Future DIY Speaker Testing Strategy?

[bluefuzz]

kit makers should in general send in their kits for free if they want the free airtime. DIY builders should pay a set fee + shipping both ways if they want to test something.

As long as Amir gets a finished speaker to test I don't see why DIY/kit speakers need to be treated differently to any other piece of gear ...

 

[Absolute]

As long as Amir gets a finished speaker to test I don't see why DIY/kit speakers need to be treated differently to any other piece of gear ...

Because that's free usage of the most advanced measuring machine available to test their design and maybe tweak it a little. I'm sure Amir would help with that if asked, but then he needs compensation for his time and some money to help downpay the machine.

For you and me it's a waste of time/internet space if the result of such a test is some kind of tweak to a design.

 

[bluefuzz]

Because that's free usage of the most advanced measuring machine available to test their design and maybe tweak it a little.

Well, that applies equally to commercial 'ready to use' speakers doesn't it? Especially from smaller 'boutique' shops. Many kits are open designs where the designer doesn't even profit financially from the kit sales.

 

[Ericglo]

I think so too. It would be a great opportunity for exposure--provided they measure somewhat decently. A lot of kits may not and those manufacturers may want to run at the sight of a Klippel!

For the manufacturers of well designed kits who may be interested, maybe the best approach is for them to find customers who would be willing to send one in (or live close to Seattle). I would guess most of these guys keep tabs on some of their customers and could probably identify a few candidates who they know are experienced or have posted build threads and/or taken measurements such that the manufacturer was satisfied the speaker is a representative example (not built wrong).

Bingo!!!

There was/are a bunch of guys in the Vancouver area over on AVS. I would think that there are more than a couple of the DIYSoundgroup speakers nearby. Besides them there should be a variety of kits that have been built that are local. The only issue is finding these people and hoping that they would allow their speakers to be tested. Putting a call out over at AVS, HTguide, HTshack, etc should hopefully elicit some responses.

Having said that, I do agree that commercial speakers are by far the most popular. As much as I may be interested in a Troels design, I would probably never attempt to build one. Getting more of the mainstream speakers tested allows people to separate the wheat from the crud.

 

[Absolute]

Well, that applies equally to commercial 'ready to use' speakers doesn't it? Especially from smaller 'boutique' shops. Many kits are open designs where the designer doesn't even profit financially from the kit sales.

Well, if you feel it's worth Amir's time and money to develop speakers for other people for free - and without giving the community any value because that speaker just tested will never be the same as posted - you're certainly free to feel that way.

I feel quite strongly that Amir's time should be valued and I feel his personal investments should not be taken advantage of by some asshole who wants free testing, marketing and forum-guiding.

..... On another note @amirm , perhaps you could fund this endeavor by developing a cheap, small diy-kit with some big-hearted speaker-designer that you could sell to us gullible morons? With unlimited access to Klippel, you should be able to make a 500 $ kit that performs absurdly good.

The speaker could be called "UpUrs", "AsRub" or something fancy that sticks it to underachieving manufacturers. I'd buy it. <3

*This idea has already been patented.* I'll donate it, though.

 

[Jon AA]

Well, if you feel it's worth Amir's time and money to develop speakers for other people for free - and without giving the community any value because that speaker just tested will never be the same as posted - you're certainly free to feel that way.

I don't think anybody is suggesting this should be the case. I don't think people want to see one-offs or prototype items being tested for development purposes. But for well established kits being purchased every day, the measurements would simply document what people are already getting or could expect to get if they purchase that kit, the same as any commercial speaker.

Of course you couldn't stop companies from fixing flaws after the fact, but that's no different than a commercial maker. If, for example, Klipsch decided to fix the crossover dip on the RP-600M after seeing the measurements would that be a bad thing? As long as they understand they aren't going to get machine time for "do-over" measurements I don't see a problem.

 

[Absolute]

If that's what was meant, then I've no problem with it. The more the merrier when it comes to data!

 

[bluefuzz]

Well, if you feel it's worth Amir's time and money to develop speakers for other people for free

No one has suggested that – apart from yourself.

But surely the whole point of testing is to improve the quality of speakers in general on the market? If speaker manufacturers – whether DIY or not – don't improve their designs as a result of testing then there's not much point in testing at all is there ...?

 

[Absolute]

No one has suggested that – apart from yourself.

But surely the whole point of testing is to improve the quality of speakers in general on the market? If speaker manufacturers – whether DIY or not – don't improve their designs as a result of testing then there's not much point in testing at all is there ...?

