In an effort to put my money where my mouth is, instead of diverting yet another thread OT, I am starting this one inspired from a post elsewhere. We were discussing the 2397 horn with the 2441 driver and I posted the graph below which inspired this post:
The information that a frequency response graph gives us is limited. There have been many discussions around this topic with the posting of RTA curves, but I don't think the topic has really been covered. An MLS plot created by a system like CLIO with a calibrated mic gives us a bit more info, but it, like the RTA plot is really only an indication of performance. Primarily what you can get from looking at a curve like this one is an idea of a speaker's tonal quality. If you see a serious peak or dip you can infer that there may be a resonance issue or other problem, but realistically all we can tell is if the speaker will sound bright or dull, honky or more neutral... it really isn't nearly as all encompassing as so many seem to think.Originally Posted by hapy._.face
When I posted this plot comparing the JBL 2441 and the TAD 4001, I said that the differences were "subtle and quite possibly not worth the big coin if cash is tight, but the inner detail and sense of dynamics is just that much better and they are slightly smoother." Tonally the two drivers were remarkably similar. You would gather that from looking at the plot. What you can't see is the way the 4001 with it's larger magnet and beryllium diaphragm has greater resolving ability which is quite audible. It also sounds slightly smoother and less fatiguing, but these differences are much more subtle.
The bottom line is that while a frequency response plot is helpful, don't put too much importance on it. Distortion and impedance plots are also useful, but as we have said countless times our own ears are the ultimate best judges of sound quality.
Widget
Reply With Quote