|
Recent Additions
Budget Components Audacious Audio
Loudspeakers
Amplification
Digital Sources
Analog Sources
Accessories Listening / Art Dudley The Fifth Element / John Marks Music in the Round / Kal Rubinson Fine Tunes / Jonathan Scull Special Features Reference Interviews Think Pieces Historical Recording of the Month Records 2 Die 4 Music/Recordings Stephen Mejias Robert Baird Fred Kaplan Wes Phillips Audio News Past eNewsletters RMAF 2008 FSI 2008 CES 2008 RMAF 2007 CEDIA 2007 HE 2007 FSI 2007 CES 2007 China 2006 RMAF 2006 HFN 2006 CEDIA 2006 HE 2006 FSI 2006 CES 2006 Forums Galleries Vote Previous Votes Dealer Locator AV Links Audiophile Societies Contact Us Customer Service New Subscription Digital Subscription Renew Give a Gift Sub Services Recordings Backissues More . . . Phono Preamp Hi-Fi Phono Cartridge Amplifiers Stereo Speakers |
KEF R107 loudspeaker:
Sidebar: 1986 Measurements I decided to measure the 107 before doing any serious listening (something I usually do not do) so I could sort out the KUBE options and optimize the 107's response for my favorite placement. With the bass cutoff set at 18Hz (the setting I used for my auditioning), the 107 puts out energy down to 20Hz, which is as low as I can measure. In fact, bass output is so extended that the 107 can readily overload a listening room. Standing-wave resonances were excited in my room like never before, including an especially nasty one at 60Hz. The contour control cannot cope with such narrow-band peaks or dips. It certainly works as advertised, shelving the response below 160Hz, but that only lowers and raises the peaks and dips without flattening them out. What is needed, in the absence of a digital time-domain equalizer, is a half- or third-octave equalizer that can work over narrow enough bandwidths. I was hoping to try Audio Control's "Richter Scale," but it did not arrive in time to meet my copy date. The Q control does affect the prominence of the bass line, and is best adjusted for a given placement by ear (using, say, double bass pizzicato) until the proper heft and decay are achieved. Ultimately, the choice of proper Q is a matter of taste and room acoustics. In my room I preferred a Q of 0.7 for placements far removed from room boundaries and a Q of 0.5 for near-wall placements. From about 200Hz to 20kHz, the in-room response is exceptionally flat and easily meets specification. This sort of response smoothness is quite an accomplishment for a conventional speaker; only large-area electrostatics in the near field have measured better in this respect.—Dick Olsher
Article Continues: Martin Colloms 1987 »
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||

