|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 27, 2013 13:55:23 GMT -5
Definitive Technology Studio Monitor SM65 review By Boomzilla DESCRIPTION:The “Studio Monitor” series is Definitive Technology’s premium bookshelf speaker line. The models include a 45, 55, and 65. The SM65 is the largest and most complex of the trio. Using two five and a quarter inch diameter woofers with a single aluminum dome tweeter, the drivers are arranged in a vertical “D’Appolito” configuration (tweeter centered between the two woofers). The woofers have “Mr. Potatohead” looking dust caps in their centers with “golf ball” texturing. Definitive Technology (DefTech) claims this helps with dispersion. The tweeter has a “wave guide” over it, again intended to increase dispersion. What makes the SM65 different from most 2-way bookshelf speakers is that the top of the cabinet sports a six by twelve-inch “racetrack” passive radiator, intended to extend bass. DefTech (optimistically) claims 30 Hz response for the speaker. Actually, using the Stereophile test disc, I could still hear 31 Hertz in my room, although significantly down from the average sound pressure level (SPL). The unit comes in black (no surprise) and sports bi-wire capability with the standard gold-plated brass jumpers between plastic knurled wire terminals. The terminals can be used with single or bi-wire cables terminated with bananas, spade lugs, pins, or bare wire tips. The standard going rate for a pair of SM65s is about $900, stands not included. SETUP:These speakers have been the most devilishly difficult to place of any I’ve owned. One would think that since the speakers use the D’Appolito configuration, that the horizontal dispersion would be very broad with limited vertical dispersion. Maybe in theory, but in practice, the speakers are VERY sensitive to both placement-width and toe-in. If the speakers are the slightest bit too far apart, one gets clumping of instruments on both speakers with a clear center image and absolutely nothing in between. If the speakers are the slightest bit too close together, then the speakers disappear sonically, but the center image remains sans depth! I eventually found a location where the speakers would image well, but then had to experiment with toe-in until I got the soundstage that I knew the speakers were capable of. If you aren’t willing to tinker with placement and toe-in, then these aren’t the speakers for you! The speakers have also shown themselves to be highly amplifier sensitive. I first tried using a Rogue Audio Tempest Magnum vacuum tube integrated amp that uses the KT-88 output tube. The Rogue allows the user to run in either ultralinear mode (60 wpc) or in triode mode (30 wpc). The speakers sounded better in triode mode, but never sounded very good. I then switched to an Emotiva Mini-X amplifier (50 wpc, solid-state) and the speakers began to open up a bit. I finally exchanged my Mini-X for an Emotiva XPA-2, and the soundstage of the speakers not only opened up more, but the bass became significantly tighter. Obviously, the SM65s like both current and a high damping factor. I finally plugged in a Dared SL2000A vacuum tube preamp. That front-end along with the Emotiva XPA-2 have (so far) given the best results yet. BREAK IN:These puppies have taken longer to break in than any other speaker I’ve owned. The out-of-the-box bass is not very dynamic and is excessively boomy. My speakers took almost a month before the bass developed pitch and quickness. For the first month, using the speakers was like riding in a boom-box car. Fortunately, once the speakers broke in, the bass became quick, articulate, and surprisingly deep. One of the reasons I bought these speakers was because I wanted to eliminate a subwoofer from the living room. With the broken-in speakers, the bass goes low enough that I no longer feel the need for a sub, even on movie soundtracks. I’m sure that the passive radiator plays a big part in the bass extension. SOUND:The speakers’ sound depends strongly on how much effort you exert in positioning them. On axis, the speakers can be shrill. Off axis, there is a suckout in the midrange (just below the crossover maybe?). Therefore, to get the best from the speakers, one can either toe them in (but slightly) for the best compromise between on and off-axis performance, or one can use some equalization to even out the frequency response. For those with audio-video receivers or audio-video-preamps that incorporate room EQ, these would be excellent speakers. For those (such as myself) using a “stereo only” system without room EQ, plan to spend some time dancing the speakers around your listening room. Too close to back or side walls, and the speakers become somewhat boomy. At least 18” from any adjacent boundary is the minimum that the speakers will demand in order to sound their best. My side walls are about six and twelve feet away from the right and left speakers, respectively. Side wall reflections, therefore, are not much of a problem for me. My room, however, requires me to place the speakers 18” from the wall behind them, so I’ve installed ATS pads to reduce slap echo. Vertical height also seems to make a big difference in