AudioSmile Little British Monitor (LBM) Loudspeaker Review

When Gene DellaSala brought a loudspeaker brand called ‘AudioSmile’ to my attention, I had to confess never having heard of them. I went over their website to see what they had, and I was impressed by the detailed and no-nonsense white paper on their Little British Monitor product page. It looked like a lot of thought was put into the design of this small powered standmount speaker, and I was intrigued. AudioSmile is a small business owned and operated by Simon Ashton in England. I inquired about the possibility of a review which brings us to today’s review of the Little British Monitor (LBM). On paper, the LBM looked like a solid loudspeaker for situations that demand a small but high-quality speaker such as a desktop monitor or a speaker for a small room or something that can easily be carried around. But I decided to check that out for myself; does the LBM deliver on the promises of all the technology involved in its design? Let’s dig in to find out…

AudioSmile LBM Appearance

The LBM has a unique but handsome design. The finish is a textured black that incorporates mica and metallic particles for a subtle sparkle effect that looks much nicer than the textured vinyl that we see on so many other loudspeakers. It looks nice, and it is also durable and resistant to exhibiting fingerprints like what would be seen with smooth satin finishes. The front baffle edges are rounded as well as the woofer’s mounting, and these edges expose the birch plywood layers of the speaker’s construction. It’s a nice highlight and exhibits how well put-together the LBMs are. The woofer has a smooth concave cone that flows well with the curvature of the tweeter’s waveguide. The drivers do not look busy or unsightly which is good since there is no included grille that could hide these elements. There is a slot port built into the top of the speaker, which is a bit unusual, but I doubt many people would care.

 

Users can also purchase a desktop speaker stand from AudioSmile that visually compliments the speaker since it is made from the same naked birch plywood. It has a playful, arched shape that tries to stay away from hard edges much like the speaker. This gives it a less mechanical character that will certainly be welcome for many users.

Overall, the LBM speakers have more aesthetic character than most speakers in this segment. Some users may prefer totally innocuous black speakers for desktop monitors, but I think most will like the look of the LBMs.

AudioSmile LBM Design Analysis

As a small powered two-way loudspeaker, the LBM would look to be pretty typical as a design, but underneath that base description, we can see that it does take some interesting departures from convention. Let’s dig into the details starting with the top of the frequency-band reproduction, the tweeter.

 

The LBM uses a ¾” inverted aluminum dome mounted in a shallow waveguide. What is unusual is the very wide bandwidth allocated to the tweeter for such a small speaker. The crossover point between the tweeter and woofer in the LBM is 1.5kHz. Usually, small speakers have a much higher crossover point such as 3kHz, because the woofer is normally much more capable than the tweeter in the upper midrange/lower treble region, and smaller woofers are usually pretty comfortable in that bandwidth unlike larger woofers of 6” or so. So, a higher crossover frequency allows designs like this to have a wider dynamic range without sacrificing linearity. However, the LBM  has a very capable tweeter that has a resonant frequency of an astonishingly low 275Hz. The resonant frequency of most ¾” domes might lay somewhere between 1kHz to 2kHz, because such tweeters are usually expected to have higher crossover frequencies so they can focus exclusively on treble ranges. They are typically very light in order to have high sensitivity and so do not need high excursion or low resonant frequencies. The LBM’s tweeter doesn’t need high sensitivity, because as a small speaker meant for near-field listening with a predetermined power source, it doesn’t need to get super loud. It does need to survive the much longer throws of this lower frequency band, and for that purpose, it has an extremely high excursion ability with over 1mm of one-way linear throw. That is much higher than most ¾” tweeters are able to do, so it should be able to withstand such a low crossover frequency without issue.

So, what is the advantage of such a low resonant frequency and low crossover frequency? The answer is essentially the width of vertical dispersion. In other words, it doesn’t need to have the tweeter aiming right at the user’s ear level to sound good. This is important in a desktop sound system since even small movements in the user’s posture translates into large degrees of change for a loudspeaker’s vertical angle in near-field listening. If you have the perfect posture with the same exact ear height at all times, this might not be a big deal to you, but that doesn’t describe a normal human being. Personally, I can be slouching pretty low at my desktop seat but sometimes I can be sitting upright for extended periods. If my desktop loudspeakers have a narrow window of vertical dispersion, the sound would change and be degraded anytime my head lay outside the vector of the tweeter’s aim.

