• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Andrew Jones’s new speaker brand - Jones and Cerreta

We need a betting pool on the price.

if you watch Jana’s latest Youtube video on them it looks very much to me like they are broadly aiming in the same market as Oswald Mills audio. Beautiful aesthetics, very high sensitivity, even higher price.
 
I wonder why he didn't use a Beryllium tweeter like the one that TAD has , it looks just like the Mofi tweeter, I would expect a more expensive speaker to have more expensive materials
the front might look like a Mofi. but why judge on the front face. its ~ 10 dB more sensitive, in a showroom with a price tag at least five times maybe 10 times higher
 
What's weird is all the fuss about the weight of the driver, as if it's enormous at 15 kilos.
A comparable size nice Audiotechnology 12" woofer for example is at around 10 kilos, so nothing too excessive about it.
At around the 9-minute mark in the video, Jones mentions 37 lbs for the drive unit alone. The 37 lbs, or about 17 kg, refer exclusively to the drive unit of a field coil driver in the Jones driver, not to the entire chassis. If you do the math, the realistic weight for the entire coaxial driver is more likely to be in the range of about 20 to 25 kg, or roughly 45 to 55 lbs.
 
Beryllium tweeters
The key factor is the stiffness-to-mass ratio.
Beryllium has an extremely high modulus of elasticity combined with very low density. This results in a very high speed of sound within the material, significantly higher than in aluminum or titanium. In practical terms, this means that a beryllium dome remains in so-called piston-shaped operation up to significantly higher frequencies before the first breakup modes occur. This breakup frequency is measurably higher than in most other metals.
 
At around the 9-minute mark in the video, Jones mentions 37 lbs for the drive unit alone. The 37 lbs, or about 17 kg, refer exclusively to the drive unit of a field coil driver in the Jones driver, not to the entire chassis. If you do the math, the realistic weight for the entire coaxial driver is more likely to be in the range of about 20 to 25 kg, or roughly 45 to 55 lbs.
That would only leave 50 kilos left for the rest of the two 12" (way lighter) drivers and the enclosure with some bracing, etc.
I would say, borderline doable for the size.
 
Field coils: as a guide to how heavy etc they are most commonly in terms of specs - fairly sure the largest manufacturer is Supravox. AJ’s new driver is a 10 inch. Supravox make one 11.4 inches - the 285, and 8.6 inches - the 215
Though the Supravox are full range rather than coax. a tweeter probably adds give or take 15% to the weight
Ive heard the 285 model. at the risk of being shot down for being a subjective observer I thought it sounded brilliant. but before you laugh at my impressions it isn’t an AB etc

over the last 60 years of being an audio enthusiast/ explorer of different sorts of transducers .. ive heard an enormous variety of speaker types. and more often than not the much vaunted ones had to my ears obvious flaws.

FWIW Supravox’s 285 field coil had none. As clean as a Scan Speak, probably better. Top tier


 
Last edited:

Made me think about how the stereotypes fit here…

The smooth Brit promoting his latest evolutionary design versus the brash, loud mouth American peddling his more is better approach. One uses measurements but plays up how experience makes his results better while the other claims he will supply measurements but fails to deliver any. :oops:
 
Last edited:
Field coils: as a guide to how heavy etc they are most commonly in terms of specs - fairly sure the largest manufacturer is Supravox. AJ’s new driver is a 10 inch. Supravox make one 11.4 inches - the 285, and 8.6 inches - the 215
Though the Supravox are full range rather than coax. a tweeter probably adds give or take 15% to the weight
Ive heard the 285 model. at the risk of being shot down for being a subjective observer I thought it sounded brilliant. but before you laugh at my impressions it isn’t an AB etc

over the last 60 years of being an audio enthusiast/ explorer of different sorts of transducers .. ive heard an enormous variety of speaker types. and more often than not the much vaunted ones had to my ears obvious flaws.

FWIW Supravox’s 285 field coil had none. As clean as a Scan Speak, probably better. Top tier



and yes Supravox specs aren’t comprehensive etc so - to me at least - they don’t too scientific aren’t up there with Seas and any of the leading manufacturers, in fact don’t look much better than a cottage industry level. like a small sports car company novel approach but looks outdated compared to the industry leaders


the proof of Jones new pudding will be in the Klippel graphs
 
The key factor is the stiffness-to-mass ratio.
Beryllium has an extremely high modulus of elasticity combined with very low density. This results in a very high speed of sound within the material, significantly higher than in aluminum or titanium. In practical terms, this means that a beryllium dome remains in so-called piston-shaped operation up to significantly higher frequencies before the first breakup modes occur. This breakup frequency is measurably higher than in most other metals.

