I sent in an inexpensive pair of B&W bookshelf speakers and Danny said he couldn’t do anything to fix them. I was disappointed but appreciated Danny’s integrity.
You need to stop the bull. He just states this isn't something he can change for the better without basically making a new speaker. If you like the sound and how it is that's good for you. From an improvement pov this was a dead end. If you think the measurement is wrong tell people about the other findings.
@@MrMallensr One thing about Danny is he did NOT remove your negative opinion of him from the comments. That is, what I feel, a good sign of a strong online character these days. He bashes some speakers and when someone bashes him he doesn't try to control or manipulate the conversation. And he easily could remove any comment.
I liked this one, I am learning so much from your explinations. Thank you! This one of my best subscribtions on RUclips. Short and sweet is also very good!
The published sensitivity is 78.5dB. The Epique woofers are fine for what they are intended for. Hoffman's iron law in play. You can go small, and low, but you sacrifice sensitivity. People need to pick their compromises. I disagree with "no output capability". The published max SPL is 102dB, and if you are using these nearfield or in a small room, that would possibly be enough. The issue is the amplification you need to get there.
Watts are fairly cheap these days....power is readily available to drive these speakers if you need more SPL. 1 watt is just a standard for measurement purposes.
@@dmark2639agreed You can get some good deals on a TPA3255 based amplifier that would take these to either excursion or the thermal limit for a couple of hundred dollars
@@dmark2639 You're right, but compression would obscure bass tone and detail, and just be a lossy overlay atop everything. Once it's experienced, it's quite easy to hear the onset of that type of compression.
@@JoyRaptor It requires 10x the power than even normal moderately inefficient loudspeakers. Motor needs that size because this design requires a lot of power, ... because of the design criteria of chasing extension in a small box. Compression is a by-product that'll overlay everything that driver's producing (w/3khz xover, that's essentially everything). It's just lossy. Physics, Hoffman's Iron Law - Small box - Extension - Sensitivity Pick two, forsake the other. The 180° opposite example is Infinite Baffle subs. My quad 18" ceiling mounted manifold IB is incredibly efficient at the bottom octaves. With the mammoth attic backspace, the Fi 18" drivers only need about 225w apiece to hit full stroke ~30mm! Back to the Dayton, appearance is an absolute grand slam. You're right, those drivers are badass! The entire loudspeaker looks badass. Those surrounds vs overall size, nice.
I don't know if it's something you care to address, but if you could get a lighter backdrop and maybe a white table cloth it would make it easier to see what you're showing. I appreciate the videos and info you share. Thanks Danny!
The woofer is a 4ohm + 4ohm dual voice coil mini extended range sub. The tweeter is 4ohm flagship. The woofer is 10db less sensitive then the tweeter without a crossover. I like dayton, but im not sure why they made these.
You could use 4 of them in a mmmmt in voicecoil in serie and woofers in parallel for a 2 ohm load. The speaker sensitivity is 82 db and the tweeter is 88 db so its not that bad as people think i guess.
@@pauldavies6037 still i think it a good woofer. I don't have knowledge about crossovers but they have made a very good speaker so i dont understand why people talk about rings and bells who aren't important. I mean if you want a bookshelf that goes as loud as a tower then these are very good, there are just some trade offs ofcourse ( high cone mass )
I saw these at axpona and bought them as soon as I got home. I run the with carver pro audio bridged amps and the sing. They are what they are. They are inexpensive party speakers.
@@1mctous minus the low frequency extension plus much larger volume. If you consider efficiency, cabinet size and bass extension, you can pick only two.
Nice, have fun. Carver high power amps ... very cool. One thing is for sure, they look killer. I'd recommend sorbothane iso-pucks between them and whatever they're placed upon. Dirt cheap and superior to anything else.
I was really excited when I first saw the opal, even willing to hotrod it. But reviews are so negative, I need to give these a listen somewhere. A shame, they look real slick
There have definitely been discussions about the sensitivity of the Opal1 being around 79db. That would require a monster amp to run a bookshelf... they do look very nice but it feels like a next gen kabuki speaker
It is actually much lower, about 75dB average and dropping to 73dB at 55Hz. You can't just throw a bunch of power at them either, their is significant woofer compression above 96dB of output.
could you have replaced the speaker with another and got good sound? Or remove the treble and crossover and run an active crossover and get a good mini sub
@@dannyrichie9743 thx Danny, will do. actually the ones i have are the Sierra LX , not the v2 version, but prob same deal and will check out the inners
I wonder if removing the passive radiators and sealing the back of the box would help with the (sub)woofer's response? It would likely *reduce* the sensitivity even more but maybe you could balance the frequency response more easily.
Danny, I ordered what are advertised to be and stamped to be WBT connectors for a pair that were broken off of an amp I bought. Steel nuts!! I cannot source replacement nuts i metric or SAE sizes. They appear to be about 1/4" with a fine thread. Recommendations? Living in the country is nice but shopping opportunities are very limited.
I wonder whats going on there at that dipped area. According to the spec for the driver its perfectly flat all the way to 2k. But the stated sensitivity is 83.3 dB 😲 However over 14mm excursion and 200W power handling. Strange little driver for sure
@@sudd3660yes I am curious about why and how it's the case that higher sensitivity speakers sound more dynamic, because I accept that they do, but I just don't know why a low efficiency speaker couldn't sound the same just with scaled up output power. Any takers for a scientific description? Could be that low sensitivity speakers simply aren't doing much of anything until a certain threshold of power overcomes their impedance and drivers moving mass, such that on a linear scale they would trend more towards the "all or nothing" side of power input vs SPL output, whereas efficient speakers trend toward the linear side, where output matches input even at lower power levels - not just absolute power levels, but RELATIVE power levels. So they're just more true to the source in that they can respond linearly to .1w and 10w, whereas the less efficient speaker does not equally respond to 1w as it does 100w... Same ratio, but different relative outputs. That's a theory.
Lower sensitivity helps when the woofer is smaller. Mine are 6 inch and are pretty flat to 40htz, but only 81 dB sensitivity. Pump 100 watts through them, and the bass is fast, tight & deep without being overpowering. That is my experience.
@@jaycoleman8062 why do you say it "helps"? It's not the lower sensitivity itself that helps, but rather if you want more bass extension naturally (i.e. without EQ) then it is a necessary side effect that simply goes with a crossover (and/or driver) design that lowers sensitivity at higher frequencies. Drivers do not have one sensitivity measurement across their frequency range, the stated sensitivity is typically at 1khz or averaged over a limited frequency range. Low bass is ALWAYS less efficient and would measure as a lower sensitivity than higher frequencies in woofers, to a point. So if your woofer with no crossover is 93db sensitive at 200hz, it may be 89db at 80hz, 84db at 60, 78 at 50, and 71db at 40hz, for example. In order to design a speaker that's only -3db at 50hz and -10 at 40hz, you cannot boost those lows, you can only cut the higher frequencies, so your x-over would pull down the sensitivity over 200hz by 12db, resulting in a sensitivity rating of 81db in this example. This isn't a benefit or "help" to be lower sensitivity, it's just physics and the fact that if you want usable bass extension in a small speaker to 40 or 50hz, your crossover HAS to pull down the higher frequencies to bring it down to the natural (maximum) sensitivity level of the low bass frequency you're targeting. You're throwing away free efficiency of the driver higher up, as a necessary evil, to get that extension. This is why active crossovers and EQ is superior, you don't have to throw away any efficiency passively, you can merely boost the lows to get the same the result, but maintain the higher inherent efficiency of the driver higher up. The amp will end up only needing to produce a very small amount of current where the driver is very efficient, and perhaps 8x the power at 40hz to get you that extension. That part is true whether active or passive, but without a passive crossover you'd require less power higher up to produce the same SPL, and get the sonic benefits of the higher sensitivity and lack of passive attenuation. A 15" pro driver can be around 100db sensitive... But not at 30-50hz. Even a very sensitive large pro woofer, if it's passively crossed and designed to play down to 30hz at -3db, is going to have a final sensitivity rating WAY under it's marketed 100db, down in the 80s like a bookshelf would be. It's just the nature of low bass. But I'd prefer to use EQ and active crossovers to boost the low bass, and not waste any energy but maintain the high sensitivity (it's natural/inherent sensitivity) of the driver sans passive crossover attenuation.
it is not easy to mount normal terminals without using a nut that can withstand being tightened. copper is too soft. the best thing is to solder the wire directly onto the banana plug or rust-free nut that is gold plated, so the signal goes through the gold coating
The dip at 3.2k looks to be diffraction related. I'm guessing that tweeter just doesn't wanna play nice in a box without heavy roundovers at the front baffle. That said: I'll bet these speakers will sound best on an actual shelf (very close to a wall) with ZERO toe in. AKA: the ideal casual listening speaker.
