DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96 loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96's frequency response in the farfield, and an Earthworks QTC-40 for the nearfield and spatially averaged room responses.

The Orangutan O/96 has a very high specified voltage sensitivity of 96dB/w/m. This is both unusual and means that the speaker will play very loudly with very low-powered amplifiers. My estimate of the DeVore's sensitivity was somewhat lower, at 91dB(B)/2.83V/m, though this is still usefully high. Concerned that I had mischaracterized the sensitivity, I checked my estimate by comparing the SPL produced by the O/96 with that from a BBC LS3/5a at the same drive level. The O/96 was 9dB more sensitive than the LS3/5a, which is within experimental error of the original 91dB figure (B-weighted).

As can be seen in fig.1, the O/96 has an unusually high impedance, conforming to the specified 10 ohms. At the 2.83V level used to calculate the speaker's sensitivity, the O/96 will therefore draw less than 1W from the amplifier, which will have a negative impact on the measurement. The impedance magnitude (solid trace) drops below 8 ohms only in the lower midrange and the mid-treble, reaching respective minimum values of 7.2 and 7.8 ohms. While the electrical phase angle (dotted trace) reaches extreme values in the bass, the magnitude is very high at these frequencies. Overall, the DeVore O/96 is one of the easiest speakers for an amplifier to drive that I have encountered.

Fig.1 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, electrical impedance (solid) and phase (dashed) (2 ohms/vertical div.).

The traces in fig.1 are disturbed by some discontinuities in the midrange, suggesting the presence of cabinet resonances of some kind. Listening to the cabinet walls with a stethoscope while I played the half-step–spaced toneburst track from my Editor's Choice CD (Stereophile STPH016-2), the side and rear walls were very lively between 130 and 230Hz, and some lower-level modes were audible higher in frequency. Investigating the cabinet's vibrational behavior with a simple plastic-tape accelerometer revealed very strong modes at 148 and 219Hz (fig.2), these coincident with the frequencies of two of the wrinkles in the impedance traces. These modes might have lent the speaker the richness on voices noted by AD.

Fig.2 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, cumulative spectral-decay plot calculated from output of accelerometer fastened to center of rear panel (MLS driving voltage to speaker, 7.55V; measurement bandwidth, 2kHz).

There were also peaks at these two frequencies in the output of the two ports on the rear panel when measured in the nearfield (fig.3, red trace). Though these are down in level, they do result in discontinuities in the nearfield woofer response (blue trace) and the overall low-frequency response (black trace below 300Hz). Other than that behavior, however, the ports' output peaks sharply in classic manner between 35 and 55Hz, its maximum level coinciding with the minimum-motion notch in the woofer's response at 43Hz, somewhat higher than the "mid 30s" mentioned by AD. (At this frequency, the back pressure from the port resonance holds the woofer cone still.)

Fig.3 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, anechoic response on HF axis at 50", averaged across 30° horizontal window and corrected for microphone response, with nearfield responses of woofer (blue) and port (red) and their complex sum (black), respectively plotted below 350Hz, 750Hz, 300Hz.

The black trace above 300Hz in fig.3 shows the O/96's farfield response averaged across a 30° horizontal window centered on the tweeter axis. Overall it is relatively flat, with small peaks balanced by small dips in the response. The region covered by the tweeter is very slightly less sensitive than the woofer's range; of more concern is the sharply defined peak just below 2kHz. This coincides with a wrinkle at the same frequency in the impedance graph ; this behavior might be due to a termination problem with the woofer cone and its surround at this frequency. However, this peak coincides with a lack of energy to the speaker's sides (fig.4), and so may well not result in coloration. What appears to be an off-axis "flare" between 3 and 4kHz in this graph is actually due to the on-axis suckout in this region filling in to the speaker's sides. Taking this into account, while the DeVore O/96's horizontal dispersion is narrower than usual above 1kHz, it is actually much better controlled and consistent with frequency than I was expecting from a design using a large woofer and a wide baffle.

Fig.4 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, lateral response family at 50", normalized to response on HF axis, from back to front: differences in response 90–5° off axis, reference response, differences in response 5–90° off axis.

