This might explain some of my bafflement with this/these projects. You are proposing to perform a few rough calculations before buying some drivers, measuring, building prototype speaker, measuring, modifying speaker, measuring,... You don't intend to spend a significant amount of group effort and time in evaluating the options and optimising the design first on paper as I, and possibly others, had assumed?
I had also assumed that after the design looked good on paper one or two might buy and build the speakers for themselves enabling further refinement to take place. This is why I have only been interested in being involved in designs for which I believe there is a demand unlike the high sensitivity designs currently being discussed for which I think there is low demand. But then it only needs one to be sufficiently happy to buy the parts, build, measure and tweak in order to complete the project.
we had different options in the poll, not just high sensitivity ones !
Andy you are not helping. you can change your tone if you think there s a better way to approach.
Perhaps a group design will prove to be a mission impossible, in our case. We will stay tuned and hope for the best. I don't see a purpose of getting emotions in the way of a progress. Andy has raised some very good points but there appears to be a lack of understanding in that sense.
Maybe I was just not clever enough to see this. Can you please enlighten me (and maybe others)?
I dont know, maybe it's ok to help pay materials for prototype boxes and xo parts. Just to get it all ironed out 100%. It does cost a lot of time and money.
But it does not sound right to me to get people to pay for the complete build including drivers. I think the prototype builders should keep the speakers, or sell them for a fair price, whatever they want.
Edit:
And if there is money left over after the project, all of it should be donated to Diyaudio.
But it does not sound right to me to get people to pay for the complete build including drivers. I think the prototype builders should keep the speakers, or sell them for a fair price, whatever they want.
Edit:
And if there is money left over after the project, all of it should be donated to Diyaudio.
Last edited:
Here's a post from the Monkey Coffin thread:
On the one hand, it is encouraging that others like what we are doing, but also raises a concern. While John Busch does not seem to "steal" the Monkey Coffing design ideas for his own commercial profit, others might actually go this route.
Would it make sense to put the open source speaker designs (Monkey Coffin, Tower XL) under some open source license? I think there are licenses for documentation projects out there that might be suitable for our purposes. This should help to avoid pirating our open source design for commercial profit without giving proper credit to what we are doing here.
On the one hand, it is encouraging that others like what we are doing, but also raises a concern. While John Busch does not seem to "steal" the Monkey Coffing design ideas for his own commercial profit, others might actually go this route.
Would it make sense to put the open source speaker designs (Monkey Coffin, Tower XL) under some open source license? I think there are licenses for documentation projects out there that might be suitable for our purposes. This should help to avoid pirating our open source design for commercial profit without giving proper credit to what we are doing here.
yes ! that is a big concern, it is absolutely absurd that someone get advantage of these projects, this is against the whole goal and purpose of open source projects, and I would be furious. TBH I never thought of that because I wouldn't think someone would do this.
maybe someone with legal experience can help us out here. maybe start a new thread for that matter ?
maybe someone with legal experience can help us out here. maybe start a new thread for that matter ?
haha. How likely is it someone is going to make any real money out of this open source project? I'd so close to zero.
not about if they make money or not, it s about if someone get advantage of all the time and work donated to this.
I actually want people to profit from what we do, for example by building and enjoying a copy of our speakers. But I do not want them to sell (substantial parts) of our designs without saying where it all comes from.
I added the following note to the first post of the Monkey Coffin thread:
Important note 31 Oct. 2019: DIYers may profit from this open-source project for their own private purposes, for example by building and enjoying a copy of the Open Source Monkey Coffin speaker. Please do not use the information developed in this open source project on a larger scale (for example by selling speakers based on the Open Source Monkey Coffin design or substantial parts of it) without written permission.
I hope that helps to get the idea across.
Important note 31 Oct. 2019: DIYers may profit from this open-source project for their own private purposes, for example by building and enjoying a copy of the Open Source Monkey Coffin speaker. Please do not use the information developed in this open source project on a larger scale (for example by selling speakers based on the Open Source Monkey Coffin design or substantial parts of it) without written permission.
I hope that helps to get the idea across.
don't get me wrong, maybe I was not clear.
this is an open source project, this is for people to build and enjoy.
this is not for COMMERCIAL use!
@Aatto : Hi there, I'm asking to self-claimed "Open Source" projects' authors to clarify the license choosed for the release.
Please read my last post about @ Open Source Monkey Box to understand better of what I'm talking about.
Thanks.
Please read my last post about @ Open Source Monkey Box to understand better of what I'm talking about.
Thanks.