The point I was trying to make was that there's a huge difference between using Amir for development and presenting a commercially available already finished developed design for review.

That's all.

 

[amirm]

The point I was trying to make was that there's a huge difference between using Amir for development and presenting a commercially available already finished developed design for review.

That's all.

It was a good point. What I do needs to be leveraged. To the extent it only tests one sample or a few of anything, it won't do any good. So designs need to already be popular for it to make sense for me to test them.

 

[Mudjock]

I've been designing DIY speakers for about over 15 years. At first, it was about getting better quality than I could afford from commercial speakers - then it became more about being in control of my own destiny (instead of complaining about the state of the art, creating what I wanted. If I wasn't happy with what I had, make it better.) I don't profit from the designs I have created, except for a few I did for Parts Express as a member of their speaker building design team that I received free parts and a small 1 time payment.

Two of my designs would probably be in widespread enough use to be relevant in this forum (the Helium's and the Perfectionist crossover for the HiVi DIY 3.1). If I submitted them for review, it would be to help answer the question: Is it worth it to build these designs vs. buying a commercial speaker? Oddly the designs of mine that gained the most popularity weren't my favorites either from a measurement or sound standpoint. The Heliums are so small, they are by necessity full of tradeoffs just to get everything to fit in that tiny box. The DIY 3.1 crossover was constrained in that I wanted to keep the cost down (accomplished primarily by keeping the big inductors unchanged from the original HiVi kit) and wanted people to be able to use the circuit board supplied with the kit.

I have found this forum pretty well-aligned with my basic audio principles and priorities, so I appreciate what Amir and others are contributing here. From an electronics perspective, I have gone through quite a bit of equipment, dating back a couple decades before I started designing speakers. At this point, I value neutrality and accuracy above all else because I want my speakers to be voiced against as neutral and revealing a reference as possible. I also appreciate value. I currently run an SMSL M500 as a dac/preamp into a Rotel RB-991 that was abandoned to a recycling facility because the former owner apparently didn't realize there were internal fuses... Per the Stereophile measurements, it appears to be pretty neutral and solidly engineered and it sounds as such. I've also used a number of other amps with varying degrees of success ranging from higher end to pro audio to little class D amps.

So, if any of my designs are of interest or value to the community here, I am willing to send them in (assuming I still have them). If not, that is fine too.

 

[amirm]

Two of my designs would probably be in widespread enough use to be relevant in this forum (the Helium's and the Perfectionist crossover for the HiVi DIY 3.1). If I submitted them for review, it would be to help answer the question: Is it worth it to build these designs vs. buying a commercial speaker?

That is indeed the question we want to answer. I am ready to take on your designs and put them through the measurement gear. Please start a conversation with me and we can take it from there.

 

[Rick Sykora]

The point I was trying to make was that there's a huge difference between using Amir for development and presenting a commercially available already finished developed design for review.

That's all.

Just to be clear (for you and anyone else on this thread), neither Amir or I have any intent to test anything other than known DIY designs by credible designers.

Please see this thread for more detail:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...peakers-would-you-like-to-see-reviewed.11104/

Am sure we will find some who are willing to help loan a DIY speaker every now and then. The question is whether there is enough interest to fund a more directed ongoing effort for speakers that forum members may find more interesting (like the Seas Loki, Linkwitz's designs and other popular kits)?

Thanks to all that have commented already!

Amir and I have discussed your feedback and should have an updated plan posted soon.

 

[GelbeMusik]

I'm a long time speaker builder. From my personal experience at least the German market addresses occasional customers. These won't go too deep into the topic, rather get stuck with fancy woodwork. Hence the technical designs are quite often quite mediocre. Trick is, You can't evaluate the product before buy. And after, in case of complaints, wasn't it You to be responsible for the 'art'?

The more experienced, interested folks wouldn't build from kits. In all my lifetime I built only one kit, and that was (scientifically) optimized immediately.

Once one might have an idea what to look for as a kit, it wouldn't be too hard to design it! Along with increased know-how today we have digital speaker management systems, which, despite of comparibly stellar performance, are cheap as dirt. Such is needful for bass management / room intergration, I think.

Yes, Linkwitz' designs are very interesting. But for sure they do not recognise the spinorama. Do they ;-)

 

[temps]

I would hugely de-emphasize DIY speaker testing going forward. It's a niche of a niche hobby. Testing one sample of a DIY speaker isn't even super representative of how that same build would sound if somebody else built it.

