Joshua,
Indeed I agree with you completely. It is really a misnomer that Lynn is using that he designs speakers as he is really designing cabinets and crossovers and not the basic reproducer. So he is just a careful selector of devices from other manufacturers. I am on the other end of things and am designing speakers from the magnet to the diaphragm materials and everything else needed to produce a working device. I agree that the attempt should be to be able to reproduce a sound as close to the original or actual sound that we know as any acoustical instrument including the human voice. This is where I place my efforts and without this level of effort I would also just be another packager of existing devices. There is no perfect device including my own designs but I strive to come as close to the ideal as mechanically possible with as few compromises as possible. I would say that at least 95% of all speakers on the market today use commodity parts available to all manufacturers and this is why so many speakers have such similar sound and issues. There is little basic research in this field today. it is more an issue of packaging and marketing than anything else these days.
Indeed I agree with you completely. It is really a misnomer that Lynn is using that he designs speakers as he is really designing cabinets and crossovers and not the basic reproducer. So he is just a careful selector of devices from other manufacturers. I am on the other end of things and am designing speakers from the magnet to the diaphragm materials and everything else needed to produce a working device. I agree that the attempt should be to be able to reproduce a sound as close to the original or actual sound that we know as any acoustical instrument including the human voice. This is where I place my efforts and without this level of effort I would also just be another packager of existing devices. There is no perfect device including my own designs but I strive to come as close to the ideal as mechanically possible with as few compromises as possible. I would say that at least 95% of all speakers on the market today use commodity parts available to all manufacturers and this is why so many speakers have such similar sound and issues. There is little basic research in this field today. it is more an issue of packaging and marketing than anything else these days.
Kindhornman, I'm curious about your built-from-the-ground-up speakers. I don't have access to phase plugs, diaphragms, magnets, or for that matter, horn moldings, which is why I have to make do with GPA, Radian, and Azurahorn components ... although some of these are special-commission items.
Lynn,
Right now I am producing a cone direct radiator with a cone material that I have developed and a complete magnetic system. It is an underhung solenoid magnetic structure using Neo of the highest available magnetic force. I am also working on a beryllium dome tweeter to work in conjunction with this driver and again I am doing the complete motor design. I have not produced a compression driver yet, but a friend was one of the designers at Radian at one time and I am very familiar with their designs and others. I do plan on doing a compression driver in the future but not right this minute. I do have waveguides that I have designed and I still have many of those in storage.
Steven
Right now I am producing a cone direct radiator with a cone material that I have developed and a complete magnetic system. It is an underhung solenoid magnetic structure using Neo of the highest available magnetic force. I am also working on a beryllium dome tweeter to work in conjunction with this driver and again I am doing the complete motor design. I have not produced a compression driver yet, but a friend was one of the designers at Radian at one time and I am very familiar with their designs and others. I do plan on doing a compression driver in the future but not right this minute. I do have waveguides that I have designed and I still have many of those in storage.
Steven
Thanks!
Thank you, Jean-Michel! I appreciate your kind response and I'm enjoying the process or learning more of your 'curve'! You have also been very kind to the community to share your learnings.
My best,
Brendon
Thank you, Jean-Michel! I appreciate your kind response and I'm enjoying the process or learning more of your 'curve'! You have also been very kind to the community to share your learnings.
My best,
Brendon
Do you mean here on this forum, diyAudio? I hope you didn't put a lot of money on that bet, 'cause you'll lose it.
Do you mean here on this forum, diyAudio? I hope you didn't put a lot of money on that bet, 'cause you'll lose it.
It seems to me that it's more about the approach than the class of music one listens to.
To my observation, among audiophiles, the two main groups are those who are primarily interested in sense of realism of reproduced music, on one hand - and on the other hand those who are primarily interested in how impressive the sound is.
Among engineers and DIY enthusiasts, the two main groups are those who are relying, eventually and primarily on the subjective listening experience, on one hand - and on the other hand those who are relying only on accepted engineering concepts and measurements results - while referring to conventional and widely accepted measurements.
