The basic designs may be similar to the way they were 20, 30, 40+ years ago, but materials, manufacturing and engineering have become incrementally better each year.
Today there are manufacturers that sell direct-to-consumer and will ship gear to you for 30 day trials. Their entire business model is built around that. There are also retailers like Audio Advise or Crutchfield that have similar models.
If you're looking to purchase used and you're in a more remote area, you can just purchase gear from here and other similar sites, then sell off what you don't want.
|
I'm a bit new, myself. Are open baffle speakers with active woofers as with the Spatial X3 an old design? They seem new to me...
|
It all depends on the price bracket you're looking in. There have been quite a number of innovations in materials used in drivers and cabinets, and in driver and cabinet construction. But these only "trickle down" slowly.
And then there's bending wave technology.
|
Interesting! thanks...
It all depends on the price bracket you're looking in. There have been quite a number of innovations in materials used in drivers and cabinets, and in driver and cabinet construction. But these only "trickle down" slowly.
And then there's bending wave technology.
|
Speaking of MDF, in the last few decades speakers have been developed with more ambitious cabinets in terms of construction and materials. Brands like YG, Magico and Rockport offer a refinement in sound that excludes MDF speakers, imo. While using similar cabinets, YG has also gone from paper to aluminum drivers, completely changing their sound.
|
I would say that it's down to refinements of existing technologies and passive components for crossovers. I believe that with all of the time that's passed, the ultimate success of any speaker is down to the talent of the person or persons who voice the speaker, even though of course the final sound is partially dictated by the room that it's used in.
|
I think all the basic technologies were developed decades ago, electrostatic, ribbon, AMT, dynamic… etc. But the progress of implementation has simply been a game changer; continued incremental improvement. I was in love with electrostatic and the ribbon speakers for over 30 years … but after 10 years of listening to live acoustic music realized why traditional dynamic speakers are the most common. They are capable of reproducing the most realistic musical sound… and decade after decade of advancement has made a huge difference in their ability to present coherent and musical output… as opposed to some exaggerated and magical sounding aspect. Advances in building enclosures, drivers and crossovers has been phenomenal. You can see my systems under my UserID.
|
The biggest step forward was the improvement in the crossover parts quality. Mainly massive leaps in capacitor technology are responsible for most of the sonic improvements we hear over 20 years ago. Basically, take a top speaker from 20 yrs ago, change crossover parts to current high quality parts (caps, resistors, inductors, wiring, solder), and it will compete at the same level as top performers today.
AKA: you have a 20-30y old speaker you love, just bring the crossover up to our age, and you have arrived.
There was a trend though in the past 20 yrs: the voicing moving away from high fidelity to high end. That is, from a balanced natural sound towards a bigger show, enhancing apparent detail level at the cost of compromised tonality.
A second strong trend of the past 2 decades: loudspeakers are getting harder to drive, impedances are sinking lower, forcing you towards solid state amplification. This provides lesser dynamic range and dependency on very high damping factor and high wattage.
|
A very few speakers from 20-40 years ago had no resonant cabinets.
But even today there are a lot of speakers with cabinet resonances.
There are a very limited number of cones that do not distort and changes shapes as breakup modes.
Some motors are more linear, but not every manufactures uses those… only a few.
Diffraction is better understood, but there are still lots of cabinets where diffraction is an issue.
Good designs from the past are still good today, and many speakers today and heavy on the marketing.
|
I think advancement in speakers is similar to advancement in other electronics like TVs and computers. Many things are similar and there's amazingly good speakers at reasonable price points.
The higher in price you look - the companies have invested in computer modeling, material science efforts resulting in step change improvements. A $500 speaker 10-20 years ago will not hold a candle to many of the $500 speakers of today.
|
Kef is doing a great job of innovating in recent years and are very transparent in communicating exactly what those innovations are and how the results are actually measured as proof.
|
@overthemoon
To add to that thought yesterday’s $30,000 speaker can’t hold a candle to todays $30,000 speaker.
|
I think advancement in speakers is similar to advancement in other electronics like TVs and computers. Many things are similar and there’s amazingly good speakers at reasonable price points.
