Two points: everyone is right, frequency response, in and of itself tells little about the "sound" of the speaker. Second, response above and below what we can "hear" influences out perception of the sound that is audible to us. I find that my subs make music sound more realistic even when there is supposedly no content present in the range they cover. The human perception system is fascinatingly complex and not yet completely understood. There was a recent experiment in which it appears that our sensitivity to ultra high frequency sound was not through our ears but through the body in some way. This sounds weird and it is but when the body was blocked from the sound and the ears left exposed the sound could not be perceived; when the ears were blocked and the body left exposed it could. As Haldane said'"The world is not stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine".
frequency response - B&W vs. Monitor Audio
I currently have a pair of B&W 685s and I am considering replacing them with a pair of Monitor Audio BR2s. The MAs freq resp gets down to 42Hz; the B&Ws only get down to 49Hz. Is this an audible difference? I would be getting the MAs through a friend who has access to wholesale prices and I will not be able to audition the MAs.
2nd issue - I am considering high-passing my bookshelfs through an active crossover in a powered sub. This will cut out frequencies below 80Hz before the signal gets to the amp and the bookshelfs. If I do this, does it matter if I upgrade to the MAs? Their high end is 30kHz, the B&Ws high end is only 22kHz. Thanks.
2nd issue - I am considering high-passing my bookshelfs through an active crossover in a powered sub. This will cut out frequencies below 80Hz before the signal gets to the amp and the bookshelfs. If I do this, does it matter if I upgrade to the MAs? Their high end is 30kHz, the B&Ws high end is only 22kHz. Thanks.
- ...
- 21 posts total
- 21 posts total