GR Research LGK 2.0 Speaker Review (A Joke)

[MacCali]

Danny has made a 2.1 version. Now together with a small bass element. Why does such a small bass driver? This is what they look like:

View attachment 235081

Danny has done some measurements on them:

View attachment 235080

LGK 2.1 Kit (Pair) | GR-Research

gr-research.com

Edit:
Why not make a classic three-way speaker? That 2.1 seems rather unnecessary in my eyes. A 10 - 12 inch woofer crossover around 500-1200 Hz .
Plus a sensible tweeter, for example:

Home

Peerless by Tymphany BC25TG15-04 1" Silk Dome TweeterDesigned by Tymphany's experienced team of engineers, the BC25TG15-04 1" dome tweeter can meet the most demanding requirements for audio excellence. The tweeter features a textile diaphragm, high-energy ceramic ferrite magnet, and sculpted...

www.parts-express.com

That would have made much more sense. I think.

If you watch the video by Amir you basically see Danny adding a different form of smoothing which actually makes the speaker measurements look much more presentable and appetizing.

All these companies looking to sell you something always stick to this agenda. I’ve never seen Amir try and provide foolish measurements.

In fact, personally would say that possibly 20% of the things he wouldn’t recommend are fairly alright for a majority of people but he is providing that they are basically bsing. Bs means not recommended

 

[fineMen]

A departed design which comes close to top Wilson's in terms of neglect. I personally appreciate the recent trend here to long for speakers that generate real sound. Harmonic distortion, o/k, but intermodulation as described is a problem, right? Compare a retro 3-way design with a contemporary 2-way, e/g on Erin's site, and You face like 1% of IM versus 30%. Guess which is better.


I watched the youtube video of Amir, and I cannot agree more. Once one notices the IM distortion, it remains perceptible even at way lower levels because of its special signature. Klippel provides a self-test targeting typical loudspeaker distortion. Alas, due to extended exposure to really bad DIY designs by myself, I manage to get down to -50..56 dB before I give up because of plain boredom. I'm struck with an acquired sensitivity.

The GR Research LGK 2.0 appears to me as an elementary school's physical experiment, an antithesis to well established knowledge. If You build these, You'll find out why common speakers do exactly not look like the offer in question. Discuss the problems with Your mate and report. Suggest remedies ... an educational task quite worth the effort, me thinks.

 

[nsfgp]

Danny has made a 2.1 version. Now together with a small bass element. Why does such a small bass driver? This is what they look like:

He already said it months ago from his LGK2.0 defense video. He has tons of these woofers left over from the Desktop Mini (discontinued) he needs to move.

 

[DanielT]

He already said it months ago from his LGK2.0 defense video. He has tons of these woofers left over from the Desktop Mini (discontinued) he needs to move.

He has tons of these woofers left, what kind of talk is that? That bass driver according to Danny:

The next step of the LGK line! The LGK 2.1 adds a single 5" Aluminum cone woofer to take over the bass frequency, with the LGK taking control in the midrange and above, where it really starts to sing.

A 5"...It is more suitable as a midrange driver. It still ends up with a classic three-way construction, that means 8-12 inch bass driver that 5" Aluminum cone woofer as midrange and a tweeter (1").
Perhaps a two-way speaker with that 5" Aluminum cone woofer and a tweeter as Danny says about the LKG 2.1: This model features a sealed cabinet design, allowing for clean bass down to 70Hz with a smooth roll off, and easy integration with a subwoofer.

But a two-way speaker with a 5 inch bass and a 3 inch mid/tweeter is completely stupid, I think.

I have a lot of junk at home left over from various projects (not HiFi), but I don't smash stuff together more or less at random just to do something with that left over stuff. Still less would I sell that hodgepodge.

LGK 2.1 Kit (Pair)
$525.00 – $1,130.00.
Nop I'm not paying $1,130.00 for those 2.1

LGK 2.1 Kit (Pair) | GR-Research

gr-research.com

 

[nsfgp]

@DanielT Watch the whole video here (the part starts @ ~6min mark but you should watch the whole video for yourself)
GR LGK update/defense

 

[dsnyder0cnn]

Will check out the track. As for build variations, there are only 2 likely ones. The driver and the internal damping. With enough internal damping material or limited airflow to the port, will get more bass rolloff and this could explain difference from Amir’s speaker. The driver is also brand new and may be inconsistent quality. With the level of emotion involved, no real attempt to troubleshoot meaningfully unfortunately.

