What makes big speakers sound "big"and smaller ones sound "small"?

[Duke]

A somewhat blind test is listening to the binaural recordings in post 36. The difference in size of speakers and directivity is about as wide a difference one can get. Can anyone hear a "size" difference?

Whichever speaker starts at 10 seconds, then 30 seconds, then 50 seconds, and so on, sounds "bigger" to me.

 

[jhaider]

It is not an issue of SPL or bass. Take a small speaker, say a Neumann KH80 DSP or Genelec equivalent properly mated with a pair of SVS 4000 or Neuman or Genelec subwoofers, correctly integrated .. FR flat as a pancake from 20 to 20,000 Hz ... Will that fool you into thinking you're listening to say a Revel Salon 2 or Neuman KH 420, similarly corrected for flat FR?
Allow me to have my strong doubts.

Salon2 no, because a key aspect of Salon2's sound is its wide directivity. So it will energize the room differently. KH420, which I believe uses the same or similar tweeter in a waveguide of the same or similar profile and has similar midrange/treble directivity? I would not bet on either outcome. It might be level dependent.

From anecdotes and casual observations. The Dutch and Dutch 8C,the Kii3, the JBL 708 even the 308 don't sound small ... In my observations, the JBL 305 does ...

JBL 305 is output limited. Even compared to the tiny KH 80 DSP, Sound und Recording measured ~3dB lower bass capability (based on a 10% THD threshold), and ~6dB lower SPL capability from 100Hz-10kHz (based on a 3% THD threshold), though 305 does have a slightly lower F3.

 

[mitchco]

Whichever speaker starts at 10 seconds, then 30 seconds, then 50 seconds, and so on, sounds "bigger" to me.

Thanks for taking a listen Duke. Cool! You chose the wider directvitiy, but diminutive KEF LS50's as the "bigger" sounding speaker.

 

[AnalogSteph]

Now maybe listening over my O110s in nearfield isn't the ideal way of evaluating this sample, but it would seem speaker 1 is not only positioned in a narrower stereo triangle than speaker 2 but also substantially drier, involving the room much less. I don't hear a difference in "bigness" per se, but definitely in directivity / diffuse sound. Makes sense with these two models.

 

[dfuller]

Couple things.

1, Big speakers have more cone area for the low drivers (and more cabinet volume). That means you end up with less distortion (all other things being equal) at a given SPL in the low end.
2, the frequency response often is different, but more importantly, the directivity is different.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

To have a truly big sound speakers should be able to replicate the full impact of the full range of the biggest live sound that the recordings we listen to are trying to reproduce. A flute solo will not require speakers with as big a sound as a full orchestra.

 

[ahofer]

Thanks @Music1969 @Pearljam5000 while not fully representative, I made some binaural recordings comparing a very large JBL cinema speaker with KEF LS50 (both with subs). See if you can hear the difference: https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/revi...ker-comparison-with-binaural-recordings-r768/

I did a quick listen of the comparison just now. There's a major difference in treble information between the two, particularly on the guitar. I don't know which is which because I'm not sure if there's a switch in the intro. Makes one of the setups sound a little muffled in comparison.

 

[valerianf]

You get big sound only from big speakers.
For that they need to have a large emissive surface that is able to handle a large amount of power.
Then you get a lot of dB.

Pre-pandemic was the last time that i heard a big sound: the concert of Shakira.
But you need a very large venue without any neighbors.
It is quite impossible to get such a sound at home.

 

[kceenav]

Based on my own experience with "small" (slim) 2-way floorstanding speakers, I also believe that the playback volume plays a significant role in the perceived size of phantom sound sources or the size of the "sound image" as a whole.

Other factors mentioned here may also be important - at least some of them sound quite plausible (in my opinion).

Regarding the aspect of (high) playback volume:
I am not so sure whether non-linear distortion is the major limiting factor here, as long as the sound is not clearly audibly 'distorted'.

I suspect that in most cases something else is much more important: The tonality of the system (including the room!) has to be as neutral as possible. (Always assuming that the sound recording itself is 'neutral' to begin with.)
If the reproduction is not maximally tonally balanced, this may be not as critical as long as playback SPL is low or moderate. Only at (very) high playback levels the colouration gets more and more obvious; depending on its specifics and/or the program certain frequency bands may even be perceived as distinctly disturbing (if they are "too loud" relative to the rest).

The result: the playback level appears "too loud" overall. Although the original sound event in real life may well be of an even higher level.

Whereas with a loudspeaker that is as neutral as possible (in the room) and generally capable to deliver the required high SPL, it is quite possible to get near the live loudness of, for example, an orchestra or a church organ, without our ears perceiving this as TOO loud or unpleasantly coloured. So that the sound image - and its elements - then is perceived as realistically "large".

---

Of course, in many cases, a "realistic" playback level is impossible from the outset, for example, because consideration must be given to other residents or neighbours.
And unfortunately, many sound recordings are so far from "perfect" in the first place that playback at "realistic" levels never can be pleasureable ...

 

[puppet]

I believe it comes down to how much air the driver can move and where it's directed. A big driver in a wide baffle will produce the biggest perceived sound.

 

[AdamG]

IMHO Speakers are Air pumps. Big pumps (speakers) move more air and create more tactile room energy which your body/ears sense. Engines are air pumps as well.

 

[mitchco]

I did a quick listen of the comparison just now. There's a major difference in treble information between the two, particularly on the guitar. I don't know which is which because I'm not sure if there's a switch in the intro. Makes one of the setups sound a little muffled in comparison.

Thanks for taking a listen. The difference is that the wider directivity speaker is providing more room reflections in the 1.5 to 3.5 kHz range, as compared to the narrower directivity speaker. You can see it in the comparison of in-room measurements. Yes, there is a switch after the first 10 seconds in the intro.

