Bob,
I've actually done a Roman column design in the past and it is a totally different concept. Also you have to realize this is not another repackaged commercial speaker, I am not using anyone else devices, that is out of the question. If you want a Seas driver or any other commercial speaker you have to look elsewhere. I am not just making cabinets and stuffing them with speakers like 99% of audiophile speakers that sell a whole lot of nothing. And I'm certainly not trying to copy anyone else design, I'm not here to emulate some other well known speaker. If you like them you'll like them and if you want something completely different you'll need to find it somewhere else.
I've actually done a Roman column design in the past and it is a totally different concept. Also you have to realize this is not another repackaged commercial speaker, I am not using anyone else devices, that is out of the question. If you want a Seas driver or any other commercial speaker you have to look elsewhere. I am not just making cabinets and stuffing them with speakers like 99% of audiophile speakers that sell a whole lot of nothing. And I'm certainly not trying to copy anyone else design, I'm not here to emulate some other well known speaker. If you like them you'll like them and if you want something completely different you'll need to find it somewhere else.
Katalyst,
I can play with that idea. As far as something over the tweeter i could just as easily integrate that into the front face plate of the tweeter and just mold it as one piece. Now if I made a wire-form that looked good would you still want it to match the color of the enclosure or go back to the stainless steel idea? I kind of think the contrast is nice but some don't seem to like that look.
I can play with that idea. As far as something over the tweeter i could just as easily integrate that into the front face plate of the tweeter and just mold it as one piece. Now if I made a wire-form that looked good would you still want it to match the color of the enclosure or go back to the stainless steel idea? I kind of think the contrast is nice but some don't seem to like that look.
Gotta agree with them looking too much like an appliance. First impression was cheap computer speakers and $1500 aint cheap. I like the idea of polyurethane but seems that most people associate plastic to cheap. Obvious simple, elegant shape would be Time Capsule/Airport Extreme (but bigger, like a tall Mac Mini) in brushed aluminum or maybe black chrome. No seams.
5th element,
the truth that is not talked about is that the additional cost to create a 1" Be dome tweeter is only $35.00 in additional real material cost. Now when you consider that most companies are charging 10x material costs you can see what is happening. The reality is if it wasn't for the marketing costs and profit margins the true cost differential is that cost. I would say that a typical dome tweeter like a Seas soft dome tweeter is produced for much less than $10.00 total material cost. Yes I could disrupt the diy scene with a Be dome tweeter for let's say $150.00 each and make money doing it. You can purchase a typical dome tweeter assembled for a couple dollars, the selling price has little to do with real costs. I will tell you the speaker I am proposing here if sold by someone like JBL or many other name brands would be an 8-10K dollar pair of speakers. If I said I was going to charge that much many who are saying what they are would instead be drooling over the speakers, that is the audiophile conundrum, price makes some disregard the actual value of the product. It is part of the marketing world that has been foisted on the uninformed. I have been doing manufacturing for far to long not to understand the power of a name brand and marketing practices. I have seen to many products that cost $10.00 total cost that sell for more than $100.00 to the public, it is just the reality of how this works on a large scale. So that Be dome material would be worth at least $350.00 dollars in additional retail cost. So I do understand what I am trying to do here, I will not be well liked by other manufacturers and will have disparaging things said to try and discourage purchase of the product. I expect that. And the comment about cheap plastic is so true in most cases, I could make the enclosure of a cheap plastic material for a couple of dollars molded and finished. The material I am using is a factor of 10x the material cost of what other plastics cost, it is not a cheap plastic part. I have worked with JBL and have quoted production for high end enclosures, they would not pay the price, they went with the cheapest plastic possible, that is what is expected of a buyer and designer. Product quality is only as good as absolutely necessary to produce what looks like a high end product, sound quality is secondary to profit margins and marketing power. And yes I do have a college education in Business Science.
ps. I was called today about a position doing industrial designing of new products for Cisco Systems. Not sure I would do it as the cost of living to move to Silicon Valley is crazy but that is the level that I am working at. I do understand product design. I am just using this forum to get feedback, at the same time I know that the information is skewed compared to asking the same question of the general public. There would be little to no discussion of technical details, unlike the feedback that is happening here.
