I'm not sure I follow? Came up "wrong"? Or that the observations made didn't line up the way you'd expect them to, following the measurements that were taken (http://www.soundandvision.com/content/zu-audio-cube-speaker-system-test-bench)?
FWIW, Mal was talking about the Druids, not the Cubes, but the point could still be made (more like "extrapolated", perhaps) that since the measurements of those two speakers were "suboptimal" (at least according to the expectation seemingly embedded in the thread here), how could anyone hearing them not immediately leap to their feat, fingers squeezing their nose closed while shouting "J'accuse!"
... which is nonsense.
I will offer that there are a great many extraordinary loudspeakers from companies with apparently impeccable reputations that measure to a fare-thee-well, yet have a remarkably narrow fan base. Conversely, there are legions of fans behind brands that put together devices that, prima facie, would seem absurd -- given their measurements.
Why is that?
You don't have to construct a psycho-acoustic theory to explain harmonic preferences, nor one that incorporates "sour grapes", nor "age-related infirmity", nor one about "the tyranny of numbers". This is aesthetics. There is no "right". There is only "preference".
Robert Parker is a big fan of French Bordeaux -- and is a world renowned expert on the subject of the quality of wines produced there. The fact that you like California Merlot is regrettable, but not interesting to Parker. Nor will your experiences on the delights of that grape be anything other than academically interesting to Parker, who will -- rightfully -- shrug at your lamentable taste.
Guttenberg is a fan of Zu Audio. Why? Who cares -- the fact is, he is, and that is all.
So, if you're expecting a review to be a universal, a can-opener on the wonders of things you cannot yourself experience directly, I regret to say that this expectation will probably not serve you very well.
But I for one am always interested in upgrades to existing products. I think this project is neat and Danny is a wizard. But the "proof in the pudding is in the eating" -- who cares how much better it measured (I mean, I guess that's nifty and all): did the upgraded units sound any better, and if so, how?
Dear Part Timer,
I am a full time loudspeaker designer.
This is what I do day in and day out. I design products for other companies, my company, and I upgrade speakers. I upgrade a LOT of speakers. Speaker upgrades are well into the hundreds now. So let me break things down for you in a more understandable way. And for everyone reading along as well.
There are subjective things. Tonal balance for instance is very subjective. I can shift it a little here or there, at the top or in the middle. Capacitors tend to have a specific sound or signature too. Some are a little soft and smear the signal just a hair. Others are faster and cleaner. Some like one, some like another. Wire, connectors, material preferences all have an effect and can have a subjective favor. And when a designer designs his products he makes certain choices based on their subjective preferences. And some will like them and some will not.
That isn't what an upgrade like this is about.
I look at all the things that aren't supposed to be there. I look at things that are not about preference or choice. I look at all the things that color the signal in an unnatural way. Sometimes they are left there out of ignorance. Sometimes these things are about cost and compromise. Regardless of the reason, I solve those problems.
Now in the case of this speaker there were what I call problems that are solved that have nothing to do with any subjective preference. Here are some of them.
Look at the response curve that John posted. It matches this one taken by Sound and Vision.
The dipped area at 4kHz is due to the woofer and the tweeter both covering that range but being out a phase. By being out of phase they cancel each other out and cause a hole. That is a problem that is easily fixed. It is not a subjective issue. There is not supposed to be a hole there. There is no preference in making a hole there.
Now the hole in the response that is centered at 15kHz is from throat cancellation in the tweeter. To fix that requires reshaping the throat and maybe adding a damping ring to absorb a little at a given frequency to do away with a cancellation effect there. I can't fix that. It is driver related.
Now look at the spectral decay. There is a ton of stored energy there. It is heard as an excessive ringing and smearing. It is not subjective or about preference. It is a problem. Some of this problem can be fixed. The ringing in the upper ranges is from woofer break up. This can be controlled by a proper crossover. The long decay rates in the lower region that look like they pop up from an area that was already down is the result of internal cabinet reflections. This colors and smears the sound considerably and is very easy to hear. Again this is not about preference. It is a problem. The cabinets were not properly damped. A small block of foam doesn't work. It might be economical from a production stand point, but it doesn't cut it. Lining the cabinet with No Rez and using a little additional damping solved this problem. See the latter much cleaner spectral decay.
There was also no baffle step loss compensation as there was no filter on the woofer at all. So the response fell off quickly below 700Hz or so (500Hz on the Sound and Vision measurements). This is not a matter of preference or taste. It is unnaturally low in output because there is no compensation for it. The new network that I designed did compensate for it and produced a smoother and more balanced response. It is not a subjective matter. Mid-range and bass areas are not supposed to be rolled off.
Thin un-braced cabinet walls resonate. It colors the sound. It isn't about subjective preference. It is not part of the input signal. Lining it with No Rez killed the resonances of the cabinet panels and took away that coloration.
Slip on connectors (made from Tin), cheap binding posts, and wire all have a effect on the signal. It degrades it to some degree. No one ever thinks that degrading the signal a little would make them sound better. It is an economical choice to use those things. Upgrading to tube connectors, higher quality wire, and soldering the drivers straight to the wire with no additional connectors all improve signal transfer and improve the sound making everything (top to bottom) much cleaner.
Lots of things can simply be improved unequivocally, and without subjective considerations because it is a matter of solving or fixing a problem.