The two above classification are coarse and generalized. With actual individuals, often certain individuals have varying degrees of mixture, or combination, of the two opposing approaches. For instance, a certain individual may rely primarily on the result of conventional and accepted measurements, while also relating, to a degree, to the subjective listening experience.
Also, the above approaches aren't correlated to the class, or classes, of music one listens to. Not necessarily.
To my view, there is no 'right' and 'wrong' here, only different approaches.
However, more often than not, the preferences of individuals from opposing groups are completely different. For instance, relating to a certain amp. People from one group may recommend it wholeheartedly because of it measures very well - while people from the other group may detest it, because of it may sound 'harsh', or something like this.
Therefore, I'm trying to find out where different people are coming from, before relating to their views and recommendations. I'm willing to spend money on building an amp recommended by people who have an approach similar to my own. I will not spend my money based on recommendations by people whose approach is opposed to mine, or who I don't know what their approach is.
Thank you for that feedback- the extra output below 50Hz would be pretty minimal IMO- 0.6mm extra xmax for the 2226h vs the 2035H, and the higher sensitivity of the 2035 offsets the extra power handling of the 2226h. In any case, I run my 15"s up to cross over to the horns in my current setup, so less coloration in the 500-1kHz band would be welcome. Right now I use a BD Designs BD15, the JBL I'd expect to be a little easier to work with, as the high impedance of the BD makes for some challenges (I'm using passive XO). It's a little bit more sensitive too which would allow for a smidge more BSC.
Sure, I'd be really interested, particularly since I will be building my own set of loudspeakers in the next several months. The previous TL's I've seen for 15" drivers have really large, but the GPA/Altec 416 drivers have much lower Q and a higher Fs than audiophile drivers, which should change things.
Last edited:
Lynn, we know you do good work, but do you REALLY need to re-post like that?
I find these posts interesting even if they contain some information previously included elsewhere in this huge thread, because most of the time they are framed in a somewhat different context, more closely related to the current twist of this discussion.
Keep 'em coming Lynn!
A part of the reason the likes of JBL and TAD are expensive. Loudspeakers have reached a mature state of engineering some time ago and improvements now come incrementally and at substantial cost. A real R&D department costs real money and it has to come from somewhere.
Let's look at designers of audio electronics. Amplifier designers do not design or manufacture triodes, pentodes, bipolar transistors, MOSFETs, JFETs, resistors, or capacitors. They select from the parts bin, and sometimes reach far into the past (see DHT-triode revival). DAC designers do not design the actual digital converters (like the well-regarded Philips TDA1541, Burr-Brown PCM1704, or ESS Sabre 9018); at most, they program gate arrays to signal-process the digital data stream. Once again, reaching into the parts bin, and using what's there.
Surprisingly few driver manufacturers are vertically integrated; many of the best-known vendors buy magnets, voice-coil formers, baskets, spiders, surrounds, and cones off-the-shelf from specialized vendors.
I can think of a few vertically integrated manufacturers of loudspeakers ... JBL, Tannoy, small manufacturers of electrostats and planar-magnetics, the usual Japanese brands, and not many else. B&W? They say they make their own, but I wonder if that's so, when it would be more cost-effective to buy special versions from the usual Euro vendors, or even Chinese vendors.
Although design flexibility is the greatest attraction for designers, the downside are the inventory requirements for production, since vendors of magnets, VC formers, cones, etc. are reluctant to sell in small quantities ... a thousand units is barely worth the attention of an OEM parts manufacturer, while it is impossibly large order for a specialist high-end manufacturer.
The worst possible situation for the specialist manufacturer is being stuck with 980 magnets, cones, or baskets that have been custom-ordered just for you and then turn out to be unsuitable for production. This kind of inventory-overstock bankrupts a lot more specialist manufacturers than you might think.
If the electronics or loudspeaker manufacturer is using fairly standard parts, at least the raw-parts inventory can sold at auction if the market collapses for XYZ amplifier or loudspeaker. If you need to get rid of 980 special-order cones or baskets, good luck getting anything for them if your company gets into a cash crunch. All it takes is one damn-with-faint-praise review from Stereophile, Absolute Sound, or Six Moons to kill off a product, and maybe take the manufacturer along with it.