 

By using a low crossover frequency, the phase relationship of the tweeter and woofer stays in sync over a wider angle because the center-to-center spacing of the drivers is a lot tighter relative to a 1.5kHz sound which as a wavelength of 9” as opposed to a 3kHz with a wavelength  of 4.5”. In other words, by having such tight grouping within such a large wavelength, the drivers act more as a single source of sound emission rather than two individual points of sound emission. It’s more like a ‘point source’ that so many loudspeakers strive to emulate, and as a loudspeaker approaches point source emission, its sound behaves the same over a wide angle on all axes. So, it does not change its sound character as much depending on the listener’s angle. That is a great quality to have when you are like me and can change posture and this listening height pretty dramatically at my office desk.

Further keeping the dispersion and thus sound character consistent over a wide angle, the LBM’s tweeter employs a waveguide as well as a phase lens. The shape of both of these elements helps to control the off-axis behavior of the dispersion so that it maintains the same sound character over a wider angle.

 

The woofer is a 3” aluminum cone with a pretty hefty motor system relative to the size. It has a 1” voice coil acting off of a neodymium magnet. The motor may not look big, but neodymium has a lot of force, often ten times as much or more than a comparably sized iron ferrite motor used by most woofers. It’s a powerful magnet, but it needs to be since it has a relatively long excursion. This woofer has 4.6mm of one-way linear throw with 1” of maximum excursion both ways. That is a lot of displacement for a 3” woofer. The woofer also utilizes a copper-alloy shorting ring to fight induction effects which increases bandwidth linearity and decreases distortion.

 

As a powered speaker, the LBM uses 50-watts of amplification for each driver, so while the drivers used are not the highest sensitivity units around, they should still have plenty of output for near-field applications. One unit carries the electronics for both speakers. It uses a class A/B amp and has a very large heatsink on the back panel. Class-A/B may not be quite as efficient as class-D, but it is more reliable on the whole, and with such a massive heatsink, it looks like a unit that was built to last. The LBM uses DSP to handle the crossover, and this allows a steep fourth-order network that would not have been possible with a passive circuit. Connectivity consists of RCA inputs, Bluetooth, and a 3.5mm jack. It can handle the Bluetooth aptX HD codec for high-resolution streaming for sources that are compatible. The LBM also has an RCA subwoofer output. Controls consist of an on/off switch, an input selector, a volume knob, and a boundary compensation selector. One thing I would like to have seen here is a USB audio input which would have bypassed the need for a separate DAC for desktop PC systems for those who want a more reliable digital connection than Bluetooth, but oh well.

 

The boundary compensation selector raises or lowers the low-frequency band that would be affected by placement close to surfaces like walls or desktops. These acoustic situations can give low frequencies a disproportionate boost, and the boundary compensation control can bring down the low frequencies if they sound too elevated from boundary gain. The boundary compensation control can also be used to activate a 100Hz high-pass filter for integration with a subwoofer.

 

The enclosure is very well-built and feels solid. The front panel is made from thick pieces of birch plywood, with other panels being made from a specific type of MDF that has a high resin content that makes it stiffer and less susceptible to warping from moisture absorption. There is a lot of bracing inside including two metal braces around the woofer. The slot port also acts as a brace. The interior panels are lined with egg-crate style acoustic damping foam. A knock test shows the LBM to be one of the more inert speakers that I have come across. Of course, it isn’t nearly as difficult to reinforce and deaden the panels of such a small loudspeaker versus a large one, but AudioSmile has certainly gone the extra mile here, and these speakers feel like little boulders. The craftsmanship and build quality exceed the pricing in my opinion.

The LBM’s port is interesting. AudioSmile’s proprietor, Simon Ashton, had put a lot of work into optimizing port designs as can be seen in his study on the subject: “Design Study of 3D Printed Loudspeaker Port Construction for Resonance and Turbulence Control.” The work into optimal port shapes has been known for some time, and I am glad that AudioSmile has paid attention to that body of knowledge. One intriguing design move that AudioSmile did was use constrained layer damping within the port panels themselves. I wouldn’t have guessed that would have made any difference, but the evidence that AudioSmile provides is convincing. Positioning of the port and woofer also looks to affect performance more than I would have anticipated. Most loudspeaker companies just use cylinder tubes as ports, but at least they bother to add flaring at the ends. Ashton has taken port design very seriously, and I have to tip my hat to AudioSmile for putting in some real effort into port optimization here. Most large loudspeaker manufacturers just phone in this important aspect, but AudioSmile has gone to great lengths to ensure that the port keeps much of its advantages while greatly reducing its disadvantages. 