In Europe these go for 900 Euros, that's pretty close to $900!! Yes they look nice, but I get the impression these where designed by a kid at school... let's get some nice looking expensive drivers, stick 'em in a box and hope they sound good. The measured response alone would indicate they don't. What are these guys thinking....?
Matt Philips is the designer. Erin from Erin's Audio Corner posted an email from him in the comments section of his recent video about the design concept.
@@spoiler9112 I watched Erin's review a while back. Danny's measurements are pretty close to Erin's. Matt explains the concept in the email however, Dayton make some really good drivers, why choose these drivers, come up with this design and then decide this is a flagship product? Makes no sense to me.
A polarity flip is not going to help. The woofers are not bad for ranges below 300Hz, and if four of them were used in series/parallel to get the output levels up. Useful drivers, just not in this configuration.
@@dannyrichie9743would love to see you show what youbwould consider an optimal design with these. I was looking at thise in series /parallel with a plainer mod amd tiny amt forbthe top end. Crossed over around 700 and 8k
What is this about, the hole arising from drivers not being in phase? The lower driver rolls off way too soon and even if you add the drivers as if they were one hundred percent exactly in phase there would still be a hole. And what is wrong with having the drivers 90 degrees out of phase at crossover? This is what makes the power response falt(if the one axis is) and also makes the summed phase linear. What is this all about?.
That speaker just came out, I have used the tweeter before and I was interested in the opique woofer because of the x max it reminded me of a inexpensive purfi. I would double up the woofers for better spl if I was going to use 2 woofers per speaker. How do you like the tweeter? It looks like it rolled off .
I use the rs28 tweeter in a lot of projects. To my earn I actually liked season tweeter better. Doubling up woofer for sensitiveity I think is the way to go here. My plan is to have 2 of the 7" versions, and a done rs52mm that can go down to 700hz and a nd20 or ribbon Super tweeter starting at 4k the cheap nd20 and rs52 are better then making one tweeter go so low
Not really, the cabinet is designed for that woofer, so good luck trying to find another woofer to fit the same hole, Passive Radiators, and airspace requirements. Then changing the tweeter won't help either as the dip at 3KHz is a diffraction issue caused by the top/side edges all being the same distance from the tweeter.
Interesting to see this (Opal 1) and a speaker like the Golden Ear bookshelf that are so similar in size and design approach, but are so different in their performance that, along with price point, is enough to flip the "no go button". Thumbs up for another good video Danny. And...... What is that speaker over your right shoulder? It look like a GR design with an offset tweeter.
There was a lot of hype about this at Axpona but I knew better. It’s disappointing because I’ve done a ton of business with pe/Dayton and I really like them. The designer has never designed a speaker before as far as I know. Not sure what they were thinking.
Probably meant to be a near-field desk monitor, where you don't need a ton of output. Also, wattage is fairly cheap today...you could easily find an amp with plenty of power without breaking the bank. Sure, it has other issues, but it's supposed to be a budget speaker, not high-end.
I love these types of videos at least you tried love the look but I'm a mid bass midrange guy with lower treble something like you wold get in the 60s 70s
Nope. Looks like both drivers have low sensitivity. I would just recomment ppl buying at tweeter that plays lower into 800-1400Hz and use an L pad to bring the tweeter level down and match the impedance of the old tweeter if one wants to use the stock filter. L pad online calculators are easy to use. Adjusting the 2 resistors can give better phase rotation even with the stock filter so the dip would be completely gone. Dayton have several awesome tweeters for cheap that sound excellent. One just have to except the fact that is doesnt play very loud without a ton of power. But it will play loud enough for nearfield use. Atleast this way you would have a good sounding speaker that doesnt need a sub. What killed this speaker is the dip at 3kHz which is in the middle of female vocal range, and voices will sound weird and too laid back in the soundstage.
Hi Danny, your fan, still holding on to my xls encore. I'm wondering is it possible for you to make a LGK 2.1 with a stronger bass? That is in the range of 58-60 Hz? And the next question is, why would a person buy the Bravo when they have the xls encore?
i would make the speaker with 3 woofers and sealed box, probably better woofers and tweeters. then require dsp to get the bass up. then you can have sensitivity and bass. even separate connectors for the bass for bi amping.
@@charlesngugi777 the woofers can be reused, but for bass only, I would pick a different driver altogether for the mid crossing between the woofers and tweeter.
That's too bad. They are nice looking speakers. 35Hz is way too low though. I think my Cambridge Audio S30s on my pc system are tuned around 55, and that's pretty low for a 4" woofer. I've got a cheap 8" Martin Logan sub paired with them, so it's not an issue.
I was disappointed with the JBL Studio 530 examination that you did. The speaker measured pretty well and you kind of left it at that because you said it was a $300 pair of speakers, so not worth the time or money. The $300 dollars was a special sale price, where regular price was always $600, which then, I think you may have gone further with this speaker and given us some upgrades and possibly adjustment fixes.
Viewing that tweeter and it's FR plot - it seems to be literally SCREAMING for a waveguide. That would be necessary for it to be able to play down low enough to meet that woofer's response slightly below ~2 kHz. That and lightening the weight on both the PRs (to increase their overall F3) would probably transform that into something that's very listenable...IMHO, that is.....
Actually this is what people need to see, not everything can be tuned or just have a little magic dust applied and become a great speaker. Some designs simply do not work as well as others and that is just a fact of engineering.
Interesting that they seem to cross so high - Dayton have tweeters that can go lower than that. I quite like the concept but I would do it active and not care so much about the poor efficiency of those drivers.
You can fix that with a 4 channel DSP and a high powered amp on the woofer. You would need to bypass that crossover. Then it would probably not have a great midrange. Yeah I wouldn’t be interested in this one. I would much rather have a regular bookshelf speaker with a subwoofer and a high pass filter.
those amps are not much power for the money, if you buy two of those you get 2x200 watt only, note more if you drop to 4hm either. i bought my NAD c298 for that money, you get 185w 8ohm(275 clipping power) and 360 4 ohm, and so on, 1100watt max. no chance two Topping does that.
@sudd3660 It's not just about power. But clean power for me. The B200 is a lot cleaner, (check Audio Science Review), than the C298 and it's class AB vs Class D of the C298. Also I don't know how much you paid but the current price of the C298 is double that of 2 B200's at 2200€. For that kind of money you can buy 4 B200''s and use 2 for each speaker, if the speaker has bi-amping capability of course, and have 400W per channel.
Sad I have many low cost Dayton speakers that are not bad. Seems money doesn't always buy better sound. I love passive radiator designs,not many out there,a shame they dropped the ball here.
You can’t put a shine on a sneaker. Buy a well-built speaker that has a smooth sonic range. Make sure you can listen to it at home and return it if you don’t like the sound.
Actually no. Sum of the drivers are 3dB higher than the tweeter dip level, even though the woofer is 7dB lower in level. They sum pretty much in phase in this region. It’s the tweeter that has an on axis dip on the baffle. It Matters because it needs to be considered for the power response of the speaker. This is not fixable in the crossover. It’s a geometric issue.
@@martinenstrom8206 If you check out the vertical off axis in each direction (up and down) you can see and watch the phase rotation. They are not out of phase, but not completely in phase either. The tweeters response is also easily fixed with the crossover.
That speaker is only good in the cabinet as I see, long throw woofers tends to be very colored, this speaker to sound good need a polypropylene midrange 5 inches to cover from 200-5khz so a 3 way design, that woofer can't be used on a 2 way design
Not without redesigning the cabinet/speaker/crossover altogether. The LGK needs a separate airspace, and you will ideally need 2 woofers in parallel to better match the sensitivity of the LGK.
Looks matter a lot to the average buyer. If they look like they will sound good and they look like they will make a lot of bass then people will buy them. These are not audiophile speakers. But so many self professed audiophiles have no clue about the realities and compromises inherent in speaker design. They also are just as susceptible as the average guy to get caught up in the wow factor of bass extension from a small design. But there's always a compromise. Many a respected company's very expensive two way "book shelf" speakers don't go much below 45 HZ for a reason.
Yes - nothing can make up for a low sensitivity driver. And it is often the case that when the driver is trying for a lower Fs, that they make the cone heavier, and then bump up the size of the magnet. Which can do something - but there is also no substitute for low(er) Mms.
@@davidstevens7809 Right - the woofer is almost always the lowest sensitivity driver used in a given speaker, and the other driver(s) have to have their output lowers to bring it into balance.