the truth that is not talked about is that the additional cost to create a 1" Be dome tweeter is only $35.00 in additional real material cost. Now when you consider that most companies are charging 10x material costs you can see what is happening. The reality is if it wasn't for the marketing costs and profit margins the true cost differential is that cost. I would say that a typical dome tweeter like a Seas soft dome tweeter is produced for much less than $10.00 total material cost. Yes I could disrupt the diy scene with a Be dome tweeter for let's say $150.00 each and make money doing it. You can purchase a typical dome tweeter assembled for a couple dollars, the selling price has little to do with real costs. I will tell you the speaker I am proposing here if sold by someone like JBL or many other name brands would be an 8-10K dollar pair of speakers. If I said I was going to charge that much many who are saying what they are would instead be drooling over the speakers, that is the audiophile conundrum, price makes some disregard the actual value of the product. It is part of the marketing world that has been foisted on the uninformed. I have been doing manufacturing for far to long not to understand the power of a name brand and marketing practices. I have seen to many products that cost $10.00 total cost that sell for more than $100.00 to the public, it is just the reality of how this works on a large scale. So that Be dome material would be worth at least $350.00 dollars in additional retail cost. So I do understand what I am trying to do here, I will not be well liked by other manufacturers and will have disparaging things said to try and discourage purchase of the product. I expect that. And the comment about cheap plastic is so true in most cases, I could make the enclosure of a cheap plastic material for a couple of dollars molded and finished. The material I am using is a factor of 10x the material cost of what other plastics cost, it is not a cheap plastic part. I have worked with JBL and have quoted production for high end enclosures, they would not pay the price, they went with the cheapest plastic possible, that is what is expected of a buyer and designer. Product quality is only as good as absolutely necessary to produce what looks like a high end product, sound quality is secondary to profit margins and marketing power. And yes I do have a college education in Business Science.
ps. I was called today about a position doing industrial designing of new products for Cisco Systems. Not sure I would do it as the cost of living to move to Silicon Valley is crazy but that is the level that I am working at. I do understand product design. I am just using this forum to get feedback, at the same time I know that the information is skewed compared to asking the same question of the general public. There would be little to no discussion of technical details, unlike the feedback that is happening here.
Last edited:
ngjockey,
that is a similar type of material but what I use is not something that you can use without advanced machinery to mix and dispense. I have been manufacturing with polyurethane materials for more than 35 years. The following is a basic description of the material without going into the physical properties. This is a material from Bayer Material Science, a company that I did much R&D with for many years. This is a true structural material. I've produced many housings using this material for many industries including medical, furniture, electronic housings and such. I am considered one of the experts in the industry and have done many first with different formulations all from Bayer. This was the only companies formulations that I used. From soft foams to rigid systems used for advanced composites. I still have friends at Bayer that I have kept in contact with since 1985.
Baydur 726 IBS is a high-density polyurethane
structural foam system used in the reaction injection
molding (RIM) process. This system incorporates a
specially engineered interactive blowing system
(IBS) and internal mold release (IMR). The system
is supplied as two reactive liquid components: Component
A is a modified polymeric diphenylmethane
diisocyanate (PMDI) prepolymer blend, and Component
B is a formulated polyol system containing no
CFC- or HCFC-blowing additives.
that is a similar type of material but what I use is not something that you can use without advanced machinery to mix and dispense. I have been manufacturing with polyurethane materials for more than 35 years. The following is a basic description of the material without going into the physical properties. This is a material from Bayer Material Science, a company that I did much R&D with for many years. This is a true structural material. I've produced many housings using this material for many industries including medical, furniture, electronic housings and such. I am considered one of the experts in the industry and have done many first with different formulations all from Bayer. This was the only companies formulations that I used. From soft foams to rigid systems used for advanced composites. I still have friends at Bayer that I have kept in contact with since 1985.
