# SB Acoustics' Satori MW13P-4 5" Mid Testing



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I bought these to use in my car as midranges from 300-2khz. As you can see, there is about a 5dB bump in response beginning at about 1.5khz, I assume caused by the dust cap. To that, the Scan Speak 15m exhibits the same bump a bit earlier in frequency. You can see their spec sheet here. Heck the Scan 15w looks nearly the same in this regard as shown here. While the FR isn't ruler flat, the bump in response in my measurements occurs where beaming begins, so this may alleviate that issue by low-passing the mid before this point. 

The 8khz (likely modal) bump is about 10dB higher than the response at 2khz. At 4khz there is approximately a 10dB delta between 0 and 60 degrees response. The HD looks VERY good. Even at 102dB @ 1/2m equivalent the THD above 150hz is less than 0.30%. The separation between 2nd and 3rd order distortion at this output has about a 15dB delta above 300hz which is very nice. 

Overall not quite stellar FR, but given the likely crossover point here around the 2khz region, the issues beyond this point aren't of huge concern. The THD is *very *nice. Overall, I think this is a really good midwoofer (even better used as a midrange).

Subjectively I can say that I've been using these in my car for the past couple weeks and have been VERY impressed with them. I actually prefer them over the Scan 12m, and the Scan 15m/15w ... but I'm basing these impressions on aural memory which isn't great, so take that for what it's worth. 

As an aside... these things are just plain gorgeous!


here's a link to the test results:
http://medleysmusings.com/mw13p-4/


Here's a picture:












PS: If you would like to help me keep up funds for testing, there's a little 'contribute' button that goes through Paypal all the way at the bottom of every page. Any little bit helps.. heck, $3 buys me painter's tape to help seal any small gaps in the baffle/blank interface.


----------



## edouble101 (Dec 9, 2010)

Very nice looking speaker. Thanks for your review


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Wow really flat under 1kHz but so strange at 1,5kHz!
But it seems less dramatic on the distortion graph.
Thx!


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Elgrosso said:


> Wow really flat under 1kHz but so strange at 1,5kHz!
> Thx!


check my first paragraph in the OP.


----------



## HiloDB1 (Feb 25, 2011)

Really like the look of those Satori drivers. Nice open basket. Looks to be a stellar performer too, to go along with its looks.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

ErinH said:


> check my first paragraph in the OP.


Yep, I read too fast!
I just tried this, is it normal that higher spl increases all "waves"? Or is it just an artefact of microphone/smoothing etc?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

it's measurement methods. in the nearfield (which is done to mitigate any room influences and achieve a very long 'window' of measurement to measure distortion) there is a high frequency cutoff where the soundwaves are not given enough time to be represented accurately. thats when you have to move to the far-field (ie; 1/2m, 1m, 2m, etc). this NF high frequency cutoff point is determined by driver diameter. for this driver, that cutoff is about 2.5khz or so, IIRC. so that basically means the waveform accuracy of the response above this frequency should be evaluated in the far field. but for distortion, it's still OK because you're only comparing the original fundamental vs the distortion artifacts; measuring further away doesn't alter the result (I did a thread on this yeeaaaars back).

You can read more info about NF/FF (nearfield/farfield) measurements here:
http://www.artalabs.hr/AppNotes/AP4_FreeField-Rev03eng.pdf



IOW, don't try to match up the HD fundamental to the FF response because the measurement methods are different and that results in different response attributes. A good tester will know this. So be careful of test results you see. I've seen a couple people measure drivers in the nearfield and post that up as frequency response... their results are wrong. 

*note: nearfield is typically within inches of the driver, while farfield is feet. the above linked pdf provides measurements that specify, but that's just a general point that may help you better understand what I mean. 

Hope that helps,
Erin


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

FWIW, a friend asked me how to determine % distortion from relative level. Use this site:
THD to dB - convert percent % to decibels dB percentage voltage % vs per cent converter THD+N total harmonic distortions calculation signal distortion factor attenuation in dB to distortion factor k in percent decibel damping - sengpielaudio Sengpiel

For example, let's look at the following results at 102dB/1m equivalent:










Let's look at 1khz. At this frequency the fundamental is at approximately 114dB. The THD (blue) is at approximately 64dB. The difference between these two values is 50dB.
Punch (-50)dB in to the link and hit the "calculate" button and below it you'll get "0.3162278" %. That value is the distortion relative to the fundamental. 

BTW, 0.32% THD is VERY low for a driver playing at 102dB/1m (102dB spl at 1 meter away).