If you want a flat response. That drop around 3 k is there because our ears are about 6 to 10 db more sensitive there so the drop counteract this. I use equalizers to match my ears as close as possible. So I drop frequencies that my ears pickup and boost the ones my ears suck at.
How were they when you actually listened to them? First impression? And after some time of auditioning? What type of music did you sample during your listening session?
@@dannyrichie9743 Wow. I've owned a set for a few months, and that has not been my experience at all. Except when I tried them off certain tube amps or a class D. Setup correctly with a good amp, they are absolutely dazzling. IMHO.
@@dannyrichie9743 They caused me to sell my Def Tech D11s and Golden Ear Aon 3s. Opal is simply better. Not only more refined, but more complete, and more engaging. To me at least, but audio is subjective, so I respect your view.
I could but it would be expensive. That's two servo amps and custom servo woofers plus everything else, and all of those woofers need their own air space.... The results will be far better and it will be a lot cheaper to add a single 12" servo sub to a pair of X-LS Encores.
It does make me wonder why all these speaker manufacturers don't follow your methods, it's probably because they are made at a price point I suppose, another excellent video 👍
Pretty strange design and the measured performance is about what I expected it would be. So many compromises overall when you lean the design so heavily towards one goal. I'm sure it could sound goood with an absolute ton of power in the right room but its just such a strange direction to go for Dayton. A three way tower with this woofer and tweeter would make more sense and personally I'd rather see PE stick with kits at least first and foremost.
You're not saying as much useful and absolute truth as you think you are and have accepted as true. Don't make an excuse for what is simply a matter of terrible decisions made for driver selection. Anyone who opts for low sensitivity drivers whether in regards to more low end capabilities or not doesn't have a clue about what truly makes a speaker sound coherent or dynamic or even truly low distortion playback. The best sounding speakers in the world aside from panel electrostatic speakers are all truly great because they understand that the less a driver has to physically move and use excursion, the lower distortion the presentation will be and the more dynamics that will be rendered correctly which is ultimately what makes something sound REAL. Only subwoofers need high excursion for simple output energy required to move those frequencies in the same level manner of high frequency signals. Physics doesn't bend. Adding DSP has its many tradeoffs as well that basically involve kissing macro detail goodbye for an "even response." Like it or not including feelings about his company left behind from his legacy, Paul W Klipsch understood the bigger picture and knew damn well that perfectly even frequency response was not to be number one or even number 2 on the list of designing & judging truly realistic sound. It's of course extremely important but not as much as time domain factors as well as truly low distortion in the midband, at least not on its own but as a combined effort with those other absolutes.
@HiFiWright Klipsch horns are not anywhere in the equation! Not only are they not accurate in frequency response, but they are missing almost 3khz of high frequency response. I guess that may be what is considered a live presentation by a small minority. DSP removes detail?' That is pure USDA choice, Bull Manure! Remove all those resistors, inductors & capacitors out of the signal path. Add a 4th order active filter. Now you have the ability to crossover in phase several octaves above and below the crossover point (something a passive network can never achieve). Plus, you can control the output of each driver with its own amplifier instead of a handful of resistors. Now, this speaker could have been designed better, with no argument in that regard. I am simply stating that part of the problem with efficiency, phase issues, and impedance is because of the passive networks used. Since frequencies have size. Bigger drivers will put out longer frequencies. So tweeters and woofers do not disperse sound in the same manner. What we experience is that sound moves at the same speed, regardless of how long or length the frequency is at the time of arrival at our ears. Tweeters present diffraction problems on the face of the baffle. Woofer problems are just the opposite. They wrap frequencies around the baffle when the frequency is larger than the baffle. So, in that regard, they are not the same. These audio systems are basicly illusions. Miles Davis blows through a horn, not a 1.25" Dome tweeter. So, duplication of a live performance has not happened in audio. At least not in my 40 years in this hobby. But sounding " like" a live performance, some systems can almost get close.
@@JoyRaptorthat says very little. A: we are talking about other basic people who have no actual qualifications or most likely sufficient knowledge of electrical engineering and/or frequency/signal manipulation and essentially anything else other than being selected based on popularity or a name they have made for themselves by being audio "experts" which i has nothing to do with true expertise, necessarily, but rather more long individuals who have more or less just heard a variety of different speakers and probably many, at that. B: However, more importantly, an audio show is going to have very little to do with sound fidelity on a micro and especially macro level but primarily based on how a speaker sounds with regards to tonality, by default- overwhelming & by majority ratio if taking into account all elements & considerations when assessing a loudspeaker's overall fidelity and characteristics. I certainly will not argue that DSP can definitely win in regards to tonality especially since applying equalization + basic phase compensation in regards to how phase affects time arrival on a frequency basis (key 2 words) - which in a nutshell is essentially what DSP aims to accomplish. However, DSP is very limited in what it can do with regards to time domain anomalies and other elemental factors such as driver material influence on transient elements, ability to control complex signal frequencies simultaneously etc. that no digital manipulation will ever be able to truly account for, because you cannot change the laws of physics nor can you predict the sea of time domain elements that occur from having what is essentially the most complex signal attempted to be reproduced aka music and especially anything that was real sound occurring in the real world, so a performance of any type that occurred regardless of whether there was anything mic'ing it or if it didn't need a computer or electronic device that was not captured outside of that domain. Etc etc - Hell, they may have even been qualified with regards to what I previously mentioned, but that still does not change human perception in regards to how it correlates what it hears initially & for relatively a limited length of time, which is almost entirely tonality and basic phase anomalies that specifically are attributed to frequency time arrival- specifically the mind identifying that the same frequencies being overlapped by multiple drivers/sources are relatively close in time arrival or if they are not close in time arrival to ones ears. DSP does a great job of correcting for what I just mentioned, especially in cases of like 3+ way speakers that might otherwise need complex crossovers in order to achieve coherent sounding time arrival of crossover overlapping frequencies + the obvious basic eq'ing of dips or peaks in individual driver response. However, this does not account for what digital domain does to the original signal itself that may or may not have already been processed either digitally or by simply passing through however many passive components that make up amps, dacs, preamps etc. since every single one of those passive components (capacitors, semiconductors, resistors of many forms, inductive elements etc all have "parasitic elements" and their own anomalies when applied with voltage and current), as a big primary example. It is never wise to from a time domain standpoint or from the basic understanding that it is nearly impossible to 100% reproduce a recorded sound to sound 100% liked what it sounded like in the real world - to then send what is a signal that is already not 100% accurate back into (or into if from an analog source) the digital domain to become even LESS accurate and coherent as an absolute perspective. Again, there is no doubt that it can and most likely will allow most driver combinations to sound good or excellent from a tonality standpoint, exclusively, though.
All due respect, I have seen shining reviews on this speaker, because they can handle a lot of power and hit some serious lows, so in the big picture if you want a loud little speaker with a ton of bass this may be for you. All the measuring in the world doesn't make anything sound good, if they sound good that's what counts.
Well, they have an uneven response and a fairly dipped out area on the vocal region. Also just above the cross over point the drivers are not in phase very well. Those are audible issues. Plus the sensitivity is so low that it will be a problem for most people. Those are the facts.
This is such a newbie thing to do. I knew guys wanted to take their car audio drivers and make home speakers with them with no regard to the driver's specs, just a simplistic notion of 'woofer/mid/tweeter' in a box.
Although I agree with you on this one. I would suggest to the owner of these speakers... If they like to keep them. I have dealt with odd ball stuff like this. Put a high output low cost Crown amp. That will push a lot of power, low cost... not sounding very good but audible. Just a though
A lot easier / relatively cheaper to buy as much power as you could possibly need these days, but sooner or later the drivers will run out of clean excursion and/or thermal compression - if not first delaminating the voice coils. This could be considered a learning experience for the designer, but probably should never have made a commercial product.
PE released the 5" & 7" at a price point and they've been on sale almost continuously since. Toid on YT also did a DIY design with the 5" version, but used two drivers per cabinet, passive radiators, and a non-PE. superior, dome tweeter. Cool, but limited.
The issue at ~3KHz with the tweeter is mainly a diffraction issue caused by the sharp edges of the sides/top all being equidistant to the tweeter, crossover slope can't really help with that. (It's also why the dip smooths out in the Horizontal axis measurements and gets worse with the grill.)
The woofers are great, they were designed as an extended-range subwoofer. I have seen good reviews on them when used as subs. Maybe they should create a new line with the same great motor structure but lower the moving mass. That way, they can give up some bass but increase sensitivity so that it can be used as a woofer in a three-way.