the speakers’ sound. I initially put the speakers on my (improvised) 24” stands but this placed the tweeters somewhat below my seated ear level. I then got some 29” stands that are about the right height for me. I’m tall, however, so you’ll have to evaluate the appropriate height in your listening environment. The tweeter becomes significantly less aggressive if moved a couple of inches above or below ear level, so I may yet have to experiment with height in search of better woofer-tweeter integration. DefTech claims a sensitivity of 92 decibels at one watt at one meter for these speakers. Again, I believe that this is a bit of marketing hyperbole. Although the 30 wpc Rogue integrated would drive the speakers to reasonable levels, my “reasonable levels” are probably what you might consider to be “soft” levels. If you want to play the speakers loudly, bring watts! Since I don’t have a sound pressure level meter, I can’t say exactly what levels I listen at. Eventually, I’ll find a SPL at a yard sale & will do some measuring then. SUMMARY:These are not perfect speakers. The discontinuity between the two woofers and the single tweeter is one major defect. The pickiness of the speakers regarding placement is another major defect. Despite the speakers’ shortcomings, once properly set-up and broken-in, the speakers are capable of far better sound than one might expect. Further, you’ll never find another speaker of this size and configuration (a stand mounted “bookshelf” speaker) that will offer anything close to the DefTech’s bass quality, quantity, and extension. I don’t feel that I’ve yet found the best that the SM65s have to offer. I think that with some height adjustment, some additional break-in, and possibly some more (or less) room treatment that I can coax really exceptional performance from these speakers. If, however, you’re the type of listener who just wants to hook up the system and listen, then these may not be the speakers for you. The amount of “tweaking” required by these speakers demands effort on the part of the listener. I’ll also say that, at least with the Rogue tube amp, speaker wires made an audible difference with these speakers. Kimber 12TC made for excessive bass. Nordost Flatline made for anemic bass. Original Monster cable made for the best bass. With the Emotiva XPA-2 in the system, the speakers don’t seem to care about the wires used. I tried both single and bi-wiring; no significant difference could I hear. If you need extended bass without a subwoofer, and if you’re using an audio-video rig with room correction, then I can recommend these speakers without reservation. Otherwise, consider carefully whether you’re willing to spend the time and effort required to get the best from the SM65s. Boomzilla – April, 2013 |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 29, 2013 10:56:18 GMT -5
UPDATE: Everything I know is wrong...
When I set up the SM65s in my room, I used known setup techniques. I placed the speakers on stands with the tweeters at ear level, and I installed the speakers vertically, as DefTech obviously intended with the passive radiator on top. You can read the review above and see the difficulties I had in getting them to image...
Recalling my store audition, where the SM65s had impressed me enough to part with almost a thousand simolians, I recalled that the speakers were on short stands and significantly below ear level. On a hunch, I removed the 29" stands and threw in some 20" ones.
Better, but the speakers still didn't disappear. For kicks, I removed the stands completely and put the speakers on the floor with a slight tilt-back. NOW the speakers disappeared, but so did the treble. No cigar...
Thinking "outside the box," I then put the speakers back on the 20" stands, but this time HORIZONTALLY (like a center-channel speaker) and with the stands toed in toward the listening position. Even better, but instruments would still clump around the speakers instead of hanging the music between them.
I then removed the toe-in and, with the speakers still horizontal and firing at 90 degrees to the back wall, tried listening again. WOW - a holographic sound stage with NO clumping of instruments about the speakers. Unfortunately, the treble was now recessed.
I then left the toe-in alone but tilted the boxes up to where, if the speakers had been toed in toward the listener, the tweeters would have been on-axis to my ears. NOW I got the holographic sound stage with proper frequency balance.
This is THE WEIRDEST setup I've ever experienced. The proof is in the listening though, and the difference is striking. I'll need to listen some more before I'm satisfied that this is the best configuration for these speakers, but for now, my assessment of the DefTech SM65s just went up by an order of magnitude.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 29, 2013 11:10:00 GMT -5
Great review! Very honest IMO. I really like the emphasis on placement. Obviously you tried a whole lotta methods. Glad to see that you like the speakers. Something tells me that some sort of floor or cieling bounce or an added warmth when tilted because of the angle to the floor was helping to create a more convincing soundstage.
