Danny Richie's latest...

[RickS]

He has recently developed a fix for the Cerwin Vega 316, priced at 755 USD. For a speaker that can be had for as little as 150.

Yes, he gets more than a few vintage speakers for alleged upgrades. Pretty sure the "upgrades" are priced to set up a bait and switch for one of his other speakers.

There has to be enough of an incentive for him to do as it takes time away from more core product development.

 

[Spkrdctr]

There are probably some nuts out there who will pay 4 times the cost of the speaker for an upgrade. More money = Better. People are just plain nuts about audio. But ASR tries to educate.......

 

[DanielT]

But here I think Danny has good points and a good solution. On axes, the Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8's FR is pretty lousy. Especially considering their price.
The solution will probably cost a lot with Danny's expensive crossover parts, but there will be a solution.He'll get to that,in detail,in the next video, so it's not covered in the video below. If you have bought a pair of expensive Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8, I'm guessing that you can imagine spending a decent amount of money on a better crossover, to fix a good FR. That while swearing at Wilson Audio when you open your wallet.

Danny's measurements (the upper ones in the screenshot) is very similar to Stereophile's results:

According to Danny, they dip down to 2.4 Ohm. According to Stereophile : There is a drop to 2.2 ohms at 77Hz (fig.1)

Wilson Audio Specialties WATT/Puppy System 8 loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements I couldn't lift the 170-lb WATT/Puppy 8 onto a tall stand for the acoustic measurements, so the farfield response measurements have less frequency resolution in the midrange than is usual. I don't believe this negatively impacted the speaker's measured performance to any...

www.stereophile.com

Danny's solution is to fix the top's FR (mid-tweeter). Let the top work in almost full range mode and then disconnect the bass boxes and power them up separately with a subwoofer plate amp (maybe with LP-HP filter? )

Danny switches the bass drivers from parallel to series to solve the low Ohm dipping problem. More amp power will then be needed with this switching but with 92 dB (according to Stereophile: sensitivity my estimate coming in at 92dB(B)/2.83V/m) when connected in parallel, there is little to "take off" when switching the double 8 inch bass drivers so they get connected in series.

 

[RickS]

But here I think Danny has good points and a good solution. On axes, the Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8's FR is pretty lousy. Especially considering their price.
The solution will probably cost a lot with Danny's expensive crossover parts, but there will be a solution.He'll get to that,in detail,in the next video, so it's not covered in the video below. If you have bought a pair of expensive Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8, I'm guessing that you can imagine spending a decent amount of money on a better crossover, to fix a good FR. That while swearing at Wilson Audio when you open your wallet.

What solution? Perhaps you meant proposed solution. Suggest we should wait for the actual implementation and some measurements before judging. He does do some baselining as you show below but chops off at 200 Hz with his usual excuses. If I just sent my expensive speaker to him, would hope he make some effort to show that he balances the bass output with the midrange output. He whines about the low impedance, but his proposed solution is a dedicated amplifier. Anyone who can afford these speakers, likely owns amplifiers that can drive them. While active bass does offer advantages, low impedance is NOT the reason to implement it. If the owner has cash to burn why not make it a fully active system?

Danny claims a big dip in the vertical off-axis response but does not specify the conditions. This is a big speaker with major spacing between drivers so the dip is to be expected. Later, he measures "lower" (location still unspecified) and it gets much better. You would expect this on most any tower speaker so no major find. Horizontal off-axis appears better but still do not know his measurement axis. Note his baselining against Stereophile stops at on-axis. As his off-axis "improvements" are often not a clear upgrade, let's wait and see what his measurements show.

Notice another major difference from his other videos? This one lacks the usual critique of the binding posts and the crossover parts. Are they good quality for an expensive speaker? How about the cabinet bracing and damping? If I owned these, would expect a more comprehensive exam....

Danny's measurements (the upper ones in the screenshot) is very similar to Stereophile's results:
View attachment 421805


According to Danny, they dip down to 2.4 Ohm. According to Stereophile : There is a drop to 2.2 ohms at 77Hz (fig.1)

Kudos for doing some baselining but Danny seems to be checking the box as does not carry much further. he does mention impedance curve baselining but kind of pointless if the FR basically matches. Still the FR is only above 200 Hz. Danny's proposes an active bass redesign but nothing more than impedance to justify a major subsystem upgrade? Seems like a pretty weak case at this point. Quality bass is such a key part of any speaker and a key differentiator for a larger one, but he gives it an overly lightweight analysis imo.

P.S. See no evidence in his youtube video that suggest to not be skeptical of Danny’s ability pinpoint real problems and apply objective fixes. Too often he applies crossover changes when straighforward equalization would likely be better and cheaper.

 

[DanielT]

Why does Danny never measure below 200Hz? Is it due to laziness?