Some common numbers worth memorizing are:
-30dB down from the fundamental = 3%
-40dB down from the fundamental = 1%


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Very interesting, some more readings in my todo list!
I also have to re-read the explanations on your blog.

Just quickly before, so you always have to merge NF and FF measured curves yourself to get a full view?
Is this why many curve responses around are a bit smoother on high frequencies?

Also, the difference between both curves is only about 2/3db variation.
So we can say this is caused by one feet only?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

don't compare the HD fundamental with the Frequency Response. 

the difference will be the high frequency accuracy. above the NF high frequency cutoff, the response will look different than if it were measured in the FF. the PDF should explain the details better than I can off the top of my head. 

for FR, unless you have an anechoic chamber you are pretty much forced to merge NF/FF together. the point at which you do this will depend on both the NF high frequency cutoff and the point of first reflection in the farfield. the latter is typically 3ms for most people because this is where floor bounce occurs for most DIY'r type measurement setups. 

I went through the trouble of building a HUGE baffle (10ft x 8ft) and treating a room so I could get the first reflection out to 10ms. in the end, it didn't really matter because the NF/FF merge took care of the issues I would otherwise have had to 'gate' out. 


read through the PDF, though. it really does a great job of providing an intro into measuring speakers (which is TOTALLY different than just RTA'ing a system).


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

When are you getting the tweeters?


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

ErinH said:


> ...
> read through the PDF, though. it really does a great job of providing an intro into measuring speakers (which is TOTALLY different than just RTA'ing a system).


Will do! thx again


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> When are you getting the tweeters?


according to UPS tracking, next Monday. (I assume you're talking about the Gladen 20mm)


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Erin, thanks for posting up these tests and for your insights as well. Your a machine!

Question...Did you flush-mount this driver in your test baffle for your measurements?


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The Satori tweeters silly.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Nope. I typically don't flush mount mids/woofers.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Interesting driver! Nonlinear performance looks superb for this size.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5 using Tapatalk


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I'm trying to work with Madisound on doing group buys after I test a product. I started a GB on the scan tweeters with them and the feedback on their end was positive so I'm going to try to keep this kind of thing going when I can. So, I was going to see if there's any interest here on me running a GB for this Satori MW13p-4. If I can get a minimum order of 10 pair, I can get the price down to $245/pair shipped CONUS. At regular price a set would run about $325 shipped. So it'd be a savings of about $80/pair!

I'll get them in and do some impedance tests on them before shipping them out. 

Any interest at all? If so, I'll make a "formal" post.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

I'm in. I missed out on the Scan Tweeter GB...but I already had two pairs so no need to hoard, haha. But I don't have these Satori's yet. Bring it.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Okay. I'll post up on TT, too.


----------



## DearS (May 14, 2005)

What do you use to cross them over? 
What frequency and slope? 
Where do you have them placed? 
where are you placing the tweeter?


----------



## hdrugs (Sep 7, 2009)

gb interest


----------



## mrgreenjeans71 (Jun 14, 2010)

ErinH said:


> I'm trying to work with Madisound on doing group buys after I test a product. I started a GB on the scan tweeters with them and the feedback on their end was positive so I'm going to try to keep this kind of thing going when I can. So, I was going to see if there's any interest here on me running a GB for this Satori MW13p-4. If I can get a minimum order of 10 pair, I can get the price down to $245/pair shipped CONUS. At regular price a set would run about $325 shipped. So it'd be a savings of about $80/pair!
> 
> I'll get them in and do some impedance tests on them before shipping them out.
> 
> Any interest at all? If so, I'll make a "formal" post.


Hello. I'm relatively new to this forum, but I've been looking at these Satori's for a while and would love the opportunity to participate in a group buy if it happens. What's the best way to get in on this?


----------



## shinn_aj (May 27, 2016)

My friend told me that this Satori hold its ground against Scanspeak. Slightly clearer midrange compared to Scanspeak.