In the vertical plane (fig.5), the optimal response is obtained just above the tweeter axis. This is sensible, given that the tweeter is just 32" from the floor when the speaker sits on its matching stand.

Fig.5 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, vertical response family at 50", normalized to response on HF axis, from back to front: differences in response 15–5° above axis, reference response, differences in response 5–10° below axis.

I visited Art Dudley to give a listen to the O/96s in his system and to measure their in-room response before bringing them back to my place for further measurements. I averaged 20 responses taken in a rectangular grid 36" wide by 18" deep, and centered on a position 36" from the floor at AD's listening position. (We have found that 36" is the height of a typical seated listener's ears; AD actually sits a little higher.) The speakers were driven by AD's Shindo Corton Charlemagne amplifiers; the result is the red trace in fig.6. The treble slopes down smoothly, if a little more than I would have liked—I found the balance in Art's room somewhat lacking in top-octave air, though the low frequencies were well extended.

Fig.6 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in AD's listening room (red); and of Audio Note AN-E/SPe HE (green).

What is fascinating about the O/96's in-room response is that it is almost identical to that of AD's reference speaker, the Audio Note AN-E/SPe HE (green trace). The Audio Notes were placed in the room corners for this measurement, with a severe toe-in; the DeVores were well away from the wall behind them but fairly close to the sidewalls. As with the Audio Notes, there is a peak between 500Hz and 2kHz, and a lack of energy between 100 and 200Hz. I suspect that, with both speakers, the latter is due to destructive interference between the direct sound from the woofer and the reflections from the walls and floor. In the case of the O/96s, these reflections would be reinforced by the fact that the distances between each woofer and the two closest room boundaries were very similar.

I was aware of the lack of lower-midrange energy when I first started listening to the DeVores in AD's room, though that receded as I continued listening. I suspect that this kind of interference is something we accommodate to. I investigated further when I got home, setting up the O/96s in my own listening room and driving them with the Devialet D-Premier integrated amplifier. The red trace in fig.7 again shows the Devore's spatially averaged response in AD's room; the blue trace shows the O/96's response in my room, measured in identical manner. Because I could place the speakers farther away from the sidewalls in my room, which is wider than AD's, their lack of energy in the lower midrange has filled in nicely. Without the boundary reinforcement in my room, the bass is slightly shelved down, though it still extends down to below 25Hz. Though there is still a bit too much energy in the upper midrange, with the solid-state amplifier the treble is considerably more extended in my room, if with the same smooth characteristic measured in AD's room.

Fig.7 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in: AD's listening room (red), JA's listening room (blue).

The O/96's step response (fig.8) indicates that both drive-units are connected in positive acoustic polarity, and the smooth integration of the decay of the tweeter step into the start of the woofer step confirms optimal crossover design. The cumulative spectral-decay plot (fig.9) reveals a generally clean decay in the treble and midrange, but with some low-level hash evident in the low treble and a prominent ridge of resonant energy coincident with the on-axis peak at 1730Hz.

Fig.8 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, step response on HF axis at 50" (5ms time window, 30kHz bandwidth).

Fig.9 DeVore Fidelity Orangutan O/96, cumulative spectral-decay plot on HF axis at 50" (0.15ms risetime).

After I'd finished measuring them, I spent a day listening to the Orangutan O/96s in my room. Even though I knew about the low-treble resonance and the lively enclosure, these problems were considerably less audible than I was expecting. Only with recordings of solo acoustic piano did they get in the way of the music by producing noticeable coloration, the piano's midrange sounding uneven, with some notes obscured. But with well-recorded rock and classical vocal recordings, the measured problems seemed to step into the background, letting me appreciate the O/96's full-range, evenly balanced sound and superb clarity. It looks as if John DeVore has accepted the inevitability of the problems caused by the O/96's physical concept and had carefully worked around them to produce a well-balanced speaker that is also drop-dead gorgeous.—John Atkinson

DeVore Fidelity
Brooklyn Navy Yard, 63 Flushing Ave., Unit 259
Brooklyn, NY 11205
(718) 855-9999

John Atkinson's picture

mrplankton2u wrote:
You apparently do like to make up the rules as you go along.

