Here's a simulated example - a pro 18" with 9mm xmax and 96 db 1w1m and Exodus Maelstrom 18" with 32mm xmax and 89 db 1w1m.
What does this show? Two very different drivers for two applications. You would never consider them for the same job.
First chart shows 400w input where the pro driver reaches excursion limits (even with a 2nd order highpass that keeps excursion below tuning no greater than above tuning). Where this is enough extension the pro driver seems to have the advantage - more efficiency. We could give it 100w and get the same SPL level. Cone excursion would be less because the vent is helping where the HT sub can't claim that advantage. If the pro driver had sufficient power handling we could extract more output if desired.
Second chart shows the Maelstrom with it's rated thermal limit. It uses most of it's excursion and reaches almost as much SPL as the pro driver but with more than 3x the power - 1.5kw.
All very theoretical so far. If you have a lossy room without room gain and you want to get to 20 Hz or below, then you might start with a monster vented corner sub, and if one driver isn't enough then stack them. Then you might use more efficient subs higher up (the multi sub approach). If you have sufficient room gain and/or don't want to get down so low then I'd say efficiency makes more sense.
Sorry Earl, I should resist the temptation to get off topic on your thread.
What does this show? Two very different drivers for two applications. You would never consider them for the same job.
First chart shows 400w input where the pro driver reaches excursion limits (even with a 2nd order highpass that keeps excursion below tuning no greater than above tuning). Where this is enough extension the pro driver seems to have the advantage - more efficiency. We could give it 100w and get the same SPL level. Cone excursion would be less because the vent is helping where the HT sub can't claim that advantage. If the pro driver had sufficient power handling we could extract more output if desired.
Second chart shows the Maelstrom with it's rated thermal limit. It uses most of it's excursion and reaches almost as much SPL as the pro driver but with more than 3x the power - 1.5kw.
All very theoretical so far. If you have a lossy room without room gain and you want to get to 20 Hz or below, then you might start with a monster vented corner sub, and if one driver isn't enough then stack them. Then you might use more efficient subs higher up (the multi sub approach). If you have sufficient room gain and/or don't want to get down so low then I'd say efficiency makes more sense.
Sorry Earl, I should resist the temptation to get off topic on your thread.
Attachments
It's very curious that people are disputing basics when I haven't said anything inconsistent with what everyone was agreeing about earlier today.
Earl, doesn't what you're saying apply to any driver?
Paul, is your comparison using the same box size and Fb?
Here is a simulation showing a Mael 18, and a single and pairs of B&C 15TBX100, all in closed 8 cf boxes and 1000 W input.
Shrinking the box to 3 cf compresses the differences to a range of 3 dB.
Earl, doesn't what you're saying apply to any driver?
Paul, is your comparison using the same box size and Fb?
Here is a simulation showing a Mael 18, and a single and pairs of B&C 15TBX100, all in closed 8 cf boxes and 1000 W input.
Shrinking the box to 3 cf compresses the differences to a range of 3 dB.
Attachments
Last edited:
Hi Paul, Noah
Noah - yes what I am saying applies to any driver when you try and extend its capability lower in frequency, but the limitations of most drivers differ for LFs and HFs. LF drivers tend to be excursion limited while HF drivers have thermal problems. So they don't act quit the same
I'm not going to be able to enter into this discussion any deeper, because 1) its about something at an extreme that I don't deal with very much, and 2) using free field simulations is just not useful for the real response of a system in a small room. I'm sure that Paul has a point, but it seems very specific to a particular set of drivers and not a general principle. As a general principle I don't believe in single subs and I don't try and go as low as is being shown. In the multiple sub situation in a real room where one is using EQ, a completely different set of criteria if required.
Noah - yes what I am saying applies to any driver when you try and extend its capability lower in frequency, but the limitations of most drivers differ for LFs and HFs. LF drivers tend to be excursion limited while HF drivers have thermal problems. So they don't act quit the same
I'm not going to be able to enter into this discussion any deeper, because 1) its about something at an extreme that I don't deal with very much, and 2) using free field simulations is just not useful for the real response of a system in a small room. I'm sure that Paul has a point, but it seems very specific to a particular set of drivers and not a general principle. As a general principle I don't believe in single subs and I don't try and go as low as is being shown. In the multiple sub situation in a real room where one is using EQ, a completely different set of criteria if required.