----------



## hdrugs (Sep 7, 2009)

Sb acoustics is also releasing new satori midranges i believe one of the model number are mr13p

The model tested here is mw13p, which i believe was more 'marketed' as a midwoofer still i got the 7 inch satori at home and the cone itself are among my favourites for vocal midrange duties all and all 

Alot of life and still retains details my prefered compromise


----------



## win1 (Sep 27, 2008)

Sub to see if gb takes off


----------



## 1fishman (Dec 22, 2012)

hdrugs said:


> Sb acoustics is also releasing new satori midranges i believe one of the model number are mr13p
> 
> The model tested here is mw13p, which i believe was more 'marketed' as a midwoofer still i got the 7 inch satori at home and the cone itself are among my favourites for vocal midrange duties all and all
> 
> Alot of life and still retains details my preferred compromise


Wow, and a MR16P also! http://www.sbacoustics.com/index.php/products/midrange/6-satori-mr16p-4/
Hard to imagine the midrange could get any better then the MW's.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Erin when you say 1/2m 102db (near field) would that be 96db at 1m or is the measurement adjusted to match with the standard of 1 meter?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

that's totally a typo. 

all my HD measurements are done nearfield to emulate the output of 90-102dB (depending on the measurement shown) in the farfield (1 meter). Not sure why I typed 1/2m but it's a typo. 

thanks for catching that.


----------



## brother_c (Sep 21, 2015)

Hope this question isn't too far from the focus of the review or out of context. Do you think that the larger mw16 mw19 would be suitable for use as midwoofers in a three way front? I was considering one of these with their high sensitivity and their somewhat lower f3s in smaller sealed boxes. The price is also in my range and very reasonable.


----------



## 1fishman (Dec 22, 2012)

brother_c said:


> Hope this question isn't too far from the focus of the review or out of context. Do you think that the larger mw16 mw19 would be suitable for use as midwoofers in a three way front? I was considering one of these with their high sensitivity and their somewhat lower f3s in smaller sealed boxes. The price is also in my range and very reasonable.


The MW16p is a great driver iv'e had them open in the door crossed at 80hz - 4000hz good midbass but the it's midrange is something special. I think in sealed pods you could get them to play a good bit lower. The mw16p is a great 2 way driver choice but for Midbass only the 19MW may be a better choice.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

I know this was an objective review but can can you give a your personal impression of the sound maybe your impression above and below 300Hz. Describing the sound you know like open, lively, accurate, dynamic. And maybe possibly compare it to some other speakers, GB40, 12M etc?

Thanks


----------



## lucas569 (Apr 17, 2007)

1fishman said:


> The MW16p is a great driver iv'e had them open in the door crossed at 80hz - 4000hz good midbass but the it's midrange is something special. I think in sealed pods you could get them to play a good bit lower. The mw16p is a great 2 way driver choice but for Midbass only the 19MW may be a better choice.


i cant decide between these and the audiofrogs, its driving me insane


----------



## 1fishman (Dec 22, 2012)

mitchyz250f said:


> I know this was an objective review but can can you give a your personal impression of the sound maybe your impression above and below 300Hz. Describing the sound you know like open, lively, accurate, dynamic. And maybe possibly compare it to some other speakers, GB40, 12M etc?
> 
> Thanks


In the first post 
qoute
"Subjectively I can say that I've been using these in my car for the past couple weeks and have been VERY impressed with them. I actually prefer them over the Scan 12m, and the Scan 15m/15w ... but I'm basing these impressions on aural memory which isn't great, so take that for what it's worth." 

I have a set of MW13p-4 NIB that i still don't have a use for. If you want to buy them, let me know, im not far from you, in Stone Mountain.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

1fishman said:


> In the first post
> qoute
> "Subjectively I can say that I've been using these in my car for the past couple weeks and have been VERY impressed with them. I actually prefer them over the Scan 12m, and the Scan 15m/15w ... but I'm basing these impressions on aural memory which isn't great, so take that for what it's worth."
> 
> I have a set of MW13p-4 NIB that i still don't have a use for. If you want to buy them, let me know, im not far from you, in Stone Mountain.


I understand that ErinH prefers the GB40 to the 12M which many respected people consider to be a fantastic midrange. But at this time in my life what I am really enjoying the dynamics of midranges like PHL1120 and the Audax PR170M0. Some that consider those two speakers to be among the best midranges made but many people do not. It is like the Morel sound, some love it others don't understand what the big deal is about.

The Audax's and PHL's can get to 113db on 60 watts and I think the GB40 will max out at 105 -107db on 100 watts which is certainly loud enough but how are the dynamics? It maybe that the lack of distortion of the GB40 at 105db means that it sounds dynamic and open (the opposite of congested). I don't know enough about speakers to say if that is true or not.


----------



## HulkSmash (May 22, 2011)

I wonder how the Satori MR16P-4 would work as a pure midrange in a three-way front with horns. About ~250 to ~2000hz.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I don't know why you'd want to pair a high efficiency driver like a horn with a standard sensitivity midrange. especially when the horn is treated more like a tweeter. just seems counterproductive to me.


----------

