Should Speaker Manufactures provide a Frequency Response Graph?

The full measurements that the kipples spit out are super valuable. At $100k-ish they don’t cost much for a business to own. It is a way for smaller (compared to Harman, Kef, etc) companies to do measurements and make better speakers. It is much cheaper than anechoic chambers which can be upwards of a million dollars. When companies want to sell speakers for $30k+ I expect them to invents money and time into design equipment. 

I also agree with @bdp24. A waterfall plot provides the most revealing graphical representation of a speakers frequency response.  However, unless procedures are standardized, comparisons between manufacturers/models will have latent errors. Also, on and off quasi-anechoic measurements do not represent real world response.  While critical during the manufacturer’s design phase, quasi-anechoic response graphs are useful for to attempt to make some preliminary determinations if a speaker may meet our listening preferences.  Audition in a real world environment, and if possible your own home and system is necessary. 

I never knew you had to get a manufacturer's permission to post a measurement. I'm all for graphs but if it sounds good, it works for me.

I agree with @bdp24 . After looking at waterfall plots for years, I feel like I can get a good idea of a speaker's amplitude response even though of course in the end, you have to listen to it.

The waterfall plot displays both the frequency response of a loudspeaker (in various dimensions) and it’s behaviour in time. It is very revealing of any "ringing" in the speaker’s response, ringing being a major cause of the lack of transparency a loudspeaker exhibits.

Eric at Tekton Designs has been battling two different reviewers who have posted measurements without his permission, using Klippel devices for their respective measurements.

So what? They posted measurements without Eric’s blessing/approval? Oh the horror! It’s a free country dude so comes with the territory. Other “manufacturers” (ehem) get by just fine without threatening litigation except for, uh, Bose. Go figure.

I’d really like to see an impedance graph along with phase angles. A frequency response graph doesn’t mean squat if my amp can’t adequately drive the speakers. Nominal impedance??? C’mon man.

PS - So long as you accurately publish the methodology you use to measure I don’t see a problem, even if that method is non-standard.

Now, coming to poor conclusions based on measurements, that's kind of ASR's bag.  😂

I would not be interested...

Meh.  As a person with 3 measurement mic's in his house, I wouldn't trust the speaker maker's measurements to begin with, and don't think most would interpret them correctly, and what good is a quasi anechoic (or fully anechoic) measurement when it comes to my room?

I'd much rather see off-axis frequency plots as done by Stereophile and others, as well as dynamic range plots.

@seanheis1 Wrote:

Should Speaker Manufactures provide a Frequency Response Graph?

Yes, my speakers came with graphs! For power handling, sensitivity, impedance, crossover frequency, efficiency, directivity, dispersion, power linearity, distortion, ect..😎

Mike

I think they have a lot more to publish before the frequency response graph. Honestly it's a mess what they don't publish. Power handling, sensitivity, impedance, crossover frequency, prices, where to buy, decent photos, company info, contact there is so much that's missing

So, the most important marketing tool should be measuring frequency response in an anechoic chamber..  This means, once they are done designing a speaker to meet your measurement requirements, they are done with their design work.  What could go wrong?

I might also add that measuring your system in place is much more informative. 

The amplitude response of a speaker is a moving target. It will change depending on the room. There are also other factors that play a significant role in audio fidelity like phase behavior and group delays. I do not pay attention to specs. I review the design of the speaker and make the best determination I can that I will be able to make the speaker perform to my expectations. 

Posting a graph wouldn't be bad idea.  I'm sure some would resist, especially those with poor graphs.  I think if we had them all, Tekton would fall toward the top.  Eric has always been proud of his flat frequency resonse.  

They already post numbers like "40-23000 Hz +/-2 dB" so show us the graph.

I agree, buy speakers based on how they sound but as a physicist, I would likely use graphs to choose which ones to check out.  I certainly would have a problem with one that had a big dip in middle C, for example.

I think those who are having fun criticizing Tekton would not really want to see a graph of their own speakers.

Jerry

You are gonna stare at a Frequency Response graph and not know a whole lot. Manufacturers should provide a minimum of the following:

Frequency Response

Impedance

Sound Power

Impedance

Directivity

Dispersion Polar

Waterfall Plot

7 plots...should be able to take it from there...

Nope.  I buy speakers based on my hearing, not a graph made in a testing lab.  

MAYBE some people may like the sound of the speaker regardless of the graph. MAYBE it does sound good even with a not so perfect graph. MAYBE it's thinking outside the box and creating a speaker that has it's own unique signature. 

ThomasAndStereo does NOT post any negative reviews. If it doesn't sound good to him he just sends it back. 

This way the company won't get the benefit of a positive review and they also won't get slammed negatively in an open forum that could have serious impact on their business. Could even put them out of business on the opinion of ONE bad review.

 "If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all" because YOU might be completely wrong!