Will hopefully know better when you make some measurements.

I finally got around to doing some measurements of my LGK 2.0 speakers today. Here's the frequency response from the listening position...admittedly, there's a desk and 27 inch 4k display between the speakers and a wall less than a foot behind the mic (and my head), but the room's primary function is my home office, not dedicated 2-channel listening.

Still, left and right channels are matched pretty well. Probably the difference above 13 kHz is because I did not remove my Zoom microphone boom...was likely causing diffraction affecting the left channel. Otherwise, they are mostly within a few dB of each other.

Here's the step response:

That's pretty much textbook...about as good as I generally hope to achieve AFTER applying room correction in other systems, yet this is with no correction at all. There are some phase issues from 14 to 19 ms, but otherwise, these things match very well in the time domain...and those issues are likely due to uneven reflections off of my desk.

Because people complain about output, I ran a compression series, increasing the sweep level by 2 dB until distortion was excessive and/or I saw signs of the traces converging:

As you can see, there are virtually no visible signs of compression above 90 Hz. So, besides low bass, the LGK 2.0 are not dynamically challenged in the slightest at normal desktop playback levels (below 90 dB).

I watched Demolition Man (an old action flick with Sly Stallone) using the LGK 2.0's and the dynamics during the action scenes were punishing. I had to turn the levels down a couple of times, not because the speakers were complaining...but for the sake of my hearing! Certainly, a high-pass filter and a sub or two would have taken the experience up several notches, but it was quite enjoyable. Rendering of the dialog was about the best I've heard anywhere.

Do good powered monitors offer better value for money? Possibly, but it depends on your application and priorities. All powered monitors I've tried so far produce hiss that's clearly audible from 3 ft away. This setup is dead silent. Many multi-way systems have audible coherence or phase issues because there is a crossover in the middle of the vocal region. Not so here. I can always add subs to improve low-end extension. Plus, these are beautiful (unlike most powered monitors) thanks to my good friend, Tom, and his excellent veneer work.

The LGK 2.0 are not for everyone, but I could not be more pleased.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

I finally got around to doing some measurements of my LGK 2.0 speakers today. Here's the frequency response from the listening position...admittedly, there's a desk and 27 inch 4k display between the speakers and a wall less than a foot behind the mic (and my head), but the room's primary function is my home office, not dedicated 2-channel listening.

View attachment 238844

Still, left and right channels are matched pretty well. Probably the difference above 13 kHz is because I did not remove my Zoom microphone boom...was likely causing diffraction affecting the left channel. Otherwise, they are mostly within a few dB of each other.

Here's the step response:

View attachment 238845

That's pretty much textbook...about as good as I generally hope to achieve AFTER applying room correction in other systems, yet this is with no correction at all. There are some phase issues from 14 to 19 ms, but otherwise, these things match very well in the time domain...and those issues are likely due to uneven reflections off of my desk.

Because people complain about output, I ran a compression series, increasing the sweep level by 2 dB until distortion was excessive and/or I saw signs of the traces converging:

View attachment 238846

As you can see, there are virtually no visible signs of compression above 90 Hz. So, besides low bass, the LGK 2.0 are not dynamically challenged in the slightest at normal desktop playback levels (below 90 dB).

I watched Demolition Man (an old action flick with Sly Stallone) using the LGK 2.0's and the dynamics during the action scenes were punishing. I had to turn the levels down a couple of times, not because the speakers were complaining...but for the sake of my hearing! Certainly, a high-pass filter and a sub or two would have taken the experience up several notches, but it was quite enjoyable. Rendering of the dialog was about the best I've heard anywhere.

View attachment 238847

Do good powered monitors offer better value for money? Possibly, but it depends on your application and priorities. All powered monitors I've tried so far produce hiss that's clearly audible from 3 ft away. This setup is dead silent. Many multi-way systems have audible coherence or phase issues because there is a crossover in the middle of the vocal region. Not so here. I can always add subs to improve low-end extension. Plus, these are beautiful (unlike most powered monitors) thanks to my good friend, Tom, and his excellent veneer work.

The LGK 2.0 are not for everyone, but I could not be more pleased.

This is the main problem, not what you have measured.

Plus the poor directivity, which you didn’t measure either.

