理性派HiFi X5 Speaker Review

[dtaylo1066]

I don't mind discussions related to IP of the drivers, etc. after we have it. It is the broader discussion of the country and its policies that I prefer to not see.

I'd be curious if the driver is a clone of Scan-Speak if you open up the cabinet.

 

[amirm]

I would say in the future since this is bound to come up again when we see overseas manufacturer's products that might bear resemblances to their contemporary counterparts we may want to add a short blurb in the preamble to the review stating that to some effect its strictly to discuss the objective performance irrespective of any other qualities. This is not to be flippant, but invariably such discussions will end up going down this road due to someone needing justification for why something was said, or personal experiences, etc. and probably better to cross that bridge sooner rather than later collectively so we all agree

Objective? No, I am going present subjective results and members are free to discuss the same. I don't know what any of this has to do with discussing a country's stance on IP. Let's move on.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

Objective? No, I am going present subjective results and members are free to discuss the same. I don't know what any of this has to do with discussing a country's stance on IP. Let's move on.

With all due respect there is an inextricable causal link between those two things that is hard to ignore or avoid discussing. If there is at least not something in passing mentioned when such reviews are done, this will come up again. And even more so as more of such products come onto the market. This doesn't mean omitting any subjective results, but that the conversation is to be restricted to simply the subjective and objective performance of what is under review. Some even say these should not even be reviewed at all here at ASR. I think that is not a good approach, but we have to at least acknowledge when something is a clear copy or derivative of another more legitimate product in some way. Its really not fair to manufacturers who are having their products copied.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

its amazing to me that certain folks here flat out dont want reviews of products on the off chance that a positive objective review COULD potentially be steering customers to that nation's products... next minute they are on their merry way to Walmart and Harbor Freight... nationalism by stealth it seems....

If you want to buy a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy... Then so be it.

 

[Steve Dallas]

its amazing to me that certain folks here flat out dont want reviews of products on the off chance that a positive objective review COULD potentially be steering customers to that nation's products... next minute they are on their merry way to Walmart and Harbor Freight... nationalism by stealth it seems....

There is a difference between buying obvious copies with probable IP problems and general Chinese-made goods at a department store.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

One of my other hobbies is Chinese homage watches, there is a distinct difference from homage and IP theft. One of my favorite watches is a homage of a Rolex made in the 40s and 50s it's called a bubbleback , Rolex no longer makes a watch like it, the company who made my watch uses it's own name on the dial. Deal is there is a world of difference between being "inspired by", and made with the intent to deceive, or defraud. Good ideas get copied, unless you can point to a specific patent being ignored, or a intentional deception, the argument seems disingenuous.

When its dimension for dimension exact, then I would say a line has been crossed. Simply looking similar or having similar function is not an issue as you say.

 

[Urvile]

When its dimension for dimension exact, then I would say a line has been crossed. Simply looking similar or having similar function is not an issue as you say.

Using watches as a analogy, that doesn't make sense; form follows function, and sizes are fairly standard. Wouldn't speakers be the same?
(edited for grammar)

 

[sarumbear]

It's the designer's response (Google Translate):



View attachment 268850View attachment 268851View attachment 268852View attachment 268853View attachment 268854

Oh dear: Test equipment is faulty and/or the unit tested is broken. That is not what you expect to hear from a manufacturer, not to mention that the equipment that noticed the resonance was a person, and a very qualified one at that.

 

[RF Air]

The product and origin of design is part of the discussion that we debate, along with performance, value and the marketable/asset viability. Conjecture is worthwhile when the topic is rooted within the purpose of the Forum. Independently finding informational sources that are supportive to greater understanding is the "Fun and Learning" when we have a worthwhile dialogue.

The IP issues and impacts on all segments of commerce and markets is very broad, impactful and a fascinating subject. Culturally, there are differences within the realm of IP which are well beyond the scope of ASR. However I found this article which may add some illumination: https://harrisbricken.com/chinalawblog/china-design-patents-the-extreme-basics/

For me, a product is the creation of inspired effort requiring an investment of risk/reward, with many different objectives, that coincides within a given marketplace. It's important for me to understand the value of the product as we have this Forum to test, question and discuss the merits of developing decision-making opinions.

Thank you Amir for the review and for the dialogue ASR inspires among many learned members who have passion for the hobby and industry we enjoy.

 

[badspeakerdesigner]

I just wanna see what the woofer is, I don't really are about the IP stuff and my lord endless posts from some folks, give yourself a break from the site.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

I just wanna see what the woofer is, I don't really are about the IP stuff and my lord endless posts from some folks, give yourself a break from the site.

Well, so long as you like whomever made that woofer, then you don't have to worry about IP. It will simply become the only one you will receive in the future. What was it Henry Ford said? You can have any color you like so long as its black? Or in this case with those markings on the cone. Same thing with that crinkly-looking surround the woofers in my $20 speakers from eBay came with. Not sure what it was supposed to do.

 

[Gatordaddy]

Fair enough, but its not anti-Chinese speculation, but rather lamenting their business practices. Given todays global market the two end up inextricably linked, which is unfortunate. I have made a lot of friends over the years working with the Chinese, and have no animus against them. Edit: And this will be a continued issue as we move forward. How long do you think it will be before we start seeing things like genuine copies of DCA's SOTA headphones? This is not to stir up "paranoia." Its a genuine concern as we must not let our desire for inexpensive products lead us to encourage unfair practices as it will hurt all of us in the end, esp. smaller manufacturers who can't afford the burden of lost sales. Again, plenty of legitimate Chinese companies. But there are also a number of other "bad apples" for reasons stated.