|
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 29, 2013 11:17:19 GMT -5
UPDATE: Everything I know is wrong... When I set up the SM65s in my room, I used known setup techniques. I placed the speakers on stands with the tweeters at ear level, and I installed the speakers vertically, as DefTech obviously intended with the passive radiator on top. You can read the review above and see the difficulties I had in getting them to image... Recalling my store audition, where the SM65s had impressed me enough to part with almost a thousand simolians, I recalled that the speakers were on short stands and significantly below ear level. On a hunch, I removed the 29" stands and threw in some 20" ones. Better, but the speakers still didn't disappear. For kicks, I removed the stands completely and put the speakers on the floor with a slight tilt-back. NOW the speakers disappeared, but so did the treble. No cigar... Thinking "outside the box," I then put the speakers back on the 20" stands, but this time HORIZONTALLY (like a center-channel speaker) and with the stands toed in toward the listening position. Even better, but instruments would still clump around the speakers instead of hanging the music between them. I then removed the toe-in and, with the speakers still horizontal and firing at 90 degrees to the back wall, tried listening again. WOW - a holographic sound stage with NO clumping of instruments about the speakers. Unfortunately, the treble was now recessed. I then left the toe-in alone but tilted the boxes up to where, if the speakers had been toed in toward the listener, the tweeters would have been on-axis to my ears. NOW I got the holographic sound stage with proper frequency balance. This is THE WEIRDEST setup I've ever experienced. The proof is in the listening though, and the difference is striking. I'll need to listen some more before I'm satisfied that this is the best configuration for these speakers, but for now, my assessment of the DefTech SM65s just went up by an order of magnitude. What about putting the speakers on the 20" stands upside-down so the woofer is on top and tweeter on the bottom? I would think if you have them horizontal you're not getting very good dispersion. [edit - oh never mind.. I see they have a rounded top so they would be a bit wobbly if you turned them upside down.] |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 29, 2013 14:33:10 GMT -5
What about putting the speakers on the 20" stands upside-down so the woofer is on top and tweeter on the bottom?...] The rounded "top" is actually a grill. The passive radiator sits beneath. This morning, when I wrote the update, I had the passive radiators toward the centerline. They were a touch boomy. I plan to aim the passive radiators outward this evening to see what I get. |
|
flyhigh
Emo VIPs 
North Carolina
Posts: 524
|
Post by flyhigh on Apr 29, 2013 14:45:39 GMT -5
Nice Posting Boomzilla.
I think that your placement/listening exercise should clearly illustrate to ALL here just HOW MUCH can be accomplished with a a tape measure, your Ear, and a bit of Sweat Equity!
All the Component/Cable "Upgrades" in the universe will never have the same degree of effect that CAREFUL SPEAKER POSITIONING will!
Allow me to make a Motion that we ALL get off our A$$es and really fine tune our speaker positioning like Boomzilla did.
Boom did it right!
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 29, 2013 15:07:38 GMT -5
amen fly. Preach on!
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 29, 2013 15:47:52 GMT -5
The room actually dictates how a speaker performs so it come as no surprise that just playing with speaker placements helps with sound.
It just makes sense to me.
That said, there is no wrong speaker placement if the sound is right.
Some people mount maggies upside down, you lay yours as center speakers.
As long as it works, it is correct speaker placement!
BTW I have the SM55 in an entertainment cabinet (not the best setup I know) and you are correct about EQ.
These speakers are very EQ friendly.
|
|
flyhigh
Emo VIPs
North Carolina
Posts: 524
|
Post by flyhigh on Apr 29, 2013 16:43:34 GMT -5
"Brothas and Sistas o' tha Church.........Can I get an AMEN!" ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 29, 2013 17:32:14 GMT -5
Well, thanks for the kudos, but my "success" still worries me a bit. How many owners of this speaker will ever bother to try them sideways? I've read some glowing reviews on the internet of the SM65s since I wrote mine, and many of them laud the excellent imaging that the speakers provide! What's the difference between my room and theirs that our outcomes are so different? Are my speakers somehow defective? Is my room so radically different? Or are my expectations just so much higher?
Whatever the case, I don't think that I'm through experimenting with these yet. They offer, at their best, imaging that I never got even from my Theil speakers. At their worst, they rival my Radio-Shag specials. I've NEVER owned a pair of speakers so vexing. In my room, setup is EVERYTHING on these puppies.
Again, I strongly suspect that an AVR with some room correction could work absolute magic with these speakers. Since I don't own such a beast, this is but speculation on my part. Perhaps I'm hoping that the "magic room correction" could cure what placement has (so far) only partly accomplished.
It's almost enough to tempt a bloke to buy an AVR just to see...
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 29, 2013 17:45:46 GMT -5
It's almost enough to tempt a bloke to buy an AVR just to see...  P.S. Sorry about your frustrations. they mirror mine with my axioms. Lots of positioning to make it sound right and you just KNOW that it's not quite there. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 29, 2013 21:32:04 GMT -5
Well, I spent the evening listening. The best location so far is with the SM65s placed horizontally on the taller, 29" stands with their passive radiators pointed outwards and the speaker sides at right angles to the rear wall with no toe-in. Is it perfect? Who knows - one always wonders if there is additional performance to be found...
