TEST OF TANNOY GOLD 5 ACTIVE SPEAKERS

[♔Chello]

TEST OF TANNOY GOLD 5 ACTIVE SPEAKERS

           


Description:
From the manufacturer's marketing:
Premium 200-Watt Bi-Amplified Nearfield Studio Reference Monitor with Proprietary 5" Dual Concentric Point Source Technology
Type: Bassreflex
Cabinet material: Plastic-based composite (not MDF !)


Assembly / preparation for use:
The speakers come in two solid boxes, and are easy to place.
The speakers look much nicer in reality than in pictures, and the build quality is impressively good.
Good, detailed manual included.
All connections are of good quality.


Equipped with 4 connections:
INPUT jack accepts AUX stereo audio over a 3.5 mm mini-jack cable
MONITOR LINK connects a speaker pair and transmits the input mini-jack audio to the additional speaker over a 3.5 mm mini-jack
INPUTS section allows you to connect up to two audio sources using balanced cables with XLR or 1/4" TRS plugs
Cables:
Good quality power cable
Poor quality 1/4" TRS plug cable


Adjustment possibilities on the front:
INPUT TRIM adapts optimally to the input and sets the overall audio level
HF TRIM (+2dB/-2dB) knob allows you to adapt the monitor`s treble frequency response to suit the characteristic of your monitoring space
POWER LED changes to red when overloaded


Adjustment options on the back:
BASS ADJUST (+2dB/-4dB) switch adapts the monitor's bass response to accommodate room requirements
SPEAKER POSITION (L/R) switch determines whether the speaker plays audio for the left or right stereo channel from the AUX audio source (e.g. mp3 player, smartphone)
AUTO-STANDBY (selectable ON/OFF)
The underside of the speakers is provided with a high quality non-slip rubber mat


1st start-up:
I have been testing them for almost 1 week in a temporary setup, and today I finished with the stands that are placed behind the OASYS.


Briefly about daily use:
Fortunately, it is possible to turn off the AUTO-STANDBY function, so that edits can be made without it turning off at any time.

When connected to the Pa5X's output terminals there is a significant noise from the Pa5X in the speakers, but there is absolutely no noise when it has started up, and only a faint blop is heard when the Pa5X is turned on or off.


Sound quality:
Gold 5 has received very varying reviews, but consistently very good reviews from serious magazines.

The immediate impression with a preliminary and not ideal setup was that the midrange and bass were exceptionally detailed.
The treble also improved significantly by turning it up by +2dB, but at the same time became a little too sharp.
The bass was surprisingly powerful; in fact too powerful with the default setting.
The sound image was clearly stereo in front of the keyboard, but there was a certain perspective from the normal listening position just over 2 meters away.


After having made the necessary stands and placed the speakers above the OASYS so that the units came at the correct ear height, I could conduct a more precise test.

   


I placed the stands so that the distance between them was 66cm between the centers of the units.
This can (and should) probably be experimented with a bit, because there was a certain perspective, but at the same time an audible stereo effect, which I don't want.

With the new stands, the speakers also came quite close to the sloping back wall, which resulted in an even stronger (and colored) bass reproduction.
Even though I adjusted from the standard +2dB to -4dB, the bass was far too powerful.
These speakers are very sensitive to placement against a back wall, and need some air between them to avoid getting a colored bass reproduction. The test setup had about 50cm to the back wall, which also gives too much bass.
This makes them very problematic to place in my studio, as I don't have enough space available.

But how does the rest sound ?
(What is now being said should be paid special attention to, because I had forgotten that I had adjusted the treble to +2dB, which should absolutely be avoided)

Not as good as the first impression; upper bass and midrange was too powerful, while the upper treble (from 10kHz and up) WAS there, but it was too weak.
The details high up in the frequency range was there too, but they lacked level.
After testing all types of styles, I put my favorite Mp3s on a USB stick, and played these to assess the quality against my horns.

What a letdown !
But this is also to be expected..?

The Mp3s I use are of an unusually high quality, and revealed clear shortcomings in the entire frequency range in a direct comparison:
The bass was unclear and muddy and too powerful, the midrange was too dominant and a little too sharp, but detailed, while the treble was quite withdrawn, but detailed.


These speakers obviously require some EQ correction to perform at their best, and I therefore tried a few changes:
Audible response is actually achieved from 16Hz all the way up to 24kHz, which was surprising.
However, what was missing was the punch that should have been present down in the frequency range - this was completely missing, resulting in a boxy sound.

