$70,000 drivers may well be a case of kidding oneself...
even a quarter of that...
Or fanaticism...
I keep thinking it is losing track of the goal.
If justifying the expense that's one thing.
If making music is the goal, that's another thing.
Is it how good a sound reproduction system can I make?
or How good a speaker can I make?
or How good a single driver speaker can I make?
(must be single driver, I've already decided single driver must sound best)
or How expensive a single driver speaker can I make? (see, it cost more, it must be best)
field coil, alnico, permendur, etc for the sake of what it is, or does it really sound that much better.
I know there's all kinds of reasons not to judge what you hear @ audio shows as "what a system can do," but @ places like RMAF, by the third day to sort things out, w/everyone starting out with the same size room, some i feel generalities can be drawn.
If I go around just listening to sound qualities, then comparing price, things look different.
That's one reason my wife has been handy @ such times, she is a professionally trained musician, with great ears, but knows very little about "audio speak."
I'll try to explain e.g. Feastrex cost so much because of field coil drivers, and she'll give this confused look, and say but they're the ones that don't have any dynamics, and fall apart playing symphonies, and you said the CAR speakers have three field coil drivers, have great dynamics, and cost half as much...
I keep thinking of the whole "kidding ourselves" not as a troll or insult if taken open-mindedly.
even a quarter of that...
Or fanaticism...
I keep thinking it is losing track of the goal.
If justifying the expense that's one thing.
If making music is the goal, that's another thing.
Is it how good a sound reproduction system can I make?
or How good a speaker can I make?
or How good a single driver speaker can I make?
(must be single driver, I've already decided single driver must sound best)
or How expensive a single driver speaker can I make? (see, it cost more, it must be best)
field coil, alnico, permendur, etc for the sake of what it is, or does it really sound that much better.
I know there's all kinds of reasons not to judge what you hear @ audio shows as "what a system can do," but @ places like RMAF, by the third day to sort things out, w/everyone starting out with the same size room, some i feel generalities can be drawn.
If I go around just listening to sound qualities, then comparing price, things look different.
That's one reason my wife has been handy @ such times, she is a professionally trained musician, with great ears, but knows very little about "audio speak."
I'll try to explain e.g. Feastrex cost so much because of field coil drivers, and she'll give this confused look, and say but they're the ones that don't have any dynamics, and fall apart playing symphonies, and you said the CAR speakers have three field coil drivers, have great dynamics, and cost half as much...
I keep thinking of the whole "kidding ourselves" not as a troll or insult if taken open-mindedly.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Well.
The cost of the Featrex isn't all about the topology of the motors. It is about hand-crafted using very exotic materials by craftsmen of the highest order. The car analogy probably didn't go far enuff, the really big buck units are probably more comparable to very exotic hand built cars not a "boring" assembly line built BMW. Even the entry level field coils i have on hand are of a build quality higher than you'd expect of anything coming off an assembly line. The difference between these and a typical vintage field coil is HUGE.
They are expensive and they don't fit the frugal-phile(tm) philosophy but it will be nice to get a benchmark,
dave
chops said:
The cost of the Featrex isn't all about the topology of the motors. It is about hand-crafted using very exotic materials by craftsmen of the highest order. The car analogy probably didn't go far enuff, the really big buck units are probably more comparable to very exotic hand built cars not a "boring" assembly line built BMW. Even the entry level field coils i have on hand are of a build quality higher than you'd expect of anything coming off an assembly line. The difference between these and a typical vintage field coil is HUGE.
They are expensive and they don't fit the frugal-phile(tm) philosophy but it will be nice to get a benchmark,
dave
Ah geez...
Ok, y'all...
I will answer up here. Here is the deal with the 70000 drivers...
I apprenticed with Feastrex this summer, enjoyed myself thoroughly and I will try to explain some of the cost to you.
A huge portion of the cost is the metal. Feastrex has tried about every different metallurgy and combinations thereof and power supply of technologies under the sun in the development phase of their units. The configurations that they have produced for the past several years are all calling upon what ends up being the more advanced processing methods from the best equipped suppliers, in some cases the only suppliers. Their permendur is custom made by sumitomo metals, they also make large diameter pieces of forged pure iron (not cheap, actually). Their machining is done by simply "the best" in Japan.