Baydur 726 IBS is a high-density polyurethane
structural foam system used in the reaction injection
molding (RIM) process. This system incorporates a
specially engineered interactive blowing system
(IBS) and internal mold release (IMR). The system
is supplied as two reactive liquid components: Component
A is a modified polymeric diphenylmethane
diisocyanate (PMDI) prepolymer blend, and Component
B is a formulated polyol system containing no
CFC- or HCFC-blowing additives.
Last edited:
As I've said this is not cheap plastic and these speakers are not a toy. This is a very serious project. The only other speaker enclosure I know of that actively uses a polyurethane material is the designs by Earl Geddes. He uses materials that are not of this level, he does not have access to the molding equipment and uses a solid material to create his enclosures.
It seems like you have to defend it's not a cheap plastic speaker. That might indicate the look as viewed by most gives the assumption of dealing with something cheap here.
I do agree with the voices here that it looks more like an appliance or computer case than a speaker in the $ 1500,00 category.
If it were my project, and you know if JBL produced it they would be charging between 8 and 10 K, I'd make sure it has the looks to match that part of the industry while keeping the original price point. Not saying it needs an exotic design, quite the contrary, tone it down with simple but elegant lines. I'm also in the camp that actually likes the boat hull shape. Simple but elegant.
A shape somewhere between:
and
I bet that would give it a more "up market" status.
Use the fact that you have an elliptical woofer, make the hull part elliptical with rounded corners to the baffle...
A metal accent could help that feel...
I do agree with the voices here that it looks more like an appliance or computer case than a speaker in the $ 1500,00 category.
If it were my project, and you know if JBL produced it they would be charging between 8 and 10 K, I'd make sure it has the looks to match that part of the industry while keeping the original price point. Not saying it needs an exotic design, quite the contrary, tone it down with simple but elegant lines. I'm also in the camp that actually likes the boat hull shape. Simple but elegant.
A shape somewhere between:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
and
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I bet that would give it a more "up market" status.
Use the fact that you have an elliptical woofer, make the hull part elliptical with rounded corners to the baffle...
A metal accent could help that feel...
Last edited:
I don't mind the futuristic looks personally, but I sadly have to agree that you probably are missing your target customers. A quality/design focused buyer owning Apple products. Your product looks much more Alienware than Apple. It would stand out considerably from any Apple device.
Look at the Apple LCD screens; I would make the foot a separate item proably in aluminium. I would clean up the shape considerably. It does not need to scream for attention. It needs to not offend over extended periods. Apple design has not been radical for many years.
This is probably a much closer interpration of what such a speaker should look like: iMac Speakers - | Livbit
Ofc it would need to be different (bigger) to meat the sonical goals for your speaker.
Good luck! I think the concept with custom made woofers, be tweeter and integrated amps is good and have potential to sell, but it's the visual design that will decide if you can sell it to a non audiophile customer.
I think this looks like a cleaned up version of yours; http://www.whathifi.com/news/focal-...esktop-speakers-plans-stereo-and-multichannel
Look at the Apple LCD screens; I would make the foot a separate item proably in aluminium. I would clean up the shape considerably. It does not need to scream for attention. It needs to not offend over extended periods. Apple design has not been radical for many years.
This is probably a much closer interpration of what such a speaker should look like: iMac Speakers - | Livbit
Ofc it would need to be different (bigger) to meat the sonical goals for your speaker.
Good luck! I think the concept with custom made woofers, be tweeter and integrated amps is good and have potential to sell, but it's the visual design that will decide if you can sell it to a non audiophile customer.
I think this looks like a cleaned up version of yours; http://www.whathifi.com/news/focal-...esktop-speakers-plans-stereo-and-multichannel
Last edited:
Personally when I see speakers with odd shapes, where the oddness seems superfluous and is more about fashion than function, it always makes me suspicious and dismissive of the speaker in question. Think of the over-designed speakers in those cheap mini-systems you might see in Walmart or Sears (Sony, JVC, RCA, etc). It's obvious the odd shapes serve no function beyond that of dramatic fashion statement.