It turned out that a reduction in the area around 100Hz reduced the boxy sound somewhat, but it was still there, anyway.
A boost in the upper frequency range was also not good, because the sound only becomes sharper and unnatural.
I tried all frequency ranges to make the Snare Drum explosive, but this one would not not sound as it should no matter what I did; it completely lacked punch. VERY surprising.
A double bass was perceived as muddy, while the Snare Drum (via Drum Editor) sounded more like a cymbal, but without its power.

The same changes while listening with the headset or horns, gave an dramatic effect and was incredibly effective.


This made me think that something must be wrong, because serious reviewers can't be that wrong ?

Then I came up with a possible reason:
I had turned up the treble by +2dB !

What if I reduced it by -2dB instead ?


Both the bass and treble controls are not made as we are used to, because they work within a much larger range (wide):

High frequency adjustment is carried out in the declared range of ±2 dB at frequencies from 1 kHz and above.
Low frequency adjustment is carried out in the declared range of -2dB to -4dB from 200 Hz and below.

This means that they do not work like old-fashioned ones, which only affect the area closest to the center frequency they are set to.


When I set the treble control to -2dB, the soundscape became very different:

The dynamics in the midrange and treble were dramatically improved, and the Snare Drums responded more normally to EQ with the Drum Editor, and now sound more like they should.

The details were also much better reproduced than in the first setup - the Gold 5 really impresses in terms of detail from the midrange and up..!

I found a measurement of the frequency response for the Gold 5 and the Yamaha HS5, and the Gold 5 gives a nicer curve, but the graph also shows what I hear; that there is too high an output in the range of 80Hz to about 110Hz.

   


When I applied a reduction of (only) 1.1dB for 81Hz and 108Hz with the Pa5X's MaxxAudio and adjusted the Q value, I was able to completely eliminate the box sound.
Another thing is that there is absolutely no noise from the bass reflex port regardless of volume.


The accompanying data sheet in the manual also shows that the Gold 5 has a bass response down to 49Hz (-10dB), but my ears say that they go deeper with a much lower dB loss.

I should be able to achieve a pretty good sub-bass with moderate amplification, and the built-in amplifiers have no problem handling low frequencies at high volumes; neither do the units.


Pros:
* Very detailed sound from midrange and up
* A certain three-dimensionality provides usable perspective
* Unusually good bass reproduction with minimal EQ correction
* Very competent amplifiers
* Good adjustment options
* Good connectivity options - possibility to connect up to two audio sources
* Very high build quality
* Plastic-based composite based  cabinet (not MDF !)
* Very good manual
* Stable base


Cons:
* Extremely poorly designed bass reflex port
* Difficult to place, as they require a certain distance to the back wall
* Significant box sound without external EQ
* Very poorly shielded amplifiers that induces significant noise via their connections to the sound card - a USB isolator DOES NOT solves the problem



Final conclusion:
NOT RECOMMENDED - SEE LATEST REVIEW

These monitors live up to their name and are a goldmine among monitors.

With minimal EQ correction they deliver a sound that is equivalent to far more expensive monitors, and are also able to provide a certain perspective, something I have never experienced with active studio monitors.

With their extremely competent built-in amplifiers they can also play loud without audible problems.

[⚅Graham UK]

Chello. Thank you for your interesting Tannoy review.

Just a passing comment...My AudioTechnica headphones also produce 80Hz -120Hz upper bass BLOOM which I have to eliminate via EQ.
In my microphone selling days to Recording Studios, I did not like to see nearfield monitors standing directly on the rear of mixing desks, the desk reflections in effect were like increasing the size of the speakers front panel causing colouration.
These were so called Pro engineers !!!.

[♔Chello]

Chello. Thank you for your interesting Tannoy review.

Just a passing comment...My AudioTechnica headphones also produce 80Hz -120Hz upper bass BLOOM which I have to eliminate via EQ.
In my microphone selling days to Recording Studios, I did not like to see nearfield monitors standing directly on the rear of mixing desks, the desk reflections in effect were like increasing the size of the speakers front panel causing colouration.
These were so called Pro engineers !!!.

⚅Graham

Glad you found it interesting.
Speakers have always been my special interest, and this is probably where I have my greatest expertise, because I have designed speakers for many decades and have had a lot of experience.

It is interesting that you mention that your Audio Technica headphones also have a higher output at 80Hz - 120Hz, because most headphones (and speakers) have a BLOOM in the 100Hz range due to an impedance peak right here.

