I like his channel BUT he's absolutely not the last word in loudspeaker and crossover design! I notice he's fast to criticize many loudspeakers companies, but these companies have price points and mass market speakers unlike him. There are MANY good speaker designers who are actual educated engineers with many decades of experience under their belts with design teams. I think it's great that he's giving people options, but I personally don't take everything he says as gospel unlike many of his followers. Just my opinion!
19 responses Add your response
And he charges no fee for the design work he puts into the loudspeakers sent him for evaluation, just the parts needed to implement his "fix" should the loudspeaker owner decide to move forward with the upgrade. I'm sure the owner pays shipping both ways, of course. But remember gentle reader, GR Research offers it's products strictly as DIY kits, not fully assembled and finished products, though Richie has associates who will do the build if you are willing to pay. |
Danny definitely pushes for a higher performance level and is good for the consumers. I think it’s great that he explains in easy to understand terms and educates people. He also exposes the parts quality used in most speakers for what they are ....it’s shocking what some companies will put inside a multi-thousand dollar speaker. It seems the bigger the company, the more pressure there is from above for profit. |
Danny’s video was a response to Jay’s Iyagi’s video and clarified or corrected things Jay was saying. I think Danny made it very clear that when people send in a speaker to him, they are doing so because there is something that needs fixing and he is looking for a parts solution and he is not redesigning the speaker. He also clarified an issue Jay had with GR Research’s own products in terms of bass heft. I’ve found interesting stuff on both Jay’s and Danny’s videos although generally, Jay is reviewing products I’m not that interested in since I tend usually to more boutique stuff where the manufacturer isn’t sending stuff out to YouTube reviewers. There also is (in Danny’s video) a little gig on the ASR method. |
Had a friend send me the dipole bass system and networks etc he couldn't get them to function properly and they were terrible I had to rework all was a few years ago maybe he's gotten better. Best to get info from many sources. Following an audio guru is usually not the best way. Learn enough to understand audio design then you can see that some audio gurus are fairly off base. With all things, YMMV and Danny's business is biased toward his own products like all businesses can't fault the guy for that. |
@dz13: One thing Danny is criticized for IS resigning some of the loudspeakers sent him. His critics ask: what makes him (or us) think he knows more about designing than the engineers at, say, Klipsch? Well, in his videos on various Klipsch models, Danny demonstrates exactly what he found to be "wrong" with them. He found the Klipsch crossovers caused the two drivers to be out of phase at the crossover frequency, causing a deep hole in the frequency response there. And when Klipsch introduced the Mk.2 versions of those same models, what had they changed? The crossovers, and in exactly the same way Danny had! So yes, Danny apparently DOES know more than the Klipsch designers. ;-) On some speakers he finds no serious problems, and merely upgrades the garbage parts used in most loudspeaker crossovers (regardless of price): replacing electrolytic caps with film ones, carbon resistors with film, the terrible binding posts found on most speakers (which contain ferrous parts!) with his own Tube Connectors, etc. He also addresses the ringing he sees in his spectral decay measurements (waterfall plots) he takes via compensation parts in the crossovers he designs, ringing left unaddressed by the loudspeaker’s designer (whether for financial or other reasons). With some loudspeakers he finds the problems to be too serious to correct (often because of the drivers themselves), with others not economically justifiable. All of this is what he talks about in his many videos, a free source of valuable information whether you decide to modify your speakers or not. The info also makes you a more informed consumer, more aware of what to look (and listen) for in a loudspeaker you are considering buying. |
@johnk: the OB/Dipole Sub CAN be confusing. The wiring of both the 2 or 3 woofers and the servo-feedback circuit has to be done correctly, or the sub won’t work properly. But the wiring diagram has been posted numerous times on the GR Research website and AudioCircle Forum. Plus, an owner can always call Danny for help---he’s a very nice guy. When correctly assembled, the sub is like no other you’ve ever heard! Lean, no fat what-so-ever. Makes "normal" subs sound "plump". ;-) |
i don't see him talking trash about MANY companies, as one person here suggested. He is only saying that there are going to be inherent problems in ANY design and he specializes in taking the best qualities and rectifying minor (or major) problems and improving a speaker. I have been designing since the late 70's and I would trust this man testing and evaluating MY speakers which 'I' feel are just fine. He knows about the kinds of parameters and how each creates a cause & Effect on a system. |
While I wouldn't exactly buy any of his modified speakers from other companies myself, I can reasonably see those things as maybe a viable option for someone else. Maybe one or two his better successes there might be interesting food for thought though. But, if Danny's not saying that most of the speakers out there are schlock, then I suppose I might say it - not that I'm here to launch some kind of campaign against them, exactly. But, that's why I finally went the DIY speaker route, and when I did everything opened up for me and I was able to get everything I ever wanted from a pair of speakers, for the first time ever. I even based the main speakers loosely on one of his original designs and his thought processes have been very influential on me. His original designs have always struck me as potentially very good, though they tend to have more or less different applications (as many speakers do), but I mean he seems to have a better grasp than even many manufacturers that good, well-thought out crossover design is a critical part of good speaker design. But, if a maker can willfully screw the pooch on crossover design (and it's often so bad that I don't think it qualifies as simply 'saving money') then my first question is what else in the overall design did they also screw up? I've seen so many bad crossover designs now, that it's no surprise to me that they are often associated with extremely bad driver mismatching as well for example, which can even be the bigger sin...something no good crossover design can remedy. But, for my own purposes, why would I want to throw bad money after good to try and improve the sound if I can avoid spending the bad money in the first place? To me, it seems most of these speakers are not built to a design standard and not even built to a price point - it's as if they are just being 'built' - that might be the best I can say about some of them. And that they are just being built for no other purpose than to get them out the door. I'm sorry to say it that way, I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes here, but that's roughly about the state of the speaker market in my mind at the moment, at least with the brands and price ranges Danny's been working with and also from what I've happened to experience as a longtime audiophile as well. |
He is the last word on the subject in Iowa Park Texas 🧐 willywonka106 posts I like his channel BUT he's absolutely not the last word in loudspeaker and crossover design! I notice he's fast to criticize many loudspeakers companies, but these companies have price points and mass market speakers unlike him. There are MANY good speaker designers who are actual educated engineers with many decades of experience under their belts with design teams. I think it's great that he's giving people options, but I personally don't take everything he says as gospel unlike many of his followers. Just my opinion! |
As someone who has helped friends upgrade 2 pair of speakers (RP-600M and KLH Model 5), I can tell you, Danny’s upgrades improved every aspect of each. With the Klipsch, his upgrades made an unlistenable (to me) speaker, into something that was pretty reasonable. With the KLH, the improvements were less obvious, but still worth the effort. The things that Danny improves are not just a matter of ’re-voicing’ the speaker, as some have accused him of doing. He is correcting demonstrable bad engineering. As if a competent speaker designer would make a choice to have bad phase relationships at the crossover point, or tons of stored energy, etc. Of course, designers designing speakers to meet a price point don’t have much of a choice to use inferior caps, iron core inductors, sand cast resistors. But how is that Danny’s problem, and not a detriment to the quality of the end results? Cheap crossover components are sill cheap crossover components, and inferior sounding, As far as Danny not being a trained engineer, therefore casting doubt on his credibility, that also doesn’t mean a whole lot, IMO. I spent years in my youth, helping a friend upgrade speakers, build speakers, upgrade the acoustics in restaurants and other public spaces, rebuild enclosures, and other related things. He had no formal acoustics or engineering training, yet he went on to work for Harman Audio on the design team responsible for Revel speakers. Let me add, that I am not associated with GR Research, nor have I ever owned any of Danny's products. |