You're obviously trying to sell to a niche market here. Trust your audience. Either the form should suggest some recognizable, carefully engineered, 'audio-phile' function or it should be kept as minimalist as possible. You want the speakers to scream 'quality,' not 'fashion.' You don't want to leave the impression that more effort was spent on being a superfluous fashion statement than on audio-oriented design considerations.
Sorry, I don't mean to sound insulting, but ask yourself who you are trying to reach with these and design them with that audience in view.
You're obviously trying to sell to a niche market here. Trust your audience. Either the form should suggest some recognizable, carefully engineered, 'audio-phile' function or it should be kept as minimalist as possible. You want the speakers to scream 'quality,' not 'fashion.' You don't want to leave the impression that more effort was spent on being a superfluous fashion statement than on audio-oriented design considerations.
Sorry, I don't mean to sound insulting, but ask yourself who you are trying to reach with these and design them with that audience in view.
Glossy white wireless Focal post#93 in WhatHifi 2013 picture is with 2009??? white glossy (plastic) Macbook. Only Mac today that is (close to) high gloss is Mac Pro I believe.
Marketing soft touch matt/dull paint? B&O might tell you it is a organic self healing carpaint used also by Alfa Romeo for interior parts. Might be true
High end audio might just be more like Alienware and MacPro.
Marketing soft touch matt/dull paint? B&O might tell you it is a organic self healing carpaint used also by Alfa Romeo for interior parts. Might be true
High end audio might just be more like Alienware and MacPro.
I'm hearing all of you about the shape. I didn't do it just to be superfluous but it seems that is how it is being perceived. I'll have to think about what to do about that. I personally like some of the boat hull shapes though I kind of think it is played out and I have the thinking it would become just another me to product? I have always like real wood veneers but i would have to think how to integrate that into an either ultra modern look or as someone else suggested and my favorite industrial style which is Art Nouveau or Art Deco. I don't really want to just blend in with what every other speaker company is doing, I do want the design to be instantly recognizable as a product, differentiation is called for I think. Who really looks at a speaker in a box shape anymore, unless you see a logo of a company they all start to look the same. B&O, B&W, Infinity and many others have had distinctive designs that you instantly recognize as those brands designs. Nobody is going to confuse the Nautilus with someone else design. I'm sure it isn't the most popular design because it is so radial a look but don't think they haven't sold many of those also because it is so different. Now once you get to a lower selling point where you are attempting to sell to a different consumer market perhaps mundane is more appropriate, but I'm going to talk to some other industrial designers about that.
I do appreciate the thoughtful responses, don't think I am arguing with you. Just remember I need to stand out in a very crowded field of clones where customers will at some point just purchase the most recognizable brand name if they look the same. I actually tried to tone down some of my earlier designs, those would have truly looked to be Alienware, they were very radical, I would say they were to use a term like a Rocketman or 50's type look. I thought it was way over the top.
I could ditch the wire-form grill and use a piece of nice wood with a rounded over edge and integrate something more like that into the look. Then it gives a more warm feel, or I could go the other way and make the face of polished, brushed or cast aluminum with again a more rounded edge look.
I do appreciate the thoughtful responses, don't think I am arguing with you. Just remember I need to stand out in a very crowded field of clones where customers will at some point just purchase the most recognizable brand name if they look the same. I actually tried to tone down some of my earlier designs, those would have truly looked to be Alienware, they were very radical, I would say they were to use a term like a Rocketman or 50's type look. I thought it was way over the top.
I could ditch the wire-form grill and use a piece of nice wood with a rounded over edge and integrate something more like that into the look. Then it gives a more warm feel, or I could go the other way and make the face of polished, brushed or cast aluminum with again a more rounded edge look.
