Dirty little secret of Pedigreed, decades old Speaker line - no one will address

Sorry, but I don't know and don't care.

People do what they want. Which is their right, as long it doesn't harm others.

So, YG has not changed its midrange cone material in many moons. How is this evidence that their product is inferior.  To me, it looks like they think they got things right in that department a long time ago.  

I like the sound of certain compression drivers and horns for midrange.  I've heard various implementations including aluminum, titanium and beryllium diaphragms and it is simply not the case that one or the other material sounds better.  The same goes with the material and construction o the magnet structure.  The one I ended up with has a phenolic diaphragm and was made sometime in the late 1930's to early 1940's.  

+1 @tony1954 +1 @larryi 

It’s simply an internal business decision on which we on the outside have no control or influence, and has nothing to do with our main interest of optimizing personal sonics within our budgets.  Businesses are run by imperfect people so of course there would be many conclusions and decisions we personally wouldn’t agree with.  This speculation serves no purpose and seems a waste of time.

Maybe the opposite would be like the old Raidho who kept introducing new models irritating some as they felt past models were somewhat obsolete.  

@john1 

Your last sentence made no sense. 

Beyond that, what is your stake in all of this? Why do you care? If they are outdated as you say, the market will decide, and YG will suffer the consequences. 

Sounds lime the OP has an axe to grind with YG. Not the appropriate place to do so. 

There is more to this story then most know.  As a manufacturer, the inside info will be kept to that only.

Happy Listening.

OP,

Where did you get your information?

the inside info will be kept to that only.

Why? Please do tell.

A company riding old technology into the ground to save a few pennies?
 

Not exactly headline news….

Already asked and still waiting for an answer, but why do you care?

There are lots of companies out there that don't make their products in the manner I would choose to do so.  I've got a very simple response to that -- I don't buy their products.

A company has a right to do as they please and a person has the right to have an opinion. Right? 
 

Why do some of you care that this message was posted? Am I missing something?

If YGs pricing model hasn’t put them out of business yet, I doubt the technology (or lack of) of their midrange driver will do it either.

Just getaway from them , if youwant great trickle down technologies 

Borresen X3 !X2,x1 Loudspeakers great price and value 

or go to their up end lines great sounding speakers.

What a bizarre post. YGs billet core process has a lot going for it from a structural and materials perspective if the intention is to make a metal coned driver. It's biggest drawback is that it's expensive and relativel time consuming - even on a fast CNC machine. At this stage in the evolution of cone and cabinet loudspeakers changes and improvements are pretty incremental right across the board.

And what's wrong with a manufacturer introducing a more affordable line - as far as I'm concerned that's to be applauded.

BTW I am not a massive fan of the sound of YG speakers personally - but that's o do with how they are voiced and absolutely not the design and engineering.

Someone ordered 10,000 instead of 1000. And they have been stuck ever since

 It happens.  Or they got a great deal on 10,000. Or they believe it can't be improved. 

ATC has really changed their excellent done midrange driver much since the early 80’s & it’s still considered amongst the best . Why fool w/ excellence ? 
 

There’s examples of good & not great sounding versions of virtually every speaker technology so the theoretical  design & driver material  is only important  / impressive on paper & not necessarily in actual use. 

Another drive-by-post and the OP is MIA...

Someone ordered 10,000 instead of 1000. And they have been stuck ever since

 It happens.  Or they got a great deal on 10,000. Or they believe it can't be improved. 

...That’s what I was thinking too...

So, you’ve been here 18 years and have started four discussions, half of which are critical of YG.  Why?  What’s your beef with them?  Have you ever even heard YG speakers?  At least YG has the capability to design and manufacture their own drivers, which is more than all but a handful of other speaker manufacturers can say.  There’s little point to this and even less substance behind it to support anything other than you just being a YG hater for some unknown reason.  

I heard YG speakers in two separate rooms at AXPONA this year and felt that they stood out from the crowd. Maybe they got it right the first time around. 

??? For YG owners it must be refreshing not to have their 5 or 6 figure speaker  become obsolete a year or 2 after purchase. 

I listened to YG at Axpona a couple years ago paired with Gryphon and I heard nothing that made me think YG was special, but I don't put much stock in show demos. 

It is not as if YG is using aluminum drivers manufactured the same as lower end manufacturers of aluminum drivers.

Is anyone else producing them from a billet of aluminum? I don’t think so. They are stamped from aluminum sheets.

And it’s not as if their drivers are simple flat aluminum cones. The back of the cones use various raised areas designed to dampen resonances, standing waves, and add stiffness.

You can’t point to one specific technology, that you happen not to like, used in specific speakers, and claim that is a deficit that cannot be overcome.

Execution of the entire speaker system is much more important than any one technology used.

