Frequency range vs frequency response


I should know this but am still fuzzy on it. Could someone explain the difference between frequency range and frequency response when looking at specs of loudspeakers? I know specs are only part of what you base a purchase decision on but which one of these tells the truer story about how low they can reproduce bass levels? Each loudspeaker has a low end value in HZ for these two measurements but they differ. Which one gives you the best idea of how low it can go? What's the difference? Many thanks.
pdn

Showing 2 responses by shadorne

The best is to see a plot of anechoic frequency response in a reputable lab like Canada NRC. Speaker Measurments

Most of manufacturers cheat on frequency range specifications (use in room boost or use loose definitions of range).
You may have noticed on the link I gave above that some speakers go lower than others. This does not necessarily make them better. You need to look at off axis response, distortion and impedance load in order to get an idea if a speaker will sound good.

Compare Dynaudio Focus 110. To the Dynaudio Confidence C4.
Obviously apples to oranges here as the C4 is TEN times the price of the Focus 110.

You will notice a similar frequency "range" (anechoic) but the similarity ends there.

Focus 110 is a small ported design and it shows up as oodles of distortion and a nasty sharp cliff drop in ultra LF (12 db/octave). Of course, for a small speaker, the Focus 110 has "astonishing" bass and would make a great near field mini-monitor for a small room even without a sub.

So it only when you look at the distortion figures that you realize that the C4 is a far better speaker (as it should be given its price). The C4 has distortion less than 1% for much of the useful audio range at decent 95 db SPL levels at 2 meters (live music levels).

Sadly, the Focus 110 has 1% distortion only between 1.5 Khz and 4 KHz (at the higher SPL test levels) with the rest far exceeding 1% and vastly exceeding even the cheapest electronic amplifiers distortion.

In the C4, only the tweeter looks slightly disappointing at high SPL - with the rest of the measurements looking stellar(it begs a question as to why did they skimp on the tweeter on such a stellar speaker?).

These basic measurements only help spot potential problems and it would be better to have more third party data, such as impulse or transient response measurements (waterfall plots). And, of course, good measurements performance just help to narrow down the speaker selection process because nothing can beat careful auditioning.