You have an otherwise nice setup. Get some Neumann‘s or Genelec‘s, than you know what great speakers for studio / nearfield can really sound like.

 

[dsnyder0cnn]

This is the main problem, not what you have measured.

View attachment 238873


Plus the poor directivity, which you didn’t measure either.

You have an otherwise nice setup. Get some Neumann‘s or Genelec‘s, than you know what great speakers for studio / nearfield can really sound like.

Directivity is not a concern since my application is nearfield...there's little room interaction, and I can point the speakers directly at my ears. Distortion is near or below the noise floor for my typical playback levels:

In my view, the tradeoff is giving up loudness and extension for coherency and time-domain accuracy. One's choice comes down to priorities. I don't feel a need to change this setup anytime soon, but if I ever do, I'll check out Neumann‘s or Genelec‘s. Thanks.

 

[Rick Sykora]

I finally got around to doing some measurements of my LGK 2.0 speakers today. Here's the frequency response from the listening position...admittedly, there's a desk and 27 inch 4k display between the speakers and a wall less than a foot behind the mic (and my head), but the room's primary function is my home office, not dedicated 2-channel listening.

View attachment 238844

Still, left and right channels are matched pretty well. Probably the difference above 13 kHz is because I did not remove my Zoom microphone boom...was likely causing diffraction affecting the left channel. Otherwise, they are mostly within a few dB of each other.

Here's the step response:

View attachment 238845

That's pretty much textbook...about as good as I generally hope to achieve AFTER applying room correction in other systems, yet this is with no correction at all. There are some phase issues from 14 to 19 ms, but otherwise, these things match very well in the time domain...and those issues are likely due to uneven reflections off of my desk.

Because people complain about output, I ran a compression series, increasing the sweep level by 2 dB until distortion was excessive and/or I saw signs of the traces converging:

View attachment 238846

As you can see, there are virtually no visible signs of compression above 90 Hz. So, besides low bass, the LGK 2.0 are not dynamically challenged in the slightest at normal desktop playback levels (below 90 dB).

I watched Demolition Man (an old action flick with Sly Stallone) using the LGK 2.0's and the dynamics during the action scenes were punishing. I had to turn the levels down a couple of times, not because the speakers were complaining...but for the sake of my hearing! Certainly, a high-pass filter and a sub or two would have taken the experience up several notches, but it was quite enjoyable. Rendering of the dialog was about the best I've heard anywhere.

View attachment 238847

Do good powered monitors offer better value for money? Possibly, but it depends on your application and priorities. All powered monitors I've tried so far produce hiss that's clearly audible from 3 ft away. This setup is dead silent. Many multi-way systems have audible coherence or phase issues because there is a crossover in the middle of the vocal region. Not so here. I can always add subs to improve low-end extension. Plus, these are beautiful (unlike most powered monitors) thanks to my good friend, Tom, and his excellent veneer work.

The LGK 2.0 are not for everyone, but I could not be more pleased.

Thanks for sharing. Am pleased you are enjoying your LGKs.

Your measurements are interesting as they are very specific to your application whereas Amir's does his based on an industry standard. Along with having a standard set of test tracks for music, this allows for more reliable comparison to other speakers he reviews. Both are valid in their own way, just cannot be compared. Notably, distortion testing is not readily comparable unless under very controlled conditions. Given what Amir found, does not bode well.

When Amir does his subjective reviewing, it is done in larger room at a distance much longer than yours. This puts more demand on a small speaker like the LGK. So not very surprising his listening experience is different too. I was listening to a set of Amir's test tracks on my Purifi SPKs in a comparable setting. Even with a reference design, was worried about bottoming out the woofer. So no surprise that the LGKs behave poorly in this case.

I very much agree with your comments about speaker tradeoffs and potential hiss issues with active monitors. However, am about value and it is not hard to find well designed full range DIY speakers. For example. Schumacher's Ion 4 is around $120 a pair at diysoundgroup.com (with cabinets!) and uses a larger driver with better excursion than the LGKs. Until GR specifically addresses the shortcomings demonstrated in this review, I would be hesitant to endorse the LGKs.

Thanks for sharing your perspective as well!

 

[YesChickenNuggets]

Just watched the review video. Amir is a pretty tame individual when it comes to commentary. It's objectively a fact that any company or engineer who would release a product like this is blatantly incompetent as they demonstrably failed to understand the very basics of speaker design.