I unintentionally recall speaker efficiency I've owned at 1 time or another. My lowest were Apogee ribbons with 80 or was it 82'db / @ 1'watt/ @ 1'meter. I never thought anyone would bother, or just give up, if mid 70's dB @ 1'watt /@ 1'meter was what they got. I'd assume sounds like the sudden suprise of a loud honk from a baritone sax you feel in your chest, & the lively snap of a sudden harder hit snare drum would be seriously curtailed, & automatically thought they'd no detailed hight treble with that massive tweeter's dome. My only question about the whole design & result would be: Why? A shameful quick cash grab before their news spread?
I sure hope GR comes out with a 3 way kit that has an 8" or 10" woofer. The 6" mid-woofers don;t have enough bass for me. WOAH - I have to take this back. GR has recently added the Old School series kit 3-way with 12" woofer. Nice.
I'm building a desktop monitor with these drivers specifically to dig deep. I'm super excited about it because I'll be making some tweaks that address several of the concerns. 1) It'll be a 3-way with a dedicated mid to handle the.....mids. I haven't measured it yet, but I intend to roll off the woofer around ~150 Hz or so with a 1st order to blend into the mid. 2) I am well aware of the low sensitivity and that's something I'm willing to accept per Hofmann's Law. I'll take depth and small enclosure over sensitivity in this case. They're intended to be a small desktop speaker for something like a home office application and will not need to go super loud. I really wish I could wire them to be 4 ohms though instead of 2 or 8 (dual voice coils at 4 ohms).
When he says he can’t fix a particular speaker what he means is he can’t get the sound signature to get what he wants for a certain price point or it will cost more than what the speakers are really worth. That doesn’t mean the speakers are crap. it doesn’t mean that the speakers, sound bad. It just means the speakers don’t meet. Danny’s liking when it comes to the sound signature and everybody watches his videos knows he is a little bit of a snob when it comes to the materials and names of parts used spend a hell of a lot of money and I mean a serious lot of money and get a very small change in the sound signature so when Danny says he cannot fix something, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is completely broken from the get go
Well, that is kind of true. I do have high standards that to some might seem a little snobbish. There are sometimes issues that I can't fix. What I consider an issue is a clear audible problem. Some might can live with it, but it is still a problem. A new video launches tomorrow covering a vintage JBL that has a LOT of woofer break up. I can't notch it out. It is a problem and it is audible. Watch the video to see where it goes. On the contrary though, most of the upgrades that I offer requires spending only a little bit of money to get significant improvements, and most of our customers consider them bargains.
@@dannyrichie9743 I completely agree with you Danny I think it’s disgusting that speaker brands play some self in a price bracket that smells of quality yet a lot of the time they use substandard off the shelf parts but they still charge you for the extra and I think in today’s times 2024, you’ve got to really be not caring and don’t give a damn as a manufacturer to produce a really crap sounding speaker because technology is got to the point where a very good product can be made. It can be tuned to sound very good. There are very good parts available on the market at sensible prices considering manufacturers would be buying in bulk they would get a better deal on the price of the parts yeah they still managed to come in short a lot of the time but at the end of the day hi-fi products are just the same as any other product. A manufacturer will have an entry point item a midpriced item and a top price item and the only way they can get around charging what they do is by overcharging for the top end charging about correct for the bottom end and then basically picking a price out there for the midpriced item but not really doing any extra with the internals compared to the base spec item and to be honest, I think a lot of times speakers are like fashion jewellery and people buy it on its looks rather than on its sound and at the end of the day it is all about the sound which is where I agree 100% with your philosophy but sadly people like magpies you know the black-and-white birds that like shiny thingsthey tend to go for the bling and the sales crap and forget about how it sounds and then try to get it to sound good after they brought it. You wouldn’t do that with any other product.
Wow interesting, RAP music mini monitor ? 😂 Would quality crossover parts made with beefy gauge wire and high voltage caps would lower the sensitivity even more ? Wonder why Dayton went in such direction? When driven by digital power amp with 400watts per channel it would match the output of 89dB monitor played with 50W amp ... kind of crazy little speaker , and sooo expensive at same time demanding very very powerful amp that will add even more to the cost .
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
I sent in an inexpensive pair of B&W bookshelf speakers and Danny said he couldn’t do anything to fix them. I was disappointed but appreciated Danny’s integrity.
which B&W model is it?
@@randycochones5965 DM303. 20 years old.
B&W is hit and miss these days, I’m not really surprised, sorry to say that.
How about you share the model #...tks! 😊
@@IronMan-tx6mt DM303
Appreciate your honesty 👍🏻
Man I was seriously going to purchase these . I'm glad I saw this video .
Other reviews are good. He can't be trusted and he makes the worst measured speakers by Audio Science review. Don't let him dissuade you.
You need to stop the bull. He just states this isn't something he can change for the better without basically making a new speaker. If you like the sound and how it is that's good for you. From an improvement pov this was a dead end. If you think the measurement is wrong tell people about the other findings.
@@MrMallensr One thing about Danny is he did NOT remove your negative opinion of him from the comments. That is, what I feel, a good sign of a strong online character these days. He bashes some speakers and when someone bashes him he doesn't try to control or manipulate the conversation. And he easily could remove any comment.
@@MrMallensr nah, trash in a fancy box.
I liked this one, I am learning so much from your explinations. Thank you! This one of my best subscribtions on RUclips. Short and sweet is also very good!
The published sensitivity is 78.5dB. The Epique woofers are fine for what they are intended for. Hoffman's iron law in play. You can go small, and low, but you sacrifice sensitivity. People need to pick their compromises.
I disagree with "no output capability". The published max SPL is 102dB, and if you are using these nearfield or in a small room, that would possibly be enough. The issue is the amplification you need to get there.
Watts are fairly cheap these days....power is readily available to drive these speakers if you need more SPL. 1 watt is just a standard for measurement purposes.
@@dmark2639agreed
You can get some good deals on a TPA3255 based amplifier that would take these to either excursion or the thermal limit for a couple of hundred dollars
@@dmark2639
You're right, but compression would obscure bass tone and detail, and just be a lossy overlay atop everything.
Once it's experienced, it's quite easy to hear the onset of that type of compression.
@@FOH3663what compression? These have a lot of xmax an liniarity for the woofer. Have you seen how that woofer is built?
@@JoyRaptor
It requires 10x the power than even normal moderately inefficient loudspeakers.
Motor needs that size because this design requires a lot of power, ... because of the design criteria of chasing extension in a small box.
Compression is a by-product that'll overlay everything that driver's producing (w/3khz xover, that's essentially everything).
It's just lossy.
Physics, Hoffman's Iron Law
- Small box
- Extension
- Sensitivity
Pick two, forsake the other.
The 180° opposite example is Infinite Baffle subs. My quad 18" ceiling mounted manifold IB is incredibly efficient at the bottom octaves. With the mammoth attic backspace, the Fi 18" drivers only need about 225w apiece to hit full stroke ~30mm!
Back to the Dayton, appearance is an absolute grand slam. You're right, those drivers are badass! The entire loudspeaker looks badass. Those surrounds vs overall size, nice.
Seems like a good candidate for an active conversion.
Knowing what to do is as important as knowing what Not to do or when not to do. Good learning experience.
I don't know if it's something you care to address, but if you could get a lighter backdrop and maybe a white table cloth it would make it easier to see what you're showing. I appreciate the videos and info you share. Thanks Danny!
Check out some of our newer videos.
LOVE THE VISUAL GRAPHICS!
Danny, put some light 🕯️ on the speaker next time. It's soo dark there, the speaker is almost invisible.
The woofer is a 4ohm + 4ohm dual voice coil mini extended range sub. The tweeter is 4ohm flagship. The woofer is 10db less sensitive then the tweeter without a crossover. I like dayton, but im not sure why they made these.
Agreed. Poor driver selection. They don't complement each other very well.
10DB says it all
You could use 4 of them in a mmmmt in voicecoil in serie and woofers in parallel for a 2 ohm load. The speaker sensitivity is 82 db and the tweeter is 88 db so its not that bad as people think i guess.
@@roygriend5143 not many amps will work in a 2 ohm load
@@pauldavies6037 still i think it a good woofer. I don't have knowledge about crossovers but they have made a very good speaker so i dont understand why people talk about rings and bells who aren't important. I mean if you want a bookshelf that goes as loud as a tower then these are very good, there are just some trade offs ofcourse ( high cone mass )
I saw these at axpona and bought them as soon as I got home. I run the with carver pro audio bridged amps and the sing. They are what they are. They are inexpensive party speakers.
You could get vintage Infinity's or Cerwin-Vega's that are 20 dB more sensitive.
@@1mctous minus the low frequency extension plus much larger volume. If you consider efficiency, cabinet size and bass extension, you can pick only two.
Nice, have fun.
Carver high power amps ... very cool.
One thing is for sure, they look killer.