No, this has been our policy since 2005.

mrplankton2u wrote:
You will not post or upload User Content that includes personal or identifying information about another person without that person's explicit consent.

Okay, as you don't appear willing to give that consent, you will no longer be allowed to post to this website. I will ask Ariel Bitran to delete your user account.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

JohnnyR's picture

ANY excuse to delete people that don't agree with your personal outlook is the reason you are doing this Atkinson. Pathetic. You can't stand anyone criticising your precious opinons. So out they go. You are one sad person.

John Atkinson's picture

JohnnyR wrote:
You can't stand anyone criticising your precious opinons. So out they go.

Not at all. You will see that mrplankton2u's comments have not been deleted. However, he had a choice: either stop posting to the site, or, as he is, by his own admission, professionally involved in audio, add his affiliation to his comments and be allowed to present his opinions. He did neither. Instead, he argued that the rules were inappropriate and by extension didn't apply to him, leaving me with no option but to ban him. Arguing with the ref is never a winning strategy, please note.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile


JohnnyR's picture

You never liked the guy, never liked that he criticised you and your magazine, never liked that he showed you up as the buffoon you are........shall I go on?  Yeah yeah the rules and you are the "ref" Tell me just how many professionals have you banned over the years due to your "rules"?  Too many sadly, so all you are left with in your precious forums are dullards, morons, halfwits and the gullible. No wonder it's so empty in there. They all left for better places to talk about FACTS instead of magic bowls, cables, rocks and rainbow foil. So it goes. You must be proud of your "great" forum lmao.

King of the Dullards all hail the King!

Regadude's picture

Your argument about JA banning plankton, because he did not like him, is wrong. If JA banned everyone who was a nuisance and caused problems, you would have been gone a long time ago Johnny. 

All hail king troll!

pi's picture

Really don't get your arguments - there is any number of speakers (some of them commonly highly regarded), that measure much worse than this one - none of those has the excuse of being guided by the effort to make it tube friendly. For example:

Vandersteen Quatro $7,000: Significant on axis suckouts at 800Hz (very problematic) and 4000Hz, off axis response is not offsetting like it is for the Devores. In room response shows a major in room depression for the midrange and bass emphasis, which even careful placement does not remove.

Verity Sarastro $40,000: 10dB depression from 100-300Hz, uneven response above 1KHz, off axis dips at 3KHz. In room depression for the critical lower midrange/upper bas and with significant 10dB lower bass emphasis. Midrange driver of the verity is crossed over at a very high 4KHz.

MBL 101E MKII $70,500: Questionable concept (radial transmission), low impedance with significant phase roller coaster down to 3Ohm, so difficult to drive. Several resonance above 10KHz. Again, in room depression for the critical lower midrange/upper bass and with significant 10dB lower bass emphasis. 

In this context, it seem Devore HAS actually taken the effort to carefully balance the design to achieve reasonable measurement (e.g. balance off axis reponse with on-axis response), while providing a speaker that is extremely easy to drive and sufficiently compact to place in small NY style apartment.

So, JA seems spot on with his assessment.

JohnnyR's picture

The above speakers you mentioned obviously are flawed also and poorly designed regardless of them being"highly regarded" There are "reveiwers" that will give a turnip praise on some websites. Just because the OP review is about a speaker that doesn't have the same flaws , doesn't make it a $12,000 speaker nor a well designed one. We can always find something worse than what we are listening too to "compare". Doesn't make it worth buying though,

tmsorosk's picture

 Mr. A, please don't ban or delete mrplankton2u's comment's , he's the Archie Bunker of audio. Haven't had this many laughs in years. 


 Hot nobs, LOL.

Glotz's picture

I was really hoping half-way through the posts he would admit his obvious ignorance regarding the neccessity of multiple measuring points for an accurate picture of measurements.

Instead, he did turn into Archie... and showed his true self. 

I just hope he doesn't slap Edith around when he's mad. 

JohnnyR's picture

Multiple measuring points are a good way of getting an overall picture but can't turn a sows ear into a silk purse. $12,000 worth of speaker? Hardly.

 What's with the Archie Bunker reference one fo your heros?

