I've been putting off getting a new speaker for years now. I'm about to move to a new flat, so I thought this could be a great option to finally work it out.
I want my new speaker to sound good and sufficiently loud, but I also want it to be a nice looking piece in my living space, rather than just a metal box.
I always loved the characteristic 60's Rock 'N Roll theme hipster design of Marshall speakers, so I started to dig a little deeper with them.
Even though the Acton II may be loud enough for your kitchen (or a smaller bedroom at best), compared to Stanmore II; you'd still get more distortion at lower loudness levels with it, so I'd almost always get the latter!
Later I found out that they have two speakers in their line-up that responds perfect to my needs: Stanmore II and Acton II.
...but the information provided in this post applies to each and all models of both products: Bluetooth, voice & multi-room.
Compared to Acton II, does Stanmore II worth the price increase (MSRP: 350 vs 250 USD)? Or would Acton II be enough for a regular guy like me?
I don't have any idea about these technical specs - Watts, tweeters, woofers, frequency etc. I don't know what to pay attention to either.
So I asked some experts to translate them to English. In addition to that, I took their advice as well, and shared all my findings in this post.
Marshall speakers are far from being cheap, so I'd strongly recommend you to read this short post entirely. But if you need a short answer for some reason, here it is:
I decided to get the Stanmore II Bluetooth. Because...
Even though the Acton II may be loud enough for your kitchen (or a smaller bedroom at best), compared to Stanmore II, you would still get more distortion at lower loudness levels with it, so I'd get the latter. For living spaces larger than, say, 220 square feet (20 square meters); I'd absolutely recommend the Stanmore II.
Have you ever noticed that there often tends to be quite the opposite opinions about a speaker?
I can understand this for more "personal taste" kinda products like clothing, for example.
But for engineering products like speakers? Personal tastes and preferences probably still play a role. But shouldn't it be less?
Why is it that we can't set a universal metric for sound quality?
First time I asked this question to myself has been a pivotal day.
Because it turns out that in the mid 90's, Electrical Engineer PhD Floyd Toole came up with a method called Spinorama. This is exactly what he accomplished with this. Turns out that his book Sound Reproduction is like the bible of audiophiles.
Put it simply, Spinorama is a set of measurements that gives a comprehensive overview of a speaker's performance from various angles.
It allows you to compare the performances of different speakers before even laying your ears hands on them.
Isn't that amazing?
This is why Spinorama was apparently groundbreaking news for audio industry. Hence in the mid-late 2010's, most brands and magazines began publishing Spinorama measurements, despite the challenges of making such measurements.
Fortunately, now we have the Spinorama data for a bunch of quite popular speakers. Pierre Aubert put all this untidy data together and put it into https://www.spinorama.org/. This is a stunning source. Pretty valuable stuff from him right there.
All good up to this point.
Now there comes a caveat.
Since the sound speakers propagate are in the form of omnidirectional waves, all measurements are obtained in anechoic or semi-anechoic chambers (a super-quiet room where soundwaves don't bounce back, here's how different that room sounds [a mind blowing time-adjusted video]).
This is a problem because it means that Spinorama alone, unfortunately, won't give us all we need. Placement and reflections play an equally important role there too.
This is why most A-class brands (like SVS, Bang & Olufsen, etc) often come up with room correction features, adjusted either manually or automatically. The EQ adapts itself to the placement (room, corner, center, etc) for a better (deeper and more accurate) sound. Which is great.
Additionally they often emphasize the importance of placement, here is an example: https://www.svsound.com/blogs/subwoofer-setup-and-tuning/75365187-the-art-of-subwoofer-placement
The source code under Pierre Aubert's work is licensed under GPL (General public license). He didn't perform any of the measurements himself, and instead he compiled all of them into one place, so that makes sense.
At this point, I thought that if there was a tool that combined both the Spinorama with the room acoustics data, it'd be extremely useful.
Unfortunately, it turns out that there wasn't any.
This is where I stepped in and partnered with an Acoustics and Audio Engineering PhD in order to achieve this.
We combined Spinorama data with room acoustics and came up with Soundton. A very simple, 2D online tool that allows you to:
- Reveal optimal speaker positions in a room,
- Test with real speakers from real brands,
- Compare different speakers and different positions in the room.
It can be very valuable for the vast majority.
The colormap provides you the locations with the best (green) and worst (red) listening experience.
It works the best with subwoofers since Soundton processes low frequency response waves only.
- Soundton is going to be, say, 80% accurate. Not 100%.
- Because, other parameters such as the age/materials of the building, furniture/windows in place also have an impact on room acoustics.
- If you want absolutely the most detailed room analysis, then what you need is an acoustics consultant. Mind you that's going to require deep pockets and patience though... assuming you find the right person and they get the job done.