Andrew Jones’s new speaker brand - Jones and Cerreta

[Cote Dazur]

I wish I had the confidence of the people on this forum who think they know more about how to go about designing a speaker than Andrew Jones.

Thank you for this comment, it is true we have a few vocal zealots posting here, always trying to defend the orthodoxy, when their is so much to learn with an open mind.
Great thread overall.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

defend the orthodoxy

if Andrew Jones isn't the orthodoxy I don't know what is haha

 

[thewas]

Recently I realized that the KEF Blade 2 Meta (released 2022, USD 28k) has nearly the same -6dB contour as the KH420 (released 2014, USD 5k):
...
The economics allowing this level of disparity in price vs. performance are just incredible.

I fully agree that the objective engineering value per price is usually much higher in pro audio (although it seems you are comparing above pair vs single price) , it should be also mentioned though that from design POV I would rather have the Blades in my living room and also their vertical directivity is superior being a good coaxial design:

 

[DanielT]

According to AI...Moondrop launched the Moondrop MM3A active desktop speakers in July 2026. While the regular retail price is around $147, they debuted with an introductory price of about $103

Here is a link to the MM3As...https://mikeshouts.com/moondrop-mm3a-active-hifi-desktop-speakers/

Interesting speakers. Seems like a lot of speakers for very little money.

From your link:

Each speaker contains a 0.65-inch silk-dome tweeter and a 3-inch aluminum-cone woofer, accompanied by two horizontally opposed 3-inch passive radiators. The latter extend the bass response to 55 Hz at −3 dB, or 50 Hz at −6 dB, without requiring a rear bass-reflex port.

Sure, via DSP and trickery you can squeeze fairly low bass out of small boxes with small bass drivers, but then we have Hofmann's Iron Law. I wonder what a fairly distortion-free SPL can be with them? Do they turn off (or via DSP start reducing low bass output) at ....85 dB or somewhere around there? We'll see when measurements are carried out on them.

In any case. Exciting speakers.
(If they measure well, add two potent bass boxes playing in stereo up to 300–400 Hz, and—presto—you have a nice pair of three-way speakers.)

 

[Curvature]

Yes, as long as the one doing it is aware of its limitations/problems and there is no better alternative. A blind AB(X) comparison with several trained listeners would for example be significantly better but we have to be aware of the tiny size of the high end audio industry. Hope the big players like Harman will continue such efforts belonging now to Samsung.

I would even say save the listening for the research stage to develop technical targets and have manufacturing follow those targets. But the research isn't yet clear enough to help optimize between small impairments and deviations.

 

[SigbergAudio]

The thing is, we all know that "listen to it" sighted is not actually "listen to it."

No, we don't at all.

Meanwhile, we're being asked to believe that ears that predate the Vietnam War bring something useful to the table even when listening sighted. Why?

Because not everything can be figured out from the measurements. And the "old people suck at listening" while not entirely without merit, is not as obvious as you and others make it up to be, as any old geezer with reasonably normal (for his age) hearing is mainly losing high frequency content. Andrew's not sitting there pretending to tune the response between 10-20khz. He also knows as much about measurements as probably anyone on this site, and use it actively when designing. So basic tonality isn't something he is tuning by ear so that we get a big peak at 4-7khz because he happens to have a dip in his hearing there.

because a famous guru guy is telling us so.

That he is famous doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[antcollinet]

Thank you for this comment, it is true we have a few vocal zealots posting here, always trying to defend the orthodoxy, when their is so much to learn with an open mind.
Great thread overall.

Orhodoxy? I love how some like to speak of science and engineering using typically religious terminology. When it is exactly the opposite of faith based thought processes.

Having an open mind is fine - so long as it is not so open your brains fall out. Which is to say - not so open that you ignore, or bring to question, what is already known.

 

[Curvature]

I fully agree that the objective engineering value per price is usually much higher in pro audio (although it seems you are comparing above pair vs single price) , it should be also mentioned though that from design POV I would rather have the Blades in my living room and also their vertical directivity is superior being a good coaxial design:

View attachment 555990

If you are listening a few meters out I wouldn't expect much difference.

Compare the sound power: https://www.spinorama.org/compare.h...ker1=Neumann+KH+420G&origin1=ASR&version1=asr

No doubt the Blade is better, but only a little for a lot more outlay and nearly a decade more time for perfection.

 

[Newman]

What I find exasperating is the number of enthusiasts who have scant scientific knowledge on which to base an opinion are so confident in their critiscisms.

A criticism is valid or not on its own merits. Instead, you choose to 'play the man'. And you are proud to do so....why?

 

[KL....]

They listen to their designs to identify problems that may not be so obvious from the measurements. That's not the same as listening to the design to assess its 'musicality' or its ability to 'convey the emotion', which is what the typical audiophile thinks that they're doing.

Thank you @Mart68, Yes, especially in this case as he does not have Klippel (perhaps equivalent, just more Steps/Setup involved) as a measureing tool. Also, as he mentions in the video, sometimes the interpretation, that is missed or not obvious, in/of the test/measure is noticed in/during the Listening session/s and requires correction with a fresh/new test/measure/interpretation. As mentioned, he stresses the Method/Application of test/measure/interpretation is critical and that this can be poorly executed/done (especially Interpretation) and that there are many ways to do this, doesn't he, especially as a Speaker has many Outputs....

 

[thewas]

If you are listening a few meters out I wouldn't expect much difference.