In the active speaker space ^this^ is clearly true.
If the OP is looking for passive, then it gets more nuanced.
Also, I unfortunately live in a hifi-challenged part of the country -- the closest decent hifi dealer is nearly 3 hours away -- so I can’t just run out and listen to a bunch of new speakers.
Which area is that? Flagstaff, Idaho, or Wyoming?
The other problem is that the dealer has an advantage in that they
- have a room that is set up
- content that plays well on what they are selling.
- control of the volume knob.
Unless you bring your own content there are a lot of variables that will alter what sounds good in your space relative to theirs.
But it is worth listening. Just also worth knowing that one cannot remember sounds too well over a time gap between shops.
- Do you have your 20 year old speakers?
- What is wrong with those that you do not like?
- How big are they?
|
|
Interesting discussion. I would have thought that the "materials science" factor, mentioned by a couple folks here, would have answered the question as "yes," but apparently this factor is just a minor one in the eyes of some. Hmmm. I guess I really don't have a good grasp on what, overall, makes a speaker design "different" in a significant way.
|
The materials science existed in the 80s and 90s too , and some well behaved speakers were made.
Why are there still speakers being made with nasty resonances?
(Cost is the main “driver”)
|
@holmz Not sure what you're saying. Are saying something like,
(a) "There was such a thing as "materials science" back then?
That's too obvious a point for me to assume you're making.
The other option is that you're implying something like,
(b) "Not a lot of progress has been made in materials science as it applies to audio."
Do you mean (a) or (b) or something I'm missing? Thank you.
|
DSP in active speakers. Drop a Dutch and Dutch 8c in a lousy room and get good sound. Genelec W371A with the Ones and you have directivity control down to something like 50hz, really amazing speakers.
|
@hilde45 I mean “B”.
Maybe more manufactures are using it now on the high end, but at the lower end “cheap sells easier than good does”… and a lot buzz like it is a speaker built by a bee keeper.
DSP in active speakers. Drop a Dutch and Dutch 8c in a lousy room and get good sound. Genelec W371A with the Ones and you have directivity control down to something like 50hz, really amazing speakers.
Some great examples ^there^.
The other (related) item is room correction for passive speakers.
There are many DSP solutions (some automatic), and at least 1 analogue multi band 20 to ~200 Hz solution.
So the OP needs to likely narrow down things a bit.
|
I recall seeing a video on YouTube (sorry I don't have the link) that showed a cone flexing and going out of shape as it moved in and out, so the selection of cone material by the manufacture is really important.
Absorption material in the enclosure can be useful in not allowing internal reflections to impact the movement of the cone. From that point of view a vented enclosure might be helpful as long as the horrid sound emanating port is addressed.
|
Wouldn't it be great not to have to pay for college, or property taxes or healthcare, or replace roofs like our pals in the UK? There'd be plenty of funds left for hi-fi!
|
I recall seeing a video on YouTube (sorry I don't have the link) that showed a cone flexing and going out of shape as it moved in and out, so the selection of cone material by the manufacture is really important.
@pedroeb is this it?
|
Yes that is it. Good find!
I'd be interested to know what others think.
|
what changed ? the most disgusting thing is that the level of the music itself (as the art and skill of the performers) ... has monstrously degraded ...
want advice? - don't spend too much on equipment...
maybe a headphone amp and a dac (in the range of 1-2k per component) is all you need...
There is progress in the industry in class D amplifiers... advances in cables (there were just a lot fewer of them before)...
|
interesting video! thanks !
|
what changed ? the most disgusting thing is that the level of the music itself (as the art and skill of the performers) ... has monstrously degraded ...
True.
People talk about cables, fuses, mechanical isolation and other tweaks… long before considering the speaker’s fidelity.
@pedroeb - Obviously (or maybe not), I think it is important. The Accuton may work similarly in the woofer/MR.
There are also carbon tweeters.