AudioSmile LBM Design Analysis Listening Sessions

 

Most of my listening with the AudioSmile LBM speakers was done in an office room with the speakers placed about three feet in front of me and facing me directly on an office desktop. I used AudioSmile’s Little Feet Desktop Stands to angle the speakers to face my listening position. A desktop environment is not the ideal space for speakers, but it is one of the intended environment for the LBMs that many users will place them in (those who want to get the best sound out of a desktop environment should refer to our article: Audioholics Guide to Getting Good Sound Out of a Desktop Sound System). I decided to evaluate the LBMs in the conditions that they will probably be used in by most owners. No equalization was used. No subwoofers were used unless noted otherwise.

AudioSmile LBM Design Analysis Music Listening

To see what the LBMs could do with some traditional choral music, I found a very beautiful album from the prestigious Alpha Classics label entitled “Bach: Actus Tragicus (Cantatas BWV 106, 150, 131,12).” As the title indicates, this album has more than just the famous “Actus Tragicus” which became a byname for BWV 106, “Gotte Zeit ist die allerbeste Zeit,” it also contains three other early cantatas from the master. This celebrated album was released in 2016 and is performed by Vox Luminis, a Belgium-based choral group that specializes in early music. The performance as well as the recording is of the highest artistry, and this music is excellent for evaluating the realism of any sound system. I streamed this release from Qobuz in a 96kHz/24-bit resolution.

The album opens with an instrumental introduction to the cantata that features some recorders, violas, and an organ, and the second movement kicks in with a flurry of singing from all of the vocal range, and it sounded fabulous on the LBMs. Voices were exquisitely rendered, and even though sopranos, altos, tenors, and bass voices were singing simultaneously, the LBMs did a great job of keeping them distinct and unambiguous. Imaging set the voices back a bit and allowed the acoustics of the environment to have some flavoring on the recording, although not an overwhelming one. It was recorded in the Church of Our Lady and St Leodegarius in Belgium, a large and reverberant church with a history dating back nearly a millennium. The effect was as if the listener was seated back in a further pew, but not so far back that all that can be heard is reverb. The album doesn’t permit pinpoint imaging, but we do get a sense of the voices’s origins which can partly be attributed to the balance of the speakers. The tonality was excellent as far as I could tell: voices sounded perfectly natural, and the instruments sounded uncolored. With so many voices of various ranges singing at the same time, tonal balance is crucial, and this album would be particularly affected by inconsistencies in the frequency domain, but I heard nothing awry at all. The music by Bach, the performance by Vox Lumina, the recording by Alpha Classics, and its reproduction by the LBMs all added up to a sublime listening experience. It sounded magnificent, especially considering I was listening in a desktop environment which is always a compromise for sound quality.   

Moving our musical clock up by a couple of centuries, I listened to a new release from Sarah King entitled “The Masquerade is Over.” This release is a performance of mid-century jazz staples from the likes of Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, and Nat King Cole. King’s voice tilts toward higher range, and she sings in the style of a club songstress from the 1940s, so these performances sound like what would have been heard in a popular jazz club sometime around the second world war. To my ears, it sounds as if King is striving for period authenticity, and it sounds great thanks not only to the performers but also the top-notch sound engineering. This music is loads of fun as well as demo-worthy for any audiophile with a decent sound system. I also streamed this release from Qobuz in a 96kHz/24-bit resolution.

The first notable aspect that I heard was a strong center image from Sarah, despite the desktop environment and near-field listening which can both degrade center imaging in my experience. Nonetheless, with good placement and good loudspeaker engineering, the LBMs managed to pull off a well-defined center image, and it was as if Mrs. King was singing from the center of my widescreen monitor. Other attributes of the recording were also audible like it was easy to hear that the piano was recorded using close miking since it spanned over the width of the soundstage with the pitch rising as it stretches to the right side. Double bass and percussion were mixed to emanate from the rear center of the soundstage, behind Mrs. King. An occasional French horn flanked King slightly to the right and a muted trumpet flanked left. The LBMs helped to make this all easy to discern. As with all other material I had heard with these speakers, the tonality left nothing to be desired, and I felt the speakers provided a very accurate account of the recording. Mrs. King’s voice sounded smooth and mellifluous, and all of the instruments sounded natural and correct. The only miss was that the double bass didn’t quite have the low-end grunt that one might have heard from a true full-range loudspeaker or subwoofer, but that is no surprise coming from speakers with 3” woofers. However, the double bass was still nicely rendered, and it still produced an enjoyable sound. In my desktop environment, I was getting strong bass down to 80Hz and usable bass down to 50Hz, and 50Hz extension is easily enough to catch the overtones of a double bass. “The Masquerade is Over” was a lot of fun and well worth the attention of anyone who is into great covers of jazz classics, especially if they have a good sound system such as the LBMs.

