I am a survivor of an older generation of audiophile schools like that of Jean Hiraga and the Maison de l'Audiophile, just to give you an idea. My sensei was called Susumu Sakuma, but there have been many more of course. Today's influencers who are guided by commercial interests have nothing to say to me. But then, I live in an audiophile diaspora today, as they say. In this respect, I could only contribute poorly any more.
FYI
www.audiosciencereview.com
Sakuma san
Well, I don't know if you mean me. You may not believe this, but I approach these conversations with the idea of attempting to disprove what is considered settled science around here: what is the extraordinary claim, and can it be true? Not because I disbelieve the sort of Toole-ish canon here, but because trying to disprove seems like what we ought to be doing. I try to channel my skepticism into just being really clear about what is being claimed that goes against what I know of the research. In this case I wanted to know if there is some kind of resonance below established audible thresholds that IS indeed audible (or creates IMD, or simply worth pursuing for engineering's sake, or whatever the claim being made here was).
+1
I don't have the time to sit on the computer all day, but I'll try to write a bit.
just got home and saw you're back, what a coincidentI don't have the time to sit on the computer all day, but I'll try to write a bit.
....thanks, I'll read it for sure.FYI
Speaker enclosure vibrations - a few measurements with accelerometer
There are been quite a number of threads dealing with vibrations in speaker cabinets, both in relation to "speaker feet" and vibrations in enclosures themselves. I recently took out my ACH01 accelerometer to do some measurements, both speaker feet and enclosures. There was some initial...
You actually described an audiophile, i.e. someone who loves the equipment, and allows that to interfere with perception of fidelity. Yes, these people love their equipment even though it doesn't accurately produce sound. And you accurately describe the psychoacoustic effect that causes people to have sighted impressions that prevent direct objective measurements with the ear. All this because even if we didn't have issues with sighted bias, our ears and brain are just not suited to make comparisons of sound between two objects. It's no wonder we overcompensate and get gear that matches some aesthetic instead of gear that meets a standard of fidelity to the signal. So, no, you didn't describe HiFi at all.
They still look really modern, more interesting visually than the new version.I always thought the earlier models were rather hansome.
I think it's the drivers on a contrasting panel that I find appealing; rather like some ATC and Dynaudio models.
I like the newer look though, but in my own taste I like those purifi woofer speakers more
In 90s lot of companies attempted to have a different shapes for their boxes other than just being a rectangular boxes. Back then it was exepensive to curve a box cabin, and therefore some of them had inconventionsl shapes but all made out of flat pieces of mdf. But in the end most of them ended up plain ugly. This on the other hand somehow is well proportioned and looks like it goes nicely with a living room without screaming „hey look at me“. I like what I heard this with canor, but I wonder if it’s different without canor. Every demo had the same amp!
Yes, I did the Yamahas as well. Guess you are talking about NS-G 150 ....I almost forgot about them. Drivers are more or less identical to the ALR ones of that period.
I have taken apart most of those speakers and noticed that the drivers were all “almost” off the shelf vifas. Back then were those drivers custom built for your design by vifa ? Most had different model numbers than what was available as generic woofers and tweeters?
I started working for and with VIFA in the 80th - just after they stopped being part of SEAS. In those days, it was possible to work on drivers with them and make custom ones. Later, with the metal cones, we went a few steps further. This was before you could just go to China and make something completely new..
What was in the note series ? It doesn’t appear to be metal. The 3rd iteration of ALR had metal drivers which were manufactured in Taiwan if m not wrong. I had Nummer 4, Nummer 4 v2 and Number 4. I liked all of them in different ways. The number 4 had everything concentrated on the tweeter axis which to me was a better sound as the other two had soundstage below the ear range. But what I never understood is your idea of gluing the drivers to the cabins. It kind of made any repair impossible without damaging the cabin. Thankfully I never saw this in any of the speakers after that!
The Note series used metal cones. The drivers after VIFA came from Minebea (Japan) with production in China and partly Taiwan. I worked for them as a consultant and we made a lot of drive units for top companies in Europe. Gluing the drivers to the cabinet worked well .....the glue was a high-damping type and never dried out. The idea came from DYNAUDIO and in fact, we bought the glue from them. Removing the driver was not difficult. You just had to lay down the box with the drivers facing the floor (with two blocks) and wait one night. On the next morning, the drivers would be loose. Still works today