I'd recommend sorbothane iso-pucks between them and whatever they're placed upon.
Dirt cheap and superior to anything else.
@@1mctouscerwin vegas, infinite with WAY higher distortion. I'd rather just power them right and have better sound
Why they didn’t use the dayton 4 inch coaxial instead of the strait tweeter and sub.? Sort of like the Orion design kit they have...that would work.
You have thst part number?
Despite the numerology… anyone had the chance to listen the speakers a d how did it sound?
The problem that i've seen with a lot of Dayton Audio's element, is very low sensetivity...like around 81-83 db/w .
I was really excited when I first saw the opal, even willing to hotrod it. But reviews are so negative, I need to give these a listen somewhere. A shame, they look real slick
There have definitely been discussions about the sensitivity of the Opal1 being around 79db. That would require a monster amp to run a bookshelf... they do look very nice but it feels like a next gen kabuki speaker
A direct reply from Parts Express said they are 78.5db, and they recommended the Dayton A400 amp, that is $630, to drive them.
Not really, 10watts will suffice
It is actually much lower, about 75dB average and dropping to 73dB at 55Hz. You can't just throw a bunch of power at them either, their is significant woofer compression above 96dB of output.
could you have replaced the speaker with another and got good sound?
Or remove the treble and crossover and run an active crossover and get a good mini sub
Hoffman's Iron Law strikes again!
Dan
Indeed ... forsaking output by choosing small and deep.
Has Danny ever checked into the Acsend Audio Sierra LX speakers, the newer ones? I have them and cant seem to find an issue..they sound great!
I've heard them. Look inside.
@@dannyrichie9743 thx Danny, will do. actually the ones i have are the Sierra LX , not the v2 version, but prob same deal and will check out the inners
I wonder if removing the passive radiators and sealing the back of the box would help with the (sub)woofer's response? It would likely *reduce* the sensitivity even more but maybe you could balance the frequency response more easily.
It would knock out all of the bottom end.
Danny, I ordered what are advertised to be and stamped to be WBT connectors for a pair that were broken off of an amp I bought. Steel nuts!! I cannot source replacement nuts i metric or SAE sizes. They appear to be about 1/4" with a fine thread. Recommendations? Living in the country is nice but shopping opportunities are very limited.
I wonder whats going on there at that dipped area. According to the spec for the driver its perfectly flat all the way to 2k.
But the stated sensitivity is 83.3 dB 😲
However over 14mm excursion and 200W power handling.
Strange little driver for sure
That is an area where there is baffle step loss.
FRA/ZMA is not the same when you mount a driver into an enclosure.
Danny should enter the PE speaker design contest this summer, show 'em how to do it. A jury of his peers.
Well, that wouldn't be fair....
I’d be willing to smooth out the response curve by pulling down the sensitivity. I’ll just need a 1000 watt amplifier.
Every speaker can do with a sheet of NoRez and Tube Connectors.
Dan The Man Can you put together this kit for the Opals?
Sure, tell that to my lead sheet lined, steel rods tensioned, machined bronze reinforced composite/mdf/birch ply monstrosity.
you made a great point about the trade-off of applying power to overcome low efficiency ... at the cost of losing dynamic range.
is not dynamic range just howe loud it can play? then ytou have dynamic range, just need power to get the highest peaks of power
@@sudd3660yes I am curious about why and how it's the case that higher sensitivity speakers sound more dynamic, because I accept that they do, but I just don't know why a low efficiency speaker couldn't sound the same just with scaled up output power.
Any takers for a scientific description? Could be that low sensitivity speakers simply aren't doing much of anything until a certain threshold of power overcomes their impedance and drivers moving mass, such that on a linear scale they would trend more towards the "all or nothing" side of power input vs SPL output, whereas efficient speakers trend toward the linear side, where output matches input even at lower power levels - not just absolute power levels, but RELATIVE power levels. So they're just more true to the source in that they can respond linearly to .1w and 10w, whereas the less efficient speaker does not equally respond to 1w as it does 100w... Same ratio, but different relative outputs. That's a theory.
Lower sensitivity helps when the woofer is smaller. Mine are 6 inch and are pretty flat to 40htz, but only 81 dB sensitivity. Pump 100 watts through them, and the bass is fast, tight & deep without being overpowering. That is my experience.
@@jaycoleman8062 why do you say it "helps"? It's not the lower sensitivity itself that helps, but rather if you want more bass extension naturally (i.e. without EQ) then it is a necessary side effect that simply goes with a crossover (and/or driver) design that lowers sensitivity at higher frequencies.
Drivers do not have one sensitivity measurement across their frequency range, the stated sensitivity is typically at 1khz or averaged over a limited frequency range. Low bass is ALWAYS less efficient and would measure as a lower sensitivity than higher frequencies in woofers, to a point. So if your woofer with no crossover is 93db sensitive at 200hz, it may be 89db at 80hz, 84db at 60, 78 at 50, and 71db at 40hz, for example. In order to design a speaker that's only -3db at 50hz and -10 at 40hz, you cannot boost those lows, you can only cut the higher frequencies, so your x-over would pull down the sensitivity over 200hz by 12db, resulting in a sensitivity rating of 81db in this example.
This isn't a benefit or "help" to be lower sensitivity, it's just physics and the fact that if you want usable bass extension in a small speaker to 40 or 50hz, your crossover HAS to pull down the higher frequencies to bring it down to the natural (maximum) sensitivity level of the low bass frequency you're targeting.
You're throwing away free efficiency of the driver higher up, as a necessary evil, to get that extension.
This is why active crossovers and EQ is superior, you don't have to throw away any efficiency passively, you can merely boost the lows to get the same the result, but maintain the higher inherent efficiency of the driver higher up. The amp will end up only needing to produce a very small amount of current where the driver is very efficient, and perhaps 8x the power at 40hz to get you that extension. That part is true whether active or passive, but without a passive crossover you'd require less power higher up to produce the same SPL, and get the sonic benefits of the higher sensitivity and lack of passive attenuation.
A 15" pro driver can be around 100db sensitive... But not at 30-50hz. Even a very sensitive large pro woofer, if it's passively crossed and designed to play down to 30hz at -3db, is going to have a final sensitivity rating WAY under it's marketed 100db, down in the 80s like a bookshelf would be. It's just the nature of low bass. But I'd prefer to use EQ and active crossovers to boost the low bass, and not waste any energy but maintain the high sensitivity (it's natural/inherent sensitivity) of the driver sans passive crossover attenuation.
it is not easy to mount normal terminals without using a nut that can withstand being tightened. copper is too soft. the best thing is to solder the wire directly onto the banana plug or rust-free nut that is gold plated, so the signal goes through the gold coating
Brass is a more realistic option than copper and still worlds better than steel
The dip at 3.2k looks to be diffraction related. I'm guessing that tweeter just doesn't wanna play nice in a box without heavy roundovers at the front baffle. That said: I'll bet these speakers will sound best on an actual shelf (very close to a wall) with ZERO toe in. AKA: the ideal casual listening speaker.
In Europe these go for 900 Euros, that's pretty close to $900!! Yes they look nice, but I get the impression these where designed by a kid at school... let's get some nice looking expensive drivers, stick 'em in a box and hope they sound good. The measured response alone would indicate they don't. What are these guys thinking....?
They think ppl buy with their eyes^^.
Matt Philips is the designer. Erin from Erin's Audio Corner posted an email from him in the comments section of his recent video about the design concept.
@@spoiler9112 I watched Erin's review a while back. Danny's measurements are pretty close to Erin's. Matt explains the concept in the email however, Dayton make some really good drivers, why choose these drivers, come up with this design and then decide this is a flagship product? Makes no sense to me.
It's the surrounds, look at those amazing, badass surrounds, ... they gotta sound good.
What about reverse polarity of tweeter. And reduce passive mass.
A polarity flip is not going to help. The woofers are not bad for ranges below 300Hz, and if four of them were used in series/parallel to get the output levels up. Useful drivers, just not in this configuration.
@@dannyrichie9743 i ment to fix the xover marriage between the woofer and tweeter dip.
@@dannyrichie9743 i agree its a mismatch in level.
@@dannyrichie9743would love to see you show what youbwould consider an optimal design with these. I was looking at thise in series /parallel with a plainer mod amd tiny amt forbthe top end. Crossed over around 700 and 8k
@@JoyRaptor I'd keep those woofers playing in a range below 200Hz.
What is this about, the hole arising from drivers not being in phase? The lower driver rolls off way too soon and even if you add the drivers as if they were one hundred percent exactly in phase there would still be a hole. And what is wrong with having the drivers 90 degrees out of phase at crossover? This is what makes the power response falt(if the one axis is) and also makes the summed phase linear. What is this all about?.
