• Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
  • HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
  • Congratulations! If you're seeing this notice, it means you're connected to the new server. Go ahead and post as usual, enjoy!
  • I've just upgraded the forum software to Xenforo 2.0. Please let me know if you have any problems with it. I'm still working on installing styles... coming soon.

How to read a speaker's Cumulative Spectral Decay plot

Flint

Prodigal Son
Superstar
Cumulative Spectral Decay is the rate at which a speaker stops moving (and making sound) after the input signal is cut instantly. So, a broadband pulse goes into the speaker and a measurement system captures the resulting sound coming out of the speaker and plots it over time and spread across a frequency range.

Stereophile is pretty good in presenting these plots and they are consistent how they set the parameters of the measurement. As such, here is a Cumulative Spectral Decay plot for a very high end speaker:

211Wilfig10.png


The vertical axis (up and down) is the amplitude of the signal being measured. Stereophile almost always uses a 24dB window, in this case is it +/- 12dB SPL.

The horizontal X-axis (left to right) is frequency - just like we always see in frequency response charts, but limited to 400Hz to 20,000Hz.

The horizontal Z-axis(front to back) represents time. In this case each line is 0.06mS later than the previous one which is behind it. So, starting at the back of the chart, each subsequent line moving forward represents what sound energy was still being measured 0.06mS after the previous line.

So, the very first line, at the back, should directly copy the measured frequency response of the speaker being tested. The next line is what the speaker is still generating 0.06mS after the pulse ended. The third line in front of that is what sound the speaker was making 0.12mS after the pulse ended, and so on until the end of the graph at nearly 4.00mS.

Why does this matter and what does it tell you?

If the goal of a speaker is to accurately follow the voltage of the incoming signal and convert it accurately into acoustic sound we can hear, it should start moving immediately when the voltage rises, but when the voltage stops, so should the speaker cones, domes, horns, diaphragms, etc. If the speaker is moving about after the voltage stops, then when the next voltage swing goes in it will have to recover and start moving again, potentially being forced to attempt to go from instantly moving outward to inward because the new voltage is counter the "resonating" of the system.

Also, if you want to experience true, accurate dynamics - as many do - a speaker's ability to stop moving after the signal stops is critical in order to reproduce the silent spots between peaks in the sound. Dynamics is all about the difference between high peaks and quiet valleys in the sound. That ratio of high SPL to low SPL is a measure of a dynamic system. But, if the speaker is continuing to make sound when the signal says it should be silent, then the range between high and low will be less and thus the dynamic range is less and the sound will be less accurately dynamic.

The chart representing Cumulative Spectral Decay is one way to show how well controlled a speaker is. It reflects the combined dynamic decay performance of the entire speaker system, from the quality of the drivers to the construction of the cabinet to the type of crossover used.

It also shows significant resonance problems in speakers, such as in the chart above there is clearly a tweeter resonance at about 14kHz and again at 19kHz leading me to believe the tweeter has a metal dome since many metal dome tweeters have resonances like this in their upper registers (and one reason I am not a fan of them).

That chart is for a high end speaker, and it is pretty good. You may notice a huge drop off in the SPL just past 6 samples, or 0.36mS after the voltage pulse ended. That's not bad, but there is a long resonance at 1kHz which isn't good, suggesting the tweeter is better at dynamics than the midrange - another reason (to me at least) that the sound of the tweeter should match the sound of the midrange/woofer. I believe most would notice that the sound in the treble is not extremely well mated to the sound in the midrange. But, some like that sound, so more power to them.

That's a start. Please wait to reply until I post one more time with less stellar Cumulative Spectral Decay chart.
 
So... here it is, a spectral decay plot which is less attractive.

1212DO96fig9.jpg


With this two-way speaker it is clear that the 10" woofer is not well behaved in the midrange (which is not surprising). The output sustains for up to 0.6mS before it come close to reaching a 12dB SPL drop in output. That isn't very good. You can see that clear up to 2kHz the decay is very slow with relatively significant SPL output running to the end of measurement graph.

Conversely, the 1" Silk dome tweeter is extremely well behaved and shows a very strong difference in dynamic ability from the woofer. There is a clear dome resonance at about 14kHz and a lesser harmonic resonance below at about 12kHz, but in general the tweeter stops making any usable sound in less than 1.20mS compared to the rolling on that the woofer puts out beyond 4.0mS.

