Which is the better woofer tester to buy for DIY use? The wt2 or the cheaper WT3.
Thanks for any help, jamikl
Thanks for any help, jamikl
Agreed, 100%. I like the folks at Parts Express, but their speaker tester is just a cheap clone of the original tester made by Smith & Larson.
Keith Larson and Brian Smith are responsible for pioneering this technology and they're still at it, making it (much) better, each and every day. I get regular updates for my WTPro from Smith & Larson, and can always contact Keith for product assistance. He goes way out of his way to support his product, and to educate his users and the DIY community in general.
With the other product, it's just a cheap clone. Hands down, no question, get the real deal from Smith & Larson. I'd like to see Parts Express begin to stock it again.
Keith Larson and Brian Smith are responsible for pioneering this technology and they're still at it, making it (much) better, each and every day. I get regular updates for my WTPro from Smith & Larson, and can always contact Keith for product assistance. He goes way out of his way to support his product, and to educate his users and the DIY community in general.
With the other product, it's just a cheap clone. Hands down, no question, get the real deal from Smith & Larson. I'd like to see Parts Express begin to stock it again.
Thanks Wayne. You have both convinced me. On paper it looked better and their site did show updates and support for their products across the board.
jamikl
jamikl
Hello diyaudio!
As the designer of the WT3 I would ask that before you decide between the WT2 and WT3 you consider some outside opinions and comments from actual users:
Jeff Bagby's comments on the WT3:
"I would recommend it over WT2, and I have both."
Jeff's Loudspeaker Design Software is widely used in the speaker design community. Here is a link to his web site:
jbagby
ref: WT2 and possibly WT3 users, I have a question. - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video, and Electronics Customer Discussion Forum From Parts-Express.com
Some other comments from the above referenced thread:
midcoast comments: "Buy the WT3 and save yourself some money and put it towards some drivers."
Rich comments: "Unless I'm doing something wrong (very possible) WT3 prints a graph which is much friendlier to my old eyes."
Alse see the WT3 product page at Parts Express for 69 candid product reviews from actual owners. WT3 gets an average of better than 4 out of 5 stars from these users.
At the WT3 bundle page (with free scale) there are currently 28 user reviews giving an average of 4 1/2 start out of 5.
Here are some of the comments on WT3 from the user reviews:
"Awesome Product!!!"
"Good thing / Small package"
"Exceptional product and value"
"Must Have for the Novice or Pro!"
Not all of the comments are this positive but I would encourage you to read the actual user comments on the WT3 to get a wider range of opinions than expressed in just this thread.
For further information on the WT3 please see the product info here.
In the latest version of the WT3 software I have added a new (patent pending) Rub and Buzz test based on my discovery that comparative impedance responses can reveal rubbing in the motor assembly. This feature was added while holding the price at $99. If you shop for other measurement systems that can detect rub and buzz problems you will see that there is nothing else available under $1000. That's what I call a high value product!
Regards,
John
I am an ACTUAL USER of the WT2 and swear by it. I've had excellent technical support from one of the key principals of S&L Audio over the years I've owned my WT2.
An added bonus is the WT2 can be used to test capacitors and inductor coils as well. Capacitor testing was recently covered in detail in the May 2011 issue of audioXpress.
An added bonus is the WT2 can be used to test capacitors and inductor coils as well. Capacitor testing was recently covered in detail in the May 2011 issue of audioXpress.
Me too. I'm an actual user of the genuine original Smith & Larson system and I must say I'm more than impressed with it. I've already chimed in, but I think this is worth another mention.
I own a Smith & Larson product. Certainly an excellent product. May just lack of a detailed step by step tutorial, the user guide being a bit "intellectual" for me.
Write to the website with any questions you may have. K. Larson is usually very responsive and helpful.
Yes, I already had contact with him and got help. I would like only to say that a more detailed tuto would have make mastering the intrument faster. Currently, I think the user guide is a bit more oriented towards concepts rather than fast familiarization of the tester. However the more I use it, the more I like it.
I built a special cable for it, with less than 0.01 Ohm series DC resistance, 0.3 µH series inductance and 33 pF parallel capacity, it's described in a PDF document in french, with photos, here :
Petit cordon de mesure. | A comme Audio
Banana plugs, coming from Multi-Contact, are remarquable :
http://www.multi-contact.com/AcroFiles/MA/TM_MA120_(de-en-fr).pdf
I couldn't agree more. I own and use almost daily a WT Pro and it is the best piece of equipment you can have for loudspeaker development i.m.h.o. The software just keeps on getting better too. Plus, they give unparalled service. And it is a pleasure to get Keith on the phone in case there is something you have questions about.
My understanding is that the PE thingy is just a clone to the point of being an IP infringement, but badly done.