In any case. You have good points, which I agree with.

I thought the solution of powering up the bass boxes separately actively was good, but as you say, you can just as well go all the way to make the entire speaker active.

BUT actually as I write this I saw that part two from Danny was posted so after watching; it is, according to Danny, baffle edge diffraction effects that make the tweeter's FR so choppy. He tests it and it seems to be correct. With a lot of felt placed on the inside of the speaker cover, the FR got better:


Of course some talk from Danny's side about the tube connectors and the new crossover he fixed, but Danny doesn't actually say much about it nor what it would cost.

Starting at 11:00, Danny starts discussing baffle edge diffraction effects:

 

[Matt_Holland]

What solution? Perhaps you meant proposed solution. Suggest we should wait for the actual implementation and some measurements before judging. He does do some baselining as you show below but chops off at 200 Hz with his usual excuses. If I just sent my expensive speaker to him, would hope he make some effort to show that he balances the bass output with the midrange output. He whines about the low impedance, but his proposed solution is a dedicated amplifier. Anyone who can afford these speakers, likely owns amplifiers that can drive them. While active bass does offer advantages, low impedance is NOT the reason to implement it. If the owner has cash to burn why not make it a fully active system?

Danny claims a big dip in the vertical off-axis response but does not specify the conditions. This is a big speaker with major spacing between drivers so the dip is to be expected. Later, he measures "lower" (location still unspecified) and it gets much better. You would expect this on most any tower speaker so no major find. Horizontal off-axis appears better but still do not know his measurement axis. Note his baselining against Stereophile stops at on-axis. As his off-axis "improvements" are often not a clear upgrade, let's wait and see what his measurements show.

Notice another major difference from his other videos? This one lacks the usual critique of the binding posts and the crossover parts. Are they good quality for an expensive speaker? How about the cabinet bracing and damping? If I owned these, would expect a more comprehensive exam....



Kudos for doing some baselining but Danny seems to be checking the box as does not carry much further. he does mention impedance curve baselining but kind of pointless if the FR basically matches. Still the FR is only above 200 Hz. Danny's proposes an active bass redesign but nothing more than impedance to justify a major subsystem upgrade? Seems like a pretty weak case at this point. Quality bass is such a key part of any speaker and a key differentiator for a larger one, but he gives it an overly lightweight analysis imo.

P.S. See no evidence in his youtube video that suggest to not be skeptical of Danny’s ability pinpoint real problems and apply objective fixes. Too often he applies crossover changes when straighforward equalization would likely be better and cheaper.

The lack of sub 200Hz measurements just baffles me. I don’t care if he doesn’t splice a nearfield but I do want to see the nearfield. The Stereophile graph shows a high Q peak in the bass and this could be caused by bass low pass filter. But zero analysis from Danny there. That alone could be a reason to go an active because inserting a low pass filter at around 200Hz nearly always messes up the bass alignment.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Our boy has supposedly corrected that nasty Wilson.

 

[RickS]

No bass measurements seems lazy but may just be his archaic measurement process and he conveniently never questions his original outdated assumptions. It is more effort, but Danny seems fine to question every other aspect but not whether the bass is well designed and performing well. His own designs (as measured by Amir) do not demonstrate competence in bass frequency response.

As I forewarned, Danny does not improve the horizontal off-axis which is the one of the most significant aspects of a speaker’s overall sound. He knows it too as he does not post before and after measurement pics. There is a major directivity problem in the 3-5 kHz range and he is distracting away from it with his diffraction claims.

Danny plays up alleged improved verticals by posting his before measurement at some unspecified worst case height that exaggerates the problem. Nobody seriously listens to a speaker sitting and standing. This is why the design is usually optimized towards a seated position and why the Stereophile measures are not nearly as bad.

At least we now know the original crossover was potted and the binding posts had some ferrous content (causing minute distortion when driver distortion is orders of magnitude worse). Too often with Danny, his cure misses or overcompensates for real issues.

 

[Matt_Holland]

He's mentioned his reasoning on this numerous times and it's on his FAQ page. We can disagree with it.......but this is his stance.

Contact | GR-Research

gr-research.com

Dave Reite.