I also just did a pretty quick google search for reviews with measurements, and universally, they measure very well. Waterfall plots look very clean, especially in the midrange region.

I laughed out loud when I read the original post. I'm running a pair of Thiel CS6 speakers from 1996 and they hold up extremely well against most speakers I've heard that cost in the neighborhood of six figures. I haven't seen evidence that newer, exotic, and massively more expensive drivers are necessarily better. But they sure are a good reason to raise the price! As someone mentioned above, maybe YG got it right and they like the sound of their midrange driver. Maybe they've tried other materials and their current design sounds the best to them. Maybe the OP needs to get a life.

BTW, I've listened to YG speakers at 3 audio shows and I thought they sounded quite good.

What a weird post. It amazes me that someone can have such a nasty ax to grind for a particular manufacturer. Something fishy going on here.

All the best,
Nonoise

Interesting that the OP has made no further comment. Was this just a drive-by shooting?

Interesting that the OP has made no further comment. Was this just a drive-by shooting?

Yes!

Mike

OP ran out of bullets 

I think the OP might be wrong (not to give this drive by any further thought), but I seem the recall the original Anat used Scanspeak drivers. Am I misremembering?

My apologies for not commenting earlier as I thought I would be getting emails that new comments were made & I didn’t. No personal axe to grind, just that some very promising technology is being left to rot on the vine. For no reason I can see. No other manufacturer anywhere following their lead in their mr drivers over decades is not somehow dismissable. I finally read what I always suspected from a reviewer in a major magazine that their mr drivers sound scratchy. As to where I get my info - its all there easily attainable in the public sphere. The distributor of YG, GTT sends out a newsletter with videos.  2 of which celebrated the long time sales director of YG leaving & him coming to work with GTT to sell it’s direct competitor, Vivid which does have a dramatically better mr technology.  Dick Diamond the SD & Bill Parish the owner of the the distributor of both & a retailer, standing side by side as DD flat out says he never has been so engaged by the music made by a speaker.  BP conspicuously stood up for YG, not at all. He has went on & on how Vivid is flying out the door.  On video.  You can’t make this stuff up. It’s all easy to see for oneself if you look through their backlog of videos.

Philosophically, I have a problem with major high end audio companies dropping the ball in obviously self sabotaging ways by failing to innovate - yet pretending to.

Just as I do from a somewhat different angle with Wilson, that has come out with nothing genuinely newish since the last iteration of their titanium tweeter in that series. I heard a Wilson Watt/puppy seven that to virtually anyone’s ears blew away a gen 2 Sasha with a silk dome, transparency wise.  One completely wired with Nordost Odin 2 throughout the entire system & Dagostino top of the line electronics at a show. They do nothing but pass down slight improvements from up above to correct problems (such as slightly rolled off high end prior to the V series). They change their cabinet materials constantly with no poof it does anything more beneficial by doing so. The first time they named a new model (The V series) after this unsubstantiated remixing does not bode well.  They will not let the XVX MR & tweeter into even the speaker below it in the range. I could go on. Magico, Rockport & many speakers with ceramic drivers show how it should be done. Marten Logan as well in many key respects. Wilson has lost a lot of their market share & no longer dominates the high end speaker market to nearly the same degree. Despite their massive advertising & ensuring their speakers are irresistibly priced for reviewers.  It's not hard to see why they're losing market share.

I ranted a slot about Krell on AG when it was so obviously degraded by its investment firm owners. Someone from Krell entered the forum discussion to say he agreed but since they walked away (they could not suck any more money from the firm) they had radically redesigned their product to be what it should’ve been & they are indeed now far more respected.

A lot of AG forum contributors are so bright they feel they can get away with beautifully reasoned but too theoretical opinion, that may sound like it OUGHT to be convincing if left unexamined. I try very hard not to do so & to stick to fact where the evidence is more then clear.

While we are at it, let’s discuss how little has been done in quite a while to innovate and improve violins, acoustic guitars, and the hockey puck.  Surely, new and better materials are available—beryllium has to be better than maple.

How do you know any one approach is inherently superior and that approach is the latest invention?  It is simplistic to assume one aspect, like the material chosen for a midrange, is superior in all aspects of performance and that a driver employing that design choice would be best in all systems.  
 

This also assumes that there is a consensus on what sounds good.  It is clear we don’t all agree which is why there are many choices out there.  For what I like, I have not found one aspect of design that always sounds superior.  It is not simply a matter of picking the latest technology, or something that measures well, or any other indicia; it comes down to hearing the gear.

Magico, Rockport & many speakers with ceramic drivers show how it should be done.