High-end audio is a discretionary purchase for a fairly narrow demographic: business owners, lawyers, doctors, engineers, with substantial incomes, and almost entirely men who are between 30 to 65 years old. The key word is discretionary; if the stock market falls, or entrepreneurs see a no-growth environment, sales of luxury items will drop sharply until confidence is regained. Doctors keep buying since they are largely unaffected by business cycles, but the other demographics can drop to zero. High-end is also in competition with other luxury goods ... fancy cars, watches, projection-screen home theater, etc. etc.
This is a roundabout way of saying that although B&W and Harmon International might weather a downturn fairly well, the little guys are probably going to get crushed unless they can shed inventory and workers fast, and wait out the downturn in a state of dormancy.
Surprisingly few driver manufacturers are vertically integrated; many of the best-known vendors buy magnets, voice-coil formers, baskets, spiders, surrounds, and cones off-the-shelf from specialized vendors.
I can think of a few vertically integrated manufacturers of loudspeakers ... JBL, Tannoy, small manufacturers of electrostats and planar-magnetics, the usual Japanese brands, and not many else. B&W? They say they make their own, but I wonder if that's so, when it would be more cost-effective to buy special versions from the usual Euro vendors, or even Chinese vendors.
Although design flexibility is the greatest attraction for designers, the downside are the inventory requirements for production, since vendors of magnets, VC formers, cones, etc. are reluctant to sell in small quantities ... a thousand units is barely worth the attention of an OEM parts manufacturer, while it is impossibly large order for a specialist high-end manufacturer.
The worst possible situation for the specialist manufacturer is being stuck with 980 magnets, cones, or baskets that have been custom-ordered just for you and then turn out to be unsuitable for production. This kind of inventory-overstock bankrupts a lot more specialist manufacturers than you might think.
If the electronics or loudspeaker manufacturer is using fairly standard parts, at least the raw-parts inventory can sold at auction if the market collapses for XYZ amplifier or loudspeaker. If you need to get rid of 980 special-order cones or baskets, good luck getting anything for them if your company gets into a cash crunch. All it takes is one damn-with-faint-praise review from Stereophile, Absolute Sound, or Six Moons to kill off a product, and maybe take the manufacturer along with it.
High-end audio is a discretionary purchase for a fairly narrow demographic: business owners, lawyers, doctors, engineers, with substantial incomes, and almost entirely men who are between 30 to 65 years old. The key word is discretionary; if the stock market falls, or entrepreneurs see a no-growth environment, sales of luxury items will drop sharply until confidence is regained. Doctors keep buying since they are largely unaffected by business cycles, but the other demographics can drop to zero. High-end is also in competition with other luxury goods ... fancy cars, watches, projection-screen home theater, etc. etc.
This is a roundabout way of saying that although B&W and Harmon International might weather a downturn fairly well, the little guys are probably going to get crushed unless they can shed inventory and workers fast, and wait out the downturn in a state of dormancy.
Last edited:
One of the economic functions of sharp downturns is shaking out smaller, undercapitalized manufacturers. In other words, sharp recessions make markets less competitive over time, because the smaller players have been squeezed out. The example used in Macroeconomics 101 classes is the number of auto manufacturers before and after the Great Depression.
The hifi biz is not exempt from this. What selects the remaining players during a shakeout is access to capital, and the ability to shed costs as fast as necessary. This has nothing to do with product quality, which might actually work against the first two business priorities. This is pretty much what happened to US manufacturers of audio gear (Scott, Fisher, Sherwood, Marantz, etc.) during the downturn of the early Seventies; they couldn't compete with the very deep pockets of Japanese banking-financed manufacturers, and the names and goodwill ended up being sold to Japanese vendors.