In general, all of this is the result of a poorly designed crossover. A well designed crossover would correct all of that.
That speaker just came out, I have used the tweeter before and I was interested in the opique woofer because of the x max it reminded me of a inexpensive purfi. I would double up the woofers for better spl if I was going to use 2 woofers per speaker. How do you like the tweeter? It looks like it rolled off .
I use the rs28 tweeter in a lot of projects. To my earn I actually liked season tweeter better. Doubling up woofer for sensitiveity I think is the way to go here.
My plan is to have 2 of the 7" versions, and a done rs52mm that can go down to 700hz and a nd20 or ribbon Super tweeter starting at 4k the cheap nd20 and rs52 are better then making one tweeter go so low
Is this a cheap Speaker and has a nice Cabinet? You can use the cabinet with new Driver and crossover
Not really, the cabinet is designed for that woofer, so good luck trying to find another woofer to fit the same hole, Passive Radiators, and airspace requirements. Then changing the tweeter won't help either as the dip at 3KHz is a diffraction issue caused by the top/side edges all being the same distance from the tweeter.
Interesting to see this (Opal 1) and a speaker like the Golden Ear bookshelf that are so similar in size and design approach, but are so different in their performance that, along with price point, is enough to flip the "no go button". Thumbs up for another good video Danny. And...... What is that speaker over your right shoulder? It look like a GR design with an offset tweeter.
News on that one is coming soon. Spooler, it is incredible.
I wonder what the measurement would be playing with the passive radiators.
There was a lot of hype about this at Axpona but I knew better. It’s disappointing because I’ve done a ton of business with pe/Dayton and I really like them. The designer has never designed a speaker before as far as I know. Not sure what they were thinking.
"To boldly go where no one has gone before." Those are sometimes the thoughts of a first time designer who is not hampered by previous experience.
@@hugobloemers4425Hundo pee pee
You don't get a clean spectral decay anywhere close to that if you don't know what you're doing. He said they went for bass, that's the prob.
There is a good explanation of how the Opal 1 came to be in the pinned comment on Erin's Audio Corner video of the Opal 1.
Probably meant to be a near-field desk monitor, where you don't need a ton of output. Also, wattage is fairly cheap today...you could easily find an amp with plenty of power without breaking the bank. Sure, it has other issues, but it's supposed to be a budget speaker, not high-end.
I love these types of videos at least you tried love the look but I'm a mid bass midrange guy with lower treble something like you wold get in the 60s 70s
I guess they are trying to latch on the the Buchardt/Amphion train with these, but what were they thinking?
Cud be. Maybe problem is the sub driver they used.
@@jondonnelly3 not very subtle
Need more HDR video. Can barely see the speaker.
What about replacing the woofer? Would that fix the problem?
Nope. Looks like both drivers have low sensitivity. I would just recomment ppl buying at tweeter that plays lower into 800-1400Hz and use an L pad to bring the tweeter level down and match the impedance of the old tweeter if one wants to use the stock filter. L pad online calculators are easy to use. Adjusting the 2 resistors can give better phase rotation even with the stock filter so the dip would be completely gone. Dayton have several awesome tweeters for cheap that sound excellent. One just have to except the fact that is doesnt play very loud without a ton of power. But it will play loud enough for nearfield use. Atleast this way you would have a good sounding speaker that doesnt need a sub. What killed this speaker is the dip at 3kHz which is in the middle of female vocal range, and voices will sound weird and too laid back in the soundstage.
Hi Danny, your fan, still holding on to my xls encore. I'm wondering is it possible for you to make a LGK 2.1 with a stronger bass? That is in the range of 58-60 Hz? And the next question is, why would a person buy the Bravo when they have the xls encore?
Question #1 already in the works. Question #2, because they want it in a smaller package.
interesting! But what speaker is the one on the left?
Yes, what speaker is that?
Oh that is something new. The vocal range and imaging is among the best speakers in the world. It is over the top good. You'll hear more on it soon.
fantastic! looking forward to it. thx for the Video
@@dannyrichie9743 Thanks for the scoop!
Agreed. Customer’s won’t be made happy with modifications to this one. Some things cannot be made to shine.
Cheers, Thank you for the video man.
I was going to grab these. Ill look elsewhere now.
Theres an expanded picture of the woofer on their website
i would make the speaker with 3 woofers and sealed box, probably better woofers and tweeters. then require dsp to get the bass up.
then you can have sensitivity and bass. even separate connectors for the bass for bi amping.
The tweeters might be the only drivers that can be salvaged for another build
@@charlesngugi777 the woofers can be reused, but for bass only, I would pick a different driver altogether for the mid crossing between the woofers and tweeter.
That's too bad. They are nice looking speakers.
35Hz is way too low though. I think my Cambridge Audio S30s on my pc system are tuned around 55, and that's pretty low for a 4" woofer. I've got a cheap 8" Martin Logan sub paired with them, so it's not an issue.
I was disappointed with the JBL Studio 530 examination that you did. The speaker measured pretty well and you kind of left it at that because you said it was a $300 pair of speakers, so not worth the time or money. The $300 dollars was a special sale price, where regular price was always $600, which then, I think you may have gone further with this speaker and given us some upgrades and possibly adjustment fixes.
The biggest problem with that one was that there was no room inside to put any real parts. It was also really hard to disassemble.
Viewing that tweeter and it's FR plot - it seems to be literally SCREAMING for a waveguide. That would be necessary for it to be able to play down low enough to meet that woofer's response slightly below ~2 kHz. That and lightening the weight on both the PRs (to increase their overall F3) would probably transform that into something that's very listenable...IMHO, that is.....
Would the spectral decay get worse with more power, such as enough power to play at 85 dB?
Yes, decay rates get longer the louder they are played.
@@dannyrichie9743 Thanks.
I actually prefer low sensiivity speakers pushed with tons of watts...intresing.
It is a huge compromise when you have a small woofer covering midrange and at the same time is playing its guts out to try to play ow bass.
Actually this is what people need to see, not everything can be tuned or just have a little magic dust applied and become a great speaker. Some designs simply do not work as well as others and that is just a fact of engineering.
Interesting that they seem to cross so high - Dayton have tweeters that can go lower than that. I quite like the concept but I would do it active and not care so much about the poor efficiency of those drivers.
You can fix that with a 4 channel DSP and a high powered amp on the woofer. You would need to bypass that crossover. Then it would probably not have a great midrange.
Yeah I wouldn’t be interested in this one. I would much rather have a regular bookshelf speaker with a subwoofer and a high pass filter.
I wonder what this man can do with the Heco Aurora 300 and what it would cost
Send one in.
@@dannyrichie9743 The costs are too high to send this to you, I live in Belgium
These speakers are rated at 200W, so they would pair well with Topping B200.
those amps are not much power for the money, if you buy two of those you get 2x200 watt only, note more if you drop to 4hm either.
i bought my NAD c298 for that money, you get 185w 8ohm(275 clipping power) and 360 4 ohm, and so on, 1100watt max.
no chance two Topping does that.
@sudd3660 It's not just about power. But clean power for me. The B200 is a lot cleaner, (check Audio Science Review), than the C298 and it's class AB vs Class D of the C298. Also I don't know how much you paid but the current price of the C298 is double that of 2 B200's at 2200€. For that kind of money you can buy 4 B200''s and use 2 for each speaker, if the speaker has bi-amping capability of course, and have 400W per channel.
Sad I have many low cost Dayton speakers that are not bad. Seems money doesn't always buy better sound. I love passive radiator designs,not many out there,a shame they dropped the ball here.
You can’t put a shine on a sneaker. Buy a well-built speaker that has a smooth sonic range. Make sure you can listen to it at home and return it if you don’t like the sound.
Spectral decay, "there is no stored energy there", well that's because there is no energy *period*
@alrio8102 think you missed the joke. but seriously speaking, you might be right, PRs often help with bass port resonances and waterfall performance.
That woofer drive measures very clean in waterfalls in independent tests.
Its a low sensitiveity drive. Toid used 2 to up the sensitiveity
It does state Sensitivity: 78.5 dB SPL on the site. That's the lowest I've seen.
3255 based monoblock should work an ab type 30 watt amp ,will struggle
Excellent show but more light on the subject ( speaker), would be fantastic. Cheers !
No money for that, power is expensive
Drivers are not out of phase. There’s a dip in the tweeters response on axis on the baffle.
Just above the crossover point the drivers are not in phase very well.
Actually no. Sum of the drivers are 3dB higher than the tweeter dip level, even though the woofer is 7dB lower in level. They sum pretty much in phase in this region. It’s the tweeter that has an on axis dip on the baffle. It Matters because it needs to be considered for the power response of the speaker. This is not fixable in the crossover. It’s a geometric issue.