Moving musical composition way up in time, I listened to “Intrusion Countermeasures Electronics” by Phazma which sounds like a soundtrack from the future. This is electronic music that isn’t easy to categorize in any particular subgenre, although it is released from the Pure Life label which has a focus on electronic ambient and ‘dreampunk,’ a spin-off genre from vaporwave that shook off the ironic sampling and accentuated a cyberpunk aesthetic. This album is a good showcase of music produced strictly in the digital domain and much of the artifice and studio trickery that come along with that.

The intro track lays down some electronic strings with what sounds like mission control NASA chatter for a space launch. The LBMs projected a wide, encompassing soundstage for these atmospherics which then segued into a simple breakbeat for the second track. The third track brought in chopped up electronic strings on top of a meaty bass line, and the LBMs expertly relayed the rapid panning of the synths across the soundstage. The bassline might have had a bit more oomph with a sub, but it was still clear and articulate. The track “Ninsei” was a largely ambient piece with filtered sweeps wafting about some samples that had been run through a vocoder against a rainy background, and the LBMs turned it all into a soothing urban vista. A subsequent track used electronic stabs over a build-up of synth waves, and the LBMs turned it into an enveloping soundscape. The more percussive tracks were given a good amount of verve for desktop speakers, although the LBMs were hamstrung a bit by their size. To be fair, I haven’t heard any other small desktop speaker reproduce lower bass better in this segment. When their size is considered, the bass of the LBMs is pretty darn good. It was perfectly listenable and enjoyable without a subwoofer, although were this my permanent system, I would add a sub since my tastes do see me listening to heavier deep bass tracks from time to time. “Intrusion Countermeasures Electronics” turned out to be a pretty cool electronic music jam, and I think these speakers were a good fit due to their wide and expansive soundstage.

 

To see how the LBMs responded to being pushed hard, I threw on an EP entitled “Dark Embrace” by Mizo. This is brawling drum’n’bass music from the Eatbrain label and features high BPM breakbeats and massive basslines. The bass runs wild in this music, and playing it at a high level will apply pressure to the woofer of any sound system. It’s good stuff to see where a system’s limits lay as well as how low the bass extends.

The LBMs could get loud, but not in bass frequencies. They compressed lower bass at higher output levels instead of running the woofers into distortion, and this is ideal behavior for speakers like this. There is no way a speaker with 3” woofers are going to produce bass loudly, so the best thing to do is simply shut down any misbehavior before it starts. For those who want accuracy, no bass is better than heavily distorted bass since subwoofers can always be added to supplement low-frequency playback. In fact, the LBMs make that easy because they have an RCA sub-out as well as the ability to high-pass themselves at 100Hz. Built-in bass management is a very welcome feature here. I added an Hsu Research ULS-15 (mk 1) subwoofer and engaged the high-pass filter to see what the LBMs could do when they weren’t burdened by low bass playback. The addition of a subwoofer turned these tracks into absolute barnburners. The LBMs could get louder than I could tolerate for near-field listening (about an arm’s length from the speakers). They had a great dynamic range for their size, and I didn’t sense any distortion even at high loudness levels. The LBMs maintained a crisp and clear sound even when driven hard.

AudioSmile LBM Design Analysis Movie Watching

Great sound mixes don’t all have to be loud. Sometimes the finest sound mixing is heard in subtlety, and horror, as a genre, can often do this well when it is trying to up the creep factor. Toward this end, I watched “Night Swim.” I had not yet seen this, but the trailer suggests it to be a film that uses sound carefully to build up scares. It concerns a family who moves into a new house with a backyard pool, although, unfortunately for them, the pool is haunted. It seems like just the other day; I was complaining that there weren’t enough haunted pool movies. While the premise might seem silly, this movie is produced by James Wan who has a great track record for scary movies, and that combined with its tense trailer made me decide to give it a chance.