It is not a matter of Feastrex's "buying power." The drivers would still be expensive if there were thousands being made because of the lack of ecomony of scale on the difficult metallurgy and machining processes involved. They already have been purchasing their motor parts in large quantities for the past several years. Their unit's price is stable, except for the ones including permendur parts which vary according to the price of cobalt.
I will not go into a huge amount of detail here, but I will draw an analogy: within the low end stuff, it is the difference between the materials cost of a production car and formula one. Within the high end stuff, the space program. Literally, the parts cost is that high on the high end stuff.
Indeed, "you get what you pay for." In time, with more and more people hearing the drivers and becoming educated about the company's history, the drivers will not seem as controversially priced. I personally could not afford to budget the the very pair of Feastrex drivers that I own and I understand a frustration with a high priced anything. I am lucky to have them though and enjoy them daily. They are indeed a great benchmark for my work with Fostex drivers.
-Clark
Ok, y'all...
I will answer up here. Here is the deal with the 70000 drivers...
I apprenticed with Feastrex this summer, enjoyed myself thoroughly and I will try to explain some of the cost to you.
A huge portion of the cost is the metal. Feastrex has tried about every different metallurgy and combinations thereof and power supply of technologies under the sun in the development phase of their units. The configurations that they have produced for the past several years are all calling upon what ends up being the more advanced processing methods from the best equipped suppliers, in some cases the only suppliers. Their permendur is custom made by sumitomo metals, they also make large diameter pieces of forged pure iron (not cheap, actually). Their machining is done by simply "the best" in Japan.
It is not a matter of Feastrex's "buying power." The drivers would still be expensive if there were thousands being made because of the lack of ecomony of scale on the difficult metallurgy and machining processes involved. They already have been purchasing their motor parts in large quantities for the past several years. Their unit's price is stable, except for the ones including permendur parts which vary according to the price of cobalt.
I will not go into a huge amount of detail here, but I will draw an analogy: within the low end stuff, it is the difference between the materials cost of a production car and formula one. Within the high end stuff, the space program. Literally, the parts cost is that high on the high end stuff.
Indeed, "you get what you pay for." In time, with more and more people hearing the drivers and becoming educated about the company's history, the drivers will not seem as controversially priced. I personally could not afford to budget the the very pair of Feastrex drivers that I own and I understand a frustration with a high priced anything. I am lucky to have them though and enjoy them daily. They are indeed a great benchmark for my work with Fostex drivers.
-Clark
Re: Re: Re: Re: Well.
Actually to be a legitimate comparison, Ford would be asking closer to $1,000,000 a peice for these and I have to say yes. If they stopped building ford cars and trucks, laid off all those people and went into business as a private company building a hand built Model T with some tweaks. They could probably market it for an astronomical price and sell enough to support a small company.
Amazing what perspective does sometims.
Speaker manufacturers are no different. Supply and demand, special construction techniques and materials etc.
/end rant lol
I have to admit, there is something sexy about a large, overpowered, multi way club jam system. For about 10 minutes.
I find the FR to be something I can listen to for hours. Perhaps ear fatigue is the difference here, but I think there is far more to it.
The complex cabinets and difficulty in procuring materials, labor, and prohibitive costs are the reason most manufacturers probably don't do FR.
Other than that, it is different. It isn't better, or worse, or anything else. It is different and some of us just love it for what it is. Many have said it far bettter than I though.
Take care,
Robert
chops said:
Actually to be a legitimate comparison, Ford would be asking closer to $1,000,000 a peice for these and I have to say yes. If they stopped building ford cars and trucks, laid off all those people and went into business as a private company building a hand built Model T with some tweaks. They could probably market it for an astronomical price and sell enough to support a small company.
Amazing what perspective does sometims.
Speaker manufacturers are no different. Supply and demand, special construction techniques and materials etc.
/end rant lol
I have to admit, there is something sexy about a large, overpowered, multi way club jam system. For about 10 minutes.
