There are many varieties of aesthetic preferences. It would help readers get a sense of yours if you could post a pic or two of speakers you like the look of.No matter how hard I try, I can't see the beauty.
It looks like a simple toy
There are many varieties of aesthetic preferences. It would help readers get a sense of yours if you could post a pic or two of speakers you like the look of.No matter how hard I try, I can't see the beauty.
It looks like a simple toy
I have learned quite a bit as a result of this. Irony of ironies is that when I was getting these results in terms of my measurement, I assumed it was some sort of in-room response rather than an issue with the crossover. My crossover designer (who shall remain un-named) did a nice job on my first two products. Frequency response was flatter (see attached measurements from Excelsior below) and the consumer and critical response has been almost universally positive. I have had other speaker designers pull me aside and heap praise on those two speakers.
Regarding measurement: Yes, these flaws showed up and I ignored both the measurements and my ears because I was a fool and believed the relative infallibility of my CO designer. This was driven by how good the first two speakers turned out and by oddities elsewhere in the frequency response curve that I was certain were oddities in my room. I had a big dip in measured response at 120hz for instance that was driven by the room. I have since been given some solid advice how to isolate the room in terms of test measures which I will be implementing on all future designs. I will trust my microphone moving forward.
Secondarily, I made changes in both my bench-marking process and placement which impacted the resulting design. These were benchmarked, not vs my external competitor but my own, higher end speakers which was a mistake. I accepted that since these were less expensive I should hear a degradation in terms of sound profile rather than focusing on my competitive benchmark and ensuring these outperformed it. I also know that my placement was closer to the wall in terms of voicing which accentuated the bass. For the MG 1, I also noticed and intentionally turned the speakers off axis during the voicing process because the frequency response was smoother. This shows up in the data.
These are mistakes that I shouldn't have made and these are clearly rookie design mistakes. They will not be repeated. I will trust my software, always use a competitive benchmark and set a more rigorous set of QC controls during the voicing process. This was sloppy.
All that being said, neither of these speakers sounds bad and in-room, I think the AL 1s sound pretty good. The measurements look don't look great but in terms of the actual listening experience, they can be quite pleasant with proper setup. Setup may be a-typical (near the wall in both cases and not toed or minimally toed in the case of the MG 1) but you wouldn't walk into a room and be horrified. Don't get me wrong, for the prices I need to charge, "not bad" is unacceptable. I need them to sound great and that is and always will be my mission.
One note, the slightly accentuated treble you are seeing in all of my speaker design is driven by the fact that I like a bit of top end sparkle. That is definitely me and my taste and I would not change my Nightshade or Blackthorn models regardless of what measurements say.
I know you've discussed this elsewhere, but, what application are you using to shape these filters, and what's the easiest way to apply them to playback either in hardware or software (Roon, foobar2000, Dirac Live / miniDSP SHD, etc.)? I'm looking into the Dirac Live for Studio plugin for my DAW workflow but wouldn't mind having a few different options for applying corrective EQ on other setups. Not so long ago this task would've been handled with a stereo graphic EQ on a budget.
I've got a lot of respect for a manufacturer with an attitude like this. You need to get the right engineer. Can I suggest you offer a bounty for a designer who can creaet a design to a specification, rather than just 'hire' an engineer? Say +/- 2db from 40hz to 18khz, under 0.2% the 700-7khz, under 1% distortion thd at any given Freq. Even off axis above the crossover region out to 60 degrees to within 4db, max SPL over 99 dB, over 85db at 1w/1m, and cardioid bass.
Say +/- 2db from 40hz to 18khz, under 0.2% the 700-7khz, under 1% distortion thd at any given Freq. Even off axis above the crossover region out to 60 degrees to within 4db, max SPL over 99 dB, over 85db at 1w/1m, and cardioid bass.
OrGood luck with that spec
In all seriousness though, if you're hiring a professional engineer who can actually design something like that, it'll cost you.
If I may ask; what do you -the manufacturer- bring to the table ?
I really don't mean to bash anybody's business, but I feel like that's a relevant question for you to ask yourself. It seems that you are using off-the-shelf parts only and outsourcing all the "engineering" and manufacturing.
Please don't take this personally, but it also seems that you are lacking the technical knowledge to verify the claims made by your "engineer".
In my humble opinion, there are only two cases in which it's sensible to start your own Audio company (or any company really)
1. You have a vision and a shitload of capital to invest. In that case you can afford any engineer and make their work fit into your vision of a product.
2. You yourself have the core competences relevant to you business and thus need less capital and contributors to come up with- and bring to market your product.
The hardest part: dealing with customers and folks like us.If I may ask; what do you -the manufacturer- bring to the table ?
just the raw materials in terms of MDF would be about $7.50 (not a typo) for a pair of these while the bamboo is about $225
I don't get that. I cut and laid 50sqm of high quality strand laminated bamboo flooring in my house. Whilst I accept that it's more expensive than MDF, it's half the price of solid oak. My understanding Bamboo is a relatively cheap material (given how fast it grows) although the hard resins used to bond it can be tough on tools (the Norwegian resin in my flooring is extremely hard and a wore out a chop saw blade cutting it).