@@martinenstrom8206 If you check out the vertical off axis in each direction (up and down) you can see and watch the phase rotation. They are not out of phase, but not completely in phase either.
The tweeters response is also easily fixed with the crossover.
That speaker is only good in the cabinet as I see, long throw woofers tends to be very colored, this speaker to sound good need a polypropylene midrange 5 inches to cover from 200-5khz so a 3 way design, that woofer can't be used on a 2 way design
Maybe replace the tweeter with an LGK driver?
You'd have to series/parallel four of them to match the sensitivity of the LGK 2.0 driver, but it could be made to work.
Not without redesigning the cabinet/speaker/crossover altogether. The LGK needs a separate airspace, and you will ideally need 2 woofers in parallel to better match the sensitivity of the LGK.
Looks matter a lot to the average buyer. If they look like they will sound good and they look like they will make a lot of bass then people will buy them. These are not audiophile speakers. But so many self professed audiophiles have no clue about the realities and compromises inherent in speaker design. They also are just as susceptible as the average guy to get caught up in the wow factor of bass extension from a small design. But there's always a compromise. Many a respected company's very expensive two way "book shelf" speakers don't go much below 45 HZ for a reason.
Yes - nothing can make up for a low sensitivity driver. And it is often the case that when the driver is trying for a lower Fs, that they make the cone heavier, and then bump up the size of the magnet. Which can do something - but there is also no substitute for low(er) Mms.
Bigger cabinet wouldnt hurt.
@@davidstevens7809 Maybe - but not by much, and that's a lotta' work.
@@NeilBlanchard oh. I agree with danny
.theres a mismatch of drivers for sure
@@davidstevens7809 Right - the woofer is almost always the lowest sensitivity driver used in a given speaker, and the other driver(s) have to have their output lowers to bring it into balance.
That frequency response looks about as level as Charles Manson.
If you want a flat response. That drop around 3 k is there because our ears are about 6 to 10 db more sensitive there so the drop counteract this.
I use equalizers to match my ears as close as possible. So I drop frequencies that my ears pickup and boost the ones my ears suck at.
How were they when you actually listened to them? First impression? And after some time of auditioning? What type of music did you sample during your listening session?
We played one of them here in the shop. They were dull and lifeless. They were not worth listening to.
@@dannyrichie9743 Wow. I've owned a set for a few months, and that has not been my experience at all. Except when I tried them off certain tube amps or a class D. Setup correctly with a good amp, they are absolutely dazzling. IMHO.
@@andrewweber495 They are one of those speakers that look good from afar, but are far from good.
@@dannyrichie9743 They caused me to sell my Def Tech D11s and Golden Ear Aon 3s. Opal is simply better. Not only more refined, but more complete, and more engaging. To me at least, but audio is subjective, so I respect your view.
Danny could you design a DIY book shelf with a small servo woofer and get good results?
I could but it would be expensive. That's two servo amps and custom servo woofers plus everything else, and all of those woofers need their own air space.... The results will be far better and it will be a lot cheaper to add a single 12" servo sub to a pair of X-LS Encores.
I diy and soldier the wires on my systems , use a sub! My observation cheat the customer in subtle cheap parts and flutter box bass
It does make me wonder why all these speaker manufacturers don't follow your methods, it's probably because they are made at a price point I suppose, another excellent video 👍
Know you truncate your FR sweeps at 200Hz, but do with you had shown less than 200Hz on this one.
These will play fairly low.
Erin's Audio Corner has measurements you can see for what's below 200Hz, they are tuned low when placed near the front wall.
@@hoth2112 I has forgotten about that. Thanks.
Your amp would have to be in 4WD to pull out of that hole. What a disappointment. I was looking closely at these.
Hey everybody! Look to Danny's left. Do I spy an LGK 2.0 sharing a cabinet with an M-165 woofer? A new speaker in the works?!?
It is actually in a box with an M-130. It has a second LGK driver on the rear. It sounds incredible. I'll shoot a video on it soon.
@@dannyrichie9743 Sweet!!!
Sweet!
Sounds like these are made for those that also like Beats headphones. Meh. Thx Danny !
Pretty strange design and the measured performance is about what I expected it would be. So many compromises overall when you lean the design so heavily towards one goal.
I'm sure it could sound goood with an absolute ton of power in the right room but its just such a strange direction to go for Dayton. A three way tower with this woofer and tweeter would make more sense and personally I'd rather see PE stick with kits at least first and foremost.
This is reason passive networks should not be used. An active 4th order bi- amped system would cure most of these issues in short order!
You're not saying as much useful and absolute truth as you think you are and have accepted as true.
Don't make an excuse for what is simply a matter of terrible decisions made for driver selection.
Anyone who opts for low sensitivity drivers whether in regards to more low end capabilities or not doesn't have a clue about what truly makes a speaker sound coherent or dynamic or even truly low distortion playback.
The best sounding speakers in the world aside from panel electrostatic speakers are all truly great because they understand that the less a driver has to physically move and use excursion, the lower distortion the presentation will be and the more dynamics that will be rendered correctly which is ultimately what makes something sound REAL. Only subwoofers need high excursion for simple output energy required to move those frequencies in the same level manner of high frequency signals. Physics doesn't bend.
Adding DSP has its many tradeoffs as well that basically involve kissing macro detail goodbye for an "even response."
Like it or not including feelings about his company left behind from his legacy, Paul W Klipsch understood the bigger picture and knew damn well that perfectly even frequency response was not to be number one or even number 2 on the list of designing & judging truly realistic sound.
It's of course extremely important but not as much as time domain factors as well as truly low distortion in the midband, at least not on its own but as a combined effort with those other absolutes.
@HiFiWright
Klipsch horns are not anywhere in the equation! Not only are they not accurate in frequency response, but they are missing almost 3khz of high frequency response. I guess that may be what is considered a live presentation by a small minority. DSP removes detail?' That is pure USDA choice, Bull Manure!
Remove all those resistors, inductors & capacitors out of the signal path. Add a 4th order active filter. Now you have the ability to crossover in phase several octaves above and below the crossover point (something a passive network can never achieve). Plus, you can control the output of each driver with its own amplifier instead of a handful of resistors. Now, this speaker could have been designed better, with no argument in that regard. I am simply stating that part of the problem with efficiency, phase issues, and impedance is because of the passive networks used.
Since frequencies have size. Bigger drivers will put out longer frequencies.
So tweeters and woofers do not disperse sound in the same manner.
What we experience is that sound moves at the same speed, regardless of how long or length the frequency is at the time of arrival at our ears. Tweeters present diffraction problems on the face of the baffle. Woofer problems are just the opposite. They wrap frequencies around the baffle when the frequency is larger than the baffle. So, in that regard, they are not the same.
These audio systems are basicly illusions. Miles Davis blows through a horn, not a 1.25" Dome tweeter. So, duplication of a live performance has not happened in audio. At least not in my 40 years in this hobby. But sounding " like" a live performance, some systems can almost get close.
@@HiFiWrightactive dsp took first place in the no limits midwest audiofest. And the judging panel were no slouches. I was there. Sounded real good.
@@JoyRaptorthat says very little. A: we are talking about other basic people who have no actual qualifications or most likely sufficient knowledge of electrical engineering and/or frequency/signal manipulation and essentially anything else other than being selected based on popularity or a name they have made for themselves by being audio "experts" which i
has nothing to do with true expertise, necessarily, but rather more long individuals who have more or less just heard a variety of different speakers and probably many, at that. B: However, more importantly, an audio show is going to have very little to do with sound fidelity on a micro and especially macro level but primarily based on how a speaker sounds with regards to tonality, by default- overwhelming & by majority ratio if taking into account all elements & considerations when assessing a loudspeaker's overall fidelity and characteristics.
I certainly will not argue that DSP can definitely win in regards to tonality especially since applying equalization + basic phase compensation in regards to how phase affects time arrival on a frequency basis (key 2 words) - which in a nutshell is essentially what DSP aims to accomplish.
However, DSP is very limited in what it can do with regards to time domain anomalies and other elemental factors such as driver material influence on transient elements, ability to control complex signal frequencies simultaneously etc. that no digital manipulation will ever be able to truly account for, because you cannot change the laws of physics nor can you predict the sea of time domain elements that occur from having what is essentially the most complex signal attempted to be reproduced aka music and especially anything that was real sound occurring in the real world, so a performance of any type that occurred regardless of whether there was anything mic'ing it or if it didn't need a computer or electronic device that was not captured outside of that domain. Etc etc
- Hell, they may have even been qualified with regards to what I previously mentioned, but that still does not change human perception in regards to how it correlates what it hears initially & for relatively a limited length of time, which is almost entirely tonality and basic phase anomalies that specifically are attributed to frequency time arrival- specifically the mind identifying that the same frequencies being overlapped by multiple drivers/sources are relatively close in time arrival or if they are not close in time arrival to ones ears.
