I hope they sell a lot of speakers despite the arm chair dorks. I like Danny Richie speaker reviews re: understanding how the parts add up to the whole.
The mistake armchair speaker snobs make too often
Recently read the comments, briefly, on the Stereophile review of a very interesting speaker. I say it’s interesting because the designers put together two brands I really like together: Mundorf and Scanspeak. I use the same brands in my living room and love the results.
Unfortunately, using off-the-shelf drivers, no matter how well performing, immediately gets arm chair speaker critics, who can’t actually build speakers themselves, and wouldn’t like it if they could, trying to evaluate the speaker based on parts.
First, these critics are 100% never actually going to make a pair of speakers. They only buy name brands. Next, they don’t get how expensive it is to run a retail business.
A speaker maker has to sell a pair of speakers for at least 10x what the drivers cost. I’m sorry but the math of getting a speaker out the door, and getting a retailer to make space for it, plus service overhead, yada yada, means you simply cannot sell a speaker for parts cost. Same for everything on earth.
The last mistake, and this is a doozy, is that the same critics who insist on only custom, in-house drivers, are paying for even cheaper drivers!
I hope you are all sitting down, but big speaker brand names who make their drivers 100% in house sell the speakers for 20x or more of the actual driver cost.
Why do these same speaker snobs keep their mouth shut about name brands but try to take apart small time, efficient builders? Because they can. The biggest advantage that in-house drivers gives you is that the riff raft ( this is a joke on an old A'gon post which misspelled riff raff) stays silent. If you are sitting there pricing speakers out on parts cost, shut up and build something, then go sell it.
Showing 28 responses by kota1
Money is a very poor indicator of speaker performance in our industry, Part of me agrees with you because I have purchased speakers that offer great performance for not a lot of $ (mostly active but some passive.) I don't know what a good indicator of speaker performance would be I could rely on consistently. What would your list be? |
Btw. right now listening to Sinatra’s ’My Way,’ and you’d think his songs were meant to be reproduced by large format horns and drivers :) Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin owned 3 Paragons EACH to listen to their own Master Tapes. Since a Single Paragon is Stereo, they had to be using a Paragon as a single speaker instead of stereo (effectively 6 speakers systems in 3 cabinets.
|
I don’t think everything JBL ever did was outstanding The reviews on the JBL 305 Studio monitors are fantastic, they were too bright for my taste. I got the passive version, the Studio 230, that was also based on the trickle down tech from the M2. You can’t compare the amp in the 305 with $$$ of the Bob Carver electronics and Mapleshade cables I drive these with on my desktop, they just opened up like a flower, (uh oh, did I just become an armchair snob)😯 |
I don’t understand the argument, The argument is snobs calculate the cost of the "parts" of a speaker and pass judgement, overlooking the design and overall SQ. This rankles the DIY crowd in general. Personally I am parts agnostic, turn it on and if it sounds good I don’t care if it is $ in parts or $$$. My bias/snobbery is that matching an amp and a speaker is a crap shoot and happens to be the most profitable strategy for manufacturers (sell you two products amp + speakers plus an additional set of cables). I think it should go away, all speakers should be designed from the ground up as an active "system", sold as a one box solution, and reduce the risk of a mismatch. Since we are discussing JBL here is an example:
To the DIY crowd, what is your opinion of this much speaker for the money, the JBL 4305P Studio Monitor. Could Joe Sixpack do better if I sent him off to shop for speakers, amp, preamp, and a DAC with the same dough? @phusis @ghdprentice what are your thoughts?