Why don't you measure below 200Hz?​

There are a few reasons for this:

1. We don’t own an anechoic chamber, so we use a gated time window of 4 milliseconds. This removes any & all room reflections from the measurement, giving us an anechoic measurement. However, the primary limitation is that it is only accurate to 200Hz. To accurately measure below 200Hz, you will need to take near-field measurements. Many Anechoic chambers are also limited to 80-100Hz.
2. In-Room measuremensts are largely unreliable. and should be taken with a large grain of salt. Your room size/shape, your listening position along the speaker placement within your room will be a big influence on the sound of your speakers, especially below 200Hz, where room modes will dominate the response, creating several dips & peaks. A measurement from the listening position might look very different from even 2-3 feet over. Speaker placement near a the front or side walls in a small room will also cause issues that wont show up in larger rooms with the speakers 3+ feet away from the front/side walls.
   Room treatment is the only real means to remedy those kinds of issues.
3. For our upgrade kits, the bass response is already determined by the manufacturer. Tuning for the bass of a speaker is determined via the driver, box size and the ports used when the manufacturer designed the speaker. We cannot change any of that without changing either the driver, the box or the ports. If there are issues, they were also present in the original speaker, or a room issue. Plus as frequencies get lower, the parts needed to make those adjustments only get larger and more expensive… so there’s no real means to fix them other than building a new box and using a different port, or changing drivers and building new boxes for those new drivers, but at that point, just get a different speaker…
4. For our own kits, we use the T/S parameters of the woofer(s) to calculate the necessary box volume and/or port dimensions needed for the desired tuning frequency. These calculations have been standard practice for determining the box size for a long time, ad the effects of an over/undersized boxes are already known. We tune the bass of our kits to be pulled away from the walls.

Thank you but I get all this. The excuses are lame if you understand speaker design and measurement. But they sound very clever and justified to those that don’t.

Danny could even lengthen his measurement time window and provide a room response which would give us an idea of the bass response. If he did this in the same room and position every time we would be able to compare different speakers.

The fact he entirely ignores below 200Hz is lazy and does a disservice to his viewers, many of whom look to him as an educator and guru in speaker design.

 

[RickS]

Thank you but I get all this. The excuses are lame if you understand speaker design and measurement. But they sound very clever and justified to those that don’t.

Danny could even lengthen his measurement time window and provide a room response which would give us an idea of the bass response. If he did this in the same room and position every time we would be able to compare different speakers.

The fact he entirely ignores below 200Hz is lazy and does a disservice to his viewers, many of whom look to him as an educator and guru in speaker design.

Yes, this is the usual list of excuses and, like most of what Danny claims, is only partially true.

My mediocre measuring room with minimal treatment has a roughly 4 ms gate. I would expect GR to have a much better room (at least higher ceilings), but if you do the math for a 4 ms gate, this yields a lower frequency response limit of 250 Hz (not Danny's claimed 200 Hz). Am not that familiar with MLS, but pretty sure that this is shown is the lower right of Danny's measurements. Actually, given different speaker heights, would expect that the gate moves around slightly. So, is best to check for each speaker and is easy to do so. The rest of #1 in his FAQs is incomplete babbling and only serves to obfuscate. Not sure whether he is ignorant or does not care enough to expound but clearly the bad math demonstrates a lack of engineering discipline in his work.

I could go on further but am only going to comment on #4 as it is incomplete as well. It appears he is implying that bass calculations are sufficient for good speaker design. He claims this without any offer of proof. For that matter, there are very simple calculators and more complex simulations. Since he does not state his tools or his process, can only judge by his results. Of the 3 ASR has measured, 2 have shown poor bass design (X-Voce and LGK) and the X-LS Encore exhibits distorted bass (notably even with eq). Despite claims of "sounds good to me", this is not the bar for good speaker design (although does not limit his criticism of other manufacturers efforts).

 

[Bruce Morgen]

It's up to you, but I suggest you just ignore him.

....but then I would miss ROTFLMAO every time he brings up his vendettas against sound-smearing steel binding post nuts and those dreadfully detrimental sand-cast resistors. Between him and the ever-cordial "high end" grandpa Paul McGowan, there's always audiophool comedy gold on good old U-Toob -- IMO they're much more entertaining than comedian wannabe "reviewers" like Chris, "The Scientific Audiophile" or Randy, the "cheapaudioman!"

 

[Matt_Holland]

Your point is taken.......but it's been made many times previously.
Apparently his viewers continue to send him money for products and services.......and they've been doing that for many years.

His whole shtick doesn't impress me and I know this guy rubs people the wrong way. But he is what he is and he's been doing it the same way for a long time.
It's up to you, but I suggest you just ignore him.

Dave Reite.

I actually enjoy his videos and I don’t think everything he does is bad. We’ve even had many interactions on YouTube comments and also by email. He doesn’t hide away and is keen to convince people what he says has merit. Not a bad guy and he knows his customers/audience.

 

[RickS]

I actually enjoy his videos and I don’t think everything he does is bad. We’ve even had many interactions on YouTube comments and also by email. He doesn’t hide away and is keen to convince people what he says has merit. Not a bad guy and he knows his customers/audience.

Know what you mean. Am not sure how to explain the apparent irony with Danny though.