Some of the concepts some have put up I don't like in the least. The plastic flat panels in gloss white don't work, they do look like cheap plastic. I like the boat hull shape of some of the Focal cabinets but not the one in black and white, that just look weird for no real reason. The wooden cabinet looks much more inviting to me but again the tweeter shape on top could be called Alienware. Those rectangular flat panels don't look like anything to me, they only work because they are so thin, once you add depth to them they are just another smooth box. I personally think the Kii speaker is ugly, no design to them if you didn't have the speakers on all the sides, they are rectangular shapes with the edges rounded over, noting that a kindergarten kid couldn't draw. Those are counting on the multiple speakers to give some juxtaposition to them, it is the integration of round speakers into the sides that give them any style at all.
Apple is known for a clean sleek look, but that doesn't seem to work for anyone else, everybody just think you are trying to copy Apple, it isn't helping Samsung to look just like an Apple product, the inherent technology in the Samsung with a better value is why people buy their product, not because it looks like an Apple. Differentiation is a necessity in the speaker market without looking toyish, so I appreciate like the hockey mask and the fencing mask how that came across. I don't want it to look silly or give those types of impressions. I would rather someone think of a Pinnafarina type of design than an early French aerodynamic look. One has style the other is just weird.
Apple is known for a clean sleek look, but that doesn't seem to work for anyone else, everybody just think you are trying to copy Apple, it isn't helping Samsung to look just like an Apple product, the inherent technology in the Samsung with a better value is why people buy their product, not because it looks like an Apple. Differentiation is a necessity in the speaker market without looking toyish, so I appreciate like the hockey mask and the fencing mask how that came across. I don't want it to look silly or give those types of impressions. I would rather someone think of a Pinnafarina type of design than an early French aerodynamic look. One has style the other is just weird.
I agree completely. You need to differentiate yourself to stand out in a tough marketplace, but in a way that doesn't come across as trying too hard.
Have you looked at some art nouveau and art deco furniture designs? You might find some inspiration there. Imagine the cabinet sides echoing that art deco chair, or the bedside tables, and so on. Just a thought.
Attachments
Philosophil.
To tell the truth the place I started was to sit in a very large Barnes and Noble bookstore looking through every book I could find on Art Nouveau and Art Deco book they had. That was really my original intention. I really like the radio and the cabinet in the next picture but once I tried to think as an audio designer the problems crop up with not disturbing the sound with something like the bars across the front of the speaker. For some reason I was drawn to an early 1934 Ford grill on a hot rod, but again the shape was very nice but the reality of that grill in front of a speaker became a problem and it turned into the now disgraced wire-form I came up with as a compromise for acoustic reasons. That is where the basic shape of the enclosure came from, it was my juxtaposition of an early hot rod design into a speaker enclosure that worked with my idea of a narrow elliptical speaker design, that was not an accident. So that is how this all started and where it has ended up at the moment. I need to go back and see how I can create that feel of the Art Deco feel while also being aware of the acoustical properties. It is not an easy design conundrum, a narrow baffle brings it own issues, just as a wider baffle does with baffle step between a cone and dome tweeter. There are no easy answers of perfect solutions.
To tell the truth the place I started was to sit in a very large Barnes and Noble bookstore looking through every book I could find on Art Nouveau and Art Deco book they had. That was really my original intention. I really like the radio and the cabinet in the next picture but once I tried to think as an audio designer the problems crop up with not disturbing the sound with something like the bars across the front of the speaker. For some reason I was drawn to an early 1934 Ford grill on a hot rod, but again the shape was very nice but the reality of that grill in front of a speaker became a problem and it turned into the now disgraced wire-form I came up with as a compromise for acoustic reasons. That is where the basic shape of the enclosure came from, it was my juxtaposition of an early hot rod design into a speaker enclosure that worked with my idea of a narrow elliptical speaker design, that was not an accident. So that is how this all started and where it has ended up at the moment. I need to go back and see how I can create that feel of the Art Deco feel while also being aware of the acoustical properties. It is not an easy design conundrum, a narrow baffle brings it own issues, just as a wider baffle does with baffle step between a cone and dome tweeter. There are no easy answers of perfect solutions.
How about a grill cloth that is set out from the baffle a little, curving around the baffle and along the front side of the speaker, with an art deco design built or woven into the cloth?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.