I received my WT2 2 weeks ago and I couldn't be happier. Its just so easy to generate T/S specs with this thing its unreal! Couple of minutes and presto. I've had about twenty odd drivers kicking around for awhile and no way to know for sure about the specs but I blew thru about 80%of them the other nite, did printouts
and graphs, wicked easy. I wish I would have heard of this unit years ago. 2 thumbs up🙂
and graphs, wicked easy. I wish I would have heard of this unit years ago. 2 thumbs up🙂
<war bonnet on>
vacuphile,
You are entitled to your opinion but let me assure other readers that the WT3 is not a "clone" of the WT2 in any way other than the fact that it measures impedance response and extracts loudspeaker driver parameters. I assume you and a few others here are just trying to support Smith and Larson by disparaging my WT3 product. That's OK. I understand loyalty to a small company and enthusiastic support for their products. But disparaging competitive products goes against the American spirit. Truly excellent products succeed on their own merit. Are you opposed to the American concept of free enterprise? Open competition is how products become better and less expensive. WT3 is a perfect example.
There is no IP (intellectual property) infringement because there are no patents, copyrights or trademarks involved. The WT3 is simply a competitive product. The technology involved in impedance measurement and parameter extraction is thoroughly covered in the technical literature and not "owned" by anyone. Impedance measurement is not a new concept for engineers.
Let me provide readers with some factual background on the WT3 development. I designed the WT3 for Parts Express and deliberately took hardly even a look at the WT2. I did not want to be influenced by its interface as I have my own approach to software interfaces that goes back to my Mac development starting in 1985. The one thing I knew about the WT2 was that it was painfully slow, requiring about 6 minutes to measure just 30 data points. I knew I could blow away that performance time using the same sine sweep and advanced DSP processing I used in my TrueRTA apps. My proprietary method of measuring impedance response employs a 64k FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) which provides more than 30,000 data points in just a few seconds. That is over 1000 times higher resolution than provided by the WT2...in a fraction of the time.
The actual operation of the WT3 is quite different from WT2. The WT2 uses the same point-by-point measurement method I implemented back in the 1980's on the Audio Precision System 1. I freely distributed that software source code to anyone who was interested in measuring speaker parameters. For all I know the WT2 could have been derived from my own earlier code. So I am no newcomer to PC based speaker parameter measurement. I've been doing this a long time and I have every right to design and sell my own measurement product in this great free nation. It was not until the WT3 was launched that Smith and Larson came out with a "fast mode" which they acknowledge is not very accurate when they say at the WT2 product page: "Note that this mode is not as precise and is not recommended in a final speaker design." In contrast WT3's measurements are not only fast but highly accurate and highly precise. Now with the latest release of WT3 software I have added a unique new rub and buzz test which allows manufacturers and end users to screen out bad drivers. Hopefully now more of those buzzy drivers will go in the trash at the manufacturing plant instead of at our shops.
In my opinion the measurement speed alone makes WT3 the superior product for measuring speaker parameters. You can easily measure twenty drivers with the WT3 in the time it takes the WT2 to measure just one. At $99 the WT3 costs less than the $160 WT2 primarily due to modern high volume manufacturing methods and my willingness to price my software very competitively. But I am content to let my product succeed on its own merits and have not disparaged the WT2. That is not who I am.
If I seem a bit hot about the attack on my work it's probably due to my Irish/Comanche heritage!
<war bonnet off>
Regards,
John
You wrote, "There is no IP (intellectual property) infringement because there are no patents, copyrights or trademarks involved."
While I can't speak for this specific case, the blanket statement that there must be a patent, copyright, or trademark to qualify something as intellectual property is just flat out wrong.
While I can't speak for this specific case, the blanket statement that there must be a patent, copyright, or trademark to qualify something as intellectual property is just flat out wrong.
Let's stay away from "Internet Lawyer" posts, please.Here is a link to the US Patent and Trademeark Offices description of "Intellectual Property" if anybody really cares.
What is Intellectual Property?
I am not aware of any IP issues between the WT2 and the WT3. They are simply competitive products.
Regards,
John
I took an informal poll on another forum of WT3 owners; asking them if they thought they were getting a new model of the WT2 when they bought the WT3. 1/2 of the 8 respondents said yes.
Clever marketing eh?
BTW, I've seen threads on the other forum about issues WT3 owners are having with their units. Haven't seen any yet about the WT2.
Clever marketing eh?
BTW, I've seen threads on the other forum about issues WT3 owners are having with their units. Haven't seen any yet about the WT2.
Speakerdoctor, you hammer the nail on the head. Just suppose I would bring out a soda under the name Coca Cola V.2.0. What do you think would happen? I would get sued the next day, because large corporations have the money to do that. Intellectual property is only as good as the lawyers you can afford. You know, there is infringement on my IP going on as I type this, but the perpetrator is too large for me to handle. So, I do feel strongly about these things.
Well, it would be more like if you made something named "Fizzy drink 2" when there was something named "Fizzy Drink".
I mean..." Woofer tester." Could you really expect reasonably that nobody will ever make another product called "Woofer Tester"?
*shrug*
- Status
- Not open for further replies.