GR Research LGK 2.0 Speaker Review (A Joke)

[amirm]

Quick q. - if you intend to do YouTube video, do you think it would be possible to record real performance of the speaker [so that this awful distortion is there for all to hear?]

I don't currently plan to do a video on it but sure, I can see if I can capture its output should I do one. The challenge is that no one can tell in a video how loud I am playing.

 

[AudioArchitech]

Just saying, I would use an amp with a better track record. This new to market PA5 seems to be failing quite a bit. And be honest with Danny, you told him you use Purifi

 

[voodooless]

I also reckon it is the PS95, or one that has a ‘shite mod upgrade’ by GR. Too many physical similarities, plus same Fs 120Hz, plus same claimed Xmax 2.5mm….

There are actually very few similarities:

Not to mention that outer diameters don't match: 98mm diameter vs 91mm, inverted surround. Also parameters are really not similar. Especially Le is wildly different: .63 mH vs .159 mH.

 

[AudioArchitech]

Likely made by Peerless

 

[Toni Mas]

Now maybe a need to test these just to see...
$159 pair no filter https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/full-range-speaker-kits/markaudio-tozzi-one-kit-pair/
$120 pair includes 2 filter options https://www.parts-express.com/Copperhead-Desktop-Full-Range-Speaker-Kit-Pair-300-7180

Looking at these, we cannot blame GR as they are not the only ones offering nonsense designs. I don't really understand the point of using such small drivers. Probably there is a demand for micro speakers intended for desktop use that they try to cover.
I have been playing in the past with similar Jordan's JX6 and consider it's a waste of time and money, even adding a subwoofer. But I also own a VTL based on Jordan's 4" JX92 I am very happy with. Using a 4" instead of 2" or 3" means covering one octave under 100hz, without the need of a subwoofer but of course the cabinet is much bigger.

 

[voodooless]

Well, anyway... I think we're not done with this whole endeavor...! The reason why this thing was started in the first place, is because somebody mentioned using a MiniDSP instead of the GR passive filter to make the speaker flat(-ish). With the response from GR that one must be out of its mind to use a MiniDSP for basically anything (heavily paraphrased ).

So would be great to have the speaker measured without the filter, so that we as a community can have a go and see what we can come up with?

 

[amirm]

So would be great to have the speaker measured without the filter, so that we as a community can have a go and see what we can come up with?

Is there a reason to stick with this driver? Seems to me keeping the box is more valuable than the driver.

 

[Toni Mas]

Imho, such a small driver should offer a blameless response without any need for Eq, except baffle step correction to provide a correct tonal balance (easy to achieve with a simple L//R network). If anything else required, it means that the driver is a piece of crap.

 

[voodooless]

Looking at these, we cannot blame GR as they are not the only ones offering nonsense designs. I don't really understand the point of using such small drivers. Probably there is a demand for micro speakers intended for desktop use that they try to cover.

For a nice and simple kitchen speaker, these could work just fine. I once build a tiny transmission line for my dad using an excellent Vifa wideband, back in 2004:

It needed no filter and went quite deep for its size (about 100 cm long line). It obviously didn't go loud but was perfect for the kitchen. Was powered by a wireless receiver with a tiny amp that I scavenged from a wireless FM speaker set.

No is that something to spend so much money on? Probably not.

 

[AudioArchitech]

try a Mark Audio driver

 

[voodooless]

Is there a reason to stick with this driver? Seems to me keeping the box is more valuable than the driver.

To finish the story: yes. For any other reason: no

 

[JSmith]

I also reckon it is the PS95

According to this it's a custom design produced by Peerless Audio in India;

LGK 2.0

LGK 2.0

www.audiocircle.com

The LGK 1.0 is gone and not to be replicated. Instead, years ago, Danny decided to Replace the LGK 1.0 with the LGK 2.0. Danny set new performance parameters and specifications. The supplier (Peerless of India) of the single driver speaker has had difficulty meetings those requirements and further had production issues to return the finished product to GR Research. The rumor is that a limited number of the drivers were delivered and that there are proto-type "LGK 2.0" Units in the hands of a few persons. We believe that the box plans for the LGK 1.0 are not the best match for this driver. We do not know what design will be recommended. The speaker is ideal for near-field listening. These would compete with the desktop minis, in theory. That's about all I have read about it thus far.

Peerless Audio | Transducers, Electronics, Software & Service

Offering an unparalleled selection of high-performance audio products, components, software, and design services. Trusted by top audio brands, engineers, and enthusiasts.

peerless-audio.com

JSmith

 

[Newman]

OK OK, I'm convinced! thanks guys

 

[AudioArchitech]

It is hilarious that Danny tests other manufacturer's speakers and shows his own measurements. Then is opposed to others doing measurements of his speakers.

 

[abdo123]

It is really a shame that the community is this divided. In my field, we would be contacting each other, trying to figure out discrepencies (perhaps you are trying to recreate some results from a journal paper, and something is just off, or perhaps you need to spend a lot of time discussing a client's test setup), and really get to the bottom of things, before making anything public, especially if it is a really gross discrepency. As Erin mentions, it would be possible to really track down what is going on here (get more samples, do more tests), and you would be able to completely dissect the issue. But this test stops at a point, where the following discussion really only adds to the divide.

Academia is great at filtering and breaking down huge egos because of all the slave labor you do to get your degree(s).

 

[MCH]

Academia is great at filtering and breaking down huge egos

I am going to disagree with this

 

[abdo123]

I am going to disagree with this

This thread already descended into chaos so feel free to explain further if you want.

 

[AudioArchitech]

It is hilarious that Danny tests other manufacturer's speakers and shows his own measurements. Then is opposed to others doing measurements of his speakers.

Although, in all fairness, this is the smallest, and is a odd, single driver speaker. I bet most of his other speakers would measure very well.

 

[abdo123]

@amirm You originally said that you listened to the speakers through your Topping PA5 amp. But then you told Danny that you used a "world class" Purifi amp. The same PA5 that you gave a rave review of, yet right here on ASR many have discussed issues with it, defective units. There is even a poll here on ASR for PA5 owners that claims a 30% failure rate (which I assume is higher since this could easily be manipulated by sellers watching, and likely many PA5 owners who haven't seen this Poll)

Edit: Also, this feels like a bit of a hit piece, you make it sound like GR is claiming that the Little Giant Killer should kill giant speakers, have lots of Bass. We all know that GR means that it's a little speaker (with a 3" driver!) that he is claiming is a "Giant Killer", meaning against other small desktop speaker (similar small speakers with small drivers...)

Are you really arguing for the case of someone selling an unusable speaker?

Or do you just like arguing for the sake of arguing?

 

[thewas]

Although, in all fairness, this is the smallest, and is a odd, single driver speaker. I bet most of his other speakers would measure very well.

They don't.