Hi, I have just been looking at your speaker designs. If they sound as good as people say (and I have no reason to doubt it). I think you are doing yourself a disservice by not improving the appearance.
Only HiFi nuts actually like to look at drive units, would it affect the response if you had a foam grill over the whole of the front? I belive this would broaden the appeal.
I realise this is probably not possible at the moment but I would also work towards real wood vinear on as much of the cabinet as possible. Wood finishes intergrate into most homes much better than black.
I would really like to see you succeed with this as I had to get out of audio due to the recession. I admire your dedication to producing something that has real design integrity rather than just marketing. However marketing is important as well and most people buy things with their eyes, however much they think they don't.
Best of luck. Andy.
Only HiFi nuts actually like to look at drive units, would it affect the response if you had a foam grill over the whole of the front? I belive this would broaden the appeal.
I realise this is probably not possible at the moment but I would also work towards real wood vinear on as much of the cabinet as possible. Wood finishes intergrate into most homes much better than black.
I would really like to see you succeed with this as I had to get out of audio due to the recession. I admire your dedication to producing something that has real design integrity rather than just marketing. However marketing is important as well and most people buy things with their eyes, however much they think they don't.
Best of luck. Andy.
Thanks Andy a very typical comment.
How much do you think people would be willing to pay for all these upgrades? Thats really the question isn't it. I CAN do all of that stuff, but at a price. Of course some people want the "appearance extras", but they don't want to pay for them. I find, in general, that if appearance is important enough for them to comment, then they aren't really all that interested in the sound quality and they go elsewhere anyways.
All that I can compete in is "sound quality". That's what I offer and that's what I deliver - the "brand promise" if you will. Others claim "sound quality" but all they really deliver on is appearance. If that's enough for the customer then they are happy, but if they are expecting sound quality then they will be disappointed. Not so my customers.
The next generation of cabinets will allow for grills and have the screws hidden. Thats easy, cost effective and does not have seveer performance implications. Almost anything else does.
Last edited:
And might I add that simple grills can be fashioned in a way that doesn't compromise sound with the current setup. As mentioned in other threads, a fabric grill could be created to fit over the woofer. A metal grill could be fashioned as well in the same way, but would require forming into shape. I've also thought that a fabric "sock" grill would work fine too. Might not look as good, but is probably an easy way to cover the drivers completely and keep prying fingers out.
Yes, I have fited grills simply but tertching fabric over the woofer and press fitting it all the way around. Woks fine, I just don't like the look. I don't like see the screws, but I don't like the look of the grill cloth either.
Download the jpg from my site and use photoshop to blank out the woofer. You will see that it looks kind of cheap - like your trying to hide something.
Well none of your speakers come in at under $1000 US and I would think you could add the grills for about $50 max if they were foam held on with velcro.
I think it would increase sales to the bigger market of people who are interested in both a nice looking speaker as well as a good sounding one but if that is not your experience, I can't really argue. Perhaps the design is just a bit to esoteric to break into the main stream, it didn't seem that way to me.
Either way best of luck with it.
One other thing I thought of; however I have not looked carefully at the requiremnts for your horn. Could you vacuume form it from plastic then damp this, as this is a quite cheap way to make things with a simple wooden former.
Regards,
Andy
I think it would increase sales to the bigger market of people who are interested in both a nice looking speaker as well as a good sounding one but if that is not your experience, I can't really argue. Perhaps the design is just a bit to esoteric to break into the main stream, it didn't seem that way to me.
Either way best of luck with it.
One other thing I thought of; however I have not looked carefully at the requiremnts for your horn. Could you vacuume form it from plastic then damp this, as this is a quite cheap way to make things with a simple wooden former.
Regards,
Andy
Andy
You can trust that I manufacture in the most practical way possible given my situation. Could the speakers be made cheaper? - I estimate that I could take out about 66% of the cost IF I made the whole thing in China, including the drivers. But to do this I would have to sell more than 10 times what I sell now, and I would have to mortgage my house to do it. Is there a market for this? I'm inclined to think not. Sound quality, in the end, is simply not that important to people.