Just focussing on the speakers is probably good for the OP. But deciding between passive and active is worthwhile. If the OP has speakers already, then just staying with those seems like the most cost effective.
They can always look at room treatments and room correcting amps/DSP, which may be a better bang/buck.
|
Right!
And all Speakers are not designed equal for sure...
Inside of a certain minimal quality cone response domain it is certainly possible to improve at high cost. but better clarity and less cone distortion, so great it will be, will not nullify the minimal lower cost design working especially in a passively well treated room and in a mechanically controlled one...An improvement dont nullify something or all design from which it improve upon ...
All aspects of sound are not only frequencies response accuracy of the speakers but also the room response to the speakers and a part of the superioir clarity and except for better dynamic and better timbre accuracy gained whith better working cone design , there exist also, imaging, soundstage, listener envelopment, which depend also nore of the room response itself and not only from the speakers response especially if this higher end cone is not in a well treated and well acoustically control room to begin with...
Then in S.Q./price ratio acoustic treatment and acoustic mechanical control is better improvement than just higher end speakers in a normal room, compared to speakers of a less costly design in a highly controlled room ...
The better bang for the buck is always acoustic in my experience.... Some vibrations control, and decreasing of the electrical noise floor with many simple solutions will help also greatly...
All that is a simple calculus S.Q./price ratio ... Acoustic is always the main factor for me up to a pont...Bad or not so well designede speakers cannot for sure be redeemed by room acoustic...
Just focussing on the speakers is probably good for the OP. But deciding between passive and active is worthwhile. If the OP has speakers already, then just staying with those seems like the most cost effective.
They can always look at room treatments and room correcting amps/DSP, which may be a better bang/buck.
|
Hi. OP here. So, my current speakers are Monitor Audio Silver 6's that I bought used around 15 years ago for just $600!! I know these are entry-level hifi speakers at best, but I actually really enjoy them. I currently drive them with a NAD M10, which I also realize is not the last word in high end, but it's so dang convenient. As I was thinking about upgrading speakers, I was just curious how much the technology had really changed. For example, of Monitor Audio's current speaker offerings, the model that appears to comes closest to my old speakers is their new Silver 200 7G, which goes for around $2,000/pair. And it got me wondering just how different are these speakers, from a materials/technology/design perspective, from what I currently have? (I hope a lot!) Again, I know the proof is in the listening, but I'm more than a 4-hour drive from the nearest MA dealer. Also, to be clear, I'm not picking on MA at all -- I'm just using them as an example as I own some. I do think the comments regarding DSP speakers is very helpful.
|
Like almost every other industry, , there has been a revolution in computer aided design, modeling, measurement, and analysis. Some companies like the Harman group with Revel and JBL have really embraced this and been very successful in improving speakers designs.
|
Most 'phile speakers are not meant to be exposed indoors to the sun, so 'under' is a terrifically bad idea to pursue.....concert PA excepted....;)
Anyone who bought 30K$ speakers 20 yrs. ago is probably listening to full boat MBL systems now, or their preferred equivalent.
Cabinet resonance will always exist; the simple physics cannot be ignored, only dealt with, unless dipole or omni. The lower frequencies can be dealt with DSP and an active system, beyond which is the placement in the given space....
Space, your final frontier. I'm working on ignoring mine for the time...ergo, the previous comment.
Welcome to the weakend, y'all. J
Don't be like me and do it in only one place... ;)
|
Full disclosure - Speaker designer / manufacturer
There are advances in materials all the time. Manufacturing process improvements help companies build products that are more consistent. Competition helps keep the costs down. Speaker technology keeps evolving but it's not always obvious to consumers. Foe example, there are companies that specialize in speaker voice coils or pole pieces. They may invest in more efficient assembly machines which allows them to make a better, more consistent product while keeping cost down.
