distort the sound, do not allow even minimal coloring in the sound, such people buy acoustics with speakers equipped with classic paper cones, high-frequency emitters, often use studio monitors as home audio. For them, the most important criteria: flat frequency response, no distortion, the dynamic capabilities of the system.
Another category is people who prefer the particular sound of a particular system or brand, they are important accents on low, medium or high, the characteristic color of the sound, they operate on such a concept as the musicality of the system. Such people have fewer requirements and questions for materials or technologies, they pay more attention to subjective perception.
There are quite specific differences in the drivers of systems that are in different price categories. This is especially noticeable in the case of RF emitters. Tape in more expensive systems, dome in a relatively budget. For speakers, the characteristics and material of the speaker diffusers are of great importance, but at the same time, the acoustic design, the material of the housing, and even more the acoustics of the room in which the speakers are installed are very important factors.
You mentioned tape emitters. What are the characteristics of ribbon twitter qualitatively superior dome tweeters?
First of all, it is a radiation pattern. Speakers with dome diffusers have a rather narrow one, respectively, there may be problems with the placement of speakers, which is important for apartments where it is not possible to organize a special listening room. With tape loudspeakers, it is much wider, in addition, the use of (10 -20 microns) film makes it possible to reduce any distortion to a minimum. The membrane of most domed emitters is thicker, even when silk is used.
In the older lines it is quite actively used tape twitter, which is justified by both higher fidelity of reproduction of high frequencies, and a wide radiation pattern. At the same time, the technology is more expensive, which, accordingly, affects the cost.
Is there a technology that allows to achieve such characteristics without using tape emitters?
There are original solutions, for example, the company Klipsch and several other manufacturers. There, the diagram has been expanded by using a horn acoustic tweeting. In this case, a speaker, which is cheaper and simpler than a lentochnik in production, was used as a radiator. Horn systems have another advantage - this is a relatively high level of sensitivity, and, accordingly, excellent dynamic performance. The level of sensitivity of such tweeters can reach 93 - 95 dB.
There are original models in which horn and ribbon tweeters are combined, these systems are more expensive. The essence of this combination is to combine the wide radiation pattern and dynamic capabilities of high-frequency dome emitters.
Today there is a lot of talk about the return of manufacturers' interest to isodynamic emitters, how relevant is this for our Russian clients and for Peter in particular?
This almost does not apply to floor or shelf acoustics, mainly isodynamics are in demand by users of headphones, sometimes portable acoustics. When it comes to something impressive, buyers are more likely to opt for systems with classic speakers and lentochnikami, large "planars" still remain as exotic as electrostatics. If it is simpler, there is no rush in St. Petersburg.
What could be the reason for this lack of interest in these technologies?
First of all cost. Other things being equal, the classic floor AC can be purchased, say, for 90,000 rubles, and the exotic will cost a million. In the case of headphones, this difference is not so noticeable, especially if we are talking about the Russian middle class. When it comes to such a difference, people with limited resources often forget about the uncompromising attitude to sound and become very pragmatic.
Another reason is that headphones are more often used by young people who are interested in innovation - this is a flexible market. Large speakers, especially outdoor ones, are a slightly different segment, there are more traditionalists aged, they perceive innovations harder and are more cautious about advanced ideas.
There are different opinions on how this or that component can affect the tract as a whole. In your opinion (as a percentage), how much does the AU determine the quality of the path?
If we exclude the influence of the room and the quality of the recording, the speakers are about 50% of the result. Of course, both the source and the gain affect the quality, but less of the speaker system. If we talk about budget kits and receivers, then, in my opinion, the AU is generally 80%, since receivers, whatever they are, sound almost equally mediocre.
Many of our customers do not live in ideal conditions, and not everyone has a listening room. Are there any ways to solve the problem without repairs and acoustic preparation of the room?
DSP-processors help in such situations, but not many decide to spend 30 thousand rubles for this device, when the problem can be solved by placing the sound-absorbing surface in the projection of direct reflection.
There are nuances associated with the acoustic design of the speakers themselves, for example, the location of the phase inverter hole on the front of the column solves the problem of placing closely against the walls. Closed cases may solve this problem, but they are rare now; several mastodon companies use this type of decoration, but one cannot say that a “closed box” is very popular.
It should be understood that the DSP-processor is not a panacea, it can solve a number of problems, but there are rooms that can not be helped by repairs with the use of acoustic materials worth hundreds of thousands.
Some traditional jeans
Do you, as an expert, have personal preferences regarding the manufacturers of speaker systems?
Among what we have here, I can single out Heco, Jbl, Focal, but it's difficult for me to say that something is definitely better. There are a lot of people and opinions. If we talk about the combination of price / quality, then in my opinion the best speakers of Heco.
I sincerely hope that the recommendations of our expert will help you in choosing. Due to the lack of time, we unfortunately did not discuss everything. If necessary, our competent specialists will help you make a choice and are always ready to give useful recommendations.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/402937/
All Articles