It's way more important to verify manufacturer's claims on finished products that sell at huge mark-ups. It's even more important to expose manufacturers that provide no information at all.

For instance, Amphion sells (at a glance) sharp edge, ultra basic box speakers for bizarrely high prices. They provide one tiny frequency response chart - that's it. The rest is all smoke, mirrors and hype. You could have a Genelec 8341 or an Amphion Two15 plus amplifier for the same cost. Is the Amphion anywhere near as good as the Genelec? I very seriously doubt it. It's a passive MTM design with sharp corners and Seas drivers. They're hyped up by suspiciously consistent praise on studio gear forums. Maybe they're that good, or maybe it's astroturfing? Amir is our best chance to find out for sure. An Amphion review would get huge traffic as it'd be the first ever objective test of one of their monitors.

alright maybe I don't care about testing DIY stuff as much as I just want somebody to actually dispense with all the bullshit surrounding Amphion.. then maybe Barefoot next. An NS10 review would be neat too. j

 

[dwkdnvr]

Interesting set of perspectives. I'm largely a DIYer, and so definitely have an interest in seeing measurements of DIY designs. For me, it's part of the learning process - you generally have a better idea of at least some of the design choices made in a DIY kit since you don't generally get a lot of detail regarding commercial designs. Seeing how they pan out in measurements is valuable.

Having said that though, I definitely understand the perspective that a DIY speaker is really more of a 'recipe' than a 'meal', and so the results may not be indicative in quite the same way. Plus, I still maintain that you should build DIY speakers because you like doing it - not because you want to save money. It'll almost always be more cost effective to buy on the used market than to build unless you already have the shop setup and are comfortable using it.

I do agree with Wrinklewizard that kits of type 4 that are basically turnkey setups including cabinets, parts etc are rather rare, and limiting the testing to these would miss the real heart of the DIY market. The C-Note is an exception, albeit a welcome one.

 

[intaud]

I would not be interested in DIY speaker tests even though I am a DIYer. My perspective like others have said, it's a learning experience, so a true DIYer should also invest in an inexpensive measurement mic and use free software (REW). Learn to use and make their own measurements and appropriate adjustments. This includes using low cost DSP (i.e. MiniDSP HD) which could help fix a number of design flaws including room issues.

I'm with temps above regarding Amphion tests.

 

[A800]

Let me share the strategy I had the most success with:
"Just do it."

 

[Mashcky]

A mixed strategy would be for members to send their own builds and for Winklewizard (and/or others as well) to make those speakers for testing that are in highest demand. There is risk of erroneous construction that does not represent the design well (this is not an issue if Winkleswizard constructs all DIY reviews).

I'm in favor of limited continuance of DIY speaker testing for two reasons. First, DIY measurements are of high value to a small number of people but the value it add to us folks is incredibly high. Second, DIY reviews are educational to all enthusiasts because it adds valuable perspective on the raw materials cost as compared to commercial offerings. For non-DIY audiophiles, this perspective gives them more information to make decisions about whether brand, support, resale value, and high quality finishes are worth the price over DIY options. This information may even encourage the marginal consumer to pay for boutique cabinet construction so they don't have to DIY.

I'd be happy to contribute my speakers if the community desires. I built a pair of the ER18DXT's that received some discussion in the wonderful compilation thread from Ilkless. Most interesting to ASR is the stepped waveguide "DXT Lens" tweeter found in many, science-based, high-end designs such as the Kii Three and Grimm Audio speakers. I mention this as an example of how the whole community could gain some knowledge if we test speakers such as this one. Another example are the SEOS waveguide speakers - I've seen some interest in these on ASR already and there are accessible pre-packaged kits from DIY Sound Group for those on the fence about DIY. Perhaps I'll build some of the latter to hold me over should I end up sending my ER18DXT to the other coast...

*Edited for clarity

 

[DeruDog]

The interest in demand for measurements of commercial speakers is undoubtedly much, much larger than demand for DIY speakers. The DIY crowd is a small subset of the audiophile crowd. I like DIY measurements, but there's no doubt that measurements of the HDI-1600 for example and the KEF R3 will be disseminated far more. I don't disagree vehemently, this is just my stance. Either way, measurements are great!

I find the spinorama data for DIY compelling. From a cost to performance ratio, DIY is *sometimes* better than commercial. I plan on building my own speakers, so I also have interest in seeing data on results before I buy. So though I may be in the "small subset" of audiophiles, I will be closely following this.