If I add 50$ I need to raise my price by at least that much that's the nature of my markup. I'd add grills if someone requested and paid for them - no one has.
You can trust that I manufacture in the most practical way possible given my situation. Could the speakers be made cheaper? - I estimate that I could take out about 66% of the cost IF I made the whole thing in China, including the drivers. But to do this I would have to sell more than 10 times what I sell now, and I would have to mortgage my house to do it. Is there a market for this? I'm inclined to think not. Sound quality, in the end, is simply not that important to people.
If I add 50$ I need to raise my price by at least that much that's the nature of my markup. I'd add grills if someone requested and paid for them - no one has.
I built some speaker grilles in the past and never ended up using them. Firstly I could hear the difference and they look a lot better without. I've never found grilles appealing, but it's a matter of personal preference. Whenever I see a grille, I get the urge to pull it off! Maybe a "sock style" grille wouldn't be noticeable acoustically.
If the Geddlee speakers aren't getting the sales they deserve based on their performance and value (and I suspect they aren't), it's probably more related to how the majority buy. I think most still want to walk into a showroom and spend considerable time listening and auditioning. There is also a perception still among many that the big brands everyone knows about are better. And the ground where most audiophiles tread is well covered by a thick foggy mist that you might call "audiophile mythology." The internet is changing this to a degree, but I think many patterns that predate the internet boom persist.
Now imagine if Gedlee speakers were in hifi show rooms all around the world on the same scale as those big brands that we all know. I could see a problem ... no not the one that comes up when the wife comes along! Suddenly it becomes much more difficult for their most expensive speakers to sell. What do you do when your most expensive speaker with a nice big margin is inferior to something at 10% of the cost? I don't really know the ins and outs of the retail side, but I expect it would rock the boat.
Here in Australia there was a sub made by a company called Whise. It was reviewed in Australian hifi as a giant killer sub that blew away much more expensive subs in output and sound quality. It was a bandpass sub with a 15" custom pro driver. When I found out my local hifi store had them, I went in for a listen only to find they didn't have them anymore. The sales guy gave the impression they weren't that great, but in reality I think it was simply a matter of size and that most weren't willing to live with such a big sub. They prefer to stock wimpy 10" subs in tiny boxes as that's what they can easily sell.
Earl is also having to work against the idea that efficient speakers are coloured, compression drivers are bad and horns are a niche for those who choose dynamics over accuracy ... (not that these are horns). How do you change that perception? In the past I auditioned some Adire HE10 kits with the Eminence 10" coax. I thought the idea was great, but the sound was plain awful. They only sounded good at moderate levels, turned up the treble was harsh and screechy. With the big Rotel amp, the Focal floorstanders next to them could actually play louder - not on paper, but they had more useful output as they didn't make my ears bleed. I've experienced CD based speakers that weren't harsh, but they tend to trade something in for their efficiency. I think Earl has found the answer to changing this, but changing performance and changing perception are two very different things!
In this particular diy niche, most guys aren't put off by something as simple as no grille.
If the Geddlee speakers aren't getting the sales they deserve based on their performance and value (and I suspect they aren't), it's probably more related to how the majority buy. I think most still want to walk into a showroom and spend considerable time listening and auditioning. There is also a perception still among many that the big brands everyone knows about are better. And the ground where most audiophiles tread is well covered by a thick foggy mist that you might call "audiophile mythology." The internet is changing this to a degree, but I think many patterns that predate the internet boom persist.
Now imagine if Gedlee speakers were in hifi show rooms all around the world on the same scale as those big brands that we all know. I could see a problem ... no not the one that comes up when the wife comes along! Suddenly it becomes much more difficult for their most expensive speakers to sell. What do you do when your most expensive speaker with a nice big margin is inferior to something at 10% of the cost? I don't really know the ins and outs of the retail side, but I expect it would rock the boat.
Here in Australia there was a sub made by a company called Whise. It was reviewed in Australian hifi as a giant killer sub that blew away much more expensive subs in output and sound quality. It was a bandpass sub with a 15" custom pro driver. When I found out my local hifi store had them, I went in for a listen only to find they didn't have them anymore. The sales guy gave the impression they weren't that great, but in reality I think it was simply a matter of size and that most weren't willing to live with such a big sub. They prefer to stock wimpy 10" subs in tiny boxes as that's what they can easily sell.