Be lends itself to making excellent drivers. In principle
But exhaustive measurements of tweeters by eg HiFi Compass shows iirc that while a bit better than good drivers made from conventional materials they aren’t much better than the best of more conventional drivers

iirc it’s (?) ScanSpeak who make four tweeters which are largely the same except for their diaphragm. Depending on your key criteria/ design goals the Be wasn’t the best in every measured result. And they were easily the most expensive
 
Be lends itself to making excellent drivers
Beryllium is just the material; what a manufacturer does with it is a whole different story. There are probably some excellent beryllium tweeters from brand-name companies, but I won’t have beryllium in my home because of its extreme toxicity, and just the sight of beryllium tweeters without grilles or other protection makes me shudder.
 
the brash, loud mouth American peddling his more is better approach
As long as that applies only to speakers, I don't really care. But ...
 
Focal Beryllium tweeters sounded different than most other tweeters.
How much of it is the material I don't know.
But I do believe you can hear some difference becaue of the material used.
I'd love to see a single blind listening test conducted by any company using a beryllium tweeter vs a different material that clearly shows a preference for the beryllium. After all this time, you'd think someone would have done it. The only large scale tweeter test I've found comes to exactly the opposite conclusion: Once you equalize and level match the various tweeter types, the differences between them become very difficult to discern The main advantage of beryllium, other than a bit better sensitivity due to lower mass, is a higher first breakup mode; e.g. 25kHz alu vs 33 kHz for be. Given we're talking about performance far above the range of human hearing, I have serious doubts that the cost, supply and manufacturing issues, toxicity, etc. are worth the effort. There always seems to be "fads" that come and go in the speaker business. E.g., prior to beryllium, it was ring radiators.
 
There always seems to be "fads" that come and go in the speaker business. E.g., prior to beryllium, it was ring radiators.
And both is still on the market today
 
People who want active speakers are not their target audience. I guess it's high efficiency, high impedance speaker suitable for low powered (tube) amplifiers.

The specifications on the product webpage for the Jones and Cerreta Troubadour currently show 5_Ohm nominal impedance and 95_dB SPL @ 2.83_Vrms @ 1_m voltage sensitivity, which translates to 82_dB @ 0_dBV (=1_Vrms) @ 1_m. In a video, Andrew Jones mentioned that the field coils on the tweeter and midrange will dissipate 50_W continuous in total while the DC bias power supply is energized. The associated heat is vented thru the bass reflex ports at the rear.

For comparison, the specifications on the product webpage for the MoFi Sourcepoint v10 Master Edition currently show 6_Ohm nominal impedance (4.5_Ohm minimum) and 91_dB SPL @ 2.83_Vrms @ 1_m voltage sensitivity, which translates to 82_dB @ 0_dBV (=1_Vrms) @ 1_m. That is 4_ dB less sensitive than the Troubadour, so the v10 requires 2.5x power from it's amplifier at the same SPL and propagation distance. But each Troubador dissipates that added 50_W while the field coils are energized.

Pricing on theTroubadour has not yet been revealed to the public. My guess is that the Troubadour will be significantly more expensive than the v10.
 
Made me think about how the stereotypes fit here…

The smooth Brit promoting his latest evolutionary design versus the brash, loud mouth American peddling his more is better approach. One uses measurements but plays up how experience makes his results better while the other claims he will supply measurements but fails to deliver any. :oops:
Speaking in broad generalities of course -- not thinking of anybody in particular.
;)
 
And both is still on the market today
coaxial drivers, too. :)

1775823638652.png


source: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbi...gm.989792376094479&idorvanity=680866563653730

15TRXBfront by Mark Hardy, on Flickr
EV15TRXBflipside by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

An early EV 15TRXB undergoing a CAT scan. :cool:
 
So much speculation about a speaker that probably will never be heard by this group
 
So much speculation about a speaker that probably will never be heard by this group
If they get toted around to hifi shows -- lots of "this group" will likely hear them.
Not under ideal circumstances (ill-suited hotel rooms, Jazz at the Pawnshop, or even, heaven forefend, Diana Krall)... but they'll be heard.
 
Beryllium is just the material; what a manufacturer does with it is a whole different story. There are probably some excellent beryllium tweeters from brand-name companies, but I won’t have beryllium in my home because of its extreme toxicity, and just the sight of beryllium tweeters without grilles or other protection makes me shudder.
The hazard of beryllium is mostly with the workers working on beryllium parts. The primary hazard from beryllium is exposure through breathing in dust (e.g. from metal working, such as grinding, polishing, etc.), fumes (e.g. welding), mist (agitating solutions containing dissolved beryllium), and skin contact with soluble salts containing beryllium.

The beryllium in your beryllium dome tweeter is not dangerous. Just don't take a sand paper to it and try polishing it, or stab yourself (or others) with it.
beryllium.png
 
Back
Top Bottom