Open source speaker project - Part II

[Alekk]

Not sure I understand. I was pointing out that you don't have a problem with copyright where you thought you had one.

The term open source refers to a source which is openly available. You don't have a source in a tangible form like documents or a set of files. Do you intend to produce some at some point? In a normal open source project the files are worked on together throughout the life of the project and to a fair extent define the project.

In the same way the type of speaker chosen to be designed will attract some people and repel others so does the chosen way to run the project. It is obviously impossible to satisfy everybody or probably even the majority. In my case I am certainly interested in a group design project but I am not interested in either of the current speaker designs and have reservations about the way the projects are going about things. I voiced some of this earlier in this thread and it's predecessor. The groups formed around unattractive designs to me and alternative ways of going about things which is absolutely fine. If the groups had formed around a design that was attractive to me and run in a way I liked it is almost certain that some of the people currently involved in the two projects would not have joined. Perhaps I will have a go when the two current projects have run their course.

Guess I'll pop in here. The speaker itself doesn't have to be open-source. Why not just make the production hardware openly available?

Currently working on a CC(ShareAlike) 3D-printable vacuum mold for creating pulp paper cones, with the 3D models being freely available and modifiable (once they are finished). The same could be done with coil winders, spacers, baskets, etc. Only thing that would be a hindrance is sourcing magnets/mounts, pole pieces, and baskets (if sand-casting and machining isn't feasible for the last two).

I feel like making the tools available is much more powerful than releasing a free and available speaker itself.

Also, if someone wants to make money using those tools, then why not let them? The speaker itself could be an original work by whoever used the tools.

 

[andy19191]

Guess I'll pop in here. The speaker itself doesn't have to be open-source. Why not just make the production hardware openly available?

Not sure I am the best person to quote given I opted not to become involved in either of the two group projects (here and here) that followed on from the discussions in this thread. I shall leave it to those more actively involved to comment on how successful or not the handling or relevance of open source was to the group projects.

The idea of 3D printing tooling seems unusual. Typically tooling is both accurate and robust neither of which is usually associated with 3D printing. These requirements tend to mean tooling is expensive which plays an active role in how drivers are manufactured, priced and what batch sizes are economical. It is common for a company getting drivers manufactured by a third party to lose the ownership of the tooling if they don't maintain an agreed minimum number of orders.

Can you give us an idea of the cost, accuracy and strength/robustness of 3D printing driver tooling that is available to DIYers?

Also, if someone wants to make money using those tools, then why not let them? The speaker itself could be an original work by whoever used the tools.

That is a decision for those involved. It is common for those committing a lot of hobby time to an open project to want it to benefit their peers but not for it to be commercially exploited. Organising the project so that commercial exploitation can be effectively blocked through the courts requires effort and planning which is often, quite understandably, missing from many projects run by enthusiasts.

 

[mbrennwa]

I shall leave it to those more actively involved to comment on how successful or not the handling or relevance of open source was to the group projects.

I really enjoyed the Open Source Monkey Coffin project. In terms of the "open source" term, it really depends on what you mean by it. If you're talking about the "legal" meaning of "open source", I don't know (and don't care). However, the spirit of openly sharing ideas and data in the OSMC project was extremely useful, and it really made the result a lot better than if some random guy would have developed a speaker in his workshop, and then presenting a photo and a drawing of his work. With such "behind the curtain" work, people tend to say "why did you do it this way?" or "you should have done this and that instead!". With the OSMC, most things were openly discussed in the OSMC thread before taking a decision, and it's great to be able to go back and understand why things are the way they are.

 

[Alekk]

Can you give us an idea of the cost, accuracy and strength/robustness of 3D printing driver tooling that is available to DIYers?

Typical PLA has great mechanical stiffness for a readily available filament (though it does deform at above 60C), with ABS/PETG/ASA being good choices for parts that need to withstand up to 100C. As far as accuracy, most competent desktop FDM printers are capable of 0.2-0.25mm(~9-10mil) tolerances. Consumer SLA can reach .1mm(~4mil) tolerance.