I find the FR to be something I can listen to for hours. Perhaps ear fatigue is the difference here, but I think there is far more to it.
The complex cabinets and difficulty in procuring materials, labor, and prohibitive costs are the reason most manufacturers probably don't do FR.
Other than that, it is different. It isn't better, or worse, or anything else. It is different and some of us just love it for what it is. Many have said it far bettter than I though.
Take care,
Robert
I have read several times here now that "complex enclosures" are one of the reasons FR systems are not in the mainstream of hifi.
I really don't see folded horns, TL's, BLH's, etc, etc as complex as some of these sealed or ported enclosures some of the big companies come out with.
A lot of these high $$ loudspeakers use enclosures that are 3-4" thick on all sides, use several different layers of exotic materials, weigh in at more than 300-500 lbs for a 4' tall enclosure, have about 100 lbs alone in just bracing and deadening material, super exotic veneers, 10-20 hand laid layers of automotive paints, lacquers, metals, glass, sands, etc, etc.
So now you have an enclosure that's meticulously hand-built as stout as a Rolls-Royce Phantom, then they have to go and ruin it by mounting several drivers to it and adding a "complex" crossover network to it.
Now who says FR driver enclosures are complex?
I really don't see folded horns, TL's, BLH's, etc, etc as complex as some of these sealed or ported enclosures some of the big companies come out with.
A lot of these high $$ loudspeakers use enclosures that are 3-4" thick on all sides, use several different layers of exotic materials, weigh in at more than 300-500 lbs for a 4' tall enclosure, have about 100 lbs alone in just bracing and deadening material, super exotic veneers, 10-20 hand laid layers of automotive paints, lacquers, metals, glass, sands, etc, etc.
So now you have an enclosure that's meticulously hand-built as stout as a Rolls-Royce Phantom, then they have to go and ruin it by mounting several drivers to it and adding a "complex" crossover network to it.
Now who says FR driver enclosures are complex?
tinitus said:
Not long ago you advocated fore huge dipoles and monster subs...thats a really impressive change
True, but I don't consider dipoles and sealed push-pull subs of any size complex.
Now when you factor in the multiple amps for quad-amping, the digital crossovers and digital EQ's, then the electronics chain is becoming quite complex, and a bit noisy as well. Hence one of the main reasons for getting rid of all of that mess.
BTW, good memory there tinitus! LOL
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well.
Your analogy is confused. If Ford built F150s the way Model Ts were, they might be $1M. It's worth your time (and chops) to investigate the hoops manufacturers like PSB jump through shaving every penny on cutting a cabinet or inserting a tweeter to deliver the value you get. I don't see how a company like Feastrex has that luxury.
Chops, listen to one. Long before I knew about field coil speakers, before this DIY rebirth, before I was given my first tube amp (a MC240, ha!) and before the Internet, I heard an RCA FC studio monitor at my first station's AM transmitter site. I still remember its 'special' sound even in the company, of massive JBL and Tannoy production monitors at the studio. I still kick myself for not buying it.
musgofasa said:
Your analogy is confused. If Ford built F150s the way Model Ts were, they might be $1M. It's worth your time (and chops) to investigate the hoops manufacturers like PSB jump through shaving every penny on cutting a cabinet or inserting a tweeter to deliver the value you get. I don't see how a company like Feastrex has that luxury.
Chops, listen to one. Long before I knew about field coil speakers, before this DIY rebirth, before I was given my first tube amp (a MC240, ha!) and before the Internet, I heard an RCA FC studio monitor at my first station's AM transmitter site. I still remember its 'special' sound even in the company, of massive JBL and Tannoy production monitors at the studio. I still kick myself for not buying it.
Others with more expertise will chime-in here, however, having built a few pairs of folded horns, as well as the above mentioned br boxes, etc. I know which is the more complex build! YMMV, of course.
The majority of DIY enclosures suffer from that flash factory finish(es) that we've come to associate with "high-end" products.
Don
The majority of DIY enclosures suffer from that flash factory finish(es) that we've come to associate with "high-end" products.
Don
Going back a few post someone was compairing the difference between Full Range and Multiway designs as like the difference between a digital piano and a real piano.