ChrisS's picture

Mother Russia Broadcasting didn't allow you to watch "All In The Family" did they, JRusskie?

ChrisS's picture

Please check your messages, JRusskie. Siberia is calling.

ChrisS's picture

Being obnoxious and annoying = Being on topic?

tunesmith's picture

Wow! I've seen and heard the DeVore Orangutans at the past 2 Rocky Mountain shows and you are crazy if you think they are cheap. The finish is just stunning, easily among the best at the show at any price and the wood on the fronts is amazing. Sonically the DeVore room was definitely in the top three at the show both years, with all-around system prices that were much lower than the other top rooms.

John Atkinson even agrees with the manufacturers comments, and from what I heard at the show with a single 300B amp, I believe it too. The sound was huge, with amazing bass driven by 6 watts. Actually JA comments on the great bass with the same system here:

MVBC's picture

$12,000 for that? I have a bridge to sell too...

Dario's picture

A lot of interesting discussion here. The summary of the review would seem to be that this is a somewhat flawed yet surprisingly compelling loudspeaker. I read that it sounds great in spite of some shortcomings.

To those who are complaining about the price and suggesting their cost to build a similar speaker would be about 25% as much: ok. So don't buy this one and do build your own. This attitude shows a lack of business knowledge. I have no doubt somebody could build a similar speaker for less if you just account for the parts. How long did it take to get the knowledge? Where to do you do the work?

A real business needs to pay rent and utilities. And likely pay employees. And that's a retail price, which has to allow for a dealer to make some money. Saying you could make it for 25% of the retail cost is about right for a product that goes through a sales channel (rather than direct). But it's irrelevant - a company can charge whatever it wants for their products. The market decides the value.

I don't work in the industry and don't have formal training in electronics or acoustics. However I am an engineer and I like to see data. I'm also generally critical of Stereophile and other audio publications for praising the differences in equipment that can really make no significant difference (cables in general, power cables in particular). These difference all tend to disappear under measurement or controlled listening test. So what's the point?

I'm critical and skeptical of most audio equipment reviews. Speaker reviews are about the only thing I read. This review has the data, and nobody seems to be challenging it. I think it's fair to say the measurements are good enough to give an idea of how the speakers performs.

To those who are critical of the design, why don't you to listen to the speakers. Rather than sitting back and speculating about how terrible it must sound, maybe (just maybe) you'll have to ask yourself how it can sound as good as it does with that design. Or maybe your suspicions will be confirmed.

I'm impressed with how Stereophile has responded to and managed this discussion. For that you have earned an returning subscription. I'm not in the market for new speakers, but would go listen if there was a dealer near me.

Jceaves's picture

I'm always amazed at how emboldened and rude some people get on forums.

Most of us read this website or have a subscription because we want a perspective on audio products. In my case, I have low powered tube amplifiers and it really helps to read reviews on the few compatible speakers that might work with my system. It would never cross my mind to go all "freaky on yo' ass" (the understood yo', whether publisher or fellow reader), in response to any of the content in this magazine. I'm not here to argue. There are other audio forums for that.

The internet is a wonderful tool for communication, but too many people use it myopically, to vent anger and frustration. However, the individuals here who rant, spew anger, and insult others fully understand how lonely, or black and blue, they'd become if they were bold enough to behave this way face to face - because it's uncivil and extreme. To do it on the internet is just cowardly and sad.

Most of us listen to music for pleasure. It's fun and emotionally moving. That is the end game. The last thing I associate with enjoying music is enduring some bozo on a rant. I don't care how much any of you know about electronics or speaker design or anything at all. You aren't the star here. You aren't even on the playbill. I don't read Stereophile to get a look inside your caustic psyche. If you left, I'd be grateful.

I've heard the O/96's at shows and at Arizona HiFi, and I think that they are great speakers. The finish quality is amazing. I love their aesthetic. Are they worth $12k? That depends on taste, system, and listening room. The people who buy them think so. I'm glad that someone is writing about them because, I'm considering a purchase, and I live far away from a dealer. I hope that Art Dudley keeps the cheeky and fun tone to his thoughtful articles. This is all about pleasure, and he gets that.


Enter your username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.