Did you get a sense as to which speaker sounds "bigger?"

 

[Snickers-is]

Sorry for the stupid question but
Bigger speakers also sound bigger to me than smaller ones even at the same volume.
I've been told this is not correct and impossible but i still feel that way, and also other people do because I read the cliche of "these speaekrs sound much bigger than they are" Pretty much everywhere.
What is the cause of this phenomenon?

This is a quite complex matter, but it can be broken down in a few parameters that can not individually be quantified. Here are a few:

1: Intermodulation distortion is probably the largest factor. A non linear motor, suspension, radiating area etc will give us clues that reveals to our ears that "this is a bit difficult" for the speaker, and that takes away the "lightness" and "effortlessness" of the speaker.

Typical factors that does cause high IMD are large and heavy surrounds, high inductance, non linear motors, motors that are too weak and has to deal with high mass. Especially if the voice coil has many turns (which often can be seen from the inductance).

2: Sensitivity is not a factor that by itself is possible to hear. But as the amplifier does not have to work as hard, it means it will distort less. If the voice coil heats up, it will affect the frequency response of the speaker. It can also give us a slow modulation effect. So unless you have a big enough amp and the coil does not heat up much, this is an audible parameter.

3: A speakers directivity is one important factor unless the room is very big or semi anechoic. For example, if the speakers are located in the dead end of a LEDE-room, directivity is not as important as if they are placed in a small non treated room. For a typical room, we face problems in the transition zone called the Schröder frequency. This can typically be 100-500Hz. This is where a room causes lots of high Q problems. In other words, this is where we typically have some hard midrange resonances caused by the surfaces near the speaker, and we often have to dial back this area a bit for those frequencies not to over power the experience completely. This problem is significantly smaller if we can reduce the dispersion of the loudspeaker.

4: And that leads us to the frequency response. We can not design a speaker that hits the room response precisely, so the frequency response will be a result of what typically works across many different rooms. Small speakers for small rooms needs to be dialed back more in the lower midrange. They also lack the capacity to keep high SPL, so by dialing back the mid bass/lower midrange a bit, and keep it at a higher level at Fb, we can get slightly more total SPL, and have less problems in a common room.

 

[richard12511]

Not sure if this will apply to everyone, but yesterday I discovered that tweeter height is a big factor in the "big speaker sound" for me. I was getting that small speaker sound with my 8351b, and it was most noticeable with orchestral music. Having the tweeters at ear level made it hard to imagine the performance as being real, as that's rarely how you hear live music. Raising the tweeters up 4" or so has gone a long way towards making them sound bigger.

I know typical advice is to get the tweeter as close to ear height as possible, but I honestly don't hear any difference in the tone of the sound with them above ear height. The only difference I hear is that the image is shifted up to a more realistic height. Something like the Salon2, with its tweeter at 50+" would be even higher(and closer to reality).

 

[rgpit]

Dynamic range?

 

[Robin L]

Not sure if this will apply to everyone, but yesterday I discovered that tweeter height is a big factor in the "big speaker sound" for me. I was getting that small speaker sound with my 8351b, and it was most noticeable with orchestral music. Having the tweeters at ear level made it hard to imagine the performance as being real, as that's rarely how you hear live music. Raising the tweeters up 4" or so has gone a long way towards making them sound bigger.

I know typical advice is to get the tweeter as close to ear height as possible, but I honestly don't hear any difference in the tone of the sound with them above ear height. The only difference I hear is that the image is shifted up to a more realistic height. Something like the Salon2, with its tweeter at 50+" would be even higher(and closer to reality).

I raised my floorstanding Infinity Primus 360 speakers about 15", certainly made the imaging of Symphonic recordings more plausible.

 

[LightninBoy]

Thanks for taking a listen Duke. Cool! You chose the wider directvitiy, but diminutive KEF LS50's as the "bigger" sounding speaker.

I agree with Duke. I also felt that the bigger sounding speaker (the LS50) was brighter than neutral, as it emphasized the vocal sibilances to an unnatural degree. What I find with a good waveguide implementation is that it will power the room with that big open treble sound while still sounding smooth and neutral.

 

[ahofer]

Not sure if this will apply to everyone, but yesterday I discovered that tweeter height is a big factor in the "big speaker sound" for me. I was getting that small speaker sound with my 8351b, and it was most noticeable with orchestral music. Having the tweeters at ear level made it hard to imagine the performance as being real, as that's rarely how you hear live music. Raising the tweeters up 4" or so has gone a long way towards making them sound bigger.

I know typical advice is to get the tweeter as close to ear height as possible, but I honestly don't hear any difference in the tone of the sound with them above ear height. The only difference I hear is that the image is shifted up to a more realistic height. Something like the Salon2, with its tweeter at 50+" would be even higher(and closer to reality).

When I'm listening to orchestral music, I tend to imagine I'm in the front of the balcony, not the floor seating, and it sorts things out for me. In fact, it's aligned behind the suspended microphones in major concert halls. I have no idea whether that placement correlates with typical recording placement, but it seems to work. All that being said, the tweeter is at ear level as that's optimal from a vertical dispersion point of view. I suppose you could raise them and angle down, but then who knows what the floor might bring?

 

[Jim Matthews]

A really good point was just raised: where do you normally sit for a live performance?

I can't afford most tickets near the front, for any sort of live show.

If a recording is mixed "close" the presentation of larger images is in the recording.

For me large diameter, highly efficient designs with dynamic response sound big, if the recording merits that.

The beef I always had with panel designs was that everything seemed large, if not dynamic.

 

[carewser]

Their size