I have both types of piano in my house and I have heard the difference between FR and MW speakers and it is not a fair comparison at all. FR and MW speakers sound different both are limited in different ways. And they sound good on different types of music at different playback levels.
A real piano, is a piano, it not a recording of a Piano is is the real thing. A digital piano is convinient because you can use headphones and you can pick it up (if its a stage one). The piano I have is old and only just holds tune, but when it is being played you would never mistake it for a recording or for a speaker. The digital piano sounds like a recording (If it is being played well) it dosn't interact with the house in the same way. I have never heared a speaker system that can do that interaction with the environment like a real instrument FR or MW although some get close for a single instrument, they fall to pieces when you get many instruments.
So the comparison should be between any speaker system FR or MW and actually going to the concert.
Anyway that is my two peneth worth. So I would say listen to whatever you like but don't fool yourself that your playback system sounds like being at the concert or in the recording studio.
Andy.
I have both types of piano in my house and I have heard the difference between FR and MW speakers and it is not a fair comparison at all. FR and MW speakers sound different both are limited in different ways. And they sound good on different types of music at different playback levels.
A real piano, is a piano, it not a recording of a Piano is is the real thing. A digital piano is convinient because you can use headphones and you can pick it up (if its a stage one). The piano I have is old and only just holds tune, but when it is being played you would never mistake it for a recording or for a speaker. The digital piano sounds like a recording (If it is being played well) it dosn't interact with the house in the same way. I have never heared a speaker system that can do that interaction with the environment like a real instrument FR or MW although some get close for a single instrument, they fall to pieces when you get many instruments.
So the comparison should be between any speaker system FR or MW and actually going to the concert.
Anyway that is my two peneth worth. So I would say listen to whatever you like but don't fool yourself that your playback system sounds like being at the concert or in the recording studio.
Andy.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well.
Oh I have. I have heard the magic field coil speakers possess. They are not up to the standards of Feastrex, but the original field coil speakers in some of these old RCA, Philco, Zenith, etc, etc floor standing console radios my father has sitting around that he works on. They are all open baffle, but they do have a sound all to their own. Some of them are quite amazing considering.
rdf said:
Oh I have. I have heard the magic field coil speakers possess. They are not up to the standards of Feastrex, but the original field coil speakers in some of these old RCA, Philco, Zenith, etc, etc floor standing console radios my father has sitting around that he works on. They are all open baffle, but they do have a sound all to their own. Some of them are quite amazing considering.
Re: Ah geez...
Like so many people, with backgrounds ranging from my wife's, (none) to Mike Fremer's, (extensive) "why does this one cost so very much more, and that one sound so much better?; e.g. have such better dynamics, frequency response, etc"
and the price analogy is a little overboard...
yeah, I do build parts for the space program @ my day job, and know what the stuff cost...
it's not about cost, some pay a lot more for speakers than feastrex cost e.g. martin coltrane, etc.
it's that blanket claim that single drivers can always be superior.
I think that hits the nail on the head, as to what prompted the "are you kidding yourself?" question...blumenco said:
Like so many people, with backgrounds ranging from my wife's, (none) to Mike Fremer's, (extensive) "why does this one cost so very much more, and that one sound so much better?; e.g. have such better dynamics, frequency response, etc"
and the price analogy is a little overboard...
yeah, I do build parts for the space program @ my day job, and know what the stuff cost...
it's not about cost, some pay a lot more for speakers than feastrex cost e.g. martin coltrane, etc.
it's that blanket claim that single drivers can always be superior.
Charles - excellent points
Let me pick 3 examples of products available at one local hi-fi retailer
(yes there are still some around)
AudioNote
B&W
Sonus Faber
All of these manufactures have products at prices that exceed the cost of a very high performance sports car - but upon close inspection, and even allowing for the margin required by the retailer business model, it's not particularly difficult to imagine were the profit goes. In some cases, it's clearly back into R&D, etc. , in others, one might assume directly into the lifestyle of the corporate principal(s).