We are a small speaker manufacturer and have invested considerable resources to design, develop and manufacture our own AMT drivers. Advances in adhesives, diaphragm architecture and substantial research of magnetic motor structures have allowed us to build AMT drivers that cover the range from 120 Hz to 24 KHz. Our speakers use digital crossover and room correction. Our woofers have a unique loading. We did not invent AMT drivers, DSP or pioneer driver loading. We did reinvent some existing technology, combined it with some relatively new technologies to build a very unique speaker system. New designs do happen.
There is ongoing development in many areas which can lead to new and innovative designs or improve the performance of more traditional designs.
|
I just recently bought a pair of Maggie's, and they are pretty much the same as they were in the 70's
|
Personally I would not upgrade them.
(It seems to be at best a minor sideways swap. There is no evidence that much has changed other than inflation.
For example, my 80s speakers were ~ $800, and are now $5650… and while they are on their 7th or 8th iteration, I think it would be more like the 10, 20 or the 40 k$ range to see a super obvious upwards change.)
If you like DSP, then you could go with powered speakers, or add a DSP.
I would look at some modest room treatment… and probably that would be after getting REW and microphone like a UMIK.
If you are going to upgrade passive speakers, then I suspect it is going to take more $2000. Hence; I would just suggest that you love them for what they are.
Getting active speakers removes the need for the amp, so selling the amp and speakers and going active, seems like another reasonable approach… but that will gobble up 2x-4x, of your 2k$ upgrade plan.
(Maybe you could get 1k for the speakers and amp.)
|
Check out the new PS Audio speakers. You can find some great videos on ayouTube to see them in action at folks homes and hear PS Audiobtalk about them. Very interesting and new. Revel make some great more affordable speakers. You can get them from Crutchfueld
|
The first commercially available speaker using DSP came out in 1991. Change in the speaker industry over the last 20 years has been more evolutionary than revolutionary. However, the pace has increased due to increased capacity for modelling and evaluation of ideas, and the rapidly increasing rate at which knowledge spreads.
However, if the question is about the history of Monitor Audio, here's their version of it: https://www.monitoraudio.com/en/about-us/timeline/. A lot of it is model introductions, but there are plenty of references to incorporation of new (to MA) technologies.
|
You can get very good speakers for not a lot of money
....wharfedale comes to mind.
|
The mass production of neodymium magnets has allowed some worthwhile improvements in driver design.
Borresen Acoustics has done some interesting work in lowering the inductance of its bass/mid unit through the elimination of iron.
That's just two examples of "under the surface" progress in loudspeaker design.
The Manger and MBL drive units are innovative.
In general audio is no different to most other industries in that the majority of progress comes from incremental improvement. The internal combustion engine is a good example - most of the conceptual work was done in the early twentieth century - lead by aircraft engines. However, advances in electronics, materials science and precision engineering have allowed significant improvements in performance, fuel economy, emissions control and durability. Even the electrification of cars is only taking a well established core technology.
|
I was actually in the exact same situation about 4 years ago. 20 year hiatus and then wanted to get back in. I feel you 100% jaybird! Had the same thoughts and wonders...But I knew where I left off was where I should start. With the speaks. Back then the journey led me to Dynaudio and that was it for me. My Audience 82's were my Holy Grail. Selling them after my divorce was one of the hardest things I had to do...Well 20 years later the Audience line is long gone. But Excite line which I didn't love (couldn't hold a candle to Audience, IMHO) led me to Evoke which is much closer to that Dynaudio Audience line that blew me away. However I still think about my Audience 82's and would love to do a side by side with my Evoke 50's. I'm not entirely sold today's technology is that much better. But at least the Evoke's have filled that gap more than anything else could...Just my personal experience and opinion...
|
@arion
There are advances in materials all the time. Manufacturing process improvements help companies build products that are more consistent....We...have invested considerable resources to design, develop and manufacture our own AMT drivers. Advances in adhesives, diaphragm architecture and substantial research of magnetic motor structures have allowed us to build AMT drivers that cover the range from 120 Hz to 24 KHz.
Thank you for weighing in. This is why I suspected the claim by @holmz (that there has been very little advances in materials since the 80's or 90's) might need checking.
|
After Jim Winey invented Magnepan speakers, the rest were simply not important.