The high-end audio industry is an unstable niche business that is extremely sensitive to business cycles, a corrupt business press (even worse than the automotive press), a retail business that is close to unsustainable without steady income from home theater installations, and a fickle and fad-driven buying public. Not surprisingly, the big-name manufacturers that are still with us after 20 years are also the darlings of the business press, which has a huge influence on buyer perceptions of quality and value.
The only two people I can think of who became multi-millionaires in audio are Amar Bose and William Z Johnson (Audio Research). Whether you like Amar's products or not, he's a genius at marketing, and has done it with zero support from the audio press. Mr. Johnson, by contrast, has great relations with the press and a very carefully chosen and loyal dealer network, and has parlayed that into one of the best-known high-end companies of the last four decades. I'm not a fan of their products, but who cares what I think? Mr. Johnson has the Lear Jet, and in this business, that's what counts.
We need to look at the realities of the business as it's practiced in North America. We are not going to receive government sponsorship as some sort of arts fund, or because we're nice people and make nice products that make people's lives more beautiful. That's a wonderful story, but that's not how our economic system works.
The hifi biz is not exempt from this. What selects the remaining players during a shakeout is access to capital, and the ability to shed costs as fast as necessary. This has nothing to do with product quality, which might actually work against the first two business priorities. This is pretty much what happened to US manufacturers of audio gear (Scott, Fisher, Sherwood, Marantz, etc.) during the downturn of the early Seventies; they couldn't compete with the very deep pockets of Japanese banking-financed manufacturers, and the names and goodwill ended up being sold to Japanese vendors.
The high-end audio industry is an unstable niche business that is extremely sensitive to business cycles, a corrupt business press (even worse than the automotive press), a retail business that is close to unsustainable without steady income from home theater installations, and a fickle and fad-driven buying public. Not surprisingly, the big-name manufacturers that are still with us after 20 years are also the darlings of the business press, which has a huge influence on buyer perceptions of quality and value.
The only two people I can think of who became multi-millionaires in audio are Amar Bose and William Z Johnson (Audio Research). Whether you like Amar's products or not, he's a genius at marketing, and has done it with zero support from the audio press. Mr. Johnson, by contrast, has great relations with the press and a very carefully chosen and loyal dealer network, and has parlayed that into one of the best-known high-end companies of the last four decades. I'm not a fan of their products, but who cares what I think? Mr. Johnson has the Lear Jet, and in this business, that's what counts.
We need to look at the realities of the business as it's practiced in North America. We are not going to receive government sponsorship as some sort of arts fund, or because we're nice people and make nice products that make people's lives more beautiful. That's a wonderful story, but that's not how our economic system works.
Last edited:
Perhaps diy points the way. At first there were OEM systems, then these were broken down into 'separates'. Current Diy devolves this to modular components. Look at the plethora of diyaudio pcb group buys. I get a Twisted pear BuffIII and put it with an Amanero USB / I2S in a nice case and go straight to hi-end Nirvana. Modules for amp biasing, filament supplies - it's so easy - the new hi-fi components. Maybe one day a LTO . Diy audio the new model, open to all with a good idea. Kind of like the new journalism. Just have to work out how to get paid for it. And make it accessible.
martin
. Diy audio the new model, open to all with a good idea. Kind of like the new journalism. Just have to work out how to get paid for it. And make it accessible.martin
Back to wall?
Lynn and others with experience of horns and Onkens,
The LTO concept turns out to result in quite hefty loudspeakers. Do they compensate this to some extent by ease of placement in relation to the back wall? I get the impression that both the Onken enclosure and the Le Cleac'h horns are more or less insensitive in this regard. Is this a true assumption?
I must add that I've been appreciating this thread for a while now. It's both educational and inspiring.
Jonas
Lynn and others with experience of horns and Onkens,
The LTO concept turns out to result in quite hefty loudspeakers. Do they compensate this to some extent by ease of placement in relation to the back wall? I get the impression that both the Onken enclosure and the Le Cleac'h horns are more or less insensitive in this regard. Is this a true assumption?
I must add that I've been appreciating this thread for a while now. It's both educational and inspiring.
Jonas