A lot of AG forum contributors are so bright they feel they can get away with beautifully reasoned but too theoretical opinion, that may sound like it OUGHT to be convincing if left unexamined. I try very hard not to do so & to stick to fact where the evidence is more then clear.

Really? This is funny cause neither Rockport or Magico use ceramic drivers. So much for sticking to facts. I’ll use a phrase an IT buddy used to use when dealing with a clueless client — “We’re working with about 100 megabytes of RAM here.” Two words of advice:

1 - Get some writing lessons.

2 - Get a life.

Peace out.

SOIX that sounds like anger for its own sake. I never said Magico or Rockport used ceramic drivers. Please reread the sentence you quote . "&" means and (in addition to), not intrinsic to.

Even if I needed writing lessons - focusing on the letter & not the spirit of the truths discussed simply dishonors you & all truths unapologetically no longer reached for.  The point here is not humiliation. That’s for those trying to hurt others in compensation for their own unresolved anxieties/neuroses.

Yes, genuine peace to you in finding positive truths for their own sake.

Where is the evidence that any one technology or material choice is superior such that YG is somehow shortchanging its customers by not employing that technology?  The only evidence has been that other brands have made changes more recently than has YG; nothing demonstrates that these changes surpass what YG offers.

I hardly think that reading promotional material and divining the attitude of distributors constitutes evidence of any sort.  You mistake what you find “all there easily obtainable in the public sphere” as verified information.

You mention Vivid, Magico, and others who take a superior approach.  Yet, they all differ in the design and material of their midrange drivers.  Are they to be criticized for not converging on the optimal design?  If you notice certain characteristics of design that correspond with the sound of particular speakers, that will at least be something to discuss, but, you have completely left out discussion of the sound.  To listeners like me, that is the only thing that ultimately matters.

The most important question for you @john1 is "why do you care so much"? The market will decide if YG is right or wrong and they will go quietly into that silent night.

Or not....

Your stance is very much like the threads bemoaning how expensive this or that thing is and why are people so foolish to waste their money. People do it because they can and it's their money.

Strangely, in this entire thread I have not seen any indication that you have listened to a YG speaker and found it lacking because of the midrange driver. You cite anecdotal evidence, but no real first hand experience.

It's an interesting quirk of human nature that some people get invested to the extreme in a cause that doesn't really affect them in any direct way, either positive or negative. The OP hasn't been forced to buy the speakers -- or even listen to them if he elects not to -- and has hundreds of other speaker brands to choose from for his own system, yet here we find him outraged at the apparent injustice of YG not updating their midrange driver as often as he thinks they should. 

Weird, but hardly the only example of the odd things that get some people moving. 

I hardly think that reading promotional material and divining the attitude of distributors constitutes evidence of any sort.  You mistake what you find “all there easily obtainable in the public sphere” as verified information.

Bingo!

My post I wrote on 06-05-2024 at 09:23pm explains much of the first principles I'm concerned about & if read at all carefully in particular.  I care about the audio industry & it's integrity that all sonic progress forward depends upon. That's why I mentioned Wilson speakers & their interesting lack in key areas also.  Of course information in the public realm is verified, even if not completely.  It's where one starts to surmise & ask further questions from.  It's a very valuable starting point & the alternative of dismissing it altogether does not accord with any notion of applied curiosity in the name of any sort of objectivity. Zero high end manufacturers (other then YG) over countless decades, using aluminum cone mr drivers amounting to nothing, rather then some kind of something, goes considerably beyond being unlikely as to being insignificant.

You skirt the question of whether or not you've even heard the speakers.

@john1 

As I see it, one of the biggest problems with your initial premise: because YG is still using aluminum drivers, therefore they are not innovating, is missing many other pieces of the entire story.

How do you know, that just because they are still using aluminum, they haven't innovated and improved: the overall geometry of the cone, the precision in manufacturing, magnet material and/or magnet  geometry, decreased the mass, decreased resonances, improved performance of the surrounds, etc.?

You have the reasoning inverted as to cause and effect.  You are saying essentially that because YG has not changed/innovated, it must be inferior.  You should first establish that YG is inferior--that there sound is no longer competitive with other speakers, and then you can speculate as to why that is the case and we would have something to discuss.  Have you heard YG and the other speakers you are comparing them to--Vivid, Magico, Rockport, etc. and found them to be wanting (i.e., established the effect--inferior sound)?  Have you established that the other brands have, through time and implementation of changes, improved while YG has not improved?  That would at least start to make the case for the cause.

@john1 

" Zero high end manufacturers (other then YG) over countless decades, using aluminum cone mr drivers amounting to nothing, rather then some kind of something, goes considerably beyond being unlikely as to being insignificant."

That sentence makes absolutely no sense, and you should be embarrassed by your original thread. Ridiculous. 

