Dayton Audio B652-AIR Speaker System Review Test Bench

Test Bench

Satellite Sensitivity: 87 dB from 500 Hz to 2 kHz

This graph shows the quasi-anechoic (employing close-miking of all woofers) frequency response of the B652-AIR satellite (purple trace) and SUB-1000 subwoofer (blue trace). The passive loudspeaker was measured with grille at a distance of 1 meter with a 2.83-volt input.

The B652-AIR’s listening-window response (a five-point average of axial and +/–15-degree horizontal and vertical responses) measures +1.78/–3.34 decibels from 200 hertz to 10 kilohertz. An average of axial and +/–15-degree horizontal responses measures +2.68/–3.04 dB from 200 Hz to 10 kHz. The –3dB point is at 91 Hz, and the –6dB point is at 77 Hz. Impedance reaches a minimum of 5.35 ohms at 200 Hz and a phase angle of –27.83 degrees at 114 Hz.

The SUB-1000’s close-miked response, normalized to the level at 80 Hz, indicates that the lower –3dB point is at 38 Hz and the –6dB point is at 33 Hz. The upper –3dB point is at 108 Hz with the Crossover control set to maximum.—MJP

Dayton Audio
(800) 338-0531

jalan's picture

The subwoofer photoed in the article is not the SUB-1000 from Dayton Audio, its the Dayton T1004A (Titanic MK 4). Perhaps this is why it sounded so good.....its a $580.00 sub, not $119.00

Mark Fleischmann's picture
The sub reviewed was in fact the SUB-1000 but the artwork shows the other model. We will correct it as soon as we get new artwork. Apologies for the error.
jagxjr15's picture

Rob Sabin's response to a letter ("The Value Quotient") in the January 2018 issue of S&V flatly contradicts the review of the Dayton Audio B652-AIR Speaker System here. Sabin's reply to the letter writer states "Our Performance rating reflects (or should reflect) only the audio or video performance of a product, irrespective of price." But the reviewer says instead, "our ratings generally measure a product’s merit relative to other products on the market in its price range, not in absolute terms. Compared with other monitor-size speakers in our Top Picks at all prices, the B652-AIR would win a solid three and a half to four stars. But relative to speakers that sell for $60/pair, which don’t make our Top Picks at all, they are five-star champions".

If the ratings are to have any value to readers, S&V should have a consistent policy. Either all of the performance ratings should be relative to other components in its price range (as the reviewer claims), or they should all be "absolute", that is with only top performing, state-of-the- art components receiving 5 star performance ratings (per editor Sabin), with the Value rating expressing the price/performance ratio of the component under review. Sabin's view makes more sense to me, otherwise one or other of the separate Performance or Value ratings are redundant. As it is now, with each reviewer deciding what the ratings mean, they have little value to S&V readers.

Heresy4fold's picture

The other issue with comparing products in particular price range is that the prices are subject to change.

Also: which prices are we referring to? MSRP? Retail? Wholesale? "Open-box-re-certified"? Or the ominous "Trump-tariff-applied" price?