Often is a challenge to tell whether a salesman is being real or just trying to sell you. After a few times that he did not own up to prior commitments, decided he simply was not trustworthy.

 

[ta240]

A salesman can be both.

He's been doing this for 30 years now. You can't hang around for this long and not have 'something' going for you.

If someone is a really good salesman they can. Especially since the internet and youtube have created a weird world where instead of just encountering a truly gifted salesman a few times in our lives, the best of them now have instant access to us and we can visit them daily if we want.

It is especially beneficial in a field where customers can be convinced they do experience what the salesman is selling. So even if the 'product' it isn't completely real, they are still happy customers. They will tell others and they will come back for more.

They used to all him the King of the White Van speakers. Which was, ironically, not untrue because every month or so a white shipping container would arrive from India with all kinds of speaker drivers in it. And out the door they would go to customers.

I'm guessing his same salesman skills that he uses today convinced a lot of people that those speakers were amazing.

But he doesn't let technical missteps/misstatements deflect him. He just keeps rolling.

I haven't seen anything to show that he has learned and grown from those missteps and misstatements; I'm not sure that is a good and admirable trait.

 

[Jon L]

I wonder what the owner of these Watt/Puppy 8's were using to drive the speakers and had (presumably) bad enough sound to send them to GR. It's generally well known that these Titanium tweeters' implementation and low impedance mandate certain type of amplification, and what I would do is drive them with Class-A, high-current SS amplification, which will tend to synergize better in the top and the low impedance. To me, Watt/Puppy's have usually sounded their best with large class-A Krells or similar.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

People like him have always been excellent salesmen. I’m sure we all know or knew a shop owner just like that -someone with a subtle, easygoing authority. They speak softly, calmly, and come across as knowledgeable.

I remember the elderly man who ran a bike repair shop in our little town when I was a kid. I also recall the local TV/audio showroom salesman who dressed neatly, but not overly so, always helpful and laid back. And then there was the local fisherman who set up his shop wagon every Saturday in the town center.

In my mind, Danny is the same type. He doesn’t mean any harm, he knows his stuff, and he’ll sell it to you -because, after all, he’s a businessman.

Here I am, a technically minded person with an understanding of electronics and acoustics, though not an expert in any means, watching his speaker upgrade videos with interest. I know how to filter out the parts that are more about bait and focus on the useful information about the speakers he covers. Sure, his measurements aren’t exhaustive, but they’re enough to determine whether a speaker is bad, average, or good. Yes, he promotes his No-Rez and tube connectors, but I still get to see the cabinet, drivers, and crossover components.

He doesn’t do much that bothers me. Just take him for what he is.

 

[Galliardist]

I wonder what the owner of these Watt/Puppy 8's were using to drive the speakers and had (presumably) bad enough sound to send them to GR. It's generally well known that these Titanium tweeters' implementation and low impedance mandate certain type of amplification, and what I would do is drive them with Class-A, high-current SS amplification, which will tend to synergize better in the top and the low impedance. To me, Watt/Puppy's have usually sounded their best with large class-A Krells or similar.

Personally, I've only heard that iteration of the Watt/Puppies once, but I would tentatively suggest based on that short audition that using any kind of amplification with them is quite OK - as long as said amps are turned off.

 

[amirm]

Sure, his measurements aren’t exhaustive, but they’re enough to determine whether a speaker is bad, average, or good.

They are not. He has released speakers with awful response due to inability to measure low frequency response: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...v123-x-cs-encore-center-speaker-review.40156/

If you want technician level evaluation/design of speakers, he is your man. If you want a proper engineer with the right knowledge, look elsewhere.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

They are not. He has released speakers with awful response due to inability to measure low frequency response: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...v123-x-cs-encore-center-speaker-review.40156/

If you want technician level evaluation/design of speakers, he is your man. If you want a proper engineer with the right knowledge, look elsewhere.

Yes, I could or should have rephrased that sentence to exclude bass response, of course.
In any case, I don't use his measurements as the objective truth, as he's been measuring defect speakers before.

 

[Andysu]

Why does Danny never measure below 200Hz? Is it due to laziness?

In any case. You have good points, which I agree with.

I thought the solution of powering up the bass boxes separately actively was good, but as you say, you can just as well go all the way to make the entire speaker active.

BUT actually as I write this I saw that part two from Danny was posted so after watching; it is, according to Danny, baffle edge diffraction effects that make the tweeter's FR so choppy. He tests it and it seems to be correct. With a lot of felt placed on the inside of the speaker cover, the FR got better:
View attachment 421885View attachment 421886

Of course some talk from Danny's side about the tube connectors and the new crossover he fixed, but Danny doesn't actually say much about it nor what it would cost.

Starting at 11:00, Danny starts discussing baffle edge diffraction effects:

i find the video to be relaxing listening to these modifications