“Night Swim” turned out to be pretty hokey, but I expected as much from such an absurd premise. The sound mix delivered the goods. Spectral music played over burbling noises as the pool began to threaten its dwellers. A neat sequence that leveraged imaging used a game of Marco Polo where a girl was tricked by a phantom who uttered ‘polo’ as a response to her ‘Marco’ thinking it was a friend. The LBMs soundstage gave this game a frightening sense of immersion. The pool drain is an especially hazardous place as noted by the eerie bubbling noises that emerged from it. It also had some of the noisiest pool lights as they were flickering. The LBM speakers handled the many scenes of deep water burbling noises well, although a subwoofer would certainly have given those scenes a fuller sound. The movie capitalized on the terror of realizing the body of water that you are swimming in is actually hostile, and it used its sound mix accordingly. It’s not a movie for aquaphobics although it does get more ridiculous as it goes on. “Night Swim” is not a great movie, but the speakers did a good job of bringing the premise to life and helping to add tension to the unfolding horror. At least my quota for haunted pool movies has been filled for a while.  

 

I have been unceasingly pestered to watch “Andor” by a family member who claims the show is “so good.” For those who don’t know, “Andor” is a Disney+ show set in the “Star Wars” universe, and because it looks like it could have an interesting sound mix, I decided to give it a go to see what the LBM speakers could do for a science fiction drama. I also wanted to end the nagging from those urging me to watch it. This show concerns the formative experiences of a young spy who joins the rebel alliance, and it looks more sober as a drama than the usual fantastical “Star Wars” stories involving Jedis and space magic.

“Andor” turned out to be much better than I expected. Along with an engaging story and characters, it looked and sounded great, but high production values are to be expected when Disney produces a “Star Wars” series. It’s a show you want to watch with a good sound system, and that is what I had with the LBM speakers. I also complemented the speakers with a subwoofer, since some of the action scenes sounded a bit thin without the sub. When the sub was added, the speakers helped to make the show sound terrific. There weren’t a whole lot of action scenes, but when there were, the effects sounds were vividly rendered by the speakers. A memorable scene that was brought to life with great sound reproduction was the ship chase in a colorful meteor shower in episode six. The meteors ripped and thundered through the atmosphere as tie fighters pursued a stolen ship through the hazardous meteor storm. Dialogue intelligibility was great throughout, at least when the spoken language was English. One aspect of the sound that was particularly notable was the superb music score by Nicholas Britell. I greatly appreciated Britell’s departure from a traditional John Williams type score. I don’t think anyone listening to the music alone would be able to tell it came from a ‘Star Wars’ series, and I view that as a very good thing. The score used electronic pieces as well as orchestral works, and it sounded stellar on the LBMs. I am by no means a big “Star Wars” fan, but I quite enjoyed “Andor,” perhaps because it was so unlike other Star Wars content, and I am glad I watched it with speakers that could realize its setting with such acuity.

AudioSmile LBM Design Analysis Gaming

Gaming isn’t a normal part of my review gamut, but there is a good chance that many people looking at premium desktop speakers will also be using them for gaming, and as someone who likes to take an occasional dive into desktop PC games, I decided to see how they fare in that arena.

One game that I think has a superb sound mix is “GTFO,” a notoriously difficult squad-based horror game with lots of stealth and action. In this game, you play a part of a four-man team of prisoners who have to accomplish tasks in a massive underground facility that has been overrun by creatures. There are too many creatures to fight, so much of the gameplay involves sneaking around them to complete the mission without waking them from their dormant state. I fired “GTFO” up and decided to play what I thought was an easy mission. The problem is, no mission in GTFO is easy, so my team and I all eventually perished a gruesome death. But at least it all sounded great in doing so. “GTFO” has terrific sound design, from the many different guns to the roar of the monsters to the creaking ambience of the dilapidated facility. The LBM speakers gave a great presentation of the experience. The speakers gave a sense of heft to the opening of the high-security vault doors, and the various sirens and alarms rang out with zeal.  One sonic aspect that stood out from what I am accustomed to was the music; the LBMs managed to give a more detailed orchestral score than what I was used to with headphones. Given that headphones excel at detail since they eliminate room acoustics, this was a very nice touch. Imaging is very important in the sound of this game since the player is navigating in the dark and often can only hear the enemies and not see them; the LBMs thankfully left no doubt as to the enemy's position in low-visibility situations. The game’s sound did benefit from a subwoofer; without the sub, “GTFO” still sounded fine on the LBMs, but it didn’t quite have the realism absent of the sub’s thunder. 