It depends on how dominant the influence of the wall and ceiling reflection is, especially the second can be problematic if not absorbed.

Compare the sound power: https://www.spinorama.org/compare.h...ker1=Neumann+KH+420G&origin1=ASR&version1=asr

No doubt the Blade is better, but only a little for a lot more outlay and nearly a decade more time for perfection.

The sound power shows that they will definitely sound different, I had the luck to listen to both (unfortunately in different sessions and rooms) and both gave me some of the best audio experiences I have ever had till now.

 

[kharan]

wild that the young upstarts at ascilab could buy one but andrew jones can't afford it. honestly i'm shocked at this news.

How I interpret it is that he has seen other people's measurements of his speakers with Klippel NFS and the measurements 100% match his own. He would be spending 150K to get what he already has, it's not that he can't afford it in the absolute sense it's that he can't afford throwing 150K in the wind.

You could argue it would allow him to iterate faster, but it's not like he's actually very slow at creating new designs, or it may be that the bottle neck isn't designing but other things like supply chain, quality control...

Sure, but if he isn't doing the listening under controlled conditions, he is kidding himself just like every other audio component designer who doesn't understand that aspect of audio science. And they go straight down Alice's rabbit hole.

And I'll put my money on him not doing it under controlled conditions, for the same reasons all the others don't.

Part of iterative means that he remeasures any of his changes.

I wish I had the confidence of the people on this forum who think they know more about how to go about designing a speaker than Andrew Jones.

You're so last gen, the best way to design a speaker is to maximise its preference rating to 0.01. Ideally, you should never listen to your speaker at all to avoid any human bias and just release the speaker free from any human listening activity.

/s

 

[SigbergAudio]

You're so last gen, the best way to design a speaker is to maximise its preference rating to 0.01. Ideally, you should never listen to your speaker at all to avoid any human bias and just release the speaker free from any human listening activity.

Perhaps I can design a speaker that is only meant to be measured. Even the customers should only ever measure the speakers, not use them to play music.

 

[fpitas]

Perhaps I can design a speaker that is only meant to be measured. Even the customers should only ever measure the speakers, not use them to play music.

I feel that way about my speakers sometimes

 

[fpitas]

We have a thread on field coils here; https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s-relics-of-the-past-or-still-relevant.41347/

 

[kharan]

Perhaps I can design a speaker that is only meant to be measured. Even the customers should only ever measure the speakers, not use them to play music.

That's too restrictive. There should at least be a list of approved tracks which they can play and have been confirmed to match reference spectrum (confirmed with AI) of their appropriate music genre when played through your speakers in a neutral room. If the customer ever deviates from that list, it's their fault.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Does Genelec/Neumann use hearing to design speakers or is it all about the measurements?

 

[Newman]

And the "old people suck at listening" while not entirely without merit, is not as obvious as you and others make it up to be, as any old geezer with reasonably normal (for his age) hearing is mainly losing high frequency content. Andrew's not sitting there pretending to tune the response between 10-20khz.

As Toole has explained, he chose to opt out of participating in experiments as a listening subject around the age of 60 because, unlike you, he was aware of the much deeper and more profound impact, of his (normal, age-related) hearing loss, on his ability to assess loudspeaker sound quality in numerous ways that matter.

It's absolutely not about 10-20 kHz.

Of course, unlike Jones, Toole's deep experience in listening to flaws in loudspeakers is supplemented by a deep knowledge of human psychoacoustics. Plus, he correlated his knowledge of the specifics of age related decline with his own measured loss in ability to discern loudspeaker flaws in controlled experiments.

So there is every reason (and nothing to do with 'my being so confident', as some are so quick to assert and others equally quick to 'like') to conclude that, even if Jones has been conducting controlled listening tests for the past 20 years that they would mislead him. Add to this the high likelihood that he is doing it sighted, and it amounts to nothing less than a mistake.

I detect a defensive pattern in your responses over time whenever the conversation turns to speaker designers 'trusting their ears'. There are valid criticisms of this approach, especially methodological criticisms, even when used in conjunction with measurements.

 

[Newman]

Does Genelec/Neumann use hearing to design speakers or is it all about the measurements?

Post #977 has some relevant observations on your question.

 

[SigbergAudio]

As Toole has explained, he chose to opt out of participating in experiments as a listening subject around the age of 60 because, unlike you, he was aware of the much deeper and more profound impact, of his (normal, age-related) hearing loss, on his ability to assess loudspeaker sound quality in numerous ways that matter.

It's absolutely not about 10-20 kHz.

Of course, unlike Jones, Toole's deep experience in listening to flaws in loudspeakers is supplemented by a deep knowledge of human psychoacoustics. Plus, he correlated his knowledge of the specifics of age related decline with his own measured loss in ability to discern loudspeaker flaws in controlled experiments.

So there is every reason (and nothing to do with 'my being so confident', as some are so quick to assert and others equally quick to 'like') to conclude that, even if Jones has been conducting controlled listening tests for the past 20 years that they would mislead him. Add to this the high likelihood that he is doing it sighted, and it amounts to nothing less than a mistake.

It's interesting how much you know about Andrew Jones.

I detect a defensive pattern in your responses over time whenever the conversation turns to speaker designers 'trusting their ears'. There are valid criticisms of this approach, especially methodological criticisms, even when used in conjunction with measurements.

Yes, it's a natural pattern to see since I disagree. In the same way there are clear patterns in what you agree and disagree on.