Thanx Earl....i think for my next project i'll give them a try.....cant really go wrong for $50 U.S.
Also all over ebay as the PRV labeled drivers...both metal and plastic diaphrams and same model numbers. No idea who actually make them.
The HOMs amplitude drops at the same rate as the main wave so the ratio is a constant. It makes no difference how near or far you measure them. Its what arrives at the listener that matters so measure where the listener is.
From what I've seen, no. FR is close, but not the same, and the DNA-360 had lower distortion.
I understand some of the appeal of the lower cost drivers, but in the "big picture", the driver cost is insignificant - or at least that is what I have found. But then I don't use the "mega-buck" drivers. Saving $50 on a speakers system that would cost thousands when done just does not seem to be a good choice. Granted, if the drivers are the same then why spend the extra money? No, I would buy them if they were the same, but to me, these new knock-offs are just too new to have established their reliability. Even B&C has trouble with long term stability of performance and they have made millions of them. The one knock-off that I tested was OK, but that was not a production sample at random, it was a hand selected and or assembled unit. How reliable will these units be long term? That is a big issue with me.
I remember testing some "Asian" low cost drivers sampled at random. There was no resemblance between the spec claims and reality and poor matching even between the samples. Basically their production was "out of control". B&C is one of the best that I have found in this regard.
I remember testing some "Asian" low cost drivers sampled at random. There was no resemblance between the spec claims and reality and poor matching even between the samples. Basically their production was "out of control". B&C is one of the best that I have found in this regard.
And an accurate assesment for someone like yourself in the commercial end of things. For us hobbyists, a $120 savings across a pair might allow for a better midwoofer....and overall a better speaker.....in theory anyways! Lol
What exactly does 'better' mean when it comes to subjective audio anyways?.........
What exactly does 'better' mean when it comes to subjective audio anyways?.........
mayhem,
Something to remember is that even with identical drivers two people doing FR testing and distortion testing could get different results using different techniques, conditions and equipment to do the tests.
One thing that I know happens more often than realized in this industry is that a contractor actually makes all the parts that go into a speaker. in-order to increase profits parts are sold to multiple end companies. Sometime the only difference between two products are visual changes such as the molded plastic covers, or changes such as a connector and other cosmetic changes. Unless B&C is producing the parts themselves this could explain why these two devices look so similar, they may in fact be the same device. I am not saying that is true, but it is possible for this to happen. It surely wouldn't be the first time that has happened.
Something to remember is that even with identical drivers two people doing FR testing and distortion testing could get different results using different techniques, conditions and equipment to do the tests.
One thing that I know happens more often than realized in this industry is that a contractor actually makes all the parts that go into a speaker. in-order to increase profits parts are sold to multiple end companies. Sometime the only difference between two products are visual changes such as the molded plastic covers, or changes such as a connector and other cosmetic changes. Unless B&C is producing the parts themselves this could explain why these two devices look so similar, they may in fact be the same device. I am not saying that is true, but it is possible for this to happen. It surely wouldn't be the first time that has happened.
It does not mean a thing - that's why when I use the term I mean strictly in the objective sense.
It's hard to tow the Objective line all the time.....i get beat up over it quite often! lol
Oh its brutally painful - kind of like beating your head against the wall. But what kind of scientist would I be if I gave up on it? None of what I have done could have come from any approach other than science.
Last edited:
I used to work at B&C, I have seen their production lines. They CAN do it all. They do buy some steel parts and ALL the magnets from China and occasionally some diaphragms from Thailand, but their production control is very tight. What they buy and what they make probably changes all the time, but I know that they do final assembly and testing in Florence.
I've posted this before, but I will describe it again. Years ago one could take a knock-off and put its diaphragm into a B&C motor structure and visa-versa. You can't do that anymore - I tried. They are definately not the same drivers.
Earl,
I will accept your information that B&C is doing their own assembly. You and I know how the Chinese factories work though many times things go out the back door with a different label and cosmetic changes and are sold under a different brand name.
You have to make sure that you are not being subjectively objective in science. that messes up the entire result. 😀
I will accept your information that B&C is doing their own assembly. You and I know how the Chinese factories work though many times things go out the back door with a different label and cosmetic changes and are sold under a different brand name.