Many of their speaker enclosures include design features/construction techniques and materials beyond the skills/reach of most DIYers - certainly more so than required to build say a Scottmoose BVR, or Ron Clark Austin BLH.
Over the past few years, I've built more than a few FR enclosure designs, and some were dead simple (Fostex ported rectangular box for FE167E), others a bit more elaborate, and I've not been above borrowing some of the construction and aesthetic elements from the mainstream. I can certainly allow for the consideration that my personal appreciation of the system's musicality is in great part a product of the design complexity and blood/sweat/tears invested in its fabrication.
Take a close look at the production engineering and manufacturing technologies in the wooden enclosure portion alone of the B&W Nautilus series. NOT your average monkey coffin, although they of course find room for those as well in their product mix. Add to that substantial heritage in extensive research and development, in house production of specialized drivers, some using fairly advanced materials and technologies.
Much the same can be said for the Sonus Faber
OTOH, having built several pairs of the kit version of the AN-E design, I can tell you the enclosure design of AudioNote loudspeakers is not without some clever tricks, but construction wise is about as basic as you can get, and let's leave aside the subjective evaluation of their offered choices of veneers and finishing. Neither is there anything particularly exotic about their drivers, other than the custom OEM manufacture.
However, and I hate to admit it, but as grossly overpriced and somewhat flawed as I find them, the AN speakers excite me emotionally more than either the highly analytical B&W or gorgeously built Sonus Fabers. All have crossovers
None of this addresses the question of whether "we're fooling ourselves" over our acceptance of the compromises that single driver/full range speaker systems entail (whether motivated financially, philosophically, or a combination).
'cause there is no "right" answer - if we're happy (even if temporarily), then why is extensive justification required?
Re the Supravox units I used as an example earlier, no, I don't regard the price as steep for either the field-coil or AlNiCo drivers. The latter are in line with similar (albeit IMHO less well engineered) Lowther units for e.g., and for drivers made in very small numbers by a very small company, it's a reasonable enough proposition.
Remember 'current magnet technology' is a bit of a misnomer. There's very little the pioneers of audio didn't do / try, and while we've seen progression in some aspects, in others, we've been travelling in reverse. FWIW, you might be interested to know that many designers / employees of companies like Wharfedale from the 1960s & earlier actually regard Neo. magnets with something not short of contempt, with its small size being the only positive thing they have to say about it.
Remember 'current magnet technology' is a bit of a misnomer. There's very little the pioneers of audio didn't do / try, and while we've seen progression in some aspects, in others, we've been travelling in reverse. FWIW, you might be interested to know that many designers / employees of companies like Wharfedale from the 1960s & earlier actually regard Neo. magnets with something not short of contempt, with its small size being the only positive thing they have to say about it.
chops said:
Now when you factor in the multiple amps for quad-amping, the digital crossovers and digital EQ's, then the electronics chain is becoming quite complex, and a bit noisy as well. Hence one of the main reasons for getting rid of all of that mess.
LOL
I like to quote you because I believe what you say is important
a very important part of going fullrange
I suppose it kind of started way back then when people began to get rit of all preamp controls, simultaniously with the revival of tubeamps...I have always hated those huge fancy amps with lots of controls, but all my friends loved them
though some seem to want tone controls back again
a pure and simple signal chain is part of the good fullrange sound, and not just the speaker itself
a little teaser...there have been reports about good result using digital EQ with fullrange drivers...imagine a digital EQ on Feastrex driver...sounds almost like murder
I feel like typing. I grew up listening to a field coil speaker, it was in a large 'Columbus' walnut mantle radio driven by a single ended 6V6. They didn't use a field coil for sound quality but rather economics as they used the field coil for HT smoothing, thus saving the cost of a separate chassis mounted choke.
The current interest in field coils and Alnico is not all bunkum as they do have different characteristics to ceramic magnets. The magnitude of any advantages are what is up for debate, I don't believe it is cheese and chalk, but then no one here has claimed that.
The current interest in field coils and Alnico is not all bunkum as they do have different characteristics to ceramic magnets. The magnitude of any advantages are what is up for debate, I don't believe it is cheese and chalk, but then no one here has claimed that.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.