Cambridge Audio's amplifiers therefore use 100Hz as the center frequency for their bass control, which can effectively reduce the problem - by reducing 100Hz, a more powerful bass is achieved WITHOUT BLOOM.

100Hz can be considered the most hostile (and destructive) resonance we surround ourselves with.

Secondly, reflective surfaces are just as destructive to perspective and coherence, and placing speakers directly on the rear of mixing desks gives unwanted reflections that Pro engineers should be aware of.

My Gold 5 is placed above the OASYS which has a large surface, but the stand is sharply angled, so that reflections are avoided.

I will spend some time locating exact problem frequencies (and ideal sub-frequency) for the Gold 5 - with the Pa5X's parametric EQ these are easy to locate by narrowing the Q value with a gain value of +10dB.

This test will therefore probably have a concluding part in a bit.

[♔Chello]

I HAVE GOOD EARS

I did an extended test to locate the Gold 5's problematic (and non-problematic) frequency ranges with the Pa5X's parametric EQ.

So how did I do this ?

From the available measurements of the frequency response, I knew that the 80-110Hz range had too high a level - this is also what my ears say.

I chose one range, set the Gain to max (+17.7dB), set the Q value to the sharpest (3.97), and began a sweep from 16Hz and steplessly upwards.

A BLOOM was very clearly made at 48Hz, 108Hz and 114Hz, which matches the measurements very well.

A reduction of only 1.1dB for 108Hz and 114Hz was enough to eliminate the problem; even with the sharpest Q value.

Then comes something worth noting:
I chose a default setting with no name, and got the values 48Hz, 108Hz and 114Hz on the first 3, while the default should be 48, 81, 136, 645, 2734, 6502 and 10321Hz.
I tried several to be sure, but got the same results every time - is this a case of artificial intelligence ?
When I later tried the same thing, I got the values that should normally be there.!?

At the same time, I also found that 6502Hz is the frequency where brushes are most pronounced, and Korg also has this as a selected default frequency vaule (!).

My ears told me that these were the frequencies that should be chosen to influence the frequency response in the right direction, and they are there, ready to use.

This suggests that Korg uses the same philosophy as Tannoy and Cambridge Audio, both of which have a reputation for knowing what they are doing.

I have had several amplifiers from Cambridge Audio over the years, and they stand out from all others in terms of three-dimensionality and perspective.
To this day - after almost 25 years of daily use - I still have the cheap C500 (for the subwoofer), which is better than most far more expensive preamplifiers.

The Gold 5 also has the same quality or ability to give more life to the music; bring hidden events to life that Cambridge Audio has.

In fact, all of my components in my equipment are of this quality, and are carefully selected to play together as best as possible.

It is therefore a great pleasure to be able to say that the Gold 5 suits my equipment to a degree I had not expected.
My main speakers are of course better, but they are also many times as expensive.

[♔Chello]

FOLLOW-UP REVIEW

After listening to the Gold 5 for a few days when everything was finally in place, the review is different:
They are now connected to the sound card, so that I can also mix the sound with my horns and subwoofer.

This makes the difference very clear:
The Gold 5 have too high a level in the upper bass and lower midrange to be called monitors.
Even if they are placed 1 meter from the back wall, the bass is too powerful; even with the bass set to -4dB and the treble to +2dB.

Secondly, the double bass is perceived as undetailed and muddy, and the Snare drums lack punch; the sound from these is not as it should be.

The bass is generally perceived as muddy and colored, while the Snare drums and cymbals lack dynamic impact.

Only the upper midrange and lower treble are reproduced with convincing authenticity.


Gold 5 therefore no longer gets my unreserved recommendation, because they are not neutral as monitors should be, and they are unusually difficult to place optimally.


Their built-in amplifiers are also very poorly shielded, which gives a significant digital noise when connected to a USB-based sound card.

Connected to the keyboard's OUT terminals there is no noise, so ordinary users will not be bothered by this noise, while the more advanced will have to invest in a USB isolator, and connect ALL USB-based equipment via this.

I will very likely build my own monitors, as I have very good units from my previous horns left over and a reasonably good digital amplifier.

I am thinking of a concept ala Korg PAAS.

[♔Chello]

BASS PROBLEM LOCATED AND ELIMINATED

I really should have thought of this right away:
The problem with too powerful and colored bass is due to the BASS REFLEX PORT.
This is much larger than normal, and lets too much air through; hence the excessively high bass output.