You have to make sure that you are not being subjectively objective in science. that messes up the entire result. 😀
That was a joke......
But there are many times even in science where a researcher has made an error based on an expected resultant. Happens more often then we want to think, skewing the end results. Done with statistics all the time.
But there are many times even in science where a researcher has made an error based on an expected resultant. Happens more often then we want to think, skewing the end results. Done with statistics all the time.
The Denovo models (350 and 360) are not same as the Dayton's or B&C's. They share no parts. I've tested a few of all 3 and opened them up many times and also have response curves.
The cheaper Denovo 350 was the first attempt at getting close to the DE250. It's good. Good enough to where most really couldn't tell the difference in a speaker. It doesn't go quite as low as the DE250 or 360 and it's not quite as smooth up around 15khz. Up that high, no one could tell.....but the computer mic can, so it is what it is.
The more expensive Denovo DNA-360 project started when I needed help to get things better. It was worked on by a couple different people (smarter than me) experimenting, sending samples back and forth across the country, testing different diaphragms from quite a few different manufacturers, etc. I think that project took about 7 months. The 360 doesn't share any parts with any other model. And it's diaphragm is actually made at a different manufacturer than the rest of the driver itself. There's more than one manufacturer involved in the 360.
As for pricing, the 350 is cheaper because it's made, assembled, and packaged at one company. Plus, if you sat and compared the 2 side by side, you can tell that the more expensive 360 starts with a little nicer parts. Mostly just looks, and attention to detail in regards to painting or polishing the metal and things like that. The 360 is also more expensive because the parts are from different manufacturers and nicer quality.
Every unit for either model is tested before shipping. The 350's vary a little bit more between units. The 360's are quite accurate from piece to piece. When testing the 360's, I always put the response curve of the DE250 on my screen and overlay each 360 tested. They always test at least as good and sound the same as the DE250. Most of the time, better. When I say better, I mean the 360 seems to always have a better high end. On the low end, they're as good, most of the time better. Of course it's by such a small margin on the low end that it's not worth talking about. The better high end is there, but as we know, most can't hear that high anyway. And even if they could, I doubt they could hear that the DNA-360 extends up higher.
The cheaper Denovo 350 was the first attempt at getting close to the DE250. It's good. Good enough to where most really couldn't tell the difference in a speaker. It doesn't go quite as low as the DE250 or 360 and it's not quite as smooth up around 15khz. Up that high, no one could tell.....but the computer mic can, so it is what it is.
The more expensive Denovo DNA-360 project started when I needed help to get things better. It was worked on by a couple different people (smarter than me) experimenting, sending samples back and forth across the country, testing different diaphragms from quite a few different manufacturers, etc. I think that project took about 7 months. The 360 doesn't share any parts with any other model. And it's diaphragm is actually made at a different manufacturer than the rest of the driver itself. There's more than one manufacturer involved in the 360.
As for pricing, the 350 is cheaper because it's made, assembled, and packaged at one company. Plus, if you sat and compared the 2 side by side, you can tell that the more expensive 360 starts with a little nicer parts. Mostly just looks, and attention to detail in regards to painting or polishing the metal and things like that. The 360 is also more expensive because the parts are from different manufacturers and nicer quality.
Every unit for either model is tested before shipping. The 350's vary a little bit more between units. The 360's are quite accurate from piece to piece. When testing the 360's, I always put the response curve of the DE250 on my screen and overlay each 360 tested. They always test at least as good and sound the same as the DE250. Most of the time, better. When I say better, I mean the 360 seems to always have a better high end. On the low end, they're as good, most of the time better. Of course it's by such a small margin on the low end that it's not worth talking about. The better high end is there, but as we know, most can't hear that high anyway. And even if they could, I doubt they could hear that the DNA-360 extends up higher.
Last edited:
This is exactly what the scientific method and per review avoid. In my experience errors are not all that common. And when they are they are usually known by the researcher.
Plausible...
As opposed to carelessly throwing out this or that pronouncement about the worth of science. [citation needed]
I used to think it best to where the listener is, but I also discovered that in the process of solving problems, other locations may have more advantage. If I were trying to verify how a final response of a multi driver speaker where drivers are quite far apart would perform, one type of test would be to assume a range of listening distance and see how the response will be at varying locations in the range.