Earl is also having to work against the idea that efficient speakers are coloured, compression drivers are bad and horns are a niche for those who choose dynamics over accuracy ... (not that these are horns). How do you change that perception? In the past I auditioned some Adire HE10 kits with the Eminence 10" coax. I thought the idea was great, but the sound was plain awful. They only sounded good at moderate levels, turned up the treble was harsh and screechy. With the big Rotel amp, the Focal floorstanders next to them could actually play louder - not on paper, but they had more useful output as they didn't make my ears bleed. I've experienced CD based speakers that weren't harsh, but they tend to trade something in for their efficiency. I think Earl has found the answer to changing this, but changing performance and changing perception are two very different things!
In this particular diy niche, most guys aren't put off by something as simple as no grille.
Paul
Very good analysis and I am well aware of all that you say and agree with it.
Here is how I see it. Retail and the "distributors" are never going to buy into what I am doing unless I raise my price to pay them a 40-60% margin at which point I am no longer such a great deal even if I am competitive. However, the market at that price point is not that great so I need to push my price up even more to make the same profit as I do now, and up goes the sale price even more - get the picture. And all this because "most still want to walk into a showroom and spend considerable time listening and auditioning", which is oh so true. But what if that does change and people started to accept the fact that speakers are science and that one does not have to listen to them to see if "they are suited to my tastes". In other words, what if accuracy, as can be defined by a comprehensive set of measurements, really is the best judge of a loudspeaker? Well then the whole ballgame changes doesn't it? And with that change I would be in an extremely good position.
And what if it never changes? Then my business will die along with hi-end audio because the current business model is already dying - the quality is stagnating while the prices go ever higher. I am trying to educate people in the ways and means of scientific design and evaluation and to show them that you actually can trust the measurements (while you can't actually trust your ears). If the audiophile world accepted this principle today then people would be listening speakers twice as good as they have for less than half the price that they paid. This carret is, to me, too great to pass up and I have to give this revolutionary approach a try. Only time will tell.
Very good analysis and I am well aware of all that you say and agree with it.
Here is how I see it. Retail and the "distributors" are never going to buy into what I am doing unless I raise my price to pay them a 40-60% margin at which point I am no longer such a great deal even if I am competitive. However, the market at that price point is not that great so I need to push my price up even more to make the same profit as I do now, and up goes the sale price even more - get the picture. And all this because "most still want to walk into a showroom and spend considerable time listening and auditioning", which is oh so true. But what if that does change and people started to accept the fact that speakers are science and that one does not have to listen to them to see if "they are suited to my tastes". In other words, what if accuracy, as can be defined by a comprehensive set of measurements, really is the best judge of a loudspeaker? Well then the whole ballgame changes doesn't it? And with that change I would be in an extremely good position.
And what if it never changes? Then my business will die along with hi-end audio because the current business model is already dying - the quality is stagnating while the prices go ever higher. I am trying to educate people in the ways and means of scientific design and evaluation and to show them that you actually can trust the measurements (while you can't actually trust your ears). If the audiophile world accepted this principle today then people would be listening speakers twice as good as they have for less than half the price that they paid. This carret is, to me, too great to pass up and I have to give this revolutionary approach a try. Only time will tell.
Earl,
I think the mainstream will stay mainstream and change there will be very slow, but there is a niche and it has a lot of potential to grow. Can you capture a big enough niche to make it worth your while to keep doing what you are doing? I certainly hope so. I'm optimistic - comparing a small niche to the mainstream is like comparing a small motor boat to a large oil barge. One takes a massive turning circle, while the other can change quickly. And when you have a small niche market of happy customers who are thrilled with their speakers, you can get an exponential growth curve. It's difficult at first to detect and not always easy to survive the early stage. But then at some point you start to notice things taking off. I think in terms of consumer awareness you are in that early stage, but if you can keep going the word will get out, happy customers will do it for you.
By the way, I do realise you've been doing this for a long time and are known in the industry. I recall reading about the original Summa years ago when I used to follow the diy speakers "bass list."