The fact that they then put such an exorbitant asking price for the privilege of owning this pathetic product borders on fraud. Is there any other way to characterize what gr-research is? They're quite clearly a con.

 

[DanielT]

Just watched the review video. Amir is a pretty tame individual when it comes to commentary. It's objectively a fact that any company or engineer who would release a product like this is blatantly incompetent as they demonstrably failed to understand the very basics of speaker design.

The fact that they then put such an exorbitant asking price for the privilege of owning this pathetic product borders on fraud. Is there any other way to characterize what gr-research is? They're quite clearly a con.

That's how it is.

Here some other "pearls". If you have high blood pressure, do not read these links:

Wilson Audio TuneTot Review (high-end bookshelf speaker)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Wilson Audio TuneTot stand-mount/bookshelf speaker. It is on kind loan from a member and costs around US $10,000 (varies due to color). I am not a fan of the way the front looks without the grill. The sides though sport probably the best...

audiosciencereview.com

Vandersteen VLR Speaker Review

This is a review, listening tests and measurements of the Vandersteen VLR coaxial bookshelf speaker. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $1,815 a pair. The VLR is quite dense and heavy. Construction seems nice other than bulging out driver. The cherry finish is to my liking as a...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[YesChickenNuggets]

My god those measurements, vomit emoji.

 

[Joppe Peelen]

That wilson...... did they ever measured just a tiny bit what they made ? i guess not. even the part that can be easily measured by a DIYér sucks

 

[DanielT]

My god those measurements, vomit emoji.

It has also been pointed out a gazillion times in the thread that you might as well buy some small broadband elements/ drivers and place them in some small boxes. Probably the easiest DIY speaker to build. At almost no cost at all, or very little cost. The sound will not be full-range tip top (not good bass or sensible highest frequencies), but better than the speakers in the laptop.

Here you can search for broadband elements, in different price ranges and sizes:

Home

Or build something fun together with the children, or if you are of that age, the grandchildren:

Lego loudspeaker project using Dayton ND91-8

This project is rather for fun but who knows, maybe it will work out well and will do more of these.... I have some spare Dayton ND91-8 full range drivers (leftover from my MCLA and my truncated line array projects) and I will put one of those into a closed cabinet made of Lego bricks Cabinet...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Gringoaudio1]

The full range single driver speaker phenomenon is a thing that some people ascribe to. There’s a whole forum on diyaudio.com dedicated to single driver speakers. Mainly old geezers who probably can’t hear highs and don’t miss a tweeter anyway. I got my start in diy audio building a couple full range speakers and quickly realized that they were missing something… for me anyway. Easy introduction to speaker building though. Had some fun. The original iteration of CSS was in Canada and they sold me a lot of stuff.

 

[Waxx]

The full range single driver speaker phenomenon is a thing that some people ascribe to. There’s a whole forum on diyaudio.com dedicated to single driver speakers. Mainly old geezers who probably can’t hear highs and don’t miss a tweeter anyway. I got my start in diy audio building a couple full range speakers and quickly realized that they were missing something… for me anyway. Easy introduction to speaker building though. Had some fun. The original iteration of CSS was in Canada and they sold me a lot of stuff.

I'm such a guy (but I also got multiway speakers) and not that old (43) and with good ears. Single driver speakers have something special no multiway speakers can do. And modern hi-engineered drivers like those from Mark Audio are way better than this driver in this GR speaker. They have a very flat thin cone and a kind of phase plug that makes their dispertion a lot better. And with the spider and surround they have 8mm xmax or so, so they can play bass better than most small midwoofers.

The GR driver is too small to be used as single driver speaker, it needs a sub. And it's bad engineered (sadly there are many such arround) so the tope is terrible. Even i as fullrange single driver speaker find this terrible. I use 5" or bigger drivers for my own builds like this bookshelf that i use in my office. Driver is the Mark Audio Alpair 10.3M in a 17.9L reflex and with a correction filter to tame the top end. And these sound good for this kind of setup. This is how i use them, in my office and driven by a Marantz PM5004 amplifier. They are against the wall, but were designed with that in mind. The finish is intented rough. I'm not so fond of how speakers look today, so i did not do the shiny polished look... I have no ready to publish measurements, and no rig like Amir to test them, but i love how they sound.