This is surprisingly bad design by Tannoy.
How is it possible that they don't hear the same thing as me ?


Anyway - I taped the ports, so that nothing came out of them, as a temporary solution.
VOILA !
Now the bass became more as it should be, without the boost in the 100Hz area; it also became significantly cleaner.

With the ports taped, the tweeters got much more level, and even though I have set them to -2dB, they can seem a bit sharp - a solution to one problem creates a new one...

But this is easy to compensate for by adjusting the bass up by +2dB, and this is also true in practice, because now both bass and treble are as I want in terms of volume.

No box noise, either.
Problem solved.

I'll try milling some inserts that I'll press into the ports - this is worth a try. 
Otherwise I'll have to muffle them from the inside.

[♔Chello]

ANOTHER EXTENDED TEST

As mentioned, the bass reflex port is too big; the external opening is too big, and the internal length is too short.

If the port had been too small externally, this would have caused noise in the port (like KRK), while when it is too big, the frequency range is extended upwards - in this case with a strong resonance hump at 85Hz and 114Hz, but also too high a level upwards to several hundred Hz.

Should I continue ?
The power is stated at 200 Watts (how this is measured is not stated).
These are two separate amplifier circuits, which means that at best it is 150 Watts x 50 Watts (peak power).

When I play loud, the amplifiers have no problems, but the unit becomes metallic and sharper in the sound, and the perspective ceases and switches to stereo, which is typical of low-quality units.
This MAY also be due to the amplifiers, but I don't think so, because they don't have problems with the bass response.

And this happens when the treble is maxed down by -2dB..!

Tannoy is not what it once was, and I have a hard time believing that these new units are an improvement on the original ones.
It would have been criminal for a company like Behringer to take over a company like Tannoy, and ruin their reputation.

I can't use these as control monitors (which was the intention), and especially the frequency range where Snare drums/brushes have their presence area, the reproduction is shockingly lousy - it's impossible to make them sound natural when I use Drum Editor, and this applies to all drum kits.

My horns and Stax headset work brilliantly with Drum Editor, and for performances the Gold 5 works OK with these, but only at moderate levels.
Fortunately I use many amplifiers, so I can easily adjust the levels individually between subwoofer, horns and "monitors".

[♔Chello]

THIS IS GETTING WORSE AND WORSE

I thought I had solved all the problems.

But a new one appeared:
When I had connected all the devices to the USB isolator via the USB Device (HUB), there was still noise.
I connected and disconnected all the devices one by one, and the source appeared clearly and distinctly:
Tannoy Gold 5.

There is only noise when these are connected, which shows that the amplifiers are even worse shielded than I first assumed.

Usually such noise would go in a loop through the system, but fortunately the recordings are not affected by noise.

And it got even worse:
The USB HUB is unable to power the sound card, the DAC and the Pa5X's USB midi driver..!

This means that I have to invest in a USB isolator for EVERY device and connect them as normal to the computer - I only have one, but I need 4 more.

This is going to be expensive, because each one costs over 100 €.
I never imagined that a couple of new monitors would cause so many problems.

This is a drop too much, and means that I absolutely cannot recommend these so-called monitors !!!

[⚅Graham UK]

Chello. So sorry to read your feedback...So frustrating.

As I previously stated, I have had first hand experience. 
When a company is so successful another company buys it and then the first thing they do is change the success they have just purchased...This is not isolated as it happens many-many times,
I resigned after 4 years and left them to sort the mess out !!!.

[♔Chello]

Chello. So sorry to read your feedback...So frustrating.

As I previously stated, I have had first hand experience. 
When a company is so successful another company buys it and then the first thing they do is change the success they have just purchased...This is not isolated as it happens many-many times,
I resigned after 4 years and left them to sort the mess out !!!.

⚅Graham


Yes; it's a shame to see a brand ruined in this way, but there are countless examples of this, unfortunately.

I'm probably far more demanding of quality than most people, but it's a fact that the bass reflex port is incorrectly dimensioned (it shouldn't have been there, because they work fine without it) and that the amplifier section is very poorly shielded against digital noise.

I haven't completely given up on them yet, because they work reasonably well when the ports are blocked, except for the noise, and if I didn't have to use a sound card (MOTU), they would have worked reasonably well with blocked ports without noise.

I have a few setups left to test with the USB isolator (Topping HS02) - there are many ways to connect this, even though it's a small box with only 2 outputs and 2 inputs.

This test was far more elaborate than I could have anticipated, and I've rarely fooled myself so thoroughly on my first impression.