Here is an interesting interview with a speaker designer. I met this fellow at RMAF and besides being a good engineer, he has a tremendous ear for music. What I found to be important in his conversation was when he said that subjective evaluation is just as dangerous as objective testing:
http://live.audiogon.com/events/the2008/vids/Guru_intv.html
John
http://live.audiogon.com/events/the2008/vids/Guru_intv.html
John
The video looks like just a sales pitch for another small 2-way speaker. How much is it anyway (outside of the cost of the trip and on the spot indoctrination)?
tinitus said:
No, I like the simple classic look
Classic? As in a creation of the highest excellence with timeless appeal?
Hmm, not feeling that.
jacco vermeulen said:
Let someone else steal it. He appears to to be quite arrogant to me. Your customers are not there for you. You are there for your customers.
You dont have to go to sweden to get the GURU speakers, just his "own" brand INO wich can be bought as diy-kits if you want to. I am active in another forum where he is also and I have never percieved him as arrogant. Infact he is very generous with his knowledge and has held several seminars on loudspeaker engineering and such.🙂
PS. The looks have absolutely NOTHING to do with aestethics.
PS. The looks have absolutely NOTHING to do with aestethics.
Lord_Humongous said:
if they were engineered for sound quality they would be bigger. such little boxes cant make enough sound to have low distortion at a usefull level.
so, the looks of those can only be for aesthetics 🙂
Lord_Humongous said:
I absolutely agree.
Loving the huge step in the baffle for tweeter time alignment. I can see it now: "So you've time aligned the tweeter, nice work, but what about the diffraction and comb filtering caused by that surface right in front of its wave launch? Couldn't you budget in a 1/2" roundover or something?" and the guy goes "Erm..."
Sorry I'm being unduly harsh, I've never heard them nor likely too. But from appearances, for the money asked and from my own engineering sensibilities there's not a lot to capture the imagination.
Lord_Humongous said:
I find that statement very confusing. IMHO looks are a huge part of aesthetics. Bigger than any other factor.
Cal Weldon said:
He is saying that the way this speaker looks is due only to performance engineering and aesthetics didn't play any role in the final design of the box.
LOL..
The problem with these speakers is that the real performance is outstanding. They sounded much better than a lot of speakers at the show that looked mo' neato and cost a lot more. The guy in the interview was very friendly and was willing to share all of his data. Furthermore, he had a very good ear and was knowledgeable about music. I can see how someone who would be intimidated by a real professional could perceive him as being arrogant. The only thing he didn't know was the selling price in American currency. I found him rather refreshing compared to the other exhibitors and some of the boors found here.
John
John
So you know where the crossover point is? I think that may have something to do with it. With a high enough crossover point and the directional baffle, the high frequency wave may never see that ledge. His data, which as I said he gladly shared, didn't show any harmful residue.
The small ones, which are the subject of discussion are around $2000.
John
jlsem said:
Regarding the larger floorstanders. Well he's crossing to an 8" so ideally he wants to be doing so at around 1.5Khz due to the centre to centre spacing of the mid/bass and tweeter, thus avoiding comb filtering in the overlap region between the two. Also note that the directivity patterns of the 8" and 1" would become further dissimilar at higher crossover frequencies leading to poor power response.
Whether the XO point is a high or low, whichever way you look at it that step in the baffle is something to take issue with. Is it a problem? Well, did he show you on-axis graphs by any chance? Any problem may have been filtered out in the XO so it would be much more telling to see off-axis plots.
The appearance of Guru is not exactly the last word in design.
Look at ProAc or JmLab Focal lines. They are nice. Let’s disregard the sound for a second. Would you rather live with a pair of disproportionate black boxes or a lively, veneered good-looking pair of speakers?
Going back to the sound. How much better this speaker is then anything else in it’s price range?
See my point now? As a bunch of educated Diyers, we are able to see through sales pitch and other BS to the point. He has to compete with other speaker makers who’s models look a 100 times better and probably sound just as good or better within the price range.
The part that I found arrogant is the notion of exclusivity.
There’s a clip of another speaker manufacturer on Las Vegas show and it was quite entertaining also.
Look at ProAc or JmLab Focal lines. They are nice. Let’s disregard the sound for a second. Would you rather live with a pair of disproportionate black boxes or a lively, veneered good-looking pair of speakers?
Going back to the sound. How much better this speaker is then anything else in it’s price range?
See my point now? As a bunch of educated Diyers, we are able to see through sales pitch and other BS to the point. He has to compete with other speaker makers who’s models look a 100 times better and probably sound just as good or better within the price range.
The part that I found arrogant is the notion of exclusivity.
There’s a clip of another speaker manufacturer on Las Vegas show and it was quite entertaining also.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.