In a perfect world measurements and theory would be enough, but as you know this has two problems. Firstly, no one provides the same measurements for the consumer market so people can't compare. I've seen off axis measurements for Genelec studio monitors, but they aren't that easy to compare and are for a different market. Secondly, people don't trust measurements and/or don't know how to interpret them. You can't change what others do, but you can work on the second one on a small scale.
So in reality I think "reviews" from happy customers will get attention. When the word starts to get out people will get curious about the theory. And when you start to hear things like guys selling their $30k speakers and upgrading to Summas ... then I think people will start to listen to the theory and start getting curious about how it's possible.
The studio market also seems like it would have great potential - especially considering it's a much more engineering-minded market. Would the Harpers make a good nearfield monitor? And I'd guess the Summa would make a great far field monitor. If that market won't be sold on superior measurements and dynamics without coloration, I don't know what market will.
I think the mainstream will stay mainstream and change there will be very slow, but there is a niche and it has a lot of potential to grow. Can you capture a big enough niche to make it worth your while to keep doing what you are doing? I certainly hope so. I'm optimistic - comparing a small niche to the mainstream is like comparing a small motor boat to a large oil barge. One takes a massive turning circle, while the other can change quickly. And when you have a small niche market of happy customers who are thrilled with their speakers, you can get an exponential growth curve. It's difficult at first to detect and not always easy to survive the early stage. But then at some point you start to notice things taking off. I think in terms of consumer awareness you are in that early stage, but if you can keep going the word will get out, happy customers will do it for you.
By the way, I do realise you've been doing this for a long time and are known in the industry. I recall reading about the original Summa years ago when I used to follow the diy speakers "bass list."
In a perfect world measurements and theory would be enough, but as you know this has two problems. Firstly, no one provides the same measurements for the consumer market so people can't compare. I've seen off axis measurements for Genelec studio monitors, but they aren't that easy to compare and are for a different market. Secondly, people don't trust measurements and/or don't know how to interpret them. You can't change what others do, but you can work on the second one on a small scale.
So in reality I think "reviews" from happy customers will get attention. When the word starts to get out people will get curious about the theory. And when you start to hear things like guys selling their $30k speakers and upgrading to Summas ... then I think people will start to listen to the theory and start getting curious about how it's possible.
The studio market also seems like it would have great potential - especially considering it's a much more engineering-minded market. Would the Harpers make a good nearfield monitor? And I'd guess the Summa would make a great far field monitor. If that market won't be sold on superior measurements and dynamics without coloration, I don't know what market will.
The Harpers could be an option for nearfield. They certainly can't be any worse than what is used now! They play incredibly loud for their size, but then they do lack low end. Hard to say which is the more important in nearfield - but its probably low end. You can throw away some sensitivity for low bass since nearfield doesn't need as much sensitivity. But if dynamics is important then the Harpers will blow away almost anything else. Its always a tradeoff.
Well there is the right way to do things and the right way to do things - take your pick.
Nice blog by the way.
Last edited:
Let me toss something out there
I have been working with modifying waveguides for a couple days now- using the PE 12" as a base for a waveguide design nearly identical to earl's. My takeaway is "Unless you're crazy or REALLY poor, just buy the darned things pre-made". I'm now half a dozen materials in and the end is not likely before Xmas.....
That said they should be nice.... but between the fillers and casting and smoothing and woodwork and and and (and all necessary to get CD down low).....
I have been working with modifying waveguides for a couple days now- using the PE 12" as a base for a waveguide design nearly identical to earl's. My takeaway is "Unless you're crazy or REALLY poor, just buy the darned things pre-made". I'm now half a dozen materials in and the end is not likely before Xmas.....
That said they should be nice.... but between the fillers and casting and smoothing and woodwork and and and (and all necessary to get CD down low).....
I would agree with most of this (and your not done yet!), but disagree with "nearly identical to earl's" - that is not what I have seen. But I'm not about to go and tell my competitors how to make their products better! There is a reason why I charge so much - you get what you pay for.
Fair enough. The profile is largely similar. What you have seen, not sure I follow- my build is undocumented.
Of course, I can give up now if you send a couple over
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.