I can say unequivocally that I now have better sound than I've ever had in my living room. Through at least a dozen sets of speakers (some expensive), through at least a dozen different components of electronics (some VERY expensive), and through hours and hours of time trying to get the previous systems to gel.
I get a holographic, three-dimensional sound stage that extends beyond the edges of the loudspeakers with significantly more detail than I've ever heard in this room. I've been listening to familiar recordings and hearing new things (always a good sign).
There may still be a few phase issues at certain frequencies. I may have to yet experiment a bit with toe-in. Overall, though, I now count the DefTech SM65s a success. They look goofy as heck on their sides, but when you close your eyes, you can't point to the speaker locations by auditory clues.
I go to bed with a smile on my face!
THANKS to all of you who have contributed and tolerated my ramblings about these things. Hopefully, there's SOMETHING of value for you here, too.
Cordially - Boomzilla (a significantly humbler audiophile)
|
|
|
|
Post by altpensacola on Apr 30, 2013 7:34:39 GMT -5
I'm quite sure all this speaker placement manipulation to get the perfect sound was once covered in a Rodrigues cartoon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 30, 2013 7:58:34 GMT -5
I'm quite sure all this speaker placement manipulation to get the perfect sound was once covered in a Rodrigues cartoon. I'm sure it must have been. Ridrigues was both insightful and hilarious. I call this effort the "speaker placement cha-cha" or "dancing with the stars." ;D |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Apr 30, 2013 9:40:15 GMT -5
 This was the first thing I thought of when you mentioned Rodrigues. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Apr 30, 2013 20:57:45 GMT -5
After listening this evening, I concluded that the sibilance was excessive on the SM65s. Since there's no adjustment to tweeter level or crossover, I tried the old trick of taping some toilet paper over the tweeter.
It definitely worked. The sibilance immediately disappeared, but now the sound was too dull. Since I'd started with two sheets of 2-ply paper, I removed one of the two sheets & tried again. Better, but still possibly a bit dull. Tomorrow, I'll remove one of the two remaining plies and see what it does then.
Reducing the treble, however, had an unintended side effect. The imaging again changed! Now instruments are clumping on the speakers again and the "holographic sound stage" is no longer there!
I may need to go through all my positioning again after taming the treble. I can do this, but it sure is disappointing. It seems that I'm almost having to re-engineer this speaker to make it work.
I'll give the speakers one more chance tomorrow. If I can't have the soundstage without the sibilance, then it may be time to give up on these and move on. I'm surely reluctant to do that though.
Has anyone any ideas that I've not yet tried?
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Apr 30, 2013 22:30:15 GMT -5
How about putting the toilet paper in your ears?  |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Apr 30, 2013 23:12:45 GMT -5
After listening this evening, I concluded that the sibilance was excessive on the SM65s. Since there's no adjustment to tweeter level or crossover, I tried the old trick of taping some toilet paper over the tweeter. It definitely worked. The sibilance immediately disappeared, but now the sound was too dull. Since I'd started with two sheets of 2-ply paper, I removed one of the two sheets & tried again. Better, but still possibly a bit dull. Tomorrow, I'll remove one of the two remaining plies and see what it does then. Reducing the treble, however, had an unintended side effect. The imaging again changed! Now instruments are clumping on the speakers again and the "holographic sound stage" is no longer there! I may need to go through all my positioning again after taming the treble. I can do this, but it sure is disappointing. It seems that I'm almost having to re-engineer this speaker to make it work. I'll give the speakers one more chance tomorrow. If I can't have the soundstage without the sibilance, then it may be time to give up on these and move on. I'm surely reluctant to do that though. Has anyone any ideas that I've not yet tried? What brand of toilet paper did you use? ;D (sorry, just kidding..) Wow, you sure are going through a lot of gyrations with those speakers but I guess that's the way to fine tune them! Good luck!  |
|
|
|
Post by briank on May 1, 2013 6:05:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 6:24:16 GMT -5
Last night it occurred to me why I'm having so much difficulty in making these speakers sound the way they did in the showroom (where the audition convinced me to buy them in the first place). The store demonstrated the speakers using an AVR. They probably had used their room EQ on the receiver (Audissey most likely) to tune the speakers to their room. Since I have no room EQ, all these problems are popping up. As to the toilet paper, it is a decades-old remedy for curing excessive tweeter brightness and it works as advertised. So my options now are to tolerate the sibilance (only sometimes bothersome), buy an AVR that can equalize the speakers to the room, or to replace the speakers. In my best Ben Stein voice: Anyone? Anyone?  |
|