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.

 

[192kbps]

Obviously many will take it as being such. But a lot of these things don't exist in a vacuum, and its only in the west that we can enjoy such freedoms as separation between politics, business, and private life, at least in principal. Invariably unless we agree to just treat such products as a purely informational exercise in seeing how they perform the comments will always tend towards "All Chinese products are cheap knock-offs, crap, etc." rather than there being some good products, but others not due to the intertwining of so many things there. Its an unfortunate reality that the prevailing forces allow such practices to be so widespread. Even companies like Topping have had their designs copied. If there are no safeguards at all in place, how can we expect anything to be different? If we want conversations to never go places we find uncomfortable then we should at least delineate future reviews of such off-brand products in some fashion. After all, to me saying Chinese products are garbage is in itself a derogatory statement.

You said very well, but we don't seem to have any evidence to confirm that it was plagiarized, do we? Or did you just make this judgment from the appearance of the speaker? If it is finally proved to be plagiarism, I think that is the time when these criticisms begin. Before that, please let us stop, unless you have clear evidence.

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

You said very well, but we don't seem to have any evidence to confirm that it was plagiarized, do we? Or did you just make this judgment from the appearance of the speaker? If it is finally proved to be plagiarism, I think that is the time when these criticisms begin. Before that, please let us stop, unless you have clear evidence.

If its a genuine Scan Speak driver despite the price point and we omit the the newer horn version from the conversation, then yes.

 

[PeteL]

Obviously Scan Speak copied these guys, right?

 

[PeteL]

A wise man once told me, If your product gets plagiarized, it's the ultimate medal telling the world that you've really made it in the business you're at, go and pop this champagne, you're only going to get more popular from there, and there's always going to be more people that want the real thing.

 

[tktran303]

My goodness.

A lot of emotional input.

Here are some facts:

“In 1992 a young creative Engineer, Lars Goller, started as R&D Engineer at ScanSpeak after holding positions at DALI and Vifa…

…In 1997 , based on another Goller idea, the first Revelator mid-woofer with sliced cone was introduced. Cutting a number of slices of uneven length and angle through the cone paper and then applying glue to the slices eliminated cone breakup modes which meant a huge improvement in sound quality"

Reference:
Danish Loudspeakrs, 100 Years, 1915-2015.


A lovely coffee table book I encourage you to buy one.

Look, the Scan-Speak 15W/8530K (and variants like 8531(uncoated cone)G(glass fibre)/K (Kapton) VC former is a nice little mid-woofer.
I used this 20 years ago... you know, when the catalogues still came on paper and I had stay up til very late at night, so I could make an very expensive international phone-call to a land-line (what is that?!) to place an order...

My point is the patents have long expired.

(Edited for brevity)

 

[Ricardojoa]

My sense tells me the woofer looks like a legitimate one. There are more reasons to clone the older classic series than the revelator.

 

[PeteL]

My goodness.

A lot of emotional input.

Here are some facts:

In 1992 a young creative Engineer, Lars Goller, started as R&D Engineer at ScanSpeak after holding positions at DALI and Vifa. From the start it was clear that Goller often saw things in a different way and often challenged the traditional ways of making loudspeakers. In his first year Goller invented and patented the second generation Symmetrical Drive, consisting of 3 copper rings placed in specific positions in the magnet system. In the early to mid-1990s a range of tweeters based on Lian’s D2905/9000 were developed. A top version featuring SD-2 Symmetrical Drive and a large waveguide faceplate was launched in 1995 and became the iconic -9900 Revelator tweeter that at its time was regarded as the best tweeter available. These tweeters continue to be offered in Scan-Speak’s product line. Goller invented the linear spider that is a key element in Scan-Speak’s Low-LossLinear Suspension which became one of the prime features in most of Scan-Speak’s woofers. This technology enables the suspension to have the same tension during the entire cone excursion allowing the woofers to have the same sound characteristics at low volume as at high volume. In 1997, based on another Goller idea, the first Revelator mid-woofer with sliced cone was introduced. Cutting a number of slices of uneven length and angle through the cone paper and then applying glue to the slices eliminated cone breakup modes which meant a huge improvement in sound quality"

Reference:
Danish Loudspeakrs, 100 Years, 1915-2015.
A lovely coffee table book I encourage you to buy one.


Look, the Scan-Speak 15W/8530K (and variants) is a nice little mid-woofer; I used this 20 years ago... you know, when the catalogues still came on paper and I had stay up til very late at night, so I could make an very expensive international phone-call to a land-line (what is that?!) to place an order...

The patents have long expired.

I think patents are about technology. Here it's about appearence, industrial drawing IP. Now all that don't matter, It's not a legal issue, nobody can file s patent in China anyway. A Patent is always a patent for a specific country. According to the rules of a specific country. They are not global. The patent is not "expired" There never was one for that market.

 

[tktran303]

@amirm

Please put us out of our misery and pop the hood will you please boss?

Is it an original Scan-Speak product, is it a fake/counterfeit product, or is it a generic or Scan-Speak inspired clone with no markings?