理性派HiFi X5 Speaker Review

[fineMen]

Copying the Scanspeak Revelator slit paper cones at such a low price point demonstrates a very poor way of understanding the business, ...

Not quite, as it obviously emphasizes the looks alone. Slit == Scan? If there is any good with the Scan Speak driver, the legit ones, then it is the internals of the motor. Cone and surround are mediocre performers to put it politely.

Insofar the copy, if any, in my book not even violates a valid technical patent. There should be no patent for slicing into a cone as to weaken it only to glue it together again for no outcome. E/g Peerless has the invisible (sic!) "pentacone" which actually works (TC9). To copy the looks shows an understanding of the business, though. How people decide on what by which criteria. Problem statement, solution?

 

[fineMen]

Here is company promotional video:

Distortion peak: something is rattling, driven by an otherwise harmless resonance. Maybe some fastening got loose during shiping (in the OEM's realm). Good motor for the bass driver, looks well done.

Waviness is from a) waveguide not being that elaborated, b) edge diffractions. Issue (b) is to be expected with such a small speaker, but can be mitigated, which wasn't that successful here.

Maybe ok-ish for lower listening levels, or to be accompanied by a bigger bass driver up to 200Hz, sub's not sufficient.

Anyway, there is strong competition in this particularly attractive price bracket.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

Not quite, as it obviously emphasizes the looks alone. Slit == Scan? If there is any good with the Scan Speak driver, the legit ones, then it is the internals of the motor. Cone and surround are mediocre performers to put it politely.

Insofar the copy, if any, in my book not even violates a valid technical patent. There should be no patent for slicing into a cone as to weaken it only to glue it together again for no outcome. E/g Peerless has the invisible (sic!) "pentacone" which actually works (TC9). To copy the looks shows an understanding of the business, though. How people decide on what by which criteria. Problem statement, solution?

This one is not really the issue, and as far as comments here are concerned seems to be out of production already. If it was what was being sold, my thoughts would have been along the lines of "meh" or "shrug." It looks like a scan speak driver. So what?

The current one seems to be a grey area in that the IP on the horn may still be in effect:

Maybe someone knows offhand, or maybe I will take a look myself. But I would still agree with some that copying aesthetics can be considered poor form in its own right.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

Maybe ok-ish for lower listening levels, or to be accompanied by a bigger bass driver up to 200Hz, sub's not sufficient.

Anyway, there is strong competition in this particularly attractive price bracket.

The current model on offer seems to be substantially more upscale, with a cost of 14,000 yuan (~$2,000 USD). I, too, would be interested in seeing its objective performance metrics. But given the marginal showing here at ASR of this lower cost version, I suspect that won't happen. But who knows, it may have good drivers in it free of resonances and actually perform quite well.

 

[fineMen]

This one is not really the issue, ...
The current one seems to be a grey area in that the IP on the horn may still be in effect:

I still cannot agree. If there isn't a straight forward mathematical / engineering recipe for designing the horn, it cannot be patented. It would be a 'registered design', basically referring to the looks rather than a proper technical invention. Europe separates these two aspects quite strictly.

As to exemplify a bit more, one might come to a methodology that would generate the horn's curvature by simple trial and error--simulated. If after such an optimzation two horns resemble each other, which of the two is patent worthy? None, as the art lies not in a genius recipe, but in the methodology of trial and error itself, which again is already an industry standard ;-)

To put it the other way round, by which observation would one prove that the shape of the horn is a copy resulting from usinf the very same recipe? I think that's why we see blatant copies of horns so often. Because it is some black arts anyway.

 

[fineMen]

Without checking the patents we would not know, ... This one is a verbatim copy of it.

A verbatim copy doesn't violate patent rights in itself, but, if at all a maybe 'registered design'. And still one has a hard time to argue with that, because after all its the technical function that dictates the looks. If there is no technical invention, put into a finalizing recipe, no patent.

E/g Dr. Geddes oblate spheroid waveguides. Patent granted, because the shape is derived from mathematical, physical principles. Only that he couldn't solve the problem with the termination of a waveguide that is not of infinite lenght

Reiterated, designing a horn is so much of trial and error, that I don't expect a patent to hold intensified scrutiny.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

A verbatim copy doesn't violate patent rights in itself, but, if at all a maybe 'registered design'. And still one has a hard time to argue with that, because after all its the technical function that dictates the looks. If there is no technical invention, put into a finalizing recipe, no patent.

E/g Dr. Geddes oblate spheroid waveguides. Patent granted, because the shape is derived from mathematical, physical principles. Only that he couldn't solve the problem with the termination of a waveguide that is not of infinite lenght

Reiterated, designing a horn is so much of trial and error, that I don't expect a patent to hold intensified scrutiny.

And to be clear, the role of a patent in principal isn't to make it so only you can make it forever and ever, its to protect the IP long enough so R&D can be recovered and some exclusivity had early on. Thereafter, its free to be copied, utilized, or genericified as people see fit.

 

[tktran303]

Yeah.

A.I. sez

“ A patent is a legal protection granted to inventors for their new and useful inventions or discoveries. The main point of a patent is to give inventors the exclusive right to make, use, and sell their invention for a limited period, usually 20 years from the filing date of the patent application. This exclusive right allows the inventor to profit from their invention, and it also provides an incentive for them to invest time and money into research and development.