DSP does a great job of correcting for what I just mentioned, especially in cases of like 3+ way speakers that might otherwise need complex crossovers in order to achieve coherent sounding time arrival of crossover overlapping frequencies + the obvious basic eq'ing of dips or peaks in individual driver response.
However, this does not account for what digital domain does to the original signal itself that may or may not have already been processed either digitally or by simply passing through however many passive components that make up amps, dacs, preamps etc. since every single one of those passive components (capacitors, semiconductors, resistors of many forms, inductive elements etc all have "parasitic elements" and their own anomalies when applied with voltage and current), as a big primary example.
It is never wise to from a time domain standpoint or from the basic understanding that it is nearly impossible to 100% reproduce a recorded sound to sound 100% liked what it sounded like in the real world - to then send what is a signal that is already not 100% accurate back into (or into if from an analog source) the digital domain to become even LESS accurate and coherent as an absolute perspective.
Again, there is no doubt that it can and most likely will allow most driver combinations to sound good or excellent from a tonality standpoint, exclusively, though.
All due respect, I have seen shining reviews on this speaker, because they can handle a lot of power and hit some serious lows, so in the big picture if you want a loud little speaker with a ton of bass this may be for you. All the measuring in the world doesn't make anything sound good, if they sound good that's what counts.
Well, they have an uneven response and a fairly dipped out area on the vocal region. Also just above the cross over point the drivers are not in phase very well. Those are audible issues. Plus the sensitivity is so low that it will be a problem for most people. Those are the facts.
Thats awfully low sensitivity plus what's the suckout about??
Baffle step loss.
This is such a newbie thing to do. I knew guys wanted to take their car audio drivers and make home speakers with them with no regard to the driver's specs, just a simplistic notion of 'woofer/mid/tweeter' in a box.
Although I agree with you on this one. I would suggest to the owner of these speakers... If they like to keep them. I have dealt with odd ball stuff like this.
Put a high output low cost Crown amp. That will push a lot of power, low cost... not sounding very good but audible.
Just a though
Emotiva might be a good option as well. 👍🏻
"not sounding very good"...
Says it all really!
A lot easier / relatively cheaper to buy as much power as you could possibly need these days, but sooner or later the drivers will run out of clean excursion and/or thermal compression - if not first delaminating the voice coils. This could be considered a learning experience for the designer, but probably should never have made a commercial product.
Diy with hypex amp!!! Sensitivity does not matter then...
One should listen to a set of speakers before looking at specs! So many "audiophiles" are just full of crap!
Specs don't tell you much, but measured responses tell a LOT.
PE released the 5" & 7" at a price point and they've been on sale almost continuously since. Toid on YT also did a DIY design with the 5" version, but used two drivers per cabinet, passive radiators, and a non-PE. superior, dome tweeter. Cool, but limited.
Excellent.
just saw the specs before watching this video am at 78 db i was what?!!! that thing needs a pa amplifier
looks like a third order electrical on the tweeter could help
The issue at ~3KHz with the tweeter is mainly a diffraction issue caused by the sharp edges of the sides/top all being equidistant to the tweeter, crossover slope can't really help with that. (It's also why the dip smooths out in the Horizontal axis measurements and gets worse with the grill.)
The woofers are great, they were designed as an extended-range subwoofer. I have seen good reviews on them when used as subs. Maybe they should create a new line with the same great motor structure but lower the moving mass. That way, they can give up some bass but increase sensitivity so that it can be used as a woofer in a three-way.
They are great little woofers if used for low bass, but it is a huge compromise to use them in ranges above that.
Dayton already has good midranges.
This is fine, just need to double up for sensitiveity
@@JoyRaptor There are much better solutions.
I unintentionally recall speaker efficiency I've owned at 1 time or another. My lowest were Apogee ribbons with 80 or was it 82'db / @ 1'watt/ @ 1'meter. I never thought anyone would bother, or just give up, if mid 70's dB @ 1'watt /@ 1'meter was what they got. I'd assume sounds like the sudden suprise of a loud honk from a baritone sax you feel in your chest, & the lively snap of a sudden harder hit snare drum would be seriously curtailed, & automatically thought they'd no detailed hight treble with that massive tweeter's dome. My only question about the whole design & result would be: Why? A shameful quick cash grab before their news spread?
I sure hope GR comes out with a 3 way kit that has an 8" or 10" woofer. The 6" mid-woofers don;t have enough bass for me. WOAH - I have to take this back. GR has recently added the Old School series kit 3-way with 12" woofer. Nice.
How about one with a 12" woofer?
So basically everything Erin already said:
ruclips.net/video/BDv222LHNM0/видео.htmlsi=n2GPcrFqWy_DMKH_
I'm building a desktop monitor with these drivers specifically to dig deep. I'm super excited about it because I'll be making some tweaks that address several of the concerns.
1) It'll be a 3-way with a dedicated mid to handle the.....mids. I haven't measured it yet, but I intend to roll off the woofer around ~150 Hz or so with a 1st order to blend into the mid.
2) I am well aware of the low sensitivity and that's something I'm willing to accept per Hofmann's Law. I'll take depth and small enclosure over sensitivity in this case. They're intended to be a small desktop speaker for something like a home office application and will not need to go super loud. I really wish I could wire them to be 4 ohms though instead of 2 or 8 (dual voice coils at 4 ohms).
I took the name and removed the "O" and use them as is. Call them PAL ..
I own a pair absolutely no volume it doesn’t play loud at all, feels solid and heavy nice looking but terrible as for sensitivity
For some people sensitivity is enough.
When he says he can’t fix a particular speaker what he means is he can’t get the sound signature to get what he wants for a certain price point or it will cost more than what the speakers are really worth. That doesn’t mean the speakers are crap. it doesn’t mean that the speakers, sound bad. It just means the speakers don’t meet.
Danny’s liking when it comes to the sound signature and everybody watches his videos knows he is a little bit of a snob when it comes to the materials and names of parts used spend a hell of a lot of money and I mean a serious lot of money and get a very small change in the sound signature so when Danny says he cannot fix something, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is completely broken from the get go
Well, that is kind of true. I do have high standards that to some might seem a little snobbish.
There are sometimes issues that I can't fix. What I consider an issue is a clear audible problem. Some might can live with it, but it is still a problem. A new video launches tomorrow covering a vintage JBL that has a LOT of woofer break up. I can't notch it out. It is a problem and it is audible. Watch the video to see where it goes.
On the contrary though, most of the upgrades that I offer requires spending only a little bit of money to get significant improvements, and most of our customers consider them bargains.
@@dannyrichie9743 I completely agree with you Danny I think it’s disgusting that speaker brands play some self in a price bracket that smells of quality yet a lot of the time they use substandard off the shelf parts but they still charge you for the extra and I think in today’s times 2024, you’ve got to really be not caring and don’t give a damn as a manufacturer to produce a really crap sounding speaker because technology is got to the point where a very good product can be made. It can be tuned to sound very good. There are very good parts available on the market at sensible prices considering manufacturers would be buying in bulk they would get a better deal on the price of the parts yeah they still managed to come in short a lot of the time but at the end of the day hi-fi products are just the same as any other product. A manufacturer will have an entry point item a midpriced item and a top price item and the only way they can get around charging what they do is by overcharging for the top end charging about correct for the bottom end and then basically picking a price out there for the midpriced item but not really doing any extra with the internals compared to the base spec item and to be honest, I think a lot of times speakers are like fashion jewellery and people buy it on its looks rather than on its sound and at the end of the day it is all about the sound which is where I agree 100% with your philosophy but sadly people like magpies you know the black-and-white birds that like shiny thingsthey tend to go for the bling and the sales crap and forget about how it sounds and then try to get it to sound good after they brought it. You wouldn’t do that with any other product.
What happens when people who should be selling speaker parts think they can design speakers. Hire a designer such as Andrew Jones or even gr research.
Wow interesting, RAP music mini monitor ? 😂
Would quality crossover parts made with beefy gauge wire and high voltage caps would lower the sensitivity even more ?
Wonder why Dayton went in such direction?
When driven by digital power amp with 400watts per channel it would match the output of 89dB monitor played with 50W amp ... kind of crazy little speaker , and sooo expensive at same time demanding very very powerful amp that will add even more to the cost .
Beefy air core inductors will make a little difference of around 1db gain which is not worth the cost
👍