This is a less well behaved speaker and will not provide the midrange dynamic performance of the speaker above.
 
Just for fun.... here's the Stereophile measured cumulative spectral decay of a large high end electrostatic speaker:

666SLA1JAfig06.jpg


Note how extremely well behaved this is in the midrange whereas the upper treble, from about 12kHz to 18kHz, it an utter mess. This helps explain the sound of large panel ESLs. Very dynamic and tight in the midrange, but too powerfully sloppy in the upper treble.
 
And, for more fun, here's the cumulative spectral decay measurement for one of those high end round horn systems, in this case a three-way all-horn system with a hornloaded 2" Dome midrange and a hornloaded plasma tweeter. Very costly and dangerous stuff here.

910Acafig8.jpg


See how the decay is darn near immediate? There is a little resonating noise in the 9kHz to 15kHz range, but it is not as resonant as the two graphs above. And the midrange drops like rock compared to the others. This is very likely an extremely dynamic sounding speaker.
 
Can you explain how Slew Rate and Dampening Factor effect those graphs?
 
heeman said:
Can you explain how Slew Rate and Dampening Factor effect those graphs?

With decent solid state amps, slew rate hasn't been important for decades. So, I don't look at tat spec anymore.

Damping Factor does impact the dynamics. That said, nearly all SS amps have a damping factor much higher than needed to control the speaker, especially when a passive crossover is present. When you really see a difference is when comparing the sound of a tube amp or any amp with an output transformer to a direct coupled SS amp.

The reason we talk so much about those two specs is to compare two otherwise very good amps. When they are both great, we have to split hairs by looking at peak current, damping factor, rated output into 4 and 2 ohms, and so on.
 
So when I was comparing amps, say the ATI with a slew rate of >60V/uSec to a Parasound with > 150V/uSec, this spec doesn't matter?
 
So the speaker decay plot is unrelated to the amplifier that is driving it?
 
heeman said:
So the speaker decay plot is unrelated to the amplifier that is driving it?

If the amp is a decent Solid State model with damping over about 50 and more than sufficient power for the test signal, then it really isn't important. Also, even if the amp is highly impacting the results, as long as the tester uses the same amp on every speaker undergoing this measurement, it still shows the differences between speakers. But I am certain Stereophile is using a more than sufficient amp for these tests.
 
I wrote a longer response about amps and dynamics in your HCA-1000a thread.
 
Good stuff Flint!
Now I get what's going on there.. Thanks.

What about the 2nd measurement?
 
Dude, I'm loving this. Now I'm starting to see what is being said & the difference.
Mods, can these classes be pinned ?
Franklin, you make it alot easier to understand. Now I know what to look for.
 
Does Stereophile keep these plots on their website somewhere? I'd love to compare different speakers.

Flint, that is excellent information and explained in a very clear way. Is there a reason why it is only measured to 400hz?
 
There is a measurements page attached to every speaker review with the charts.
 
lakedmb said:
Does Stereophile keep these plots on their website somewhere? I'd love to compare different speakers.

Flint, that is excellent information and explained in a very clear way. Is there a reason why it is only measured to 400hz?

The way the tests are performed it isn't possible to get reliable and accurate measurements below a certain frequency and over time that frequency increases (notice the way the filter goes up in frequency over time?). Every setup is slightly different, but the measurement is based on a gated window sort of filter on the microphone AND the arrival times for different frequencies will vary and the measurement system has to take that into account, so it just isn't possible to get good data at lower frequencies.

If they had a fullrange anechoic chamber, it could go much lower. But those are expensive.
 
Razz said:
Just curious as to what speakers are represented in the grafts above...

I quite intentionally left that information out of the my posts because I didn't want this tutorial on a measurement process and how to understand it to turn into a pro or con of any specific model or brand of speakers which could turn ugly if I said someone's most favorite speaker had a terrible measurement compared to some other speaker that person hates.

If you really want to know, look at the URL for the image which has the Stereophile abbreviation for the speaker being tested and you can backwards lookup the review I pulled it from. But let's keep that discussion out of this thread.
 
Back
Top