Patents also serve as a means of promoting innovation by encouraging inventors to disclose their inventions to the public. In exchange for the exclusive right, the inventor must publicly disclose the details of their invention in the patent application. This disclosure helps to advance the state of knowledge in a particular field and can lead to further innovation and development.

Patents can also be used to prevent others from using or exploiting an invention without the inventor's permission, which can help protect their intellectual property rights and prevent competitors from copying their invention. This can also help to promote competition, as it encourages companies to develop their own innovations rather than simply copying someone else's.”

 

[somebodyelse]

Yes, so lets copy it!

You have shown no proof it's a copy. It looks visually similar, but so do many of the results for an oblate spheroid horn with rectangular mouth. Oblate spheroid horns go back to Geddes in the early '90s, and Freehafer half a century earlier. Both are well before the priority date of the JBL patent. The superellipse term Batik added for ATH to improve termination mostly affects the mouth, and Geddes had nice things to say about it (which I can't find now in the ~500 pages of diyaudio thread).
Edit: adding some links
Pointing out the similarity to the JBL M2
OS-SE paper with references to prior work
pretty pictures of the variety of horn shapes generated by following the formula

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

And if its not infringement, then it would be nice as these could simply be made as COTS aftermarket components that we can purchase for our own use. A useful thing to have for DIY since they could then come in a lot more shapes and sizes than what Harman has on offer.

 

[PeteL]

Cone and surround are mediocre performers to put it politely.

What's wrong with Scan-Speak cones objectively?

 

[fineMen]

Patents can also be used to prevent others from using or exploiting an invention ...

In my book progression by trial and error isn't patent worthy. An invention is a concept, hence the term of intellectual property. If someone points to the very concept of that particular shape in question, I may withdraw my already stated argument.

What's wrong with Scan-Speak cones objectively?

Basically nothing. But from the measurements I may conclude that the concept isn't specifically successful. My focus lies on the surround, though. It shows resonance with unduely raised intermodulation distortion. In other words, the technique of slicing the cone shouldn't be considered the prominent merit of those drivers, but the motor. Anecdotally, the motor design has always and ever since defined Scan Speak's excellence. I already worked with those old AlNiCo powered devices, jaw dropping stellar in performance, back then!

 

[AdamG]

You might not realize it but this is an extremely political statement and I and probably other users would rather political discussions were kept to "off topic" areas of the forum or at least their own threads. I have my own political beliefs which I try to not share on technical review threads of audio enthusiast websites.

There is NO place on ASR for Political Content and or discussion. Any type, shape, or form, of Political Content will be deleted and the Poster will be issued a Warning. The subject post you refer to has been deleted.

Thank you for your understanding and support.

 

[AdamG]

Mods can y’all do something to curtail the anti Chinese speculation going on in this thread? This is one of the only audio websites I spend any time on because not every thread devolves into CCP paranoia.

We have attempted to clean up the thread and curtail future political posts. If you see any we missed please Report the said post as political. Warning to those that may have made political posts we have yet to discover. If you delete it before we get to it you might save yourself from earning a Warning and Thread Ban!

 

[Vini darko]

Thanks for the tare down amir. Looks like nothing was found to explain the tweeter issue. Shame about the woofer screws as it otherwise looks like a nice cabinet. Basic crossover design could be improved to clean up the speaker response I would think.

 

[oversky]

The concept in this case is constant directivity (source: https://jblpro.com/innovation-directivity):
Additionally, their patent in regards to constant coverage waveguide has recently expired (US 8,548,184 B2).

US4685532A - Constant directivity loudspeaker horn - Google Patents

A high-frequency constant-directivity horn including a relatively large throat driver and a relatively large throat for receiving sound from the driver, further includes a pair of vanes mounted wholly within the throat, respectively above and below the longitudinal axis in a vertical plane, for...

patents.google.com

US 8,548,184 has a Priority Art
US06/832,155 1986-02-21 Constant directivity loudspeaker horn

​

 

[Steve Dallas]

Thanks for the tare down amir. Looks like nothing was found to explain the tweeter issue. Shame about the woofer screws as it otherwise looks like a nice cabinet. Basic crossover design could be improved to clean up the speaker response I would think.

The impedance curve looks not great to me. I don't think the box is sealed, nor well enough damped. The crossover lacks glue and zip ties to keep it quiet. Some of the wires are not wrapped in foam. My guess is we are seeing box leakage and/or rattling components.

If this had been a DIY project of mine, I would have spent a lot of more time smoothing out the impedance chart before even starting work on the crossover design. This is either an unfinished design or a poor implementation, or both.

 

[Nebbermind]

Speaker name is Li Xing Pai. Meaning is opposite of emotional and more rational.

I think it meant it is only concerned (理) about sex (性)
Jk

 

[anphex]

Huh, sometimes ASR is mental.
This speaker for a pair costs less than ONE piece of the speaker reviewed right before this one, performs better but people on average give it a worse rating.
What's up with you guys?

 

[Steve Dallas]

Huh, sometimes ASR is mental.
This speaker for a pair costs less than ONE piece of the speaker reviewed right before this one, performs better but people on average give it a worse rating.
What's up with you guys?

This speaker has strong enough resonances that it sings on its own. That is a deal breaker for many.