LDTKA, I am curious who you are. I assume you aren't someone I know personally, but I from Agon or Facebook. Just curious and no hard feelings. Feel free to PM if you don't want to share here.
I do take exception to your description above. Our intent with using premium parts was not to "entice audiophiles" but to prove I am not cutting corners and using cheap parts. I have purchased a lot of high end gear through the years and have been extremely disappointed in some of the finishing touches. For example, I purchase a $7.2K pair of speakers to get a product that had cheap binding posts that only accepted banana plugs and had cheap plastic feat on the stands. I have had amplifiers that use cheap parts and turn into maintenance issues because of corporate accounting departments. It is a statement that I have the freedom to make choices that are in the best interest of my customers. Of course....a better crossover design in these two products would probably be better than good caps and binding posts but that is a separate issue. I will elaborate on that separately in a different post.
Regarding why would I ship here for measurement. If one only seeks advice from people they know will give them positive responses, how do you get better? It had the "nice price" in that Amir even offered to pay shipping one way. I declined to take him up on that. But I read this site and new what I was getting into prior to shipment.
Bamboo adds costs in terms of raw material and CNC time. For example, just the raw materials in terms of MDF would be about $7.50 (not a typo) for a pair of these while the bamboo is about $225. I don't do the cabinet production myself at this time and have a cabinet maker that does them. Someone in the prior thread criticized the design having the top and bottom edges exposed and that was a choice. My cabinet maker is perfectly capable of mitering the edges to get a flush fit and we opted against this because I preferred this aesthetic.
That being said, bamboo is 30% stronger than red oak, because it is laminated, is homogeneous in terms of density and slats are selected explicitly so there are no voids. It is a great material to make speaker cabinets from. It also is easy to finish in the sense that a rubbed oil or clear coat can be applied. It is difficult to stain so needs to be veneered if you want to transform the look. And CNC time is significantly longer than MDF and it burns through saw blades and router bits much faster.
I don't get that. I cut and laid 50sqm of high quality strand laminated bamboo flooring in my house. Whilst I accept that it's more expensive than MDF, it's half the price of solid oak. My understanding Bamboo is a relatively cheap material (given how fast it grows) although the hard resins used to bond it can be tough on tools (the Norwegian resin in my flooring is extremely hard and a wore out a chop saw blade cutting it).
Good luck with that spec
In all seriousness though, if you're hiring a professional engineer who can actually design something like that, it'll cost you.
If I may ask; what do you -the manufacturer- bring to the table ?
I really don't mean to bash anybody's business, but I feel like that's a relevant question for you to ask yourself. It seems that you are using off-the-shelf parts only and outsourcing all the "engineering" and manufacturing.
Please don't take this personally, but it also seems that you are lacking the technical knowledge to verify the claims made by your "engineer".
In my humble opinion, there are only two cases in which it's sensible to start your own Audio company (or any company really)
1. You have a vision and a shitload of capital to invest. In that case you can afford any engineer and make their work fit into your vision of a product.
2. You yourself have the core competences relevant to you business and thus need less capital and contributors to come up with- and bring to market your product.
If I may ask; what do you -the manufacturer- bring to the table ?
Someone in the prior thread criticized the design having the top and bottom edges exposed and that was a choice. My cabinet maker is perfectly capable of mitering the edges to get a flush fit and we opted against this because I preferred this aesthetic.
I would be happy to do that. I've been following the reviews to look for more consistency in the measurements and comments.
you still just get a box speaker with response irregularities that represent another flavor at the Baskin-Robbins.
Why does the CSD die around 2.5k?
Is it the midwoofer only?
One could imagine that tweeter will fire say 100uS before woofer and probably reason why omitted in CSD waterfall caused by misalligned impulse response presented for waterfall calculation, in that waterfall plot dont present anything happening before time zero we see nothing there.Sorry about that. Was troubleshooting something there and I guess I forgot to re-run that.
You have handled this well. I'd guess you are certainly heading in the right direction with time. This is all a process/journey anyway, wouldn't be fun if it was over already now would it?I will say, I have asked myself that question more than once since the results of the first speaker were posted on this site!
The reality is, this venture started with an intent to bring the first 3D printed speaker to market using carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastics. The technology exists, but is not ready in large format yet and I couldn't print anything much larger than a desktop speaker using the technology that would work.
I have invested a fair amount of capital and I am willing to interact with customers, the press and the engineers as was so kindly pointed out above. Not sure if this will be a success but in the end, if I am going to fail in a business I would rather it be doing something I at least enjoy. Regardless, I have about 25 years to get this right and will do my best to make products that people truly enjoy.