|
I demand a lot OF speakers now, You have a very nice room, go with a 7.2.4 setup and enjoy the thrills. Think, you can get a LOT more dynamics and imaging from coverage of 11 speakers plus two subs than just one pair of speakers. Get these active Focals and save your money on buying more amps or rack space. I know there might be some "snobs" in this thread that frown on pro gear, don't let that stop you:
|
All the hoopla on "matching the individual driver to an amp channel" has gotten old long ago, It "burns" me when I see a product trashed from an audio "snob" that simply mismatched the speaker to the amp, the cable, or the room. My personal take and not least given enough options would be favoring the bundled, active package vs. a passive ditto - in named context. Optimally though I prefer the outboard active solution. That is audio wisdom, well said. I have a pair of DefTech W7 active speakers on my porch that are in the DTS Play-Fi ecosystem that I chose for convenience and a bargain, they were on a close out. They sound great, and not just for the price. They are in a sun room surrounded by windows just sitting on stands. Being streamed to wirelessly with the play-fi app.Low price, small convenient, = no brainer. |
What I am after is an end-game speaker that I can afford for my listening room and my taste in sound. What I posted is totally MY taste, so I get it. If I had a mission like yours the goal is to get the taste in sound YOU want. For an end game that would lead me to three brands, JBL (the M2 if you want to hear your masters as they were recorded, they have an outboard active crossover so you can choose your own amp), Revel, (if you like a little more bloom with your accuracy), or Martin Logan if you want sheer "wall of sound" envelopment. BUT, I don’t think your mission (every song played through those speakers fits your taste to a T) is going to end no matter what speaker you get unless you get this F360 tube preamp by Black Ice audio, watch the Z review and would love your feedback: If there could be only 2 passive speakers in my room I think I would want these ML Neoliths:
|
As to why most speaker manufacturers use "off the shelf" drivers is because it is more cost effective and easier. Easier? Yes. Cost effective? No, companies that make their own drivers don't do it to compress their margins, they do it to increase their margins: https://www.paradigm.com/en/technology-design/factory-tour
|
The only reason I would need a center channel is if I was able to playback a R2R 3 channel recording The only reason you can say this is because YOU are sitting in the "sweet" spot, everyone else in the room is screwed to some degree. Absolutely backward thinking because this is from an "audiophiles" perspective. Here is the deal, if you use a dedicated center channel any where you stand in that room you can still tell what sound is coming from the center. Now on my desktop system I don’t have a center because there is one chair, granted. But for a listening room, no. See Robert Harley’s book "High End Audio", regarding Meridian’s Trifield playback algorithm for playing back 2-channel sources over more than two speakers. He writes "it fills the center of the soundstage, presents a wider sweet spot . . . profound ability to solidify the soundstage. “That’s just silly. I think. One of my favourite things is the centre speaker, because the nice thing is when you anchor stuff to speakers, especially the centre, you can walk around the room and it doesn’t move. If it’s just phantom, you walk over to the right and the phantom centre follows you to the right, just like it does in stereo — which is one of the drawbacks of stereo. I like actually walking around the room, I’ll stand over here on the side between the right side and right rear and the picture still stays the same. I mean, the balances are different, so I’ll be hearing more of whatever’s coming out of those speakers, but everything’s still in the same place, right? The vocal’s still coming from the centre, and I love that. https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/mixing-atmos-bob-clearmountain |
OK, if you are talking mastering a stereo recording I agree, two speakers with the engineer sitting in the sweet spot is what you need to master the recording. Now, where our personal "preferences" take a fork in the road is you feel it is the "quality" of the speaker that determines how accurate that image is produced. To me that is simply a money pit. We both agree you are an expert on audio matters. You have years of experience, a custom built room, and enough disposable income to pursue the "quality" speakers you mention. You are required to sit in the sweetspot and let stereo do its thing. I agree with Tomlinson Holman: three items correlate well with Holman's answer to the question; "What determines the bit rate needed for audio on media?"
As Mr Holman is quick to point out, any audio engineer confronted with the question, “what do you want to do with a higher bitrate?”; will always ask for more frequency range and more dynamic range because they don't know what to do with more channels. "It's a new paradigm." "Just to go to 192 KHz sampling rate to satisfy passing bats instead of human beings is pretty crazy, but adding channels is of very great value." If your personal taste prefers two expensive speakers I got no beef with that. It is the most expensive, least realistic way to recreate what the MUSICIANS actually did in the studio (not what the engineer palyed back on the desk. My layout is similar to the Tooles (as in Floyd), right down to having not one but TWO center channels and a VOG channel:
|
I totally respect where you are coming from and the debate I remember from the seventies was the value of 4 channels (quadrophonic) vs 2 (stereo). I don’t know that we are comparing apples to apples re: the center channel and music reproduction. Your philosophy of the center channel disrupting the proper image is the opposite of Bob Clearmountain’s (please check his creds here) and that is just one of many engineers/experts who prefer a three or more channel image. I agree re: 3 channel audio recordings being a non issue but there are many ways to integrate more than two channels. I agree that I can watch a movie with a sound bar or a pair of speakers and its better than the TV alone. I don’t disagree with your preference for two excellent speakers, that’s all good. I disagree that the best strategy to reproduce music is with two speakers, any two speakers regardless of cost. I think the "chrome mountain/sound cannon" approach is the most profitable for the dealer and the most fun for baby boomers with disposable income. Look at all the threads here asking how to spend thousands of dollars with no questions asked about acoustics, it is almost crazy. The "science" is available today to arrive at $$$$$ type performance on a beer budget. You need to treat your room $, use DSP and get the acoustics right $, This is 2023, Moores Law benefits consumers, to build a "stereo" like you would in the nineties makes 0 economic or sonic sense, but it can be a fun way to tinker around. For example, look what Sony can do with a two channel signal via their 360 sound mapping tech, the most expensive receiver they sell comes in at around $3500: https://www.youtube.com/live/eWBBoi3n_qQ?feature=share