IF you want speakers that reproduce WHAT YOU FEED THEM, this is your choice. Then, you can fine-tune your electronics and source information.
If you start with speakers that do not color the sound, you are starting correctly for only hearing what you provide.
Do NOT believe me. Go to a shop and listen for yourself, then have the dealer bring a pair to your house and listen IN YOUR ROOM.
Cheers!
|
The short answer is "yes", but if you put it on a graph it would look like a "smiley face" with the biggest gains at the budget level and extreme high ends. The mid-band of the range has been generally getting it right for quite a while. Gains in this range are better, but incremental.
To the OPs specific case, I'm with @realworldaudio on this one. Improving parts quality in an existing speaker can prodce stunning results with the speaker fighting well above its weight (price?) class in transparency, detail, and emotional impact. Spending more money on a speaker that incorporates low-to-medium quality crossover components is like spending big money on a turbo upgrade for your car, and driving around with the parking brake on. Taking the parking brake off is a good first step.
We drill down pretty deep into speaker upgrades and modifications. Our rule of thumb is to have an upfront converation about the speaker they are aspiring to own. Then, set an upgrade limit of 40% of that cost as a budget to upgrade the client's existing speakers. Above that, the additional investment in improving internals may not overcome the gains made by improvements in newer/better drivers, stiffer cabinets, etc. So, we get off at the 40% exit. This approach will, without question, have an outcome that will do MANY things better than a newer, more expensive speaker of a similar design. In the OPs example, I would set a budget top end at $800 (40% x $2k). This will allow for the installation of serious crossover components (and, other upgrades) and allow the speaker to perform as the original designer intended. I'm not trying to paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa. Just geting things out of the way that make the speaker sound worse.
If you are handy with a soldering gun, you can perform the work yourself. If not, the crossovers can be removed, shipped off, and returned to you with all the "goodies" installed -- including the pigtails (using quality cable, of course) ready to solder to the raw driver's input lugs. I've taken in speakers that, to put it mildly, were not my Top Ten list of favorites. Then, found myself actually enjoying listening to them after the performance mods. Just think what will happen when you already enjoy the sound of your speakers?
|
Borresen, Magico, YA, all pushing the envelope-- but also very expensive. Listen to Borresen if you get a chance. The best speakers in the world IMHO.
|
Better materials, better measuring tools, better understanding of human preferences, more powerful computers for analysis, more on line reviews and impressions....but in the end it all comes down to how does the system sound to you in your room with your music...and unfortunately, even with Room Perfect and all the other room improvement systems, there is still a fair amount of trial an error.
Until you try it in your home, you can't know for sure.
|
I’m going to mention a couple of brands which I think are doing really innovative things in an area of development I care about: driver arrays.
I’ve not heard them, sadly, but two brands stand out for me, and that’s Arion and Tekton. Both use multiple high frequency drivers and both have managed to really drive down the prices from what I’d expect, so a lot of the innovation here is that both brands have really broken the normal sales price to component cost ratios we see in almost all commercial speakers. Well done to both of them.
Both of these brands have also managed to bend the laws of physics and bring down the crossover frequency of their drivers significantly to make these arrays take over a broader range as well as leveraging acoustics to bend the speaker room interactions to their will.
Of course, they are different speakers, with different goals. Tekton achieves all of the benefits of a co-axial speaker with none of the drawbacks of doppler distortion,horn loading or having offset acoustical centers. Arion creates a broad-band line array that goes down to (forgot exactly) 100Hz or 200Hz. A remarkable achievement for AMTs. Given how AMT’s can be made very low distortion and vanishing amounts of stored energy I’m absolutely intrigued! In some ways this is like the Woofer-Assisted Wide Band designs I’ve seen, but in a line array!