 

For sheer FPS action, I loaded up the 2016 version of “Doom” which has to be regarded as a modern classic for all of the much-deserved acclaim it received upon release and the fondness everyone still holds for it. In this game, we play as the ‘Doom’ guy, who is a skilled warrior who fights monsters emerging from a portal from hell on a Martian mining facility. The action is lightning fast and involves lots of aerobatics combined with gunplay. I played a few maps in ‘Arcade’ mode that dives the player right into the action for a quick fix. I hadn’t played this game in some years, and I had forgotten how well it played, as well as how good it looked and sounded. The LBMs gave “Doom” a spirited presentation, and gunshots, explosions, and demons’ screeching were all beautifully articulated by the speakers. The industrial music score sounded great, and the LBMs managed to give the distorted guitars and crunchy synth basslines some grunt. “Doom” has a famously bass-heavy sound design, but the LBMs had enough low-end for me to not pine for a subwoofer. As with GTFO, imaging and soundstage is important in this game since sound cues help the player quickly determine enemy position, and I was never confused as to where enemy sound cues originated from. A sub would have enhanced the immersion, but I was surprised at how much bass the LBMs could produce for this game’s sound. The LBMs certainly did not sound thin, which is a minor miracle for loudspeakers with 3” woofers.

Switching up genres, I played “GRIP: Combat Racing” which is an arcade-esque racing game as its title suggests. I hadn’t yet played it, but it looked like a fun twist on the norm for the genre. In this game, players use cars that have wheels that are larger than the body, so the cars can flip upside down and still race. This allows them to drive on walls and ceilings with enough speed. The cars also have access to power-ups and weapons to help them eliminate the competition. I went through the tutorial and played a couple races and was proud of myself for not finishing dead last in a lower difficulty setting. “GRIP: Combat Racing” was like “Wipeout XL” combined with “TrackMania,” and it proved to be a very fun combination. Much like “Wipeout XL,” “GRIP: Combat Racing” had a killer electronic music score, and it was all high BPM drum’n’bass, a perfect match for the lightning fast pace of the game (available here in Bandcamp: GRIP: Combat Racing Official Soundtrack). It sounded glorious on the LBM speakers, especially when a subwoofer was shoring up the low end. The game sounded terrific when played loud, and the LBM speakers had no problems with the elevated loudness levels. The acceleration of the cars when they hit boost pads, the missiles whooshing past, and the rumble of crashing were all given a vibrance by the speakers that heightened its arcadey feel. It almost gave me the feeling of going to an “Aladdin’s Castle” arcade with $15 in quarters in my pocket on a Saturday afternoon when I was a kid. Those quarters would never last as long as I hoped, but it sure was fun burning through them. When paired with a sub, the LBM speakers left absolutely nothing to be desired for this title. Without the sub, they sounded fine, but the music in this game definitely benefits from the added oomph of a subwoofer.   

AudioSmile LBM Measuremements and Analysis

The AudioSmile LBM desktop speakers were measured in free air at a height of 4 feet at a 1/2-meter distance from the microphone, and the measurements were gated at a 5-millisecond delay. In this time window, some resolution is lost below 500Hz, and accuracy is completely lost below 250Hz. Measurements have been smoothed at a 1/24 octave resolution.

 

The above graph shows the direct-axis frequency response and other curves that describe the AudioSmile LBM’s amplitude response in a number of ways. For more information about the meaning of these curves, please refer to our article Understanding Loudspeaker Measurements Part 1. The first aspect to note is just how neutral and even this response is. In fact, it is one of the flattest I have measured to date. For the on-axis response and listening window, the only two deviations it takes from perfection is a slight dip around 1kHz and also a drop in amplitude that starts around 17kHz or so. I doubt either of these artifacts would be audible. These speakers reproduce the source signal with utmost accuracy. The flatness of the first reflections directivity index also suggests that they hold this neutrality at a very wide angle, so they should retain a similar tonality no matter the room’s acoustics. This is excellent performance.

 

 

The above graphs depict the speaker’s lateral responses out to 90 degrees in five-degree increments. More information about how to interpret these graphs can be read in this article: Understanding Loudspeaker Review Measurements Part II. In these graphs, we get a better look at how the on-axis response and nearby angles compare to the off-axis responses. Much as the first reflections directivity index indicated, we see excellent correlation of frequency response between all angles from the LBM. Again, near perfection. There is not much else to say here. There is a small off-axis bump at around 15kHz that smoothes out as we get closer to the on-axis response that is probably a glitch between how the waveguide interacts between the inverted dome tweeter or maybe the phase lens, but it is of academic interest only since its almost certainly entirely inaudible. With a response like this, these speakers only put out what they receive. They don’t lie about the source signal. If you need small speakers for mixing and mastering purposes, this quality makes them excellent candidates for that mission.