|
Quadraphonic died rapidly because the technology at the time could not do it without marked compromise in 2 channel performance. Today you can get a Jim Fosgate designed 4 channel upmixing matrix in a tube preamp (Black Ice F360) that markedly improves 2 channel performance, see this video: Even now that the technology exists to do "surround sound" well, people interested in the highest levels of performance regard it strictly as a theater stunt. "Surround sound" is so last decade, today surround sound has been superseded by immersive audio. News about this in the pro community can be seen here: https://www.mixonline.com/tag/atmos If you have decent ears I can prove to you in a very short period of time that a center channel detracts from 2 channel image formation at its highest level. I just had my hearing tested and its perfect so I’m "all ears". I own a fantastic two channel preamp ( the Sony TAZH1-ES) and if you look at the two channel measurements of my room (posted) it reproduces the two channel response curve I prefer in an exemplary fashion (maybe better than yours? Please post your in room FR to compare if you dare). Let me know your experiment and I’ll do it, then I’ll post an experiment for you as a follow up, fair? you still have to spend quite a bit more than most people are willing to spend. This is a deal breaker that actually proves my point, trying to create the illusion of a live music performance with just two speakers is a fools errand. See how the goal posts have moved and artists are now using the same tech I use in my media room to deliver immersive sound to every seat in 5000 seat venues (hint, it needs more than 2 speakers LOL). You can build a system to reproduce immersive audio in someones home for less than $10K. You can blow it out as a SOA system for far less than it takes to build a stereo SOA system (I think the OP has invested over 6 figures if I’m not mistaken and I can’t imagine the time it takes to DIY it): https://www.mixonline.com/live-sound/venues/on-the-cover-las-vegas-takes-immersive-live-part-1
|
A center channel will improve the results. It will provide the best two dimensional image for the largest number of people (locations), a wide "sweet Spot." Agreed. That third dimension is the most fragile of all audio characteristics. I can’t argue that if you only experienced it 4 times its rare and desirable. You know there is a system that is literally named after 3 dimensions, I am not claiming it will reproduce what you heard, only that we are both in agreement in our quest to achieve a 3D soundstage.
|
It seems that lately no matter what topic I try to discuss it gets turned into a discussion about multi-channel audio. I for one would appreciate it if those discussions found a home in their own threads. I can take a hint. 🤝 Thread started, @mijostyn @fleschler @mahgister we can continue our discussion here: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/immersive-audio-and-how-to-achieve-it |
I hope you are all sitting down, but big speaker brand names who make their drivers 100% in house sell the speakers for 20x or more of the actual driver cost. I personally measure value when I compare speakers around the same price point. If the manufacturers have high or low margins at that price point has little interest to me. I think consumers are more conscious about where a product was assembled/made today then the sum expense of the parts used, do you agree? |
Hidden cost factor: For what my woodshop cost, I could have bought top end Wilsons! Same with the misconception you can build furniture cheaper than you can buy it. Your post is illuminating for those of us that lack "the skills to pay the bills". You have me curious about getting one of Danny’s kits to dabble a bit without the expenses you mention above, THANKS! |
@fleschler - Not only is the topic of room treatments off-topic in this particular thread, but I can find absolutely nothing mentioning J. Gordon Holt and carbon wall panels. I totally respect the OP and of course he is correct, I started a new thread if you care to share over there 😀 |
If you go outboard active you can have even better and more powerful amps. Bryston has a line of active speakers, an outboard crossover that you can BYOA (bring your own amp). I know Bryston makes great amps but I would prefer a Sunfire 7400 or 7401. You can choose their outboard BAX-1 crossover OR (my preference) use their SP4 HT processor for the crossovers and DSP. https://bryston.com/active-loudspeakers/ Why wouldn’t JBL go bundled with their top monitor if it (supposedly) meant the world into über-specialized amp-driver integration with a differentiated amp topology approach? I often thought the same thing, it must have been a decision of the marketing dept.
|
I have sold off my pile of of stuff I was not using. It's good to focus on what you really need. I try and recycle by just giving it away to friends if I don't want to sell. Go into the virtual system area, you will see a link at the top to add a new system and it will walk you through. You can see a members system by clicking on their handle and if they have one posted there will be a link. |
Brad, that was a clip on you tube from someone’s cell phone. The link below is a "sanctioned" video that is from a year ago. The reason I posted it is because I had damage to drivers in my Paradigm active speakers which are out of production. I called paradigm asking to buy new drivers and they told me because they have their own factory all I needed to do was send the damaged drivers in. I paid a repair fee and my drivers were repaired and I just reinstalled them. This was a HUGE relief and made me a fan. When I saw this thread I didn’t realize the advantage I had when I bought speakers that had their own driver factory. The other nice thing is the dealer network, you can drop it off or send it in. When I bought these speakers I wasn’t even thinking about the service side, I kind of lucked out.
The clip you posted is excellent, it looks like speaker surgery :). Check this out: |