You also use then incorrectly instead of than twice.

I've never heard a major high end speaker company not improve when they change their mr drivers. Including Rockport, Magico etc. To not even try bothers me. Yes, I have problems with most aluminum midranges, although Vivid was far, far better then most.  No one mentions my criticisms of Wilson which are at least philosophically related.  YG has done some very interesting things with improving silk domes to be sure.  Stuff Wilson won't even reach for.  YG has done a lot of work on improving their bass drivers too & their xovers were always their claim to fame.  To not do a single thing ever over decades to their mr drivers blows my mind but if it doesn't concern others on AG (even as other manufacturers haven't & won't go near it for decades) then G-d bless. Just because I see a lack of integrity applied here but exercised elsewhere, doesn't mean anyone else is necessarily bound to find it the least bit peculiar & worth noting.  I also notice almost all comments address the spirit of what I'm saying, rather then the technical letter of linguistic correctness - which speaks to the intrinsic integrity & honorableness of most AG contributors.  Worth noting.

I don't see how not changing their midrange driver (at least visibly) is an integrity issue by the company. They manufacture their drivers to meet their specifications and design goals for the speakers that they build. I think that actually shows more integrity, not less. They are sticking by what they believe to be the best for their business. If their choice is wrong, the market will sort it out and even potentially put them out of business. Why would that matter at all to any consumer unless one owns their product? All in all, this OP and follow up is a bad take on the situation IMO.

To csmgolf - Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

That & the market hardly sorts out all issues evenly or in every ones interest. Why it might matter to someone who values progress in the audio industry as much as audio journalists who write about just that on our behalf - is not I suggest, a question that should even be asked. All who engage in these forums, ipso facto care in just the way you question.

So I gather you have never listened to the speakers you are ranting about and as for improving drivers, just take a look at KEF. Their UniQ driver has been updated more than a dozen times and each time they also updated the crossovers as well.  Then came the Meta series and they upgraded the crossovers once again.  And they are just one example.

Why it might matter to someone who values progress in the audio industry as much as audio journalists who write about just that on our behalf - is not I suggest, a question that should even be asked. All who engage in these forums, ipso facto care in just the way you question.

There have been plenty that have asked that very same question on this thread, so what you just said is not true.  New technology guarantees nothing with respect to improvement. The overall design and end result is what tells the tale. When I have heard YG at shows, what they do well is even tonal balance and good imaging. Would I ever buy them, probably not. On the other hand, there are manufacturers utilizing new technology drivers that have the voicing completely screwed up. B&W comes to mind. Changing because everyone else is using new technology because you want to keep up with the trends and having the product be worse is what is truly foolish. 

It sounds like you have a love hate relationship with YG. Get a divorce.

@john1 , one last chance to answer the question lest you be labeled a lame internet troll.

Well, at least they don’t use staples to hold the speaker together...LOL. If they are getting the frequency response and transient response from aluminum that they want, then why bother ever changing it? They have invested heavily in the process. Once engineers get "buy-in" from marketing and from the head honchos to invest in say an expensive CNC machine to implement designs, they aren’t going to stop using it willy-nilly unless there is some huge payoff in sonic benefits and increased sales to justify it.

Companies must make a profit. That’s job one.

And note that materials science is forever coming up with "newer, faster, better, cheaper" materials. But at the end of the day, are they really demonstrably better?

Many people actually prefer the sound of paper cones, especially for bass. To each their own. If you don’t like the sound of YG, don’t buy one. That’s your prerogative. Move on.

I may not like the grille design on Fords these days, but I don’t go out of my way to criticize them for it. I simply don’t buy one.

csmgolf,

I agree with your assessment of the sound of YG and B&W speakers.  YG does get voicing right, it is just that there is something I don't really love about the sound--a kind of "dryness."   Still I respect their speakers.  B&W, as you and I agree, get basic voicing wrong and do a whole lot of other things I don't like.  But, different speakers appeal to different tastes and priorities so I don't dismiss them outright, much less accuse them of betraying the industry by their choice of technological approach.  

The end result is what matters, not what technology is employed, or for that matter, how the speaker measures.  There are so many elements to the design of a speaker that it really matters what choices one makes for a combination of elements, not so much how each element performs individually.  It is often the case that something old, and technically inferior is actually the better choice is a particular system design.  I know a builder of amps who gets back some of his amps which were "improved" with newer and much more costly parts.  He chose parts based on how they sound in the particular circuit and there were certain cheaper parts that sounded better.  This is a common thing.  About 20 years ago, another builder was in a bit of a panic because a cheap potentiometer was no longer being made and he could not find a replacement he likes.  The stuff he builds is ultra premium, so price was not an issue, it was the particular way this cheap pot functioned in his gear.