The above polar map graphs show the same information that the preceding graphs do, but they depict it in a way that can offer new insight regarding these speakers’ behavior. Instead of using individual raised lines to illustrate amplitude, these polar maps use color to portray amplitude, and this allows the use of a purely angle/frequency axis perspective. The advantage of these graphs is that they can let us see broader trends in the speaker’s behavior more easily. For more information about the meaning of these graphs, we again refer the reader to Understanding Loudspeaker Review Measurements Part II.

The dispersion pattern of the AudioSmile LBM speakers show superb uniformity for this class. It is a very wide dispersion loudspeaker as would be expected of the design, but the directivity matching is very good. Without knowing the specs, I wouldn’t be able to tell where the crossover between tweeter and woofer occurs from looking at this graph. The dispersion does start to constrict a bit above 7kHz or so that squeezes the output from about 80 degrees to 60 degrees, but that is unlikely to add any coloration to the sound, especially since these are almost certainly going to be used in the near-field. This graph tells us that these speakers will sound the same over a very wide horizontal angle in front of them.

 

The above graph shows the LBM’s response behavior along its vertical axis where zero degrees is directly in front of the tweeter, negative degree values are below the tweeter, and positive degree values are above the tweeter. We can see that the LBM holds its wide dispersion on the vertical axis as well. We do see an off-axis notch in the response above 1kHz, and to get a better look at that, let’s examine it from a polar map perspective…

 

We don’t normally publish polar maps of the vertical response, but I thought it would be interesting to see how the vertical response squares away with AudioSmile’s literature regarding their rationale for the low 1.5kHz crossover frequency between the twitter and woofer. Their reasoning for such a low crossover frequency was to keep a wide dispersion at that frequency. While we do see some waist-banding around the crossover, it is very minor compared to most two-way loudspeakers, so their designs seem to have worked out like intended. The LBMs have an extraordinarily wide angle of vertical dispersion. What that means is that you don’t have to be listening with the tweeter level with your ears as you would with so many other loudspeakers. That is an important quality for near-field monitors since the user’s posture makes large changes relative to the vertical on-axis angle. These speakers give the listener an incredible 30-degrees of vertical dispersion before the response starts to become erratic. The listener does not need to have the speakers aimed directly at their ears to hear a great sound. If the speakers are aimed somewhat high or low, they should sound the same. Reflected sound from the desktop should have similar character as well. This performance gives the LBMs a flexibility that makes it a great choice not just for ideal listening situations but very compromised ones as well.

 

The above graphs show the LBM’s low-frequency responses that I captured using groundplane measurements (where the speaker and microphone are on the ground in a wide-open area). As the graph notes, I have measured the speaker in a few different configurations of the Boundary Compensation knob. The knob adjusts levels below about 1kHz, although its most fully expressed below 500Hz which is what we show here. In total, the knob can attenuate output by about 6dB which might be useful in congested acoustic situations. It does not look to affect extension except for the “100hz Cut” setting that is intended for use with subwoofers. Whatever setting the knob is at, the response is extremely flat. The integration between woofer and port is perfect. The neutrality of this bass response is ridiculously good. While the knee of the response starts at about 70Hz, users will definitely get usable bass below that from boundary gain, especially in a desktop setting. In my own situation, I managed to get usable bass down to 50Hz. Nonetheless, with 3” woofers, these speakers will run out of gas quickly if they are tasked with deep bass, so the addition of a subwoofer is recommended if you want true full-range sound.

AudioSmile LBM Conclusion

Before bringing this review to a close, I will briefly go over the strengths and weaknesses of the product under evaluation. I usually begin this section by listing the weaknesses, but AudioSmile’s ‘Little British Monitor’ doesn’t really have any. The only nit I could possibly pick is that the inclusion of USB audio connectivity would have been beneficial for this class of speaker, but that is a small miss when looking at the overall package. There is no aspect in which I feel it falls short, and that brings us to discussion of its strengths.

