Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk.II loudspeaker Measurements part 2

The Mk.II's lateral dispersion (not shown) was basically the same as the 1.3 Mk.I's, the speaker's high-frequency output falling off progressively to the sides of the tweeter axis in an almost textbook manner. In my experience, this measured behavior always correlates with excellent imaging precision. The vertical dispersion (not shown) was also identical to that of the Mk.I, suckouts in the crossover region developing above and below the tweeter axis. The listening window is relatively large, however, at +5, -10 degrees.

In my Santa Fe listening room, the speaker's spatially averaged response (fig.5) was superbly flat through the upper midrange and treble, though my experience has been that if a speaker's in-room output is maintained flat to too high a frequency, or even rising slightly as it is here, it will tend to sound "cool." Note that I did find the Contour's balance to be on the cool side. The lack of measured energy in the middle of the midrange is due to the classic "floor bounce" you get with a stand-mounted speaker, while the low frequencies are surprisingly extended, the 31.5Hz band being just a couple of dB down in-room from the reference level.

Fig.5 Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk.II, spatially averaged, 1/3-octave, free-field response in JA's listening room.

In the time domain, the 1.3 Mk.II's step response (fig.6) is identical to that of the earlier version, with both drive-units connected with the same (positive) acoustic polarity. Other than a slight ridge of delayed energy in the presence region, the cumulative spectral-decay plot on the tweeter axis (fig.7) was very clean.—John Atkinson

Fig.6 Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk.II, on-axis step response at 50" (5ms time window, 30kHz bandwidth).

Fig.7 Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk.II, cumulative spectral-decay plot at 50" (0.15ms risetime).

Share | |

X
Enter your Stereophile.com username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
Loading