A multiway will always have a better dispertion and a flatter response, that is true. But not the true source point sound and lack of phase shifts that most, if not all multiway speakers suffer from. So it's a matter of choices of compromises. This speaker is not everybody's cup of tea.

But again, this GR speaker is just crap, even for a single driver setup. And those prices are totally crazy.

 

[Joe Smith]

I like my KEF Q 15.2 speakers in my office setup for nearfield...very nice with the combined woof/tweet axis lined up with my ears (just slightly lower by about 6" just because of the stands I'm using). Kinda satisfied my interest in the concentric speaker types. Bass down to 50hz comfortably.

 

[Gringoaudio1]

I'm such a guy (but I also got multiway speakers) and not that old (43) and with good ears. Single driver speakers have something special no multiway speakers can do. And modern hi-engineered drivers like those from Mark Audio are way better than this driver in this GR speaker. They have a very flat thin cone and a kind of phase plug that makes their dispertion a lot better. And with the spider and surround they have 8mm xmax or so, so they can play bass better than most small midwoofers.

The GR driver is too small to be used as single driver speaker, it needs a sub. And it's bad engineered (sadly there are many such arround) so the tope is terrible. Even i as fullrange single driver speaker find this terrible. I use 5" or bigger drivers for my own builds like this bookshelf that i use in my office. Driver is the Mark Audio Alpair 10.3M in a 17.9L reflex and with a correction filter to tame the top end. And these sound good for this kind of setup. This is how i use them, in my office and driven by a Marantz PM5004 amplifier. They are against the wall, but were designed with that in mind. The finish is intented rough. I'm not so fond of how speakers look today, so i did not do the shiny polished look... I have no ready to publish measurements, and no rig like Amir to test them, but i love how they sound.

View attachment 245564

A multiway will always have a better dispertion and a flatter response, that is true. But not the true source point sound and lack of phase shifts that most, if not all multiway speakers suffer from. So it's a matter of choices of compromises. This speaker is not everybody's cup of tea.

But again, this GR speaker is just crap, even for a single driver setup. And those prices are totally crazy.

Nice. I looked into the Markaudio speaker drivers but I moved over to multiway designs and haven’t looked back. Probably should look into those and try again. When I first heard Tangband W3-871 drivers in a small ported box I was blown away. Struggled with the CSS (Canadian CSS) drivers for a few years before I realized that they were completely incapable of what was being asked of them. Still they make a nice near field mid range in a three way but wow they were over promoted!

 

[mhardy6647]

It has also been pointed out a gazillion times in the thread that you might as well buy some small broadband elements/ drivers and place them in some small boxes. Probably the easiest DIY speaker to build. At almost no cost at all, or very little cost. The sound will not be full-range tip top (not good bass or sensible highest frequencies), but better than the speakers in the laptop.

Once upon a time, Radio Shack marketed speaker drivers designed to be used in their cartons.

source: https://www.radioshackcatalogs.com/flipbook/1969_radioshack_catalog.html page 38

 

[Waxx]

Nice. I looked into the Markaudio speaker drivers but I moved over to multiway designs and haven’t looked back. Probably should look into those and try again. When I first heard Tangband W3-871 drivers in a small ported box I was blown away. Struggled with the CSS (Canadian CSS) drivers for a few years before I realized that they were completely incapable of what was being asked of them. Still they make a nice near field mid range in a three way but wow they were over promoted!

If you want to go into that world again, start with good brands like Mark Audio, it's inspirator Jordan (who did the first part of the engineering of those modern drivers) and EAD (another Jordan spinoff). Seas, Scanspeak, SB acoustics and Tang Band make also relative good ones. Fostex are also good, but are mostly targetted to the far-east asian market who like a bright sound. But those Fostex in general are still usable for our goals also if you make the right cabinet.

But there are also many very bad drivers, and they are often very expensive. Brands like Audio Nirvana, Cube, Voxativ, ... that often cost thousands of $ or € are just trash. And even more known brands like Lowther and Lii are not that good from hifi perspective. They run on snake oil if you ask me... But they still got their following that is very radical and hardcore. On Diyaudio.com it's a constant battle to keep it science based without going into endless flameware with those. The admins (Planet10 and Scotmoose) are more on the science based diy side, but it's hard to find the balance. And on other spaces (fb and fora) it's even harder.