 

The LBM’s foremost strength is its audio performance. You can’t really ask for much more from a desktop speaker in terms of sound quality. Its frequency response is nearly ruler flat. It has a wide yet quite even dispersion, so it projects a high-quality sound over a wide angle meaning it isn’t fussy about the listening position to get a great sound. Set them up properly, and they will sound great over a wide listening area. As was mentioned before, these are more than good enough for professional monitoring applications due to their highly accurate sound reproduction. They have unexpectedly good low-frequency extension for smaller speakers as well. For acoustic music, I think they do a great job on their own, although for bass heavy stuff, a subwoofer certainly helps to give it a stronger foundation. But for those who only have room for a small pair of speakers and no subwoofer, there probably isn’t much else out there that would do better than the LBMs. Their dynamic range is more than sufficient for desktop speakers, and I think they could also be used as a two-channel system in a small room, although the addition of a subwoofer would make even more sense in that use case.

The feature set is fine for the class, and I particularly like the 100Hz high-pass filter for easy integration of a subwoofer. Bluetooth connectivity is a great element so users can easily connect their smartphone and stream high quality music on a whim. The 3.5mm jack also makes music playback from a phone or laptop simple.

Audiosmile LBM Subwoofer Recommendations

Good candidate subwoofer recommendations would be the Kanto sub8 for something that can fit into tight situations and offers reasonable performance for a desktop system on a budget. For more serious bass output, the MartinLogan Abyss 8 is a significant step up in both performance, feature set, and price. If your budget is very relaxed and you want a small subwoofer that can rock seriously hard, look at the Sigberg Audio 10D.

 

Outside of their audio performance, the LBMs have stellar build quality. They have a heft and solidity that makes it feel like you get your money’s worth. I do get the sense that they are built to last when I handle them. They look good too. The high quality textured black finish along with the exposed birch layers give it a unique high-end appearance. AudioSmile’s “Little Feet” desktop speaker stands accentuates this appearance and is a worthwhile addition for the aesthetics alone. They look and feel like luxury products yet don’t have the outrageous pricing of so many luxury products.

Audiosmile LBMs vs the Competition

The value of the LBMs are highlighted when I compare them to a couple desktop speakers I looked at over the last couple of years. One speaker was the MonAcoustic SuperMon Mini speakers, a high-end desktop speaker that likely has the best build quality and appearance of any desktop speaker available but are not powered and require external amplification. While the LBMs are very well built, they don’t match the excessive build of the SuperMon Minis, nor should anyone expect them to, given the massive pricing difference. However, the SuperMon Minis were very fussy about placement to get a good sound, and even then, the sound was not exactly neutral although still pleasant. That contrasts with the LBMs which project a neutral and outstanding sound over a wide area and are anything but fussy in terms of setup. Another recently reviewed desktop speaker that serves as a great comparison are the Kanto ORAs. Like the LBMs, the ORAs had a terrifically neutral response on and off-axis. However, the ORAs did feel plasticky and a bit cheap, especially in comparison to the LBMs. The ORAs made up for their feel in their audio performance, but $350 for plastic desktop speakers is still not an easy sell. The LBMs cost significantly more than the ORAs and significantly less than the SuperMon Minis, but they have the best traits of both speakers.

At current exchange rates, the LBMs are priced at about $700/pair as of this writing. That isn’t at all cheap for desktop speakers, and that doesn’t even include import fees since these speakers only ship from England, but I think there is a very good chance that these are the best small desktop speakers on the market at the moment. Getting the best of something is never inexpensive, especially a consumer electronics item, but I would have expected to pay thousands for the best desktop speakers that money can buy. It turns out, that isn’t the case. AudioSmile put a tremendous amount of design work into perfecting the small desktop loudspeaker form factor, and I think it paid off. In my opinion, which makes the LBMs a bargain. Were I shopping in this segment, they would be my first choice, even if cost were no object.

The Score Card

The scoring below is based on each piece of equipment doing the duty it is designed for. The numbers are weighed heavily with respect to the individual cost of each unit, thus giving a rating roughly equal to:

Performance × Price Factor/Value = Rating

Audioholics.com note: The ratings indicated below are based on subjective listening and objective testing of the product in question. The rating scale is based on performance/value ratio. If you notice better performing products in future reviews that have lower numbers in certain areas, be aware that the value factor is most likely the culprit. Other Audioholics reviewers may rate products solely based on performance, and each reviewer has his/her own system for ratings.

Audioholics Rating Scale

• — Excellent
• — Very Good
• — Good
• — Fair
• — Poor

Metric	Rating
Build Quality
Appearance
Treble Extension
Treble Smoothness
Midrange Accuracy
Bass Extension
Bass Accuracy
Imaging
Dynamic Range
Fit and Finish
Performance
Value