In conclusion, yeah, there’s always some new exotic material being touted in driver design, whether in the driver, the construction of the surround, the voice coil former, or the spider. B&W, Focal, KEF and Monitor Audio and others have really pushed these ideas forward, but if you ask me what’s really interesting it’s in Tekton and Arion using arrays to bend a room to their will and making things possible at really remarkable price points for the offering.
|
Good comments above - I'll add a few points.
Like pretty much all manufactured products, the quality range has compressed as the industry has matured. There are hundreds (thousands?) of speaker models available now and for the most part they are all pretty good for their price points. This is due to thousands of refinements that keep improving the quality as the bar gets raised higher and higher.
Breakthroughs are few and far between. Every manufacturer wants to say that their cone material or their crossover design is revolutionary but it is just marketing hype. There are a few examples where the designer is truly doing something different, i.e. MBL, but even that technology has been around for decades.
If you can possibly swing it I would highly recommend that you go to an audio show. AXPONA is coming up but there are shows all around the country. There is just no better way to hear how different speakers compare.
I'm going to give my view on a related question. I have a Krell preamp (KRC-2) and amp (KSA 300S) plus a pair of Thiel CS6 speakers that all date from the mid 90's. I went to the 2018 AXPONA and I was very pleasantly surprised to find out that my system holds its own compared to everything but the megabuck systems. In a few cases my system sounded better, to my ears, than speakers costing 6 figures. I can't tell you how many systems I heard where the cords, cables, and interconnects cost more than my entire system and the sound wasn't anything special. Granted, my room is more optimized than a typical room at the hotel but if there has been some sort of breakthrough in the last 25 years I can't hear it.
There was one notable exception - the MBL room playing the 101 Extremes Mk II. The sound in that room was indeed different and better, at least to my taste. I went back again and again and concluded that this is the system I would own if I could afford it.
|
Look up Tekton Design speakers. They use a tweeter array to reproduce killer mid range. For me personally after a long journey of listening to many many speakers I stopped after being dumb struck by the Double Impact. THIS was the sound I was looking for.
|
If you can possibly swing it I would highly recommend that you go to an audio show. AXPONA is coming up but there are shows all around the country. There is just no better way to hear how different speakers compare.
I'd love to do this if within a reasonable distance. How do you find out about the shows? Anything in the Southeast U.S. (e.g., Atlanta, Charlotte) in the near future?
|
@Arion
Full disclosure - Speaker designer / manufacturer There are advances in materials all the time.
Thanks for your perspective. Very informative. Any other designers/manufacturers out there willing to weigh in?
|
Jaybird, We are located in Charlotte and welcome everyone to stop by for a listen. You don't have to be in the market for new speakers to stop by. We enjoy meeting people and making new acquaintances.
Capital Audiofest outside of DC capitalaudiofest.com
Florida Audio Expo floridaaudioexpo.com
are the closest to you.
|
Yes, for some to many. Crossovers, caps, parts, Drivers, materials, cone materials, surround materials, internal wiring, binding posts, and even cabinet designs have improved compared to 20yrs ago.
example:
VA: Helped a friend to upgrade his Vienna Acoustic Grand Mozarts. Replaced boards, caps, woofer surrounds, in the same cabinets on the first try. A marketed improvement just using better materials. 2nd try a better X-over design with modern measurement tools, software. Raised to another level again. It’s possible.
Hersey: Ask any Klipsch Hersey owner if their Version 1 speakers sound as good as versions 2,3, or the new Hersey 4s. Same basic speaker, better drivers, materials. Compare the old vs new versions and then ask if there is no change or improvement.
Quad57s: Dave at Marihart Audio completely redid his Quad57s, every single bit replacing what he could or simply using updates parts with the same basic speaker design and reports are in, he’s absolutely thrilled with the results. Super cool upgrade!
Mine: AMTs, better crossover parts and drivers with Nomex cones with better materials, new material diaphragms, decent solder, connectors, binding posts sound notably better than 20yrs ago.
I worked on a speaker assembly line early 1980s, and most of the internals were marginal compared to what we are in decent quality speakers today.
Yes, sure, in many cases with new speakers or upgrade kits too for old speakers as another option.
|
