Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bryan Mac Berntsen]

Ive been researching active speakers and have been shocked by the SPL ratings on some of this new active gear along with economical prices.  I also noticed that most brands, even the high end stuff, only give calculated specs and not measured.  Im sure anyone in sound or music biz has worked with the srm450 at one time or another.  Theyre rated @ 126db while the new Mackie HD 12" actives are rated at 132.  I understand they have more power and more efficient amps/speakers, but are they really 3x loud as theoretically calculated?  +3db=2x as loud....  Same go for subs as brought up in another review where active subs in the $1000 range are advertising calculated in 135db range.  I have a set of EV sxa180 subs that are 600w and max 126db, now EV's new line of active subs that are 700w are showing 134db.  Again, almost 4x louder.  According to the specs, one new EV livex sub with 100w more power is as loud as 4 of my EVsxa180s rated at 126db each....  These are just random examples cause Ive worked with those speakers, but same rings true for pretty much all comperable new gear.  Is there a new standard of measuring SPL or has technology advanced this far to where Active speakers are really capable of producing these SPL levels in these under $1000 price range cabs? 

[Brad Weber]

I understand they have more power and more efficient amps/speakers, but are they really 3x loud as theoretically calculated?  +3db=2x as loud....

"Loudness" is a perceived value and typically a 3dB difference is assumed to be a readily noticeable difference, however twice as loud would generally be taken to require a 10dB difference. A +6dB change might be a bit more than a 50% increase in perceived loudness.

Beyond that, there is a lot of playing with the numbers that can go into many ratings.  For example, is the maximum output the overall level, the peak at any frequency, the average over the stated frequency response, the minimum over the stated frequency response, the maximum with some specific signal or what?  So while some of the differences you note may indeed be due to improvements in technology and production, others may be the result of conservative or creative marketing.

[Bryan Mac Berntsen]

"Loudness" is a perceived value and typically a 3dB difference is assumed to be a readily noticeable difference, however twice as loud would generally be taken to require a 10dB difference. A +6dB change might be a bit more than a 50% increase in perceived loudness.

Beyond that, there is a lot of playing with the numbers that can go into many ratings.  For example, is the maximum output the overall level, the peak at any frequency, the average over the stated frequency response, the minimum over the stated frequency response, the maximum with some specific signal or what?  So while some of the differences you note may indeed be due to improvements in technology and production, others may be the result of conservative or creative marketing.

I just never understood why theres not an industry standard.  Even when measured, most use at 1 meter while some manufactures dont even bother indicating distance measured. Almost all just offer calculated SPL which means nothing in my book.  A/Bing is the best option, but especially with subs, room makes huge difference and alot of music stores arnt the best acoustic venues and arnt going to want you moving gear all over and blasting music for hours.  Too many variables.  It seems with all the big name brands investment in research and technology that theres not a standard test room size/design, standard power current, spec frequencies, meter placement ect to get apples to apples specs so at least you have an idea what your investing in.  Sorry to ramble and bitch but getting frusterated trying to read between the BS in purchasing next set of tops to replace my Mackie HD1531s that are garbage.  I learned my lesson about bloated specs and expectations on those!!!!  Ill take my old underpowered and low SPL 1530s all day over these "HD" turds!!!!

[Tim McCulloch]

There is no industry standard because it's not in the "industry" interest to make legitimate comparisons easily.

The Federal Trade Commission came up with technical standards for rating power amps back in the 1970s, and for a time you saw a lot of lower numbers... until marketing departments figured out how to "measure" performance in ways that gave their brand or model an edge over a competitor.

Also marketing departments are good a finding or creating "specifications" that don't have any significance in modern designs (like damping factor) that are honest but meaningless.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc

[John Roberts {JR}]

There is no industry standard because it's not in the "industry" interest to make legitimate comparisons easily.

The Federal Trade Commission came up with technical standards for rating power amps back in the 1970s, and for a time you saw a lot of lower numbers... until marketing departments figured out how to "measure" performance in ways that gave their brand or model an edge over a competitor.

Also marketing departments are good a finding or creating "specifications" that don't have any significance in modern designs (like damping factor) that are honest but meaningless.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc

I was in the market and business back then and recall the FTC "cleaning" up power amps specs. While there were some abuses of power statements that were almost laughable, I am generally of the opinion that consumers get the specifications they insist on... If the manufacturer refuses to give you understandable specs, just say no.

Since every time the government gets involved (to help us), there are unintended consequences, one interesting consequence of the FTC 1/3 power (worst case for Class A/B) preconditioning test, meant that amp makers had to design in more heat sink and more transformer iron than typical consumer amps really needed, just to measure well. Arguably this regulation of how specs were measured and stated cost consumers untold millions of dollars in getting more amp than they really needed for many applications. (note Class G/H conveniently shrugs off the 1/3 power testing)

On the subject of powered speaker specifications, I am pleased to finally see SPL, being used. This is so much better than how many amps the vacuum cleaner motor draws.

But as Ivan will surely share there are many ways to parse these measurements, that some marketers will use to show their product in the best possible light, perhaps stretching reality.

While an informed consumer did not save Sy Sims from bankruptcy, it is worthwhile learning how to read SPL specs to save yourself from same. If a manufacturer is unclear, intentionally or unintentionally, call them on it... If enough customers complain, they will give you what you ask for. If OTOH the customers passively acquiesce, they will get what they always get.

JR

 

[Ivan Beaver]

But as Ivan will surely share there are many ways to parse these measurements, that some marketers will use to show their product in the best possible light, perhaps stretching reality.

JR

Since you asked---------------

As usual-a complicated question is easily answered with a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer.  SPL is one of those numbers.

The "typical" consumer would assume that the rated SPL is the SPL they would get when they play music and measure it with a "typical" cheap SPL meter.

There are several problems with this.  First is the response time of the meter and the dynamic range of the source material.  While the loudspeaker may be actually producing the rated SPL-the meter will not show it-because it cannot respond fast enough.

Or is the "max SPL" some peak in the response? but yet the average level is actually lower. 

As with the power amps of old (JR era-sorry) where you had a power supply that could allow an amp to produce a higher output before it ran out of voltage, it could have a higher power rating (for short bursts), but the average/constant power it could deliver would be less.

Yes it could still reproduce those peaks, but was rated with a lower output (at least for real amps), because that would be more realistic.

Then there is the whole SPL rating-lets assume that the loudspeaker actually does produce it, but what does it sound like at that SPL?

Is that something you want to listen to?  In some cases yes-in other cases no.  But that is not a spec that you see.  Listenable SPL-that would be a new one.  But who would determine what is "listenable?"

Of course that spec idea is not limited to powered loudspeakers-regular loudspeakers would fall into this as well.

Of course the best way is listen-especially side by side-but that is not always possible.

Kinda like buying a car without a test drive.  Does it respond the way you want?  Give you the performance you want?  Spec numbers-no matter how well done-don't always tell the whole story.

And different people like/look for different things in all types of products.

[John Roberts {JR}]

Despite Ivan's reservations, no doubt because of his having to deal so intimately with loudspeaker specs, I repeat, SPL is the only true measure of sound output. So ignore all the BS specs that will be offered.

That said there is a long list of qualifications or different ways to measure this sound output that means there will not be a simple single SPL number that tells the whole story.

In an ideal world where every speaker makers specs their loudspeakers exactly the same, then looking at the numbers will be reasonably comparable.

This is worth educating yourself about, because if you don't become a critical customer we will never be able to get all (or most) manufacturers to follow reasonable guidelines to generate comparable specs.

Do I feel lucky, yes, I'm not shopping for loudspeakers. 

JR
 

[Peter Morris]

Ive been researching active speakers and have been shocked by the SPL ratings on some of this new active gear along with economical prices.  I also noticed that most brands, even the high end stuff, only give calculated specs and not measured.  Im sure anyone in sound or music biz has worked with the srm450 at one time or another.  Theyre rated @ 126db while the new Mackie HD 12" actives are rated at 132.  I understand they have more power and more efficient amps/speakers, but are they really 3x loud as theoretically calculated?  +3db=2x as loud....  Same go for subs as brought up in another review where active subs in the $1000 range are advertising calculated in 135db range.  I have a set of EV sxa180 subs that are 600w and max 126db, now EV's new line of active subs that are 700w are showing 134db.  Again, almost 4x louder.  According to the specs, one new EV livex sub with 100w more power is as loud as 4 of my EVsxa180s rated at 126db each....  These are just random examples cause Ive worked with those speakers, but same rings true for pretty much all comperable new gear.  Is there a new standard of measuring SPL or has technology advanced this far to where Active speakers are really capable of producing these SPL levels in these under $1000 price range cabs?

FWIW this isn't too bad ....

http://www.mackie.com/products/hdseries/pdf/HD_REAL_SPL.pdf

[Bryan Mac Berntsen]

FWIW this isn't too bad ....

http://www.mackie.com/products/hdseries/pdf/HD_REAL_SPL.pdf

Thanks for posting that link Peter.  I read that a while ago and helped me understand measured vs calculated levels.  It also made me wonder why all speakers arnt tested in a controlled room like the "pit".  Yet with all this testing, Mackie still dosnt bother posting its measured SPL on many of their products.  And I understand why...  When they worked, my 1531s had plenty of volume, and the sound from Mackies HD speakers were crystal clear at high voulmes while the amp with built in fan stayed nice and cool to touch.  HOWEVER,  Mackie should do a controlled test like the link posted called "why our shit blows up" compared to other manufactures in a controlled environment!!!!  These speakers are best in class for sound quality, but when amps start shutting down or when you loose a HF and LF driver at the same time leaving only a 6" midrange speaker working in an advertised 1800w 135bd active cabinet, My Iphone speaker has better sound quality!!!  lol   Ya, Im still bitter with Mackie!!!!!

[g'bye, Dick Rees]

Thanks for posting that link Peter.  I read that a while ago and helped me understand measured vs calculated levels.  It also made me wonder why all speakers arnt tested in a controlled room like the "pit".  Yet with all this testing, Mackie still dosnt bother posting its measured SPL on many of their products.  And I understand why...  When they worked, my 1531s had plenty of volume, and the sound from Mackies HD speakers were crystal clear at high voulmes while the amp with built in fan stayed nice and cool to touch.  HOWEVER,  Mackie should do a controlled test like the link posted called "why our shit blows up" compared to other manufactures in a controlled environment!!!!  These speakers are best in class for sound quality, but when amps start shutting down or when you loose a HF and LF driver at the same time leaving only a 6" midrange speaker working in an advertised 1800w 135bd active cabinet, My Iphone speaker has better sound quality!!!  lol   Ya, Im still bitter with Mackie!!!!!

There are two parts to the "equipment destruction" equation:

The gear
The operator

It is almost always the operator pushing the gear outside its designed capacity.  Also